HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 03-12 City Council PacketPre- Agenda Meeting - Thursday, 318101, 4:45 P.M.
AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 P.M., Monday, March 12, 2001
Council Chambers, Municipal Building
Meeting No. 03 -06
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
C. ROLL CALL
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Minutes of Meeting 02 -05 (February 26, 2001)
E. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
F. APPOINTMENTS /PRESENTATIONS
G. CONSENT AGENDA
All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine b y � the C Council and will be enacted
by one motion. If a member of the City Council wishes to discuss an item, that item will be removed from the
Consent Agenda and will be considered separately.
1. Approval of Claims
2. Disposal of Old Financial Records
3. Cable Commission Grant
4. 2000 Community Design Review Board Annual Report
5. Conditional Use Permit Review - Ramsey Co. Family Service Center (2001 Van Dyke Street)
6. Lawful Gambling License Application -White Bear Avenue Business Association
7. Joint Powers Agreement -City of Maplewood and Minnesota Department of Public Safety -
Communications
8. Staff Liaison to Historical Preservation Commission
H. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 7:00 P.M. Amendment of Tax Increment Plan for Housing District 1 -4
2. 7:15 P.M. Gladstone West Neighborhood Streets, Project 00 -05
A. Ordering Improvement After Public Hearing
3. 7:30 P.M. Beaver Lake Townhomes (Maryland Avenue, Lakewood Drive to Sterling Street)
A. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Planned Unit Development (PUD)
B. Street Right -of -Way Vacations
C. Easement Vacations
D. Preliminary Plat
I. AWARD OF BIDS
None
J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
K. NEW BUSINESS
1. Service Engineering Parking Reduction Authorization (2720 Maplewood Drive)
2. Auto Zone Parking Reduction Authorization (749 Century Avenue North)
3. South Service Office Study
L. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
1. -
2.
3.
4.
O. ADJOURNMENT
Sign language interpreters for hearing impaired persons are available for public hearings upon request. The request for
this service must be made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk's Office at (651) 770 -4523 to make
arrangements. Assistant Listening Devices are also available. Please check with the City Clerk for availability.
RULES OF CI VILITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY
Following are some rules of civility the City of Maplewood expects of everyone appearing t Council Meetings -
g g elected officials, staff
and citizens. It as hoped that by following these simple rules, everyone's opinions can be heard and understood in a reasonable manner.
We appreciate the fact that when appearing at Council meetings, it is understood that everyone will follow these
rY f principles. Show respect
for each other, actively listen to one another, keep emotions in check and use res ect e. ul language.
p f g g
DI
MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 P.M., Monday, February 26, 2001
Council Chambers, Municipal Building
Meeting No. 02 -05
A.
B.
0
CALL TO ORDER:
A regular meeting of the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota was held in the Council Chambers,
Municipal Building, and was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Mayor Cardinal.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
Robert Cardinal, Mayor
Present
Sherry Allenspach, Councilmember
Present
Kenneth V. Collins, Councilmember
Present
Marvin C. Koppen, Councilmember
Present
Julie A. Wasiluk, Councilmember
Present
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Councilmember Allenspach moved to aDprove the minutes of Special Meeting No. 02 -03 (Februga 8
2001) as corrected:
The Special Meeting started at 4:45 P.M.
Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk
Ayes - Mayor Cardinal, Councilmembers
Allenspach, Koppen, Wasiluk
Abstain - Councilmember Collins
Councilmember Wasiluk moved to aDprove the minutes of Meeting No. 02 -04 Februa 12 2001. as
presented.
- - - _ - - _ - - - - - -- - - -
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all
Councilmember Koppen moved to aDprove the minutes of Council/Mana er Workshop Februa 12
2001) as presented.
Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk
Ayes - all
E. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Councilmember Collins moved to approve the Agenda as amended:
Item G4, Budget Adjustment for Edgerton Park Improvement from Park Development Fund was
removed and will be put on a later agenda.
2 -26 -01
1
M1. Winter Carnival
M2. Cable Donation
N1. Bruentrup Farm
N2. AARP
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all
F, APPOINTMENTS /PRESENTATIONS:
None
G. CONSENT AGENDA:
Councilmember Collins moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended:
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all
1. Approval of Claims
Approved claims.
ACCOUNTS
PAYABLE
$429,456.08
Checks #53133 thru #53231 dated 2/13/01
$216,309.54
Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 2/6 thru 2/12/01
$11,228.04
Checks #53232 thru #53235 dated 2/13 thru 2/14/01
$196,618.70
Checks #53236 thru #53324 dated 2/20/01
$158.620.21
Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 2/13 thru 2/20/01
$1,012,232.57 Total Accounts Payable
PAYROLL
$327,567.51 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 2/16/01
$26,647.01 Payroll Deduction check #82850 thru #82855 dated 2/16/01
$354.,214.52 Total Payroll
$1.366,447.09 GRAND TOTAL
2. 2001 Charitable Gambling Change (Red Cross)
Allocated charitable gambling funds in the amount of $800 to bone marrow typing and that
remaining monies be allocated for flexible use including a canteen area at the blood drives.
2 -26 -01 2
3. Personal Service License for Tracy Simpson - Salon Nostalgia
Approved an Individual Personal Service License for Tracy Simpson at Salon Nostalgia.
4. Budget Adjustment for Edgerton Park Improvement from Park Development Fund
This item was removed and will be put on a later agenda.
H. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 7:00 P.M. (7:08 P.M.) Highway 61 Frontage Road Right -of -Way Vacation (3007 Maplewood
Drive)
a. Mayor Cardinal convened the meeting for a public hearing.
b. City Manager Fursman introduced the staff report.
C. Assistant Community Development Director Ekstrand presented the specifics of the
report.
d. Commissioner Paul Mueller presented the Planning Commission report.
e. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The
following persons were heard:
Barry Morgan, 2021 Hennepin Avenue East, Minneapolis, representing the Applicant
George Rossbach, 1406 East County Road C, Maplewood
f. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Collins moved to adopt the following resolution vacating the unused part of the
Highway 61 frontage road right -of -way that is south of County Road D, next to the property at
3007 Maplewood Drive:
RESOLUTION 01 -02 -016
VACATION RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Mr. Frank Frattalone applied for the vacation of the following - described right -of-
way:
The southerly 503 feet of the following described tract:
The Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 4, Township 29, Range
22 West, Ramsey County, Minnesota;
2 -26 -01 3
Which lies easterly of a line running parallel with and a distance 50 feet westerly of the
westerly right -of -way line of Trunk Highway No. 61 (formerly Trunk Highway No. 1
g Y ) as
the same is now located and established over and across Section 4, Township 29, Range
22, in Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the history of this vacation is as follows:
1. On February 5, 2001, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve the vacation.
2. On February 26, 2001, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a
notice in the Maplewood Review and sent a notice to the abutting property owners. The
council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements.
The council also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and
planning commission.
WHEREAS, after the city approves this vacation, public interest in the property will go to the
following abutting property:
Subject to County Road D and Subject to gas pipeline easement and except East 661.6
feet of the North 1006 feet, the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 4, Township 29, Range
22, Maplewood, Ramsey County. (PIN 04- 29- 22 -11- 0006.)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above - described
right -of -way vacation for the following reasons:
1. It is in the public interest.
2. The city and the applicant have no plans to build a street in this location.
3. The adjacent properties have street access.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all
I. AWARD OF BIDS
None
J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Ordinance Amendment - Compensation for Elected Officials
a. City Manager Fursman introduced the staff report and presented the specifics of the
report.
Councilmember Collins moved to adopt the second reading of the following ordinance amending
the Maplewood Code pertaining to compensation for elected officials:
2 -26 -01 4
ORDINANCE NO. 810
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MAPLEWOOD CODE
PERTAINING TO COMPENSATION FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS
Section 1. Section 2 -23 is hereby amended as follows:
Section 2 -23 Compensation. Pursuant to Section 415.11 of Minnesota Statutes, the salary of the
Mayor in the year 2000 was Ten Thousand Twenty Three Dollars ($10,023) per year payable in
bi- weekly installments, and the salary of each member of the Council in the year 2000 was Eight
Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty One Dollars ($8,821) per year payable in bi- weekly
installments. Hereafter, the Mayor's salary and the salary of each Councilmember shall be
adjusted bi- annually based on the change in the cost of living over that two year period. Starting
in 2002, and in every even numbered year after, the cost of living index published by the
Department of Labor shall be used for the prior two years to establish adjusted salaries for the
Mayor and Councilpersons. Such adjustments become effective on the first day of January and
bi- annually thereafter.
Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all
K. NEW BUSINESS
1. Gladstone West Neighborhood Streets, Project 00 -05
A. Accepting Report and Calling for Public Hearing
a. City Manager Fursman introduced the staff report.
b. Assistant City Engineer Cavett presented the specifics of the report.
Councilmember Allenspach moved to adopt the following resolution accepting the report an-
d-
calling for the public hearing for the Gladstone Neighborhood Street Improvements, Project 00-
05:
RESOLUTION 01 -02 -017
ACCEPTING REPORT AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution of the council adopted November 27, 2000, a report has been
prepared by the city engineer division with reference to the improvement of the Gladstone West
Neighborhood Streets, City Project 00 -05, and this report was received by the council on
February 26, 2001, and
WHEREAS, the report provides information regarding whether the proposed project is
necessary, cost - effective, and feasible,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
2 -26 -01 5
1. The council will consider the improvement of such street in accordance with the report
and the easement of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the
improvement of $1,470,000.
2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 12th day of March,
2001, in the council chambers of city hall at 7:15 p.m. and the clerk shall give mailed and
published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all
2. Development Policies for Open Space Management
a. City Manager Fursman introduced the staff report.
b. Parks and Recreation Director Anderson presented the specifics of the report.
Councilmember Wasiluk moved to adopt the policy recommendations as prepared by staff and
reviewed by the technical advisory task force and Parks and Recreation Commission for the open
space management plan.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all
3. Sandy Lake - Proposed Development
a. City Manager Fursman introduced the staff report.
b. Parks and Recreation Director Anderson presented the specifics of the report.
The council opened this item to the public for their comments. The following persons were
heard:
Carolyn Peterson, 1999 Jackson Street, Maplewood
George Rossbach, 1406 East County Road C, Maplewood
Milo Thompson, 1794 Onacrest Curve, Maplewood
Councilmember Collins moved to put this item on the April 23rd Council /Manager Workshop
for discussion.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all
4. Animal and Fowl Code Variance - Number Limitation
a. City Manager Fursman introduced the staff report and presented the specifics of the
report.
2 -26 -01 6
Councilmember Collins moved to deny the variance request from Mr. and Mrs. Dick Dover,
2415 Nebraska Avenue, on the number of animals they can keep because of the quality -of -life
issues for surrounding neighbors.
Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk Ayes - all
L. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None
M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
1. Winter Carnival - Councilmember Koppen said he was pleased to see the Maplewood Fire
Department at the Torchlight Parade and requested that the City Manager send a thank you note
to the volunteers for participating in events during the year.
2. Cable Donation - City Manager Fursman said the city received a letter from Tim Finnerty,
Executive Director of the Cable Commission, advising that the city has received a $1,000 grant
from the Ramsey /Washington Cable Commission. This is a one -time grant to help develop a
municipal web site. The council expressed their thanks to the Cable Commission for the grant.
N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
1. Bruentrup Farm -City Manager Fursman said that the Bruentrup Farm is once again before the
State Legislature and our legislators are attempting to acquire another $200,000 to help complete
some of the repairs that are necessary to preserve the buildings that have been transferred to the
new location.
Councilmember Allenspach moved to adopt the following resolution of support for the
Bruentrup Farm to our State Legislators, Scott Wasiluk and Chuck Wiger.
RESOLUTION 01 -02 -018
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT
WHEREAS, in the year 1999, the City of Maplewood in cooperation with the Maplewood Area
Historical Society worked with local State Representatives to acquire funding support for the
preservation and restoration of the Historic Bruentrup Farm, the last remaining farm in the City
of Maplewood; and
WHEREAS, an initial request of $300,000 was made to complete the entire project; and
WHEREAS, in the year 1999, the State of Minnesota granted the Maplewood Area Historical
Society the sum of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) towards the relocation and
restoration of the Bruentrup Farm; and
2 -26 -01 '7
WHEREAS, the project expanded to include the relocation of a house, barn, three outbuildings
and a windmill; and
WHEREAS, some of the renovation and changes for code compliance have been completed;
and
WHEREAS, several significant restoration elements of the project are in need of immediate
attention; and
WHEREAS, the original state support was one third of the funds necessary to complete the
project sufficiently for occupancy or use; and
WHEREAS, the project is of significant value and interest to the City of Maplewood, it's
Historical Society and the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the efforts of the City of Maplewood and it's Historical Society have drawn
statewide attention and acknowledgment including an award by the Preservation Alliance of
Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, supports the request for additional State
funding and on behalf of the Maplewood Area Historical Society will act as their fiscal agent;
and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Maplewood, on behalf of the
Maplewood Area Historical Society does hereby request that an amount of $200,000 be granted
to complete the project.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all
2. AARP - Mayor Cardinal said that there is free tax help for seniors at the Community Center
sponsored by AARP. On behalf of the council, Milo Thompson and all the other volunteers who
donate their time to do tax preparation were thanked. The dates and times are as follows:
February 19th through April 11 th
Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday
9:00 a.m. - 12:00 Noon
O. ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember Allenspach moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:02 P.M.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes - all
Karen E. Guilfoile, City Clerk
2 -26 -01 8
AGENDA NO. G1
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council
FROM: Finance Director
RE: APPROVAL OF CLAIMS
DATE: March 5, 2001
Action by Council
Date
Endorsed
Modified
Rejected
Attached is a listing of paid bills for informational purposes. The City Manager has reviewed the bills
and authorized payment in accordance with City Council approved policies.
ACCOUNTS
PAYABLE
$1 10 225.55
Checks #53325 dated 2/20/01
$92,469.76
Checks #53326 thru #53366 dated 2/27/01
$66
Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 2/21 thru 2/26/01
$77
Checks #53367 thru #53372 dated 3/1/01
$348
Checks #53373 thru #53445 dated 3/2 thru 3/6/01
$661,963.16
Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 2/27 thru 3/5/01
$1 Total Accounts Payable
PAYROLL
$357,,081.76 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 3/2/01
$25,423.17 Payroll Deduction check #83040 thru #83047 dated 3/2/01
$382 Total Payroll
$1,631,128.38 GRAND TOTAL
Attached is a detailed listing of these claims. Please call me at 770 -4513 if you have any questions
on the attached listing. This will allow me to check the supporting documentation on file if necessary.
hu
Attachments
C: \OFFICE\WP DOCS\AGENDA\APCL0105.MAR
vehlist
02/23/2001
10 :20:34AM
Check Register
City of Maplewood
Page: 1
Check
Date
53325
2/20/01
53326
2/27/01
53327
2/27/01
53328
2/27/01
53329
2/27/01
53330
2/27/01
53331
2/27/01
53332
2/27/01
Vendor
■ iAA AM.N44A oft /A Aw w..-.L
00809
00114
00198
00254
00255
00276
00349
00446
53333
2/27/01
00379
53334
2/27/01
00464
53335
2/27/01
01973
53336
2/27/01
01972
53337
2/27/01
00508
KONG, TOMMY
ANOKA- HENNEPIN TECH COLLEGE
BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS
CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS
CAPITOL RUBBER STAMP CO.
CORPORATE BENEFIT SERVICES
CUB FOODS - MAPLEWOOD EAST
DANKA OFFICE IMAGING CO.
DAVE PERKINS CONTRACTING INC
EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECH, INC
ERICKSON OIL PRODUCTS INC
EVENT SOUND & LIGHT
FIRE INSTRUCTORS ASSOC OF MINN
53338
2/27/01
00585
GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL
53339
2/27/01
00661
HERITAGE BANK
53340
2/27/01
00681
HORSNELL, JUDITH
53341
2/27/01
00719
53342
2/27/01
01971
53343
2/27/01
00821
53344
2/27/01
00870
53345
2/27/01
00901
53346
2/27/01
00904
53347
2/27/01
01091
53348
2/27/01
00395
53349
2/27/01
01126
53350
2/27/01
01169
53351
2/27/01
01175
53352
2/27/01
01218
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. #622
JACKSON, MARY
KVAM, DAVID
LINDBLOM, RANDY
M.G.F.O.A.
M.L.E.E.A.
MIXED BLOOD THEATER CO
NATURAL RESOURCES, DEPT OF
NCPERS GROUP LIFE INS 612001
NORM'S TIRE SALES INC.
NORTH ST. PAUL, CITY OF
ON SITE SANITATION
53353
2/27/01
00001
ONE TIME VENDOR
53354
2/27/01
00001
ONE TIME VENDOR
53355
2/27/01
00001
ONE TIME VENDOR
53356
2/27/01
00001
ONE TIME VENDOR
PAYROLL CHECK TO DIR DEP ERROR
TRAINING - FF TO CHIEF
MONTHLY WATER UTIL - JAN 2001
REPAIR RADIO
PRE -INKED HANDLE NOTARY STAMP
REFUND CBSA - D HAIDER 00023439
COOKIES & PUNCH (DARE)
COPIER USAGE - DEC 2000
COPIER USAGE - JAN 2001
PROJ 99 -13 - PARTIAL PYMT #6
SERVICE & LAMP INSTALL
REFUND 1998 SAC - 32 UNITS
EMERGENCY SOUND LIGHT REPAIR
COMPANY OFFICER
2001 FIAM CONF 2/17 & 2/18
JAN 2001 SRV - 15 CALLS
US SAVINGS BONDS 2/2 & 2/16 P/R
REIMB MILEAGE - 11/22 TO 12/7
REIMB MILEAGE - 1/16 TO 2/15
LAMINATING - POSTERS & MAPS
REIMB MILEAGE - 12/5/00
REIMB MILEAGE - 2/21/01
MEALS AT TRAINING
LUNCH 2/16
MEMBERSHIP - FAUST & BAUMAN
EXPLORER MEMBERSHIP - J OLSON
THEATER PERF 2/18 EDGERTON
DNR FEES
PERA LIFE INS- P/R DED IN FEB
FLAT REPAIR
MONTHLY UTI L - 1/8 TO 2/7/01
TRASH SERVICE - EDGERTON PARK
TRASH SERVICE - GETHSEMANE PARK
REF RONA MINORIK - 2/8 MOONWALK
REFUND CHRISTINA REEDER - WSA
REFUND AETNA LIFE INS - J BRADEN
REFUND JEFF LUND - OVERPAYMENT
1,225.55
480.00
942.75
80.40
22.37
643.14
26.62
450.00
450.00
6,524.13
46.53
32,000.00
1,073.00
30.00
60.00
24.00
500.00
26.07
4.51
52.50
7.80
12.68
- - - - -- 28: 34- --
8.00
205.00
30.00
400.00
853.00
237.00
22.50
1,326.58
57.65
57.65
9.00
32.00
58.03
70.00
1
vchlisf
02/23/2001 10:20 : 34AM
Check Register Page: 2
City of Maplewood
Check
Date
Vendor
53357
2/27/01
00001
53358
2/27/01
00001
53359
2/27/01
00001
53360
2/27/01
00069
53361
2/27/01
01409
53362
2/27/01
01413
53363
2/27/01
01446
53364
2/27/01
01633
53365
2/27/01
01734
53366
2/27/01
01793
42 Checks in this report
ONE TIME VENDOR
ONE TIME VENDOR
ONE TIME VENDOR
RISK MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES
S.E.H.
SAFEASSURE CONSULTANTS INC.
SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION
TOTAL ENTERTAINMENT PROD INC
WALSH, WILLIAM P.
XEROX CORPORATION
REFUND GARY COOK - OVRPD MEMBERSH
95.85
REF IMATION - HALF RENTAL 2/13/01
256.00
REF STEINKRAUS PLBG - PRMT# 0003242
273.60
COMM PAYMENT TO COLLECTIONS
827.38
FIRE STATION DESIGN - JUL 2000
24,450.00
FIRE STATION DESIGN - AUG 2000
2,800.00
FIRE STATION DESIGN - OCT 2000
7,698.47
ONE -YEAR CONTRACT FOR CONSULTANT
3,821.00
TRAINING SEMINAR/LUNCH - 4
120.00
DJ FEE 2/9
300.00
COMMERCIAL PLUMBING INSPECTIONS
4,095.00
XEROX CHARGES - JAN 2001
261.00
Total checks :
93, 695.31
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Disbursements via Debits to Checking account
Transmitted Settlement
Date Date Payee
02/16/01
02/20/01
02/20/01
02/16/01
02/16/01
02/21/01
02/2110.1
02/14/01
02/22/01
02/22/01
02/16/01
02/23/01
02/23/01
02/21/01
02/21/01
.02/21/01
.02/21/01
02/21/01
02/22/01
02/22/01
02/22/01
02/23/01
02/23/01
02/23/01
02/26/01
02/26/01
CBSA
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer.
Elan Financial Services
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
MN Dept of Revenue
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
WI Dept of Revenue
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
TOTAL
Description
Dental claims
Drivers License #697
Deputy Registrar #149
State Payroll Tax
Purchasing card items
Drivers License #697
Deputy Registrar #149
Fuel'' Tax
Drivers License #697
Deputy Registrar #149
State Payroll Tax
Drivers License #697
Deputy Registrar #149
Amount
2,229.55
816.00
7,543.75
12,434.22
11,260.39
1,126.50
11, 377.40
543.00
781.00
9
1,275.29
870.00
7,169.97
66,429.27
3
vchlist Check Register Page: 1
03/02/2001 10:39:20AM City of Maplewood
Check
Date
53367
3/1/01
53368
3/1/01
53369
3/1/01
53370
3/1/01
53371
3/1/01
53372
3/1/01
53373
3/6/01
Vendor
■ IAA A M; MA :A aft , A at, AA■ ■M♦
Amount
01085
MN LIFE INSURANCE
00276
CORPORATE BENEFIT SERVICES
00529
FORTIS BENEFITS INSURANCE CO.
00644
HEALTHPARTNERS
00966
MEDICA CHOICE
01283
POST BOARD
00017
A T & T WIRELESS SERVICES
53374
3/6/01
01981
ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER
53375
3/6/01
00111
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES, INC.
53376
3/6/01
00170
BECKER, RONALD
53377
3/6/01
00174
BELDE, STAN
53378
3/6/01
01974
BLUE CROSS REFUNDS
53379
3/6/01
00254
CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS
53380
3/6/01
00283
CENTURY COLLEGE
53381
3/6/01
00305
COLEMAN, MELINDA
53382
3/6/01
00312
COMPRESSAIR & EQUIPMENT CO.
53383
3/6/01
00423
DRIVERS LICENSE GUIDE CO.
53384
3/6/01
00449
EDEN SYSTEMS, INC.
53385
3/6/01
00538
FRED PRYOR SEMINARS
53386
3/6/01
00543
GE CAPITAL
53387
3/6/01
00586
GOVSTORE USA
53388
3/6/01
00589
GRAF, DAVE
53389
3/6/01
00612
GYM WORKS
53390
3/6/01
01983
HACKMAN, CHARLES
53391
3/6/01
00668
HIEBERT, STEVEN
53392
3/6/01
00712
I.S.F.S.I.
53393
3/6/01
00719
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. #622
53394
3/6/01
01975
INDIANHEAD COUNCIL BSA
53395
3/6/01
00776
JONES, DONALD
53396
3/6/01
00867
LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWSPAPERS
53397
3/6/01
00884
LUNDSTEN, LANCE
53398
3/6/01
00888
M/A ASSOCIATES
53399
3/6/01
00917
MAC QUEEN EQUIPMENT INC
MONTHLY PREM - MARCH 2001
MONTHLY ADM FEE - MARCH 2001
MONTHLY PREM - MARCH 2001
MONTHLY PREM - MARCH 2001
MONTHLY PREM - MARCH 2001
POLICE OFFICER LIC - MARTIN & LU
MONTHLY CELLULAR CHARGES
MONTHLY CELLULAR CHARGES
PAGER REPAIR
MAPLEWOOD PATROL & BOARDING FEES
REIMBURSE MILEAGE 1/23 TO 2/15
K -9 HANDLER
P SCHWARTZ 00011051 A
REPAIR RADIO
AED INSTRUCTOR COURSE
AED INSTRUCTOR COURSE
LUNCH FOR INTERVIEW PANELIST
REPAIR TO COMP AT STATION 2
ID BOOKS
UPGRADE SOFTWARE - EQUIPMENT
COMPUTER CLASS - ZWIEG
KODAK COPIER LEASE
PO #100055 - INFOCUS LP335 LCD PROJ
KARATE INSTRUCTION - FEB
LI FECYCLE SEAT & CHAIN
REIMBURSE FOR DEFECTIVE SEWER SRV
K -9 HANDLER
2001 MEMBERSHIP FEE
SRV FEE - PRINTING & DISTRIBUTING FLYE
EXPLORER POST FEES
SAFETY BOOTS
AD FOR BID - TRUCK
LUNCH 2/28 - SUSA MEETING
30 GAL RED
ELGIN PELICAN SE -2000 STREET SWEEPS
CURB SHOE
BLADES/WEDGE BOLTS/WEDGES 26
2,811.72
523.60
2,381.70
33, 204.80
38,706.00
180.00
138.76
15.34
40.00
1,142.99
166.08
35.00
278.05
80.40
65.00
65.00
9.75
42.06
70.00
31.25
59.00
528.32
4,197.16
210.00
40.00
2,200.00
35.00
75.00
121.32
48.00
159.95
53.68
10.00
142.80
97, 647.72
1,051.41
370.62
vchlist Check Register Page: 2
03/02/2001 10:39:20AM City of Maplewood
Check Date Vendor
Description /Account Amount
53400
3/6/01
00932
MAPLEWOOD BAKERY
BIRTHDAY CAKES
171.00
BIRTHDAY CAKES
159.75
53401
3/6/01
00977
METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY
GOGGLES
145.17
53402
3/6/01
00985
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
WASTEWATER - MARCH 2001
158,973.53
53403
3/6/01
00998
MIDWEST COCA -COLA BOTTLING CO.
MERCH FOR RESALE
666.60
53404
3/6/01
01072
MINUTEMAN PRESS
INCIDENT SHEET
81.63
53405
3/6/01
01035
MN CHAPTER IAAI
2001 MEMBERSHIP - GERVAIS
25.00
53406
3/6/01
01086
MN NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY
SUBSCRIPTION - MN NATIVE PLANT JOURN
20.00
53407
3/6/01
01052
MN PARK SUPERVISORS ASSOC.
MPSA 1.ST QUARTERLY MEETING
30.00
53408
3/6/01
01977
MN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION
INSPECTION TRNG - LINDBLOM & PRIEBE
200.00
53409
3/6/01
01058
MN SHREDDING LLC
DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION
49.95
53410
3/2/01
01933
MUNICIPAL CODE CORP
RECODIFICATION OF CITY - CODE OF
2
53411
3/6/01
01136
NARDINI FIRE EQUIP. CO., INC.
FIRE EXT NEW & RECHARGE
81.21
FIRE EXT /CHARGES /CHEMICALS /CART
136.50
53412
3/6/01
01978
NATURAL AREAS JOURNAL
SUBSCRIPTION TO JOURNAL
30.00
53413
3/6/01
00395
NATURAL RESOURCES, DEPT OF
DNR FEES
959.00
53414
3/6/01
01961
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
CELL PHONES
233.08
53415
3/6/01
01187
NORTHERN TOOL &EQUIPMENT CO.
SNOW PLOW LIGHT KIT
85.19
MISC SUPPLIES
31.83
SUPPLIES
26.74
53416
3/6/01
01212
OLSON, ARNOLD G
REIMBURSE MILEAGE - 1/22 TO 2/19
75.73
PLAN REVIEWER & CODE CONSULTANT
1,100.00
PLAN REVIEWER & CODE CONSULTANT
725.00
53417
3/6/01
00001
ONE TIME VENDOR
REFUND JOHN GRIFFENDORF - DANCE
45.00
53418
3/6/01
01311
P.E.R.A.
P/R DEDUCTION REMITTANCE 3/2/01 P/R
39,927.20
53419
3/6/01
01982
PARTNERS FOR VIOLENCE PREY
TUITION - DUNN & WATCZAK
50.00
53420
3/6/01
01270
PITNEY BOWES INC.
RESET CHARGES FOR POSTAGE METER
28.50
53421
3/6/01
01275
POLAR CHEV, GEO, MAZDA
MISC SUPPLIES
47.93
53422
3/6/01
01962
PUBLIC SAFETY PUBLICATIONS
FIRETRADER AD
120.00
FIRETRADER AD
120.00
53423
3/6/01
01679
QWEST DEX
MCC DIRECTORY INFORMATION
99.00
53424
3/6/01
01344
RAMSEY COUNTY PARKS & REC.
SHOW MOBILE NNO NIGHT
256.50
53425
3/6/01
01360
REINHART FOODSERVICE
MERCH FOR RESALE
235.09
MERCH FOR RESALE
307.60
53426
3/6/01
01384
ROSEVILLE FIRE GROUND ACCT
NAMETAGS
16.50
53427
3/6/01
01387
ROSSINI, DR. JAMES
STRESS TEST & ADMIN FEE
250.00
53428
3/6/01
01390
ROTHHAMMER INTERNATIONAL INC.
MERCH FOR RESALE
196.00
53429
3/6/01
01418
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
MERCH FOR RESALE
171.61
VENDING MACHINE SNACKS
106.03
lqw
vchlist
Check Register
Page: 3
03/0212001 1039:20AM
City of Maplewood
Check
Date
Vendor
Description /Account
Amount
53429
3/6/01
01418
SAM'S CLUB DIRECT
(Continued)
SNACKS, CANDY, MISC SUPPLIES
272.05
FILE CABINET, TRASH CANS, LATEX
168.04
SNACKS & CANDY
140.33
MERCH FOR RESALE
273.06
STATION 7 SUPPLIES
128.10
CANDY & SNACKS
439.30
CANDY & SNACKS
181.44
MERCH FOR RESALE
335.00
53430
3/6/01
01463
SISTER ROSALIND GEFRE
MASSAGES - JAN 2001
3,057.50
53431
3/6/01
01504
ST PAUL, CITY OF
CRIME LAB SRVS - JAN 2001
85.00
53432
3/6/01
01538
STREICHER'S
SQD CHANGE -OVER DARE SQD
2,914.37
53433
3/6/01
01560
SUPERIOR SERVICES INC
JAN RECYCLING 2001
16,040.20
53434
3/6/01
01644
TREADWAY GRAPHICS
POLOS /DAREN LION
457.50
POLOS & CREWS
437.50
53435
3/6/01
01580
TSE, INC.
JANITORIAL SRVS THRU 1/10/01
563.52
53436
3/6/01
01669
TWIN CITIES TRANSPORT &
CHANGE SQD TIRE
35.00
53437
3/6/01
01691
U.S. POLICE CANINE ASSOC.
2001 MEMBERSHIP DUES
40.00
53438
3/6/01
01693
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE
REPLENISH POSTAGE METER
3,000.00
53439
3/6/01
01979
VANDERPOOL, MARY
SPEAKER -4 FUR TRADE PROGRAMS
300.00
53440
3/6/01
01732
WAKOTA MUTUAL AID ASSOC. 2001 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL
25.00
53441
3/6/01
01734
WALSH, WILLIAM P.
COMMERCIAL PLUMBING INSPECTIONS
330.00
53442
3/6/01
01750
WATSON CO INC, THE
MERCH FOR RESALE
234.16
53443
3/6/01
01980
WHITE BEAR GLASS INC
MIRRORS - AEROBICS STUDIO
443.23
CLEAR MIRROR
243.62
53444
3/6/01
01924
WSB & ASSOCIATES INC
FIELD SURVEY - EDGERTON PARK
500.00
53445
3/6/01
01807
ZWIEG, SUSAN
REIMBURSE MILEAGE & LUNCH 2/21
20.44
79
Checks in this report
Total checks :
426
L
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Disbursements via Debits to Checking account
Transmitted Settlement
Date Date w ee
02/26/01
0.2/26/01
0.2/23/01
02/27/01
02/27/0.1
02/23/01
02/28/01
02/28/01
03/01/01
03/01/01
03/01/01
03/02/01
03/02/01
03/02/01
02/2 7/01
02/27/01
02/27/01
02/28/01
02/28/01
02/28/01
03/01/01
03/01/01
03/01/01
03/02/01
03/02/01
03/05/01
03/05/01
03/05/01
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
CBSA
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
Elan Financial Services
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
Smith Barney
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
U.S. Treasurer
TOTAL
Description
Drivers License #697
Deputy Registrar #149
Dental claims
Drivers License #697
Deputy Registrar #149
Purchasing card items
Drivers License #697
Deputy Registrar #149
Investment purchase
Drivers License #697
Deputy Registrar #149
Drivers License #697
Deputy Registrar #149
Federal Payroll Tax
Amount
950.00
13, 326.43
957.84
596.00
14,613.25
13, 849.24
577.00
57,845.50
494, 038.19
575.00
14,648.65
550.50
13,408.50
80,319.82
661,963.16
I -A
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
------ - - - - --
DIRECT DEPOSIT
---- - - - - --
03/02/01
------------------------ - - - - --
ALLENSPACH , SHERRY
-------- - - - - --
350981
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
ALDRI DGE , MARK
2 7 3 5. 2 0
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
BOHL , JOHN C
2595,50
DEPOSIT
. DIRECT
03/02/01
FLOR,TIMOTHY
2968.71
DIRECT DEPOSIT -
03/02/01
FRASER,JOHN
3530.09
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
TAUBMAN,DOUGLAS J
2368.80
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
PALMA,STEVEN
3063.20
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
JOHNSON , KEVIN
2726,86
DIRECT DE POSIT
0.3/02/01
ERICKSON,VIRGINIA A
2755.23
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
CROTTY , KERRY
2573.52
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
HASSENSTAB, DENISE R
44.55
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
HI EBERT , STEVEN
3057,32
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
DUNN ALICE
2 4 9 5.11
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
CORNER AMY L
77,60
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
BELDE,STANLEY
2586.60
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
RENSLOW,RITA
291.45
DIRECT DEPOSIT
.03/02/01
BAKKE,LONN A
2514.85
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
BOWMAN ,RICK A
2680,83
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
KOPPEN , MARVIN
3 5 0.81
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
PIKE , GARY K
1976,43
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
HEINZ STEPHEN J
2 8 8 2.2 9
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
HERBERT,MICHAEL J
2814.79
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
STOCKTON,DERRELL T
2671.56
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
RO S SMAN ,DAVID A
2807,46
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
HALWEG ,KEVIN R
2486,20
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
MARUSKA ,ERICA
3 9 5. 05
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
OLSON ,JULIE S
17 4 7.2 3
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
BREHE IM , ROGER W
1829.08
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
LARSON,DANIEL J
1785.34
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
THIENES,PAUL
2691.53
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
ANZALDI,MANDY
156.87
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
POWELL,PHILIP
1896.25
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
S Z C Z EPANSKI , THOMAS J
2801,54
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
WEN Z EL , JAY B
18 31.5 0
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
DOBLAR , RI CHARD N'
2983 .2 8
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
COLLINS , KENNETH V
3 5 0.81
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
CAMPB ELL CRAIG D
�
2551.40
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
WHITE BARRY T
60.00
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
DO LLERSCHELL,ROBERT J
280.52
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
ERICKSON,KYLE F
734.76
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
WEAVER,KRISTINE A
1003.28
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
HAWKINS,LISA A
79.40
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
KOEHNEN , AMY
3 8.4 0
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
McGUI RE ,MICHAEL A
197.48
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
O STER , ANDREA J
1684,22
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
URBANSKI , HOLLY S
16 0 5.9 6
DIRECT DEPOSIT (
03/02/01
ANDERSON,CAROLE J
1768.54
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
JACKSON,MARY L
1659.01
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
TETZLAFF,JUDY A
1497.17
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
CASARE Z , G I NA
1471,69
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS.REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
CARLE , JEANETTE E
1558.83
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
JAGOE , CAROL
15 7 8.0 9
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
OLS ON , SANDRA
10 6 3 . 3 2
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
CORCORAN,T HERE SA M
13 41.4 5
DIRECT DEPOSIT -
03/02/01
RTINSON CAROL F
MA ,
1558.45
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01.
EVERSON,;PAUL.
2209.45
DIRECT DEPOSIT
.
03/02/01
PARSONS, KURT G
1735.26
DIRECT DE POSIT
03/02/01
SPANGLER , EDNA E
689.12
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
ZWIEG,SUSAN C.
1676.41
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
DeBILZAN,THOMAS C
1510.97
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
EDGE , DOUGLAS
1735.46
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
LUT Z , DAV I.D P
1786,46
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
MEY ER , GERALD W
18 7 3 .6 3
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
NAGEL , BRYAN
1824,10
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
0 SWALD ERI CK D
1806,88
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
DUCHARME,JOHN
2092918
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
PECK,DENNIS L
2211.36
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
PRIEBE,WILLIAM
2852.85
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
DOHERTY , KATHLEEN M
1742,60
DIRECT DEPOSIT a
0 3 02 / 01
/
SCHINDELDECKER, JAMES
17 4 8.6 5
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
GREW — HAYMAN , JANET M
916.2 0
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
HORSNELL,JUDITH A
1108,44
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
NELSON,JEAN
1121.06
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
GAYNOR,VIRGINIA A
1640.82
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEP OSIT
03/02/01
LIVINGSTON , JOYCE L
863 . 15
10
11
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
THOMP SON , DEBRA J
583,63
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
EKSTRAND , THOMAS G
2 3 0 3.01
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
ROBERTS ,KENNETH
2277.54
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
CARVER NICHOLAS N
2192,25
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
KELLY,LISA
1286.26
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
NORDQUIST,RICHARD
2269.30
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
OTIS,MARY ELLEN M
714.85
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
CHRISTENSEN,JODIE D
1081.20
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
COLEMAN, PHILIP
603.60
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
FARR ,DIANE M
344,21
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
HORWATH , RONALD J
603.58
DIRECT: DEPOSIT
03/02/01
LARSON , DEBRA
562.92
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
S EEGER , GERALD F
427,86
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
STEINHORST , JEFFREY
6 4 6.8 8
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
SWANSON LYLE
,
17 2 9. 3 5
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
FLUG,MEGAN L
135.63
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
WATCZAK,LAURA
2781.35
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
HOIUM,DORA
671.50
t
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
MORNING , TIMOTHY L
1857.39
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
S CHULT Z ,SCOTT M
1519,89
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
RE I LLY ,MICHAEL R
1325,76
DIRECT DEPOSIT =Ft
03/02/01
YOUNG,DILL ON J
882,71
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
ATKINS,KATHERINE
222.38
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
RAWLINGS,RINDA M
1232.76
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
FLUG, ELAINE R
23.13
11
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
- - --
EMPLOYEE NAME
------------------------ - - - - --
AMOUNT
-------- - - - -
------ - - - - --
DIRECT DEPOSIT
---- - -
03/02/01
McCLUNG , HEATHER A*
--
519.41
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
DARST , JAMES M
1749,24
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
S I NDT , ANDREA J
1316,98
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
WORWA LI ND SAY M
182,55
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
JUNG,STEPHANIE J
2029.75
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
FRY,PATRICIA
1652.90
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
CARLSON,THERESE
1991.69
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
LE,SHERYL
3763.45
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEP OSIT
03/02/01
FAUST ,DANIEL F
3924,68
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
BADMAN , GAYLE L
2574,25
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
KELSEY , CONN I E L
1661.91
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
GUI LFOI LE , KAREN E.
2513,43
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
WINGER, DONALD S
3 8 0 0.5 6
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
ANDREWS SCOTT A
2318.34
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
BANI CK s JOHN J
2973,51
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
KARIS,FLINT D
2355.23
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
KVAM,DAVID
2264.74
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
RABBETT,KEVIN
2509.45
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
STEFFEN, SCOTT L
2943,78
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
THOMALLA ,DAVID J
2 9 7 3.51
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
BERGERON ,JOSEPH A
2 8 7 7.0 3
DIRECT DEPOSIT
J
03/02/01
GERVAIS— JR,CLARENCE N
2211.58
DIRECT DEPOSIT r
03/02/01
CALLAHAN,COLLEEN J
2073.93
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
LUKIN,STEVEN J
2880.57
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
SVENDSEN,RUSTIN L
2300.00
12
AMOUNT
-------- - - - - --
2160.05
2428.09
2758.25
2855.59
3590.65
2424.49
1988.70
3768.99
1420.65
1420.65
1889.51
2379.45
2679.65
2040.88
2508.99
988.80
1814.03
398.62
350.81
4774.78
483.00
50.00
450.47.
1942.67
1615.48
13
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
--
EMPLOYEE NAME
------------------------------
------ - - - - --
DIRECT DEPOSIT
---- - - - -
03/02/01
PRIEFER, WILLIAM
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
KANE ,MICHAEL R
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
LUNDSTEN LANCE
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
CAVETT,CHRISTOPHER M
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
ON BRUCE
ANDERS ,
DIRECT' DEPOSIT
03/02/01
MARUSKA,MARK A
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
HUTCHINSON,ANN E
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
COLEMAN,MELINDA
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
GRAF ,MICHAEL
DIRECT DE POSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
ROBB INS , AUDRA L
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
CROS SON , LINDA
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
EASTMAN , THOMAS E
DIRECT DEPOSIT
J
03/02/01
STAPLES PAULINE
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
SCHLINGMAN,PAUL
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
HURLEY,STEPHEN
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
JOHNSON,BONNIE
DIRECT DEPOSIT
DIRECT DEPOSIT
03/02/01
BERGO , CHAD M
82858
0 3/ 0 2/ 0 1
CARDINAL ,ROBERT J
82859
03/02/01
WASILUK,JULIE A
82860
03/02/01
FURSMAN,RICHARD F
82861
03/02/01
ZICK,LINDA
82862
03/02/01
INGVOLDSTAD,CURTIS J
82863
03/02/01
CUDE,LARRY J
82864
03/02/01
MATHEYS,ALANA KAYE
82865
03/02/01
WEGWERTH,JUDITH A
AMOUNT
-------- - - - - --
2160.05
2428.09
2758.25
2855.59
3590.65
2424.49
1988.70
3768.99
1420.65
1420.65
1889.51
2379.45
2679.65
2040.88
2508.99
988.80
1814.03
398.62
350.81
4774.78
483.00
50.00
450.47.
1942.67
1615.48
13
14
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
82866
03/02/01
VIETOR,LORRAINE S
1784.19
82867
03/02/01
BECKER,RONALD D
765.00
82868
03/02/01
PALANK,MARY KAY
1558.07
82869
03/02/01
RICHIE,CAROLE L
1558.07
82870
03/02/01
RYAN,MICHAEL
3276.35
82871
03/02/01
SVENDSEN,JOANNE M
1737.57
82872
03/02/01
BARTZ,PAUL
2550.43
82873
03/02/01
BUSACK,DANIEL P
1861.85
82874
03/02/01
KONG,TOMMY T
1797.85
82875
03/02/01
WELCHLIN,CABOT V
2432907
82876
03/02/01
MEEHAN,JAMES
3184.99
82877
03/02/01
SHORTREED,MICHAEL P
2911.54
82878
03/02/01
DARST,ROBERTA L
282.00
82879
03/02/01
SCHWAB,TAHIRAH H
100.00
82880
03/02/01
CHLEBECK,JUDY M
1746.86
82881
03/02/01
NIVEN,AMY S
607.49
82882
03/02/01
FREBERG,RONALD L
1864.67
82883
03/02/01
JONES,DONALD R
1515.26
82884
03/02/01
ELIAS,JAMES G
2211.36
82885
03/02/01
LINDBLOM,RANDAL
2446.18
82886
03/02/01
EDSON,DAVID B
1807.80
82887
03/02/01
HELEY,ROLAND B
1803.75
82888
03/02/01
HINNENKAMP,GARY
1734.56
82889
03/02/01
LINDORFF,DENNIS P
1750.24
82890
03/02/01
NOVAK,MICHAEL J
1355.31
14
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
82891
03/02/01
BERGREN,KIRSTEN A
99.00
82892
03/02/01
WORDEN,KRISTEN L
22.50
82893
03/02/01
HANSEN, LORI L
950.07
82894
03/02/01
ANDERSON,EVERETT
161.36
82895
03/02/01
BESETH,GORDON R
170.00
82896
03/02/01
OSTROM,MARJORIE
2788.13
82897
03/02/01
WENGER,ROBERT J
2227.05
82898
03/02/01
ANGLES,JERI L
200.00
82899
03/02/01
BENDER, JAYME L
36,25
82900
03/02/01
BENNETT, HEIDI
114,00
82901
03/02/01
BJORK,BRANDON R
195.00
82902
03/02/01
BLAND,NEIL J
49.00
82903
03/02/01
BUCZKOWSKI,ALAN
126.00
82904
03/02/01
DRAGOS,AMANDA M
13.50
82905
03/02/01
DRESSEN, EMILY L
21.00
82906
03/02/01
FINN,GREGORY S
1519.77
82907
03/02/01
FRANK,LAURA
425.01
82908
03/02/01
GEBHARD,JILLIAN R
297.25
82909
03/02/01
GLASS,DANIEL M
73.31
82910
03/02/01
GLASS,ROBERT P
45.00
82911
0 3/ 0 2/ 01
GORE ,MICHAEL A
90,00
82912
03/02/01
HAWKES,BRYAN L
33.75
82913
03/02/01
HOLDER,RYAN M
99.00
82914
03/02/01
HORNER,JAY B
22.00
82915
03/02/01
JAWORSKI,ERIC K
92.50
15
16
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
r
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
------ - - - - --
82916
----- - --- --
03/02/01
------------------------- --- - --
JONDAHL,ERIN E
-------- - - - - --
33.75
82917
0 3/ 0 2/ 01
KAREL , BRADLEY M
21,50
82918
03/02/01
KAREL,JULIE E
22000
82919
03/02/01
KIMLINGER,LAURA K
28.00
82920
03/02/01
KLEM,JOSH H
233.75
82921
03/02/01
KRIER, DANIEL G
33.75
82922
03/02/01
KRIER,JOHN T
63.75
82923
03/02/01
LANDE,JOSEPH R.
63.00
82924
03/02/01
LANDE,MICHAEL
55.00
82925
03/02/01
LEPPLA,JONATHAN G
33.00
82926
03/02/01
LUSHANKO,ADAM
22.00
82927
03/02/01
MARTINUCCI,ERIN R
28.00
82928
03/02/01
MICK,JONATHAN
41.00
82929
03/02/01
MCBRIDE,PATRICK D
230.50
82930
03/02/01
NIEMCZYK,ANTHONY R
77.00
82931
03/02/01
NIEMCZYK,BRIAN N
56.25
82932
03/02/01
O'GRADY,BENJAMIN T
13.00
82933
03/02/01
O'SHEA,COLETTE T
70.00
82934
03/02/01
OHLHAUSER.,MEGHAN M
130.50
82935
03/02/01
RAJAN,RAJIU E
70.00
82936
03/02/01
ROERING,JORDAN T
51.25
82937
03/02/01
SATTER, BONNIE K
19.50
82938
03/02/01
SHOBERG,KARI A
295.44
82939
03/02/01
SIKORA,PAUL T
44.00
82940
03/02/01
SPENCER,WILLIAM
56.25
16
17
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
82941
03/02/01
TARR- JR,GUS L
45.00
82942
03/02/01
THOMAS,RUSSELL
63.00
82943
03/02/01
UNGAR, KRI STOPHER
88.00
82944
03/02/01
VAUGHAN,PATRICK J
346.00
82945
03/02/01
WALSH,JESSICA M
52.00
82946
03/02./01
WERNER,KATIE M
198.75
82947
03/02/01
ZIELINSKI,JOSEPH R
20.25
82948
03/02/01
GERMAIN,DAVID
1761.28
82949
03/02/01
HAAG,MARK W
1541.93
82950
03/02/01
NADEAU,EDWARD A
2426.89
82951
03/02/01
FUDGE,SUSAN L
156.40
82952
03/02/01
GLASS,JEAN
1038.78
82953
03/02/01
HOIUM, SHEILA
954.67
82954
03/02/01
MOFFAT,ETHAN J
34.00
82955
03/02/01
PARTLOW,JOSHUA J
285960
82956
03/02/01
POWERS,NICOLE L
355.74
82957
03/02/01
RIDLEHOOVER,KATE I
468.54
82958
03/02/01
SCHMIDT,RUSSELL
1396.31
82959
03/02/01
SHOBERG,CARY J
666.66
82960
03/02/01
SMITH,AMY L
74.03
82961
03/02/01
ZAHRADKA,NICHOLAS T
124.10
82962
03/02/01
ANDERSON,TIMOTHY R
40.80
82963
03/02/01
BACHMAN,NICOLE T
58.23
82964
03/02/01
BODZIAK,MICHAEL D
302.25
82965
03/02/01
CARLSON,JULIE ANN
78.00
17
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
82966
03/02/01
CHAPMAN,JENNY A
394.58
82967
03/02/01
CMIEL.,NICHOLAS S
39.60
82968
03/02/01
COSTA,JOSEPH P
225.00
82969
03/02/01
DEMPSEY,BETH M
62.05
82970
03/02/01
DeGRAW,KRYSTAL M
5.86.33
82971
03/02/01
ERICKSON,CAROL A
63.45
82972
03/02/01
FONTAINE,ANTHONY
22.50
82973
03/02/01
GRUENHAGEN,LINDA C
297.75
82974
03/02/01
HAFNER,THOMAS J
51.56
82975
03/02/01
HAGGERTY,KATHRYN A
132.30
82976
03/02/01
HAWKE,ASHLEY RYAN
883.29
82977
03/02/01
HEINN,REBECCA L
288.70
82978
03/02/01
HOLMGREN,LEAH M
38.48
82979
03/02/01
HOULE,DENISE L
154.80
82980
03/02/01
IRISH,KARL D
133.25
82981
03/02/01
JOHNSON,ROB.ERT P
226.95
82982
03/02/01
JOHNSON,ROLLAND H
82.20
82983
03/02/01
JOHNSON,SUSAN M
67.50
82984
03/02/01
JOVONOVICH,TODD R
56.80
82985
03/02/01
KERSCHNER,BRANDON R
32.50
82986
03/02/01
KERSCHNER,JOLENE M
198.00
82987
03/02/01
KOEHNEN,MARY B
693.90
82988
03/02/01
KRONHOLM,KATHRYN R
130.00
82989
03/02/01
MEISEL,TAMBREY
11.25
82990
03/02/01
MILLS,ANNE K
81.25
iE3
AMOUNT
-------- - - - - --
102.38
87.75
165.39
187.83
120.25
137.55
42.50
258.70
151.70
59.70
117. 00
212.70
173.88
226.25
54.00
760.03
284.25
122.25
104.55
145.25
234.50
123.95
51.00
151.20
99.00
19
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
82991
03/02/01
MOSSONG,ANDREA M
82992
03/02/01
McMAHON,MELISSA E
82993
03/02/01
OIE,,GINA M
82994
03/02/01
OLSON,ABIGAIL E
82995
03/02/01
OWEN,JONATHAN
82996
03/02/01
PEHOSKI,JOEL T
82997
03/02/01
REGESTER, DOUG
82998
03/02/01
SMITLEY,SHARON L
82999
03/02/01
SWANER,JESSICA
83000
03/02/01
WARNER,CAROLYN
83001
03/02/01
WEDES,CARYL H
83002
03 / 02 / 01
WELTER, ELIZABETH M
83003
03/02/01
WELTER,KRISTINE M
83004
03/02/01
WHITE,NICOLE B
83005
03/02/01
WHITE,TIMOTHY M
83006
03/02/01
WILLIAMS,KELLY M
83007
03/02/01
WOODMAN,ALICE E
83008
03/02/01
ZIELINSKI,JENNIFER L
83009
03/02/01
BOSLEY,CAROL
83010
03/02/01
GLASS,GILLIAN
83011
03/02/01
GROPPOLI,LINDA M
83012
03/02/01
HANSEN,ANNA K
83013
03/02/01
HANSEN,EMILY J
83014
03/02/01
HUPPERT,ERICA L
83015
03/02/01
KONECZNY,JENNA M
AMOUNT
-------- - - - - --
102.38
87.75
165.39
187.83
120.25
137.55
42.50
258.70
151.70
59.70
117. 00
212.70
173.88
226.25
54.00
760.03
284.25
122.25
104.55
145.25
234.50
123.95
51.00
151.20
99.00
19
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK NUMBER
CHECK DATE
EMPLOYEE NAME
AMOUNT
83016
03/02/01
LARKIN,.JENNIFER L
217.76
83017
03/02/01
RADKE,ANN M
142.50
83018
03/02/01
SCHROEDER..,KATHLEEN
323.40
83019
03/02/01
TARNOWSKI,MICHAEL
52.80
83020
03/02/01
TRAPP,STACY M
128.25
83021
03/02/01
BEHAN,JAMES
1583.25
83022
03/02/01
CHAPEAU,GREG M
759.29
83023
03/02/01
DOUGLASS,TOM
264.60
83024
03/02/01
JAHN,DAVID J
1571.17
83025
03/02/01
KOSKI,JOHN F
1238.91
83026
03/02/01
KYRK,ASHLEY
94.50
83027
03/02/01
LANGEVIN,KRISTINA A
114.00
83028
03/02/01
LESLIE,DUSTIN G
216.00
83029
03/02/01
LONETTI.,JAMES F
939.22
83030
03/02/01
MAINA,FRANK
132.00
83031
03/02/01
MORIN,TROY J
174.00
83032
03/02/01
PATTERSON,ALBERT
800.45
83033
03/02/01
PRINS,KELLY M
306.51
83034
03/02/01
RISTOW,JONATHAN W
78.00
83035
03/02/01
ROSEBEAR,CRYSTAL J
18000
83036
03/02/01
SEVERSON,HOLLY A
90.00
83037
03/02/01
AICHELE, CRAIG J
1551.09
83038
03/02/01
MULVANEY.,DENNIS M
1929.55
83039
03/02/01
PRIEM, STEVEN A.
1769.72
357081.76
20
AGENDA NO. CJ
AGENDA REPORT
To:
City Manager
FROM: Finance Director
RE: DISPOSAL OF OLD FINANCIAL RECORDS
DATE: February 8, 2001
Action by Council
Date
Endorsed
Modified
Rejected
Annually the City disposes of financial records that have passed their legally
required retention period. However, before the records can be destroyed, the City
is required by law to submit the attached resolution and application for approval to
the State. It is recommended that the attached resolution be adopted so that the
appropriate financial records can be destroyed.
hu
C:\OFFICE\WP-DOCS\FINANCE\RECDISP.AGN
Attachments
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, M.S.A. 13 8.17 governs the destruction of city records; and
WHEREAS, a list of records :has been presented, to the Council with a request in
writing that destruction be approved by the Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA;
1. That the Finance Director is hereby directed to apply to the Minnesota
State Historical Society for an order authorizing destruction of the
records as described in the attached list.
2. That upon approval by the State of the attached application, the Finance
Director is hereby authorized and directed to destroy the records listed.
MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY
STATE ARCHIVES DEPARTMENT
APPLICATION FOR AUTHORITY
TO DISPOSE OF RECORDS
For use by Records Panel
Application No. Date
Instructions:
1. This form does not provide continuous authority to dispose of similar records and cannot be used to approve a records retention
schedule.
2. Complete original and three copies. Photocopies are acceptable.
3. Complete items 1 through 6 and item 8. Use reverse side to continue records description. If more space is needed, use plain paper.
4. Send original and two copies to the State Archives Department, 345 Kellogg Boulevard West, St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 -1906.
5. Retain one copy until your approved copy is returned. The approved copy will be your authority to dispose of records. It should be
retained permanently.
V. Additiana copies Of this foil are available from the address above or by telephoning 612- 2974502. (FAX: 612- 296 -9961)
NOTE: Laws of 1971, Chapter 529, Section 3 reads as follows: "It is the policy of the legislature that the disposal and preservation of public
records be controlled exclusively by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 138 and by this act, thus, no prior, special or general statute shall be
construed to authorize or prevent the disposal of public records at a time or in a manner different than prescribed by such chapter or by this
act and no general or special statute enacted subsequent to this act shall be construed to authorize or prevent the disposal of public records at a
time or in a manner different than prescribed in chapter 138 or in this act unless It expressly exempts such records from the P rovisions of such
chapter and this act by specific reference to this section."
1. Agency or Office 2. Division or Section
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD I Finance Department
3. Quantit of Records
2
Cubic Feet
4. Location of Records 5. Laws other than M.S. 138.17 that relate to the destruction or safekeeping of the
Maplewood Public Works Building records: None to our knowledge
6. I certify that the records listed on this application are accurately described, and that AUTHORIZATION: Under the authority of M.S. 138.17, it is hereby ordered that the
they have no further administrative, legal, or fiscal value for this agency. records listed on this application be destroyed, except as shown in item 7.
-►
Authorized Signature (Type name below) Director, Minnesota Historical Society Date
Daniel F. Faust February 8, 2001
Name Date Legislative or State Auditor Date
Finance Director 651/770-4513
Title Phone Attorney General Date
7. Exceptions to Destruction. (For use by Records Disposition Panel).
8. Description of Records. Describe each record series or type of record separately. Number each series, beginning with " 1
a. Item No. b. Name of record, form numbers, content, usage, arrangement, original, c. Inclusive Dates
duplicate, or microfilmed.
1 FINANCIAL RECORDS (6 -year retention)
Cash Treasurer Report Original 1994
A/P Check Register Original 1994
Bank Statements /Bank Reconciliation Original 1994
Deposit Slips Original 1994
Cancelled A/P Checks Original 1994
(OVER)
a. Item No. b. Name of record, form numbers, content, usage, arrangement, original, c. Inclusive Dates
duplicate, or microfilmed.
(1 cont.)
2
6K
0
FINANCIAL RECORDS (6- year), Continued
Receipts Original
Journal Entry Books Original
Budget Changes Documentation Original
Charitable Gambling Original
A/R Cash Receipts Journal Original
Ambulance Billing Records Original
A/R MIS /DEV Billing Records Original
,..,,FINANCIAL RECORDS (10 -year retention)
Invoice Registers /Journals Original
Paid Invoices & Claim Vouchers Original
PAYROLL RECORDS (6 -year retention)
P/R Leave Hours Report
Original
Time Sheets
Original
P /R. Check Register
Original
Cancelled P/R Checks
Original
Quarterly P/R Reports
Original
Garnishments
Original
P/R Deductions - UW, W -2, W -4 Forms
Original
Pay Rate Documentation
Original
Health Insurance Books
Original
Accident Reports
Original
1099 Information
Original
UTILITY BILLING RECORDS (2- to 6 -year retention)
Adjustment Reports (6 -yr.)
Original
Billings (Register) (5 -yr)
Original
Daily Transaction Reports (5 -yr)
Original
Receipts: Utility Bill Stubs & Cash
Register Tape (6 -yr)
Original
1994
1994
1994
1994
1994
1994
1994
1990
1990
1994
1994
1994
1994
1994
1994
1994
1994
1994
1994
1994
1994
1993
1993
1994
PR-1 (1/14)
I
C:\OFFICE\WP-DOCS\FORMS\DISPOSE.REC
AGENDA ITEM NO - 3
MEMO
To:
Richard Fursman
From:
Melinda Coleman M,(�
Subject:
Cable Commission Grant
Date:
February 28, 2001
Action by Council
Date
Endorsed
Modified _�....
Rejected
INFORMATION
The City recently received $1,000 from the Ramsey- Washington Suburban Cable Commission to
be used for the development of the city's web page. Details are in the attached letter. Before the
money can be spent, the City Council should approve the appropriate budget adjustment. The
$1,000 should be recorded as revenue to the Data Processing Fund.
REQUESTED ACTION
Staff requests that the $1,000 be recorded and appropriated to the Data Processing Fund. The
funds will be used to enhance our city web site.
RAMSEY-WASMNGTON SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION
7245 Stillwater, Boulevard North
Oakdale, Minnesota 55128
Birchwood Village
Dell wood
Grant
Lake Elmo
Mahtomedi
Maplewood
Telephone: 651- 779 -7144
Telecopier: 651- 779 -8990
North St. Paul..
Oakdale
Vadnais Heights
White Bear Lake
White Bear Township
Willernie
Richard Fursman
City of Maplewood
1830 East County Rd. B
Maplewood, MN 55109
Dear Richard:
February 21, 2001
Enclosed please find a check to your municipality in the amount of $1, 000
from the Ramsey /Washington Cable Commission. This is a one -time grant from
the Commission which is given to each member municipality.
The purpose of the grant is to help pay for or defray costs associated with
the development of a municipal Web site. The idea is to encourage member
municipalities to either start a Web site or continue and enhance the site they already
have.
Municipalities are also welcomed to take advantage of the high speed cable
modem service which is offered by AT &T Broadband to each municipality free of
charge under the franchise agreement. Along with a cable modem, AT &T Broadband
also allows for a Web site with this free service (AT &T Broadband actually sets aside
space on its server for the site, but the actual development and ongoing updating of
the content is the responsibility of the subscriber, and it is for this aspect that
municipalities may wish to use the grant, for example).
Enclosed also please find a listing of institutional sites eligible under the
franchise agreement for AT &T Broadband cable modem service (listed as "free
MediaOne Express "). Included in this list are the municipal buildings designated for
such service. To activate service at any location, please contact me at the
Commission office.
Meanwhile, please feel free to contact me if you should have any questions.
Sincerely,
Tim Finne
rtY
Executive Director
TWF: do
Enc.
cc: Mary Koppen
AGENDAMEMN00- G _ f
TO: City Manager
FROM: Thomas Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director
SUBJECT: 2000 Community Design Review Board Annual Report
DATE: February 22, 2001
INTRODUCTION
Attached is the 2000 community design review board annual report.
COMMITTEE ACTION
Action by - - t
Date - -
Endorsed
Iced
,► j
February 21, 2001: The community design review board finalized their annual report and moved
to forward it to the city council for review and acceptance.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the 2000 community design review board annual report.
p:lmisscellldrban rep. 00 (6.2)
Attach
2000 Community Design Review Board Annual Report
1
3,
i
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FRAM: Matt Ledvina, Chair
SUBJECT: 2000 Community Design Review Board Annual Report
DATE: February 1, 2001
INTRODUCTION
In 2000, the community design review board (CDRB) reviewed 44 items:
New Development Proposals
24
Expansionsand Remodeling
6
Sign Reviews
1
Code Changes
1
Variances
5
Miscellaneous
7
Total
44
COMPARATIVE TABLE 1994 -1998
Year Number of Items Reviewed
1994
54
1995
57
1996
31
1997
53
1998
35
1999
28
ATTENDANCE
Board Member Meetings Attended (of 18 meetings)
Matt Ledvina
18
Ananth Shankar
13
Tim Johnson
12
Craig Jorgenson
14
Jon LaCasse
17
DISCUSSION
2000 was a busy year with 24 new development proposals and six addition and remodeling
pro proposals. Some projects were controversial
p p j oversiai such as the Woodland Hills Church on Builder's
Square site and Emma's Place, a 13 -unit subsidized townhouse development north of City ty Hall.
There were four cellular - telephone tower proposals and several housing developments. In
addition to Emma's Place, the housing developments reviewed were: Woodlyn Heights
Townhomes #7 (nine units), New Century Townhomes (93 units), Dearborn Meadow Twinhomes
i
0 0 nits), Pineview Estates Condominiums (72 units), Rosoto Senior Apartments 70 units
Birc Glen Apartments (60 units), Emerald Estates Town homes (12 units) and the Highpoint
Townhomes (36 units). The community design review board has endeavored to improve the
city's site - lighting ordinance. The board invited Ms. Tine Thevenin, a researcher on this subject
to present her thoughts and ideas on site lighting. As a result of this discussion, the board is in
the process of evaluating potential changes to the site - lighting ordinance to improve energy
conservation and reduce light pollution for the City of Maplewood. Some of the other ro'ects
p J
approved in 2000 were: the new post office annex on Gervais Avenue, Bennigan's Restaurant
and Pub, the Gladstone Fire Station, Forest Products, Wheeler Lumber Landscaping,
Maplewood Corner Shoppes on the old Bali Hai site and a substantial addition to Mounds Park
Academy. In addition to these reviews, the board also reviewed an amendment to the curbing
requirements.
In 2001, the board is looking forward to reviewing areas of special concern such as the 80 -acre
Robert Hajicek property near the Maplewood Mall. The board also feels that there may be a
need to evaluate the building and design criteria as it relates to the White Bear Avenue Corridor
Study which was completed in 1999.
The board is dedicated to promoting attractive development in Maplewood and will continue to
require quality building designs in the year 2001.
pAmisscellldrban rep. 00 (6.2)
2
AGENDA ITEM NO G � S
J
MEMORANDUM Action by Council
Bate
TO: City Manager Endorsed
FROM: Thomas Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director Modified
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Review — Ramsey County Family Service Cen ected
LOCATION: 2001 Van Dyke Street - - - -- - - - - - - --
DATE: February 1, 2001
INTRODUCTION
The conditional use permit (CUP) for the Ramsey County Family Service Center at 2001 Van Dyke
Street is due for review. The city code requires a CUP for public- agency buildings. Refer to the
maps on pages 2-4. This facility is a 21 -room, 55 -bed shelter that primarily serves women and
children. It opened on February 1, 2000.
BACKG
January 25, 1999: The city council approved a land use plan change from P (parks) to G
(government facility), a CUP and building, site and landscape plans for the Family Service Center.
Refer to the minutes on pages 5 -10.
March 27, 2000: The city council approved reviewed this CUP and moved to review it again in one
year.
DISCUSSION
The county has completed all of the work associated with this facility with the exception of the
installation of the elevator in the county barn. The elevator installation was a condition of the CUP.
Staff is holding $140,000 in escrow for the installation of the elevator. The city council's intent was
that the county install the elevator, not for the city staff to merely hold their money. Ramsey County
should either install the elevator as required or request that the city council amend the CUP to drop
the requirement.
RECOMMENDATION
Review the conditional use permit for the Ramsey County Family Service Center at 2001 Van Dyke
Street in one year. By that time the county shall either have installed the elevator in the county barn
or have applied for an amendment to their conditional use permit to drop the elevator condition.
p:sec141famshelt. rev
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Property Line /Zoning Map
3. Site Plan
4. City Council Minutes dated January 25, 1999
Attachment 1
Lu
z (A
z oc <62> I I
W S U �R AVE. E NA Q' 1-4-
U MER AV O v
° >
• 9
V z
RIPLEY AVE.
0 0 N G Woketietd o
• � } 0 Joke m <a>
— y �ii KINGSTON A VE.
SOP HIA AVE C z -'
_ W W W PRICE AVE. V)
z �, Y N m
75 Lu
PRICE �►� • C W
z W
W cr m
ad
VIKING
DR. i
Kn a od Lake
�--�
CASTLE AVE.
•
SHERREN AVE.
COPE
�
�
AVE.
COPE AVE
!� (;�
AV
u N AVE
C7
�ii LARK Q AVE.
a cn
,,.
z
=
V
vA = LAURIE R
c=n
u LAURIE
RD.
o LAURIE ° RD.
W
V
u
MCKNOW LN
D
D
Li
O SAND
URST
z '
AVE. S
a
W v
J
W
W
z
z
Y CO. RD.
z
N
B �n
?CE
AVE m eURKE
AVE. o
BURKE AVE.
center
G�
,
0 _: EIDR IDLE
ti
AVE. $
�'^ �+++
I
`���
�
FAMILY SERVICE
BE LMONT AVE.
ift I(°
CENTER
AV
E. SKILL MAN AVE.
ewo
I�ARRIS AVE.
CRY ma
J
ROSEWOOD A
N.
w
R P
AN AV.
��
ROSEWCOID
AVE. S.
�
8 W
AVE •
ALDRICN
G00 CH HOLLOWAY
�O
Lu
z (A
z oc <62> I I
W S U �R AVE. E NA Q' 1-4-
U MER AV O v
° >
• 9
V z
RIPLEY AVE.
0 0 N G Woketietd o
• � } 0 Joke m <a>
— y �ii KINGSTON A VE.
SOP HIA AVE C z -'
_ W W W PRICE AVE. V)
z �, Y N m
75 Lu
PRICE �►� • C W
z W
W cr m
LOCATION MAP 4
2 N
�
�
S
RI
PLFY
AV
KINGSTON]
AVE.
z
=
V
O
u
MCKNOW LN
S
�
LARPE14TEUI
�
oWC
LOCATION MAP 4
2 N
to •
1 1 ► '- 12 M ' � i
110 T
-T -AV E 0 i
.
j.aT e►t. � �o
r
{ +�
35
(2.45ot
I .9C�•
�•�eel 2 � -
e
.1
�I
IT , RE
Z L
�)I6 BUILDI o
N0 F -
too
, �� s �, ; �+ ? �_ ,i i J b, VAN K� ST .
COUNTY BULL. INGS
�. t w I.OSw• t
f
I
r ! o
FAMILY SERVI
` IL
-•: -=—�;� CENTER
FROST AVE. --
RAMSEY CO
6 (S) -� M Y NURSING HOME
RA
(d) o
2,22 vs ki
Q
O
R �
( (te) • RAMSEY COUNTY Lu
t43S of*
;� : :KV ► t
Z3) ui
"ILL •:
to AL.DRICH ARENA
"S Its
r'
;tom) 12
M G O
DOME_
_ LULL zIPs � - • • •
A.-m" RI P L EY AVE.
(0 9
..} 14 S n o
PROPERTY LINE 1 ZONING MAP
3
RAMSEY COUNTY
GOLF COURSE
4
N
, Attachment 2
oncWe 9- Attachment 3
i.
1
COUNTY BUILDINGS
t .fj
4� r, t ul
I,
FROST AVE.
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
1
1
1
1
I
i
1
i
i!
11
W:
>
Co
W
F-
2
1
r -� /�• . J i s.: ''. � •. � • � ' • �i •� y •
ALDRICH ARENA
�•� � .�.~�S• *i ;•MYa�" w � 1 �_• :•- • .may
• �'� - � ► . Zit GG.f �•� .r :..:...r
_•�.S'. t ♦ .••}.7 'a-:..• • ••f1''
• �,��� -� nt�� •T l w {.ter �. �
•
1
I
i
l
1
SITE PLAN
4
RECREATION _
r 'i �.�.'•.� • 4w ��•
BUILDING .u � : �
. a :L'.i si•:�..
T • T 4.
�' • `e S s i•:R Vii •
j • ow
• _.:� ID -. FAMILY SERVICE
�.:. .• } ''CENTER
w� ;
W
W
IL
of
i
I
t
RAMSEY NURSING_ HOME
&
4
N
&
4
N
Attachment 4
Dick Zangs, 2071 E. California - St. Paul
;reg Co eland, 612 E. Cook Ave. - St. Paul
Jeff Wi 1 i ams , 1890 Barclay St. - Maplewood
Lori La Bey, 1758 Waik Ave. - Maplewood
Father, Michael Reding, 1735 Kennard St. - Maplewood-
Carrie Wasby, , 762 Geranium - St. Paul
J. Tacheny, Edina Realty, 2303 Minnehaha - Maplewood
Ruth Santella, 1579 Cottage
Regina LaRoche Thiene - Maplewood HRC
Irene Ripley, 2276 Holloway Ave. - Maplewood
Sue Butler, 1967 Payne Ave. - Maplewood
Mark D. Bradley Sr., 2164 Woodlynn Avenue - Maplewood
Beth Blick, 401 Ashland Avenue #9, St. Paul
Mary Schoenborn, 2649 Midvale Place - Maplewood
Sandra'Nelson, 1510 .Eastshore Dr., St. Paul
Howard Muraski, 55 McClelland St. - Maplewood
g. Mayor Rossbach closed the public hearing at 12:00 p.m..
Councilmember Carlson (12.05 a.m.) moved tend the meetina until the agenda was
corn d.
Seconded by Councilmember Kittridge Ayes - all
st aff �,ouncilmember Kittrid introduced the followin Resolution amendina the ComDreV&,
ing Home and-Cotwt-�����
Mill °1!! •1 and moved its !�•• •1
RESOLUTION
99 -01 -05
LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Ramsey County applied fora change to the city's land use plan from P (parks)
to G (government facility).
WHEREAS, the city staff proposed a change to the city's land use plan from P (parks)
to G (government facility) for the Ramsey Nursing Home site and the county barn site to
bring the land use plan into conformance with these uses.
.WHEREAS, this change applies to the Ramsey Nursing Home (2000 White Bear Avenue), the
proposed Family Service Center northeast of the nursing home and the county barn (2020 White
Bear Avenue). The legal description is:
SUBJ TO AVE THE W 620 FT OF N 438 FT OF SW 1/4 AND W 620 FT OF S 235 8/10 FT OF NW 1/4
ALSO N 52 FT OF S 287 8/10 FT OF W 160 05/100 SD NW 1/4 ALL IN SEC 14 TN 29 RN 22
AND
1 -25 -99
5
SUBJ TO AYES AND ESMTS AND EX W 620 FT OF N 438 FT THE W 810 FT OF N % OF SW 1 4
t Z OF SEC
14 TN29R
N 22
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
1. On December 21, 1998, the planning commission held a ublic hearing. Th
ubl i shed a P 9 e ci staff
p hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding
property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a ch
speak and resent written 9 nce to
s
P p statements. The planning commission recommended that th
city council approve the land use p g plan change.
. e
2. On January 25, 1999, the city council discussed the land use lan
p change. They
consi .
dered reports and recommendations from the tannin commission and ci
p g ty staff..
NOW, 'THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the _
change because:
city council approve the above described
1. This change for the proposed Family Service Center would be consi
r ' � stent with the
comprehensive ehensi ve plans goals and pot i cies by rove di n housi n and services
� � p g g to meet the
needs of nontraditional households.
2. This change would correct the land use tan ma b incorporating the
p P Y P g Ramsey Nursing
Home site and the county barn site into the G classifi rather than the c urrent
P cl
'econded by Councilmember Carlson Ayes - Councilmembers Carlson, on. Kittredge. &
Allenspach
Nays - Mayor Rossbach & Councilmember Koppen
MOTION FAILED
I •1 • .1 II - II• -
ML �• .��•� �• 1 •1� •1 1• �• 11 /•_
34 1
1' '�•
to W 9.11 111 ' i •
if •1 •1 1 i' • 1' �•.II • .1 . 1 o w •• •1 1
RIM
1! 1•!1• • 1 11'ilK ► �•' • • • #�•� . 1 II.1�11'flowors- ST & Tr
MAORI 110114WILAWAR I! 11 II'il•' ffe1
RESOLUTION
99 -01 -06
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Ramsey County applied fora conditional use permit for a family service
1 -25 -99
6
center.
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the site northeast of the Ramsey Nursing Home at
2000 White Bear Avenue. The legal description is:
SUBJ TO AVE THE W 620 FT OF N 438 FT OF SW 1/4 AND W 620 FT OF S 235 8/10 FT OF NW 1/4
ALSO N 52 FT OF S 287 8/10 FT OF W 160 05/100 SD NW 1/4 ALL IN SEC 14 TN 29 RN 22
AND
SUBJ TO AVES AND ESMTS AND EX W 620 FT OF N 438 FT THE W 810 FT OF N 2 OF SW 1/4 OF SEC
14 TN 29 RN 22
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On December 21, 1998, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve this permit.
2. On January 25, 1999, the city council held a public hearing. City staff published a
notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The council
gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The
council also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning
commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above - described
conditional use permit, because:
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 not involve an activi p rocess, materials e quipment
y y p or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, 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 runoff, vibration, general
unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not
create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
6. The use would be served by adequate 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.
8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and
scenic features into the development design.
. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
1 -25 -99
7
lO.The proposed Family Service Center is considered a governmental use and is consistent
with the other Ramsey County facilities and operations such as the adjacent Nursing
Home.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of
community development may approve minor changes.
2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council
approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline
for one year.
3. - The city council shall review this permit in one year.
4. The county shall add more parking to the site if the city council deems it necessary.
5. Before issuance of a building permit, the County shall provide concrete evidence of a
negotiated agreement with the local school government regarding all logistical and
financial ramifications incurred by this establishment.
6. There shall be no increase in size or capacity of the structure
7. The County shall assume financial responsibility for all services provided to the
residents of the Shelter that would normally be charged to the citizens (Example:
Ambulance and paramedic runs)
80 All elements of the listed Emergency Housing Program Parameters shall remain in force
unless a change is agreed to by the City Council at a subsequent CUP review.
9. The County shall arrange with the contractor to assure no loss of space or utilities,
normally available to the 1999 Ramsey County Fair, shall occur.
10.A11 heretofore and subsequent agreements regarding restitution and expansion of the
area for County Fair purposed shall be completed before a certificate of occupancy is
issued. The new access to the lower level as agreed upon by the fair board and the
county shall be completed before the 1999 fair. Other improvements shall include but
not be limited to legitimate handicapped access to the barn upper level, and all other
improvements discussed in the fair board negotiations.
11.Parking spaces on the North side of the designated East -West Van Dyke Ave. Shall be
redesigned in accordance with the concerns of the Fair Board in the use of this area.
The new layout shall meet the approval of the fair Board and the City. Each year at
a prearranged time before and during fair week, all these new parking areas shall be
evacuated from the use of the fair board at their discretion, if the use of these is
to be an advantage to them.
12.A11 disturbed electrical and other utilities, which affect the fair operation, shall
be completely restored and ready for the 1999 fair.
13.If at any time, the City Council determines there is a need, the County will contract
for, or provide from their own staff, security patrols in the complex bounded by the
Willard Munger Trail, White Bear Avenue, Ripley Street, and the Goodrich Golf course.
1 -25 -99
P
1
Ti and extent of the patrol will be established at that point in time.
14.This Conditional Use Permit will be reviewed annually, and if in the opinion of the
City Council, any evidence of negative repercussion to the area, or valid reason that
the facility has caused undue hardship to the residents, the city may revoke the
Conditional Use Permit with no financial obligation to the city, and the normal
amortization process would not apply. The County would then have one hundred and
twenty (120) days to cease operations as a homeless shelter and devote the structure
to an acceptable planned backup use such as elderly care.
15.A11 portions of the Conditional Use Permit and land use plan shall be agreed to by the
county and a letter agreeing to all elements of the same shall be submitted to the city
before issuance of a building permit.
16. Ramsey County shall be responsible for the maintenance and plowing on the sidewalk
along White Bear Avenue from the County facilities to the Gateway Trail.
Seconded by Councilmember Carlson
Councilmember Kittridge moved to s
Ayes - Councilmember Kittridge & Carlson, Mayor
Rossbach
Nays - Councilmembers Koppen & Allenspach
property owner, Ramsey County, shall do the following:
The
1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for
this project.
2. Before getting a, building permit. the applicant shall provide the following for
staff approval:
a. A grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plan.
b. A sidewalk/trail plan for the extension and connection to the Gateway Trail.
.,.c. A revised � Y
site plan showing the handicap parking next to the front sidewalk.
3. Complete the following before occupying the building:
a. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure for any outside trash containers. The
enclosures must be 100 percent opaque, match the color of the building and have
a closeable gate that extends to the ground. If the trash container is not
visible to the public it does not have to be screened.
b. Install all required landscaping. An in- ground lawn irrigation system is not
required since there are county maintenance personnel on site to water landscaped
areas.
c. Construct, maintain & plow the sidewalk /trail extension and connection along
White Bear Avenue.
d. Screen any roof -top mechanical equipment that would be visible from the Ramsey
Nursing Home. Any other roof -top units that are visible from any other direction
1 -25 -99
9
1
must be painted to match � h the building.
e. The screening mentioned in 3.a. and d. shall be subject to staff
a pp rova 1.
4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if:
a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety
or welfare.
b. The city receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the
required work. The amount shall be 200 of the cost of the unfinished work.
c. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any
unfinished work.
5. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development
approve minor changes. may
Seconded by Councilmember Carlson
Ayes - Councilmembers Allenspach. Kittridge,
Carlson & Mayor Rossbach
Nays - Councilmember Koppen
I. AWARtI n
NONE
J. UNFTNTSNFILg JqTNFCc
-NONE
K. NEW B [SMM
NONE
L. VISTT(1R PRG rrnMc
NONE
M. C0 pRFCGI�Te
NONE
N. ADMTNTSrQernVc eercrNr.TT.,....
NONE
0. AD.lnl �RNM�ur
rouncilmember Carlson motioned to adjourn the meeting at 12:42 p.m.
1 - 25 -99
10
AGENDA NO. GF &
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
DATE: March 5, 2001
Action by Council
Date
Endorsed
Modified
Rejected
RE: Lawful Gambling License - White Bear Avenue Business Association
Introduction
The White Bear Avenue Business Association has submitted an application for a lawful
gambling license to be held at The Bird Night Club, 3035 White Bear Avenue.
Background
City Code directs that lawful gambling permits be approved by the City Council. Proceeds of the
games will be used for the following purposes: community development, youth sports and local
schools.
Background checks have been completed on the officers listed on the application and nothing
was found that would prevent a license from being issued.
Recommendation
It is recommended that council approve the lawful gambling application for the Association.
AGENDA ITEM NO...fi- _ '
MEMO TO: Richard Fursman
FROM: Steve Hurley
SUBJECT: CJDN Joint Powers Agreement
DATE: 3/1/01
Action by Council.
Date
Endorsed
Modified
Rejected
INTRODUCTION: A signed joint powers agreement and a signed and certified City
resolution indicating authority to enter into a joint powers agreement is needed by the
Minnesota Department of Public Safety.
BACKGROUND: The Minnesota Department of Public Safety is providing network
services to state law enforcement agencies.. As a part of the, process the City of
Maplewood must enter into a joint powers agreement for distribution of these services.
The city must indicate which of two service options it selects. The agreement also
outlines State and Governmental Unit responsibilities, effective dates, liabilit y and so on.
REQUESTED ACTION: A resolution approving the joint powers agreement between
the City of Maplewood and Minnesota Department of Public Safety for CJDN network
services and three signed copies of the joint powers agreement.
MN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
CRIMINAL JUSTICE DATA COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK AGREEMENT
(DISTRIBUTION OF NETWORK SERVICES TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES)
Contract #
THIS JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT, by and between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of
Public Safety, Office of Technical Support Services - (hereinafter referred to as the STATE) and - - the City of
Maplewood, Maplewood Police Department, 1830 East County Road B, Maplewood, MN 55109 (hereinafter
referred to as GOVERNMENTAL UNIT) witness that:
WHEREAS, the STATE, pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 299C.46, Subdivision 1 is authorized to lease or
purchase facilities and equipment as may be necessary to establish and maintain the data communications network
with criminal justice agencies, and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute, Chapter 299C. 46, Subdivision 2 defines criminal justice agencies allowed to
connect to the criminal justice data communications network, and
WHEREAS, the STATE, pursuant to Laws of Minnesota for 1999, Chapter 216, Article 1, Section 7, Subdivision 3 is
appropriated funds for the statewide criminal and juvenile justice data information system upgrade; and
WHEREAS, the STATE, pursuant to Laws of Minnesota for 2000, Chapter 311, Article 1, Section 3 is appropriated
funds for criminal justice technology infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, Subdivision 10 authorizes both the STATE and the
GOVERNMENTAL UNIT to enter into joint powers agreements, and,
WHEREAS, the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT represents that it meets all requirements for this Agreement as a
criminal justice agency, or is a city, county, or political subdivision participating on criminal justice
communications network authorized to accept network services from the STATE for the purpose specified
herein, and
WHEREAS, the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT represents that it is duly qualified and willing to perform and carry outthe
services and tasks described in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed:
I. SERVICE OPTIONS Criminal justice agencies may select either option A or B below. Cities, counties, or
political subdivisions may only select option A. Service option checked below applies to this Agreement
A. = The STATE's base installation is a T1 access circuit, a defined level of backbone
bandwidth, and supported telecommunication equipment which includes (modem, DSU /CSU, and
router).
The total cost of the network connection will be computed based on the combined requirements of the
STATE and the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT for backbone bandwidth, supported telecommunication
equipment with appropriate ports, access circuit, and installation. The STATE will pay what they would
have paid for the base installation, as specified in Clause II of this agreement, and the
GOVERNMENTAL UNIT through a service agreement with the Minnesota Department of
Administration Intertechnologies Group (ITG) will pay the difference. This will include an additional
PVC or an increase in the base bandwidth, an appropriate level of Community Router Service, and
may include an additional router port.
CJDN traffic will have priority routing. Either party to this Agreement can expand their bandwidth within
the available bandwidth, but if a conflict in bandwidth needs occurs, then the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT
PAGE 1 of 4
will order another access circuit from ITG for their use at the prevailing rates. The same
telecommunications equipment can be used.
B. GOVERNMENTAL UNITS wants to utilize available CJDN bandwidth.
If the expected bandwidth requirements by the GOVERMENTAL UNIT are low, the GOVERNMENTAL
UNIT can utilize some of the available bandwidth within the planned network. The GOVERNMENTAL
UNIT must obtain the STATE's approval in advance for each type of service that they want to use. The
only cost of this option to the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT will be for an additional router port, if it were
needed in order to segregate the CJDN traffic and establish the required separate segment.
CJDN traffic will have priority routing and if the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT experiences bandwidth congestion
1 . ( response `time), then the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT can acquire additional bandwidth, if available, on the
existing circuit or the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT can acquire another circuit connection through InterTech.
The same installed router can still be used.
II. STATE'S RESPONSIBILITIES
A. The STATE shall, by the nature of the location of the GOVERNMENTAL UNITS that it serves,
cause the Minnesota Network (MNet) to be extended to more locations throughout the state. This
provides an opportunity for GOVERNMENTAL UNITS to partner with the STATE and ITG to more
fully utilize the planned network connections and increase connectivity between public sector
organizations.
B. Wherever feasible, the STATE shall use current MNet digital network connections to connect to
participating agencies for the purposes of criminal justice access. If a GOVERNMENTAL UNIT
does not have a current MNet connection or it is inadequate for the application, the Criminal
Justice Data Communications Network (CJDN) Upgrade Project will bring routed connectivity to
that site.
C. The STATE, through ITG, will coordinate and pay the telephone company for the initial inside
(premium) wiring service at the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT's site, not to exceed $200.00. This
cost is limited to the wiring from the Main Point of Presence (MPOP) in the facility to the
STATE provided router, unless otherwise specified within this agreement.
D. The STATE, through ITG, will determine the bandwidth requirement for the CJDN applications at
each site and will coordinate and pay the telephone company for the initial installation of the circuit
required to support that bandwidth.
E. The STATE, through ITG, will coordinate and pay the telephone company for the initial installation
and monthly cost of the circuit located at the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT's site.
F. The STATE, through ITG, will coordinate and pay for the initial activation, support, and
maintenance of one router port on the MNet router located at the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT's site.
If an additional port is required, the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT will be required to pick upthe monthly
charge. Access Control Lists (ACL) for the connection to the STATE will be maintained by ITG
with the approval of the STATE.
G. The ITG will ensure that a separate, and dedicated, modem line is installed at the
GOVERNMENTAL UNIT's site for the express purpose of monitoring the ITG owned and
maintained MNet router.
H. The STATE, through ITG, will maintain the Access Control Lists (ACL) on the MNet routers for
PAGE 2 of 4
connection to the STATE for the purpose of gaining access to criminal justice information.
The ITG will bill the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT its appropriate share of the costs depending on
service options and /or service agreements entered into between the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT and
ITG.
III. GOVERNMENTAL UNIT'S RESPONSIBILITIES GOVERNMENTAL UNIT receiving equipment and /or
services under this Agreement must:
A. If a circuit is to be installed, the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT shall grant access to the facility main
point of presence (MPOP) for the telephone company installer to install the circuit.
B. The GOVERNMENTAL UNIT shall indicate to the telephone company installer where the MNet
router is located or will be installed within the facility (this is premium wiring).
C. Following the initial premium'wiring, the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT shall be responsible for any and
all costs of installing, repairing or replacing internal wiring in support of their criminal justice data
communications network connection. Further, the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT will be responsible for
any cost associated with damaged wiring due to relocations, misuse, or abuse.
D. The GOVERNMENTAL UNIT shall report to the STATE any plans to relocate their offices that
would impact their criminal justice data communications network connection. A minimum of 120
days notice is required to ensure uninterrupted service for circuit moves. In all cases, the relocation
costs are the responsibility of the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT.
E. The GOVERNMENTAL UNIT shall provide and maintain any disposable and consumable
components originally provided by the STATE, and shall supply all other necessary disposable and
consumable components not provided by the STATE at the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT's expense.
F. The GOVERNMENTAL UNIT shall properly dispose of any and all state provided internal wiring
when it is no longer operational or needed for connectivity to the criminal justice data
communications network.
G. If an additional port is required, the GOVERNMENT UNIT will be required to pick up the monthly
charge. Access Control Lists (ACL) for the connection to the STATE will be maintained by ITG
with the approval of the STATE.
H. The GOVERNMENTAL UNIT is required to sign a Service Agreement with ITG if they selected
Option A of this Agreement.
IV. TER MS OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall be effective on 3/26/01 , or upon the date that the final required signature
is obtained by the STATE, pursuant to Minn. Stat. 16C.05, Subdivision. 2, whichever occurs later, and shall
remain in effect until 3/27/06 , or until all obligations set forth in this Agreement have been
satisfactorily fulfilled or the Agreement has been canceled, whichever happens first.
V. TERMINATION
This Agreement may be terminated by either the STATE or GOVERNMENTAL UNIT at any time, with or
without cause, upon ten (10) days written notice to the other party.
VI. STATE'S AUTHORIZED AGENT
The STATE's authorized agent for the purposes of this Agreement is Robert P. Johnson or his designee,
Department of Public Safety, Office of Technic Support Services, 444 Minnesota Street. Suite 140. Town
Square, St. Paul, MN 55101 -5140 Such agent shall have final authority for acceptance of the
GOVERNMENTAL UNIT's services.
PAGE 3 of 4
VII. ASSIGNMENT
GOVERNMENTAL UNIT shall neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this Agreement
without the prior written consent from the STATE.
VIII. LIABILITY
The GOVERNMENTAL UNIT shall indemnify, save and hold the STATE, its representatives and
employees, harmless from any and all claims or causes of action, including all attorneys' fees incurred by
the STATE, arising from the performance of this Agreement by the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT or
GOVERNMENTAL UNIT's employees, agents, or subcontractors. This clause shall not be construed to bar
any legal remedies the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT may have for the STATE's failure to fulfill its obligations
pursuant to this Agreement. The GOVERNMENTAL UNIT's liability shall be governed by the provisions of
the Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.01- 466.15 and other applicable law.
IX. STATE AUDIT
The books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices of the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT
and its employees, agents or subcontractors relevant to this Agreement shall be made available and
subject to examination by the STATE, including the contracting Agency /Division, Legislative Auditor, and
State Auditor for a minimum period of six years from the end of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed intending to be bound thereby.
APPROVED
:=
G.L� `.....�t ll:�� 'A ...UNIT . ::....:......:...::::..:....... ::............. . .......
...• ........................................•.......... •:............................. :............... ....... E:NT': C3E:: P:UB:I'C': •. :....:: :.::....:.•..•..•......•..•.•.• •.•.•.-
A T
By: By: Janet M. Cain
Title: Title: Chief Information Officer
Date:
in
Title:
Date
Date:
rerson(s) signing the Agreement and obligating the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT to the conditions of the agreement
must be authorized. A certified copy of the resolution authorizing the GOVERNMENTAL UNIT to enter into this
Agreement and designating person(s) to execute this Agreement must be attached hereto.
PAGE 4 of 4
AGENDA NO. v � v
Action by Council
Date
Endorsed
AGENDA REPORT Modified �,--
Rejected
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
RE: Staff Liaison to Historical Preservation Commission
DATE: March 5, 2001
Attached is a request that apart -time employee be appointed as a staff liaison to
the Historical Preservation Commission retroactive to January 6, 1999. The
request includes information, which indicates that a former employee spent 29
hours in 1999 and 20 hours in 2000 at Historical Preservation Commission
meetings. The request is based upon a commitment made by the previous City
Manager.
No money was included in the budget to finance a staff liaison to the Historical
Preservation Commission because the Acting City Manager did not believe it was
necessary. If the City Council believes it is important that there be a staff liaison
to the Historical Preservation Commission I will prepare a list of options for the
Council to consider at the next meeting.
It is recommended that the City Council approve the request for payment of time
spent in 1999 and 2000 at $11.00 per hour and a budget transfer from the
General Fund contingency account to finance the payment.
c: \agn \budget - historical commission.doc
February 17, 2001 Page 1 of 2
TO: Maplewood City Manager Richard Fursman
Mayor Robert Cardinal
Council Members: Sherry Allenspach
Ken Collins
Marvin Koppen
Julie Wasiluk
FROM: Anne Fosburgh - 651 - 777 -6339
2516 E. Idaho Avenue
Maplewood, MN 55119
REPRESENTING: The Maplewood Area Historical Society
and the Historical Preservation Commission
As per my conversation with Mr. Fursman on Thursday, February 15, 1 am writing
this letter to request that Lois Behm be paid by the City of Maplewood as our Liaison
between the City of Maplewood and the Historical Preservation Commission of the
Maplewood Area Historical Society.
There is a MEMORANDUM addressed to Ken Haider from Lois Behm, dated
September 19, 2000 that gives you some background. (Memorandum attached).
I quote from paragraph 2 from a conversation with Mike McGuire (former city manager)
"I (Lois Behm) would become a part -time employee of the City, being paid $11 .00/hour
for time spent at meetings and preparing the minutes and reports."
We are requesting that the City of Maplewood live up to this agreement with Lois
Behm as our Liaison for the Historical Preservation Commission.
LOIS takes, prints, mails minutes of our meetings along with meeting notices.
Prints, folds and mails our newsletter
Makes Membership cards
Printed and mailed pot -luck notices
Printed and folded farm brochures
Printed Arbolado booklets
Donated paper and computer ink cartridges for the above.
We hope that the Manager, Mayor and Council will give this matter considerable
thought and put Lois Behm on the part time payroll of the City of Maplewood as
agreed upon by former manager Mike McGuire.
Thank you for taking the time to give this your consideration.
Pa 2 of 2
ENCLOSURES:
Letter dated September 4, 2000, to clarif the differences between the Maple-
wood Historical Commission, Maplewood Historical Societ and a
Historical Preservation Commission.
* Memorandum dated Jul 7, 1998, to Cit Mana Michael McGuire
Maplewood Historical Commission & Maplewood Area Historical Societ
Summar dated Jul 19,98 throu Au 2000
* An Act, Chapter No. 155 - H.F. No. 371
Memorandum dated September 19, 2000, to Ken Haider and Time Sheet
that was submitted b Lois Behm, for which she was never paid.
8 Brochures on the Bruentrup Farm for the Mana Mayor and Council
Members.
M
TO: Ken Haider
FROM: Lois Behm
RE: Historical Commission
DATE: September 19, 2000
In thinking further about our conversation on September 5, I think we missed one point which
may have some bearing on your belief that the City's contribution to the Commission or Society
was in order for them to pay me for my services..
While I was working for the City, I was the staff person assigned as liaison to the Historical
Commission. Prior to the last Commission/Society meeting before I stopped working, I asked
Mike McGuire if he had decided who would be assigned in my place so I could tell the members.
His response was that he had been giving it quite a bit of thought, had not been able to come up
with what he felt was a suitable choice and asked if I would be willing to continue in that capacity
after my retirement. After some discussion, it was agreed that I would continue during the
"vacation" time until my actual retirement then, after being off payroll for 1 month as required by
P.E.R.A., I would become a part -time employee of the City, being paid $11.00/hour for time
spent at meetings and preparing the minutes and reports.
I don't know if it is a required by ordinance, but each of the other City Commissions do have a
staff person who attends their meetings. To the best of my knowledge, no other person has been
assigned to act as the City's liaison to the Commission, and when I talked with Mike just before he
left he said I should go ahead and figure out my time spent since December 1998 and submit it to
the City for payment, so I would think that means I should be paid by the City rather than by the
Commission or Society.
If you want to discuss this further, please call me at 770 -8941 - most any time would be fine.
TIME SPENT AS CITY LIAISON FOR HISTORICAL COMMISSION
(Actual meeting times -does not include pre- or post-meeting time)
1999
January 6
January 13
February 4
March 10
April 14
April 21
May 12
June 9
June 16
July 14
August 11
September 8
October 13
November 10
December 8
2000
January
February 9
March 8
April 12
May 10
June 14
July 12
August 9
September 13
October 11
November 8
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Farm Committee
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission/Society Meeting
Commission /Society Fleeting
Meeting Cancelled Twice - W
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
Commission /Society Meeting
7:00 P.M. - 8:45 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 8:55 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 9:05 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 9:30 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 9 :00 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 8 :05 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 8.55 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 9:20 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 8:50 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 8:36 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 9:05 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 9:07 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 8:55 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 9:15 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 9:10 P.M.
Total 1999:
leather
7:00 P.M. - 9:45 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 8:50 P.M.
7 :00 P.M. - 9:00 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 9:50 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 8:50 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 9:10 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 8 :05 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 9:05 P.M.
7:00 P.M. - 8:40 P.M.
7 :00 P.M. - 9 :20 P.M.
1 Hr. 45 Min.
1 Hr. 55 Min.
2 Hr. 5 Min.
2 Hr. 30 Min.
2 Hr. - -
1 Hr. 5 Min.
1 Hr. 55 Min.
2 Hr. 20 Min.
1 Hr. 50 Min.
1 Hr. 36 Min.
2Hr. 5 Min.
2 Hr. 7 Min.
1 Hr. 55 Min.
2 Hr. 15 Min.
2 Hr. 10 Min.
29 Hr. 23 Min.
2 Hr. 45 Min.
1 Hr. 50 Min.
2 Hr. - -
2 Hr. 50 Min.
1 Hr. 50 Min.
2 Hr. 10 Min.
1 Hr. 5 Min.
2 Hr. 5 Min.
1 Hr. 40 Min.
2 Hr. 20 Min.
20 Hr. 35 Min.
AGENDA NO. ./i 4ft /
AGENDA REPORT Action by Council
Date
TO: City Manager Endorsed
Modified
FROM: Finance Director Rejected
RE: Amendment of Tax Increment Plan for Housing District 1 -4
DATE: February 15, 2001
PROPOSAL
It is proposed that the Tax Increment Plan for Housing District 1 -4 be amended to
extend the duration of the district by two years to 12 -31 -2020.
BACKGROUND
Under state law in the case of a housing district whose certification request date
occurred on or after August 1, 1979 and on or before June 1, 1993 the date of
decertification can be up to 25 years from the date of receipt of the first tax
increment. Since this state law applies to Housing District 1 -4, the city has the
option to extend the duration of the district by two years to 12 -31 -2020.
Extending the duration will provide the city with two additional years of tax
increment revenue which will insure that there will be adequate revenues to
finance the debt service payments for the 1999 Tax Increment Bonds. Last year
the tax increment revenue on this district was $52,835.
In order to amend the Tax Increment Plan for Housing District 1 -4, a public
hearing must be held and certain other governmental entities must be notified
(i.e. Ramsey County, ISD 622, and ISD 916). Letters have been sent to the other
governmental entities informing them of the public hearing. Also, a public hearing
notice has been published.
RECOMMENDATION
At the conclusion of the public hearing it is recommended that the Council
consider adoption of the attached resolution which will amend the Tax Increment
Plan for Housing District 1 -4 to extend the duration of the district by two years to
12 -31 -2020.
PAFINANCE \WP\AGN \TIFAMEND.WPD
MODIFICATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING PLAN
FOR
HOUSING DISTRICT NO. 1 -4
WITHIN
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD : MARCH 12, 2001
This document was drafted by:
BRIGGS AND MORGAN
Professional Association
West First National Bank Building
Saint Paul, Minnesota
1246913.2
The City has heretofore on December 23, 1991 established Housing District No. 1 -4
within Development District No. 1 and adopted a Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor. The
City has since modified the Tax Increment Financing Plan. The City hereby further modifies the
Tax Increment Financing Plan to extend the duration of Housing District No. 1 -4 to December
31 2020 from December 31, 2018 as previously identified in the Tax Increment Financing Plan,
as modified.
The City does not propose to add any land to Housing District No. 1 -4 nor is there any
additional development occurring within Housing District No. 1 -4 which will increase the
captured tax capacity within Housing District No. 1 -4. Since no new land is being added and no
additional development is occurring which will increase the captured tax capacity, the City does
not believe this modification will have any fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions other than
the fiscal impact previously disclosed to the other taxing jurisdictions.
This modification does not increase the total project costs. The tax increment collected in
the years 2019 and 2020 will be used to pay debt service on the City's outstanding General
Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1999B (Capital Appreciation Bonds). The Tax
Increment Financing Plan, as modified, remains in full force and effect.
1246913.2
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
HELD: MARCH 12, 2 0 01
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota, was duly held on the 12th day of March, 2001 at
7:00 p.m.
The following members of the Council were present:
and the following were absent:
Member
adoption.
introduced the following resolution and moved its
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD RATIFYING
NOTICE PUBLICATION APPROVING THE MODIFICATION
OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
FOR HOUSING DISTRICT NO. 1 -4
WITHIN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1
A. WHEREAS there is a p to modify the Tax Increment Financing Plan proposal fy g an for
Housing District No. 1 -4 within Development District No. 1 under the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 469. 174 to 469.179 (the "Act "); and
B. WHEREAS, the Modification of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing
District No. 1 -4 (the "Modification ") has been prepared; and
C. WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the "City "), has performed all
actions required by law to be performed prior to the approval of the Modification, including, but
not limited to, notification of Ramsey County, Independent School .District No. 622 and
Northeast Metropolitan Intermediate School District No. 916, and the holding of a public hearing
upon published and mailed notice as required by law for the City; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Maplewood:
1) The City finds, determines and declares that with respect to the Modification:
1246913.1
a) The City is not modifying the boundaries of Housing District No. 1 -4, but
is, however, modifying the term thereof and modifying the budget in the Tax
Increment Financing Plan therefor.
b) The City reaffirms the findings previously made with respect to Housing
District No. 1 -4.
2) The Modification conforms to the general plan for the development of the City as
a whole.
3) The Modification conforms in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will
help fulfill a need ,to develop an area of the State which is already.built up to provide
employment opportunities to improve the tax base and to improve the general economy of the
p g Y
State and thereby serves a public purpose and will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with
the sound needs for the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the project
area by private enterprise in that the intent is to provide only that public assistance necessary to
make the private developments financially feasible.
4) The Modification is hereby approved.
5) The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file a copy of the Modification with
the Commissioner of Revenue.
6) All prior actions taken by the staff of the City n causing the notice of public
tY g p
hearing which is attached to this resolution as Exhibit A to be published as required by the Act is
hereby ratified, affirmed and approved.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing esolution was duly seconded b member
g Y Y
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
1246913.1 2
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council (the "Council ") of the City of
Maplewood (the "City "), County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, will hold a public hearing on
Monday, March 12, 2001 at 7:00 p.m., at the City Hall, 1830 East Count y Road B in
Maplewood, Minnesota, relating to the modification of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for
Housing District No. 1 -4 within Development District No. 1 of the City, pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.179, inclusive, as amended. Copies of the Modification
of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing District No. 1 -4 as proposed to be adopted will
be on file and available for public inspection at the office of the City Clerk at City Hall.
Development District No. 1 encompasses the entire corporate boundaries of the City of
Maplewood.
A map of Housing District No. 1 -4 is set forth below:
[INSERT MAP of Housing District No. 1 -4]
All interested persons may appear at the hearing and present their view orally or in
writing.
[Publish February 28th
1246913.1 A -1
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the City of Maplewood,
Minnesota, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and foregoing extract of
minutes with the original thereof on file in my office, and that the same is a full, true and
complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the City Council of said City, duly called and
held on the date therein indicated, insofar as such minutes relate to tax increment financin g in the
City.
WITNESS my hand this 12th day of March, 2001.
City Clerk
1246913.1
i
AGENDA ITEM
AGENDA REPORT Action by Council
?ate
TO: City Manager En dorsed
r: A40difi+ed
FROM: Assistant City Engineer )+� d
Y g mom
J
SUBJECT: Gladstone West Neighborhood Streets, Project 00 -05
Public Hearing and Order Improvement after Public Hearing
DATE: March 5, 2001
The Public Hearing for this project has been scheduled for 7:15 p.m., Monday, March
12, 2001. Notices of the public hearing have been mailed and published. Staff will also
hold another Public hearing on Thursday, March 8th at 7:00 p.m. in the council
chambers.
Reference information for the public hearing has been provided as a supplement to the
council packet. The supplement includes information on the impacted properties and
the probable assessments. The city council will consider ordering the improvement
following the public hearing.
Staff recommends that the city council approve the attached resolution ordering
the improvement of the Gladstone West Neighborhood Streets, Project 00 -05.
CIVIC
RESOLUTION
ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AFTER PUBLIC HEARING
WHEREAS, a resolution of the city council adopted the 26th day of February,
2001, fixed a date for a council hearin g proposed on the construction of the Gladstone
p
West Neighborhood Street Improvements, City Project 00 -05,
AND WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the
hearing was given, and the hearing was duly held on March 12, 2001, and the council
has heard all persons desiring to be heard on the matter and has fully considered the
same;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, as follows:
1. That it is necessary, cost - effective and feasible, as detailed in the
feasibility report, that the City of Maplewood make improvements to the Gladstone
West Neighborhood Streets, City Project 00 -05.
2. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the council
resolution adopted the 12th day of March, 2001.
3. The city engineer is designated engineer for this improvement and is
hereby directed to prepare final plans and specifications for the making of said
improvement.
4. The finance director is hereby authorized to make the financial transfers
necessary to implement the financing plan for the project. A project budget of
$1,470,000 shall be established. The proposed financing plans is as follows:
The project cost recovery is summarized below:
Street assessments:
Storm assessments:
Water assessments:
Sewer assessments:
Sewer utility fund:
SPRWS Obligation:
City general tax levy:
$596,345
(40.6 %)
73,800
(5.0 %)
1
(
5
(0.4 %)
48
(3.3 %)
27
(1.9 %)
$717,421
(48.8 %)
Total: $1,470,000 (100.0 %)
clty of
M a lewood
B att*gya r ur wam e"�dfid address on , h Y 1� to addr
sii ess :the
,t is sheet, yowl aye reque ng
r
\
,
i
i
yr.
,
�C
l
\
'Of m o 6d
_ OfIrk.-I awl
A uttin out name and adess..on ,tai s `"sheep ou a� re u,estin to- address the
p gy.
,
Ma' lewood Ci . Council on the olZowzn to • rc, fol1' .' g p p. _ .
AGENDA ITEM N
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FROM: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Beaver Lake Townhomes
LOCATION: Maryland Avenue and Sterling Street
DATE: February 27, 2001
Project Description
Action by Council
Date
Endorsed
Modified
Rejected
Mr. Tony Emmerich, representing the AJE Companies, is proposing to develop a 162 -unit
planned unit development (PUD) called Beaver Lake Townhomes. It would be on a 27 -acre site
on the south side of Maryland Avenue, between Sterling Street and Lakewood Drive. (Please
see the maps starting on page 16.)
Requests
To build this project, Mr. Emmerich is requesting several city approvals including:
1. A conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) for a 162 -unit housing
development. The applicant is requesting the CUP because Section 36- 566(a) of the city
code (the shoreland district regulations) require a PUD for developments with buildings with
more than four units when the site is in the shoreland district of a lake. In this case, the site is
in the shoreland zone of Beaver Lake and would have a mix of housing with 42 single- family
detached town homes and 124 rental units in 15 8 -unit buildings.. In addition, having a PUD
gives the city and developer a chance to be more flexible with site design and development
details than the standard zoning requirements would normally allow.
2. Street right -of -way and easement vacations. These would be for the unused street right -of-
ways and easements on the site. (See the map on page 22.)
3. A preliminary plat to create the lots in the development. (See the enclosed project plans.)
I also should note that the applicant has not yet applied for design approval. If the city approves
the above- listed requests, then the applicant will apply to the city for final PUD approval and
design approval (including architectural and landscape plans). Please also refer to the developer's
application booklet and project plans for more information about these proposals.
BACKGROUND
On March 20, 1980, the city council approved a preliminary plat, street vacation and a planned unit
development (PUD) for this site called Beaver Lake Hills. This plan was for 46 4 -unit buildings (184
units). See the plan on page 24. The preliminary plat approval was subject to eight conditions and
the PUD approval was subject to nine condition.
On December 13, 1983, after several time extensiont, the city's approval of the preliminary plat
and PUD for the Beaver Lake Hills development expired.
On February 27, 1984, the city council changed the zoning map for the property on the south side
df (Maryland Avenue between Lakewood Drive and Sterling Street. This change was from F (farm
h6idence) to R -3 (multiple dwellings).
DISCUSSION
Open Space
The Maplewood Open Space Committee called this property Site 156. They ranked this site fifth
out of the 66 they rated in 1992 and first out of the two they rated in this neighborhood. When the
open space committee reviewed this site, they gave the property points for several characteristics.
These aspects included being part of a linear open space corridor, it has running water (a stream)
and valuable wetlands, that it was an area with natural processes or ecological relationships that
are unique or have area -wide significance, it is near a public school and the site could be or is part
of a public trail system.
Maplewood has not included this site ,in. its park or open space acquisition plans. Many neighbors
prefer to keep this property for open space or a park. Maplewood or Ramsey County would have to
buy this property to keep it as open space. There are several areas of publicly -owned open space
and park land in this part of Maplewood. Ramsey County has about 55 acres of open space land
along the west, north and east sides of Beaver Lake (south of Maryland Avenue and west of
Lakewood Drive). Geranium Park, a 9 -acre neighborhood city park, is about 500 feet to the east of
the site on the south side of Geranium Avenue. In addition, Maplewood has a use deed with the
State of Minnesota for drainage and open space purposes on the vacant 34 -acre parcel on the
north side of Maryland Avenue (east of Sterling Street).
Metro Greenways Program
In 1999, the city received a $100,000 matching grant from the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) Greenways program for this property. The purpose of the Metro Greenways is to
protect, connect, restore and-manage a network of significant natural areas, parks and other-open
spaces interconnected by habitat corridors. The grant for this site is for the city to acquire part of
this property (primarily along the stream) as a natural greenway between Beaver Lake and the city
pond to the south and west of the site and the wetland area north of Maryland Avenue. This
greenway would be 150 to 200 feet wide and would serve several purposes. These include acting
as a natural buffer area around the stream and wetlands (to protect the water quality and the
natural features from human impact) and to be a wildlife corridor between existing open spaces.
I had Al Singer, the Metro Greenways Coordinator from the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources (DNR), review the proposed project plan. His comments are in the letter on pages 29
and 30. He has several concerns about the proposal and its probable impacts on the stream
.corridor. Specifically, Mr. Singer noted that the removal of the existing conifers (pine trees) and
other plant material on the site, along with the damage due to construction equipment, soil
compaction and slope alteration, would further degrade the aesthetic and ecological value of the
corridor. He also noted that the city park dedication requirements should take the form of donated
property adjacent to the corridor. Mr. Singer ends his comments by stating that the "proposed site
plan, with the apparently stated intention by the landowner of not wanting to provide public access,
would no longer meet our program criteria and objectives. If the plan as submitted is not
substantially altered, Metro Greenways funding would no longer be available for this project." In
other words, any property that the city wants to acquire with Metro Greenways funding must be for
all to use, not just for the adjacent residents.
The city wetland and stream protection ordinance requires the developer to protect much of the
stream and wetland corridor on the site. Maplewood's wetland protection ordinance requires a 50-
foot -wide no- disturb buffer around the wetlands on the property. This ordinance also requires at
2
least a 50- foot -wide no- disturb buffer area along both sides of the stream (as measured from the
top of the st ream bank) to help protect it f rom the impacts of nearby developme As such, the
city code e oes not allow any ground disturbance including grading within the buffer area. The
ro osed ra
p g ing plan,. however, sh ows gra d ing - In several part s o . e 50-foot-wide buffer. These
areas are near the rear of buildings 4 -$ 22 -25 29 - 33, 37 and 44. Since the code does not allow
the proposed grading in these areas, the applicant Will need to revise the grading plan (and
probably the site plan) to meet this ordinance requirement. The Maplewood Nature Center staff
also had several concerns about the impacts the proposed plans would have on the buffer areas.
(See their memo starting on page 25.)
As I noted above, existing city ordinances will protect the immediate area along the stream and
around the wetlands from development. " is mush interest from city stiff, the he ighbors and
the Ramsey/V'llashington Metro Watershed District in increasing the siz. of the protected area
along the stream and wetlantls. lying the Creenways grant from the DNR, while matching the
states dollars with city open spice money (as is ret�w rid) to buy aidditional protected easement
area along the strum is an option the city should consider toward this goal.
Park Issues
An area of natural significance that is in and near the south side of the stream corridor is the grove
of coniferous trees (pines) that proposed buildings 26 -36 would encroach into. (See the site plan
on page 23.) 1 had Bruce Anderson, the Maplewood Parks and Recreation Director review the
proposed development plans. His comments are in the memo starting on page 27. It is
Mr. Anderson's opinion that the proposed development does not take into consideration the
ecological sensitivity of the dreek and the abutting vegetation. He also noted that the pine grove on
the property is a significant amenity to the landscape as they are critical for water quality but also
for their visual /aesthetic value. Mr. Anderson also stated concerns about the sensitivity of the
pines to any disturbance and that any tree removal would ultimately lead to the deterioration of the
remaining tree stand and potentially their ultimate death.
We also received a letter from Jean Moulle, the Urban Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Coordinator of the Metro Forestry Division of the DNR, about the proposed development. (See his
letter on pages 33 and 34.) Mr. Moulle also expressed several concerns about the proposed
development. He noted that the stand of pines near the streams "provides significant ecological
benefits to the watershed district including the wildlife habitat corridor and water quality as well as
social benefits including recreational opportunities such as trail and open space benefits to future
residents. Preserving the pine stand as open space will add significant real estate values to the
subdivision."
An option for the city to consider in protecting additional land along the stream corridor would be to
require the developer to dedicate up to 2.7 acres of land (10 percent of the project site) to the city
for park and open space purposes. Section 30 -6(f) of the city code allows the city to "require that a
reasonable portion of any proposed subdivision be dedicated to the public or preserved for public
use as parks, playgrounds, trails or open space; This land dedication would be in lieu of the
city collecting park charges with the building permits in the development. For reference, 2.7 acres
is 117,612 square feet in area. An example of this size property is a 50 -foot -wide strip of land
2,352 feet long or two 50- foot -wide strips of land each 1,176 feet long.
However, to help protect the most - sensitive natural .features on the site, the city council could
require the developer to dedicate a permanent public conservation easement along either side of
the stream and covering the wetlands. This easement area would protect this part of the site from
3
building, fences, mowing, cutting, filling, dumping or other ground disturbances. This would help
ensure the natural linear or corridor aspect of the site (primarily around the stream) would remain
as it is now.
Trails and Sidewalks
The second issue that Mr. Anderson noted in his memo is about the planned north /south trail
corridor through this part of Maplewood that goes through this site. This trail is to eventually
connect the Maplewood Nature Center with the Priory Open space to the north. The developer,
however, has not shown any trails within the site. Mr. Anderson recommends that the city require
the developer to install a trail along the creek corridor and an internal trail system that would
connect the west and east sides of the proposed development (including a bridge over Beaver
Creek).
The developer's plans do not show any walking paths or sidewalks within the development.
However, the Maplewood Parks, Open Space and Trail System Ilan that the city adopted in 1999
identified the natural corridor along the stream on this site as the location of a park trail. This trail
would connect Stillwater Road on the south with the open space(s) north of Maryland Avenue. The
Implementation Plan of the 1999 Parks Plan identified this trail segment as the highest priority trail
to build of those the city identified for the trail system. That is, the city should make the building of
this trail its top priority when discussing the building of trails or when reviewing development
proposals for this site.
To be consistent with the adopted Parks Plan, the city should require the developer to build the
part of this trail that will be within his project site. Section 9- 196(e)(2) of the city code, however,
states that a trail within a wetland or stream buffer "must not be of impervious surface." As such,
any trail within the buffers on this site must be constructed of wood chips or another material that
is not impervious. The responsibility of the developer would be to install an 8- foot -wide trail from
the centerline of the vacated Magnolia right -of -way on the south end of the site, continue the trail
north and east through the site to the corner of Sterling Street and Maryland Avenue. This trail
could have some areas of bituminous (especially on the two ends) while the part of the trial within
a required buffer would have to be of an impervious surface. The developer's engineer would need
to design this trail to follow the existing contours of the property while saving as many trees as
possible.
Staff also believes that it is important that any development and trails on this site connect the land
on the east and west sides of the creek to each other and to the new trail in the center of the site.
To accomplish these connections, the city could require several things. First, the city should
require the developer to install 8 -foot -wide trails on top of or near the proposed storm sewer pipes
between buildings 9 and 10 and between buildings 24 and 25. Secondly, the city could require the
developer to install a trail bridge or crossing over the stream that would allow people to easily
cross from one side to the other.
In addition to the above -noted trails, the city should require the developer of this property to install
a sidewalk along the south side of Maryland Avenue between Sterling Street and the east driveway
of Rosewood Estates. This sidewalk would give the residents of Rosewood Estates and the new
residents on Maryland Avenue a place to walk off the street while going to and from the trails north
of Maryland Avenue and to the new trail along the stream.
4
Zoning, Land Use and Comprehensive Plans
The city intends areas designated in the land use plan as residential medium density (RIVI ) as
areas for town houses or apartments of ups to 6 units per gross acre. (See the land use plan map
on page 17.) For areas the city his zoned multiple - family residential (fit -3), the city allows a mix of
housing types including double dwellings, town houses and apartments. The proposed
development plan is consistent with the density allowed by the comprehensive plan and with the
zoning designation for the property.
Specifically, the 162 units on the 27 -acre site means there would be 6.0 units per gross acre. This
proposal would meet the density standards outlined in the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan for
this site. In addition, the proposed development density would be consistent with the density
standards recommended by the Metropolitan Council for housing in first -ring suburbs. This is a
good site for a mix of housing styles and densities. It is on a rrSajor collector street (Maryland
Avenue) and on an arterial street (Lakewood Drive) and is near open space.
However, while the proposal meets the city's density standard for medium density residential
development, there are problems and issues with the proposed project plans as I note elsewhere
in this report. These include areas of grading that go into the required buffer areas, the standards
for developing in the shoreland district of Beaver Lake, the number of driveways proposed for
Maryland Avenue and the negative impacts of the development on the creek and on the stream
corridor. With a proposal such as this, the city must balance the interests and rights of the property
owner to develop his property with the city's ordinances, development standards, neighborhood
interests and Maplewood's Comprehensive Plan.
Conditional Use Permit
The applicant has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development
(PUD) for the 162 -unit housing development. They are requesting the CUP for the PUD because
Section 36- 566(a) of the city code (the shoreland district regulations) require a PUD for
developments with buildings with more than four units. In this case, the site is in the shoreland
zone of Beaver Lake and would have a mix of housing with 42 single- family detached town homes
and 120 rental units in 15 8 -unit buildings. In addition, having a PUD gives the city and developer
a chance to be more flexible with site design and development details than the standard zoning
requirements would normally allow. The developer intends to sell each of the detached town
homes.
Page 13 of the PUD application booklet lists much of the data for the proposed development
including the proposed densities and overall project data and density. As proposed, the 162
dwelling units would be on about 27 acres for an overall project density of 6 units per acre. For a
comparison, the comprehensive plan allows developments with single dwellings to have up to 4.1
units per gross acre. As such, on a 27 -acre site, there could be up to 110 single- fdmily homes.
Shorelcind District Regulations
At I noted earlier, this site is in the shoreland district of Beaver Lake. Maplewood adopted the
shoreland district regulations, under the guidance of the DNR, in 1 996. The code says that the
shoreland district "is to provide specific regulations to protect the city's shorelands. It is in the
public's best interest to provide for the wise subdivision, use and development of shorelands." Th6
objectives of the shoreland Code are:
5
(1) Protect, preserve and enhance the quality of surface waters.
(2) Protect the natural environment and visual appeal of short lands.
(3) Protect the general health, safety and welfare of city residents.
As such, there are several shoreland ordinance regulations that apply to this request (including the
requirement that the city approve a CUP for a PUD). These include open space requirements, the
maximum building height, vegetation preservation and screening requirements. Specifically, the
shoreland code requires the following:
at least fifty (50) percent of project area remain as open space (Section 36- 574(c));
- that the buildings have a maximum height of 25 feet (unless the city approves taller
structures) (Section 36- 566(c )(3));
that the developer minimize the loss or removal of natural vegetation (Section 36- 571(b)(2));
there be no intensive vegetation clearing on steep slopes (Section 36- 567(a)(2)(a)). The
shoreland code has the following definitions for "intensive vegetation clearing" and for
"steep slopes." Intensive vegetation clearing is "the complete removal of trees or shrubs in
a specific patch, strip, row or block. " A steep slope is "land having average slopes over
twelve (12) percent, as measured over horizontal distances of fifty (50) feet or more ... it
(Section 36 -562);
the applicant prepare a storm water management plan for the proposal (Section 36-
574(d)); and
the developer design the structures to reduce their visibility from the lake (Section 36-
571(a ) (2)).
Specifically, Section 36- 574(e)(4) of the code says "This design shall use vegetation, topography,
increased setbacks, color or other means. The city may require additional vegetation to help
screen these facilities." The proposed project plans say that the development will have 67 percent
open space as proposed.
When I reviewed the existing topography and preliminary plat for the proposal, I found several
existing areas on the site that have steep slopes as defined by the shoreland code. They include
the slope along the existing driveway from Lakewood Drive into Rosewood Estates and several
areas on either side of the creek. Specifically, these are next to or in the areas where the
:developer has proposed buildings 4-9,11-14, 23 -24, 28 -36, 37-42 and 44. These are all areas on
the site that the shoreland code prohibits intensive vegetation clearing. As such, the applicant
would need to revise the project plans to ensure that they will not be doing any intensive
vegetation clearing on the steep slopes. This also means that grading cannot occur in these areas
as that would remove the vegetation. Mr. Moulle of the DNR also expressed concerns about the
impact of the proposal on the steep slopes. (See his letter on pages 33 and 34).
The applicant has not provided any building or landscaping plans, so staff cannot yet determine if
the plans will meet the maximum height and screening requirements noted above. The applicant's
engineer has submitted a grading plan with calculations that the city engineer will review for
consistency with city standards. Meeting all city and other agency standards would need to be a
requirement of the city's approval of the conditional use permit and the design plans.
T
Site Plan Concerns
Stream Corridor and Wetland Buffers
As I also noted above, the city wetland and stream protection ordinance requires the developer to
protect much of the stream and wetland corridor on the site. Maplewood's wetland protection
ordinance requires a 50- foot -wide no- disturb buffer around the wetlands on the property. The
wetland ordinance also requires at least a 50- foot -wide no- disturb buffer area along both sides of
the stream (as measured from the top of the stream banks) to help protect it from the effects of
the proposed development. As such, the city code does not allow any ground disturbance,
including grading, within the buffer area. The proposed grading plan, however, shows grading in
several parts of the 50 -foot -wide buffer. These areas, are near the rear of buildings 4 -8, 22 -25, 29-
33, Rand 44..Since the code does not allow the proposed grading in these areas, the applicant
would need to revise the grading plan (and probably the site plan) to meet this ordinance
requirement.
Section 9- 196(h)(5) of the city wetland protection ordinance says "the city may require a variable
buffer width to protect adjacent habitats that the city determines is valuable to the wetland, stream,
wildlife or vegetation." In addition, Section 36- 571(b) of the shoreland ordinance has special
conditions about conditional use permits in shorelands. Specifically, Section 36- 571(b)(2) states
the city may include a condition about the "limitation on removing the natural vegetation or
requiring the planting of additional vegetation. At
The city could use both of these code sections as a basis to deny the proposed plans and require
the developer to revise the proposal to protect more of the stream buffer and vegetation on the
site.
North Side (along Maryland Avenue
Lakewood Drive and Maryland Avenue adjacent to this site are county roads. As such, I had Dan
Soler, the Ramsey County Traffic Engineer, review this proposal. His comments are in the memo
on page 35. The most important of Mr. Soler's comments is Number 3 about the proposed
driveways on Maryland Avenue. He states that the county would like to see a private roadway
constructed in this area to provide access to the proposed homes. This private roadway would
have one or two access points onto Maryland Avenue.
Such a private road would probably be parallel to Maryland Avenue with an entrance near the
pipelines on the west end and another entrance to the east closer to Sterling Street. The purpose
of this driveway design is to lessen the number of driveways going onto Maryland Avenue.
Mr. Soler told me that the county prefers to have only one or two driveways connecting onto their
road in this situation instead of the eight that the developer has proposed. He also told me that it is
the county's practice to encourage the use of common entrances onto the county roads wherever
possible. This is to minimize the number of potential conflict points with the tragic on the county
road.
Tot Lot
The applicant has not proposed any play or recreational facilities with the development. The city
should consider requiring the developer to furnish and install playground or other outside
recreational equipment for the west side of the development. The area near Sterling Street may
7
use the city facilities at Geranium Park for their neighborhood recreational needs. As such, there is
no need for additional play equipment for the eastern part of the development.
Property Values
The Ramsey County Assessor's Office has told us in the past that multiple dwellings adjacent to
single dwellings are not a cause for a negative effect on property values. If properly maintained
and kept up, the development should not be detrimental to the neighborhood. The required annual
review of the conditional use permit is a built -in safeguard to ensure that the city council would
regularly review the development. In fact, this applies to any development that the city approves
with a conditional use permit.
Front and Rear Yard Setbacks
As proposed, with the lot sizes, layouts and site topography, the developer has shown a variety of
building locations on the proposed grading plan. The proposed front yard setbacks listed on page
13 of the application booklet do not meet the standard setbacks the city usually requires in the R -3
zoning district. (Typically, 30 to 35 feet from the front property line.) Having a variety of setbacks
in this development would allow for less mass grading and more individual house styles.
Off- Street Parking Standards
The city code requires the developer to provide at least 324 off - street parking spaces (two for each
unit) in this development. The developer noted on page 13 of their project application book that
they would be providing 460 parking spaces (including garages) within the site. This number
exceeds the city requirement and would be enough parking for the residents and their guests.
Street and Easement Vacations
Mr. Emmerich has asked the city to vacate all the unused street right -of -ways and easements
within the project area. (See the map on page 22). However, for the city to vacate a right -of -way
or easement, the council must find that there is no public interest in keeping the right -of -way or
easement.
Preliminary Plat
The proposed development and preliminary plat with 162 units meets the city's density
requirements for-medium-density residential development. Having a lot under each detached town
house unit will allow the developer to self each unit individually.
Wetlands and Stream
The developer had the wetlands on the site delineated by a trained wetland professional. The
watershed district has classified these wetlands as Type II wetlands. The existing city wetland and
stream protection ordinance requires the developer to protect much of the stream and wetland
corridor on the site. Maplewood's wetland protection ordinance requires a 50- foot -wide no- disturb
buffer around the wetlands on the property. The wetland ordinance also requires at least a 50 -foot-
wide no- disturb buffer area along both sides of the stream (as measured from the top bank of the
stream) and the building foundations must be at least 60 feet from these wetlands and from the
stream.
In addition, the city code does not allow any ground disturbance, including grading, within the
buffer area. The proposed grading plan, however, shows grading in several parts of the 50 -foot-
wide buffer. These areas are near the rear of buildings 4 -8, 22 -25 29 -33, 37 and 44. Since the
code does not allow the proposed grading in these areas, the applicant would need to revise the
grading plan (and probably the site plan) to meet this ordinance requirement. The contractor
should place the silt fence and temporary construction fencing so they protect this buffer during all
construction.
Drainage and Watershed District
Most of the site drains to the existing stream in the center of the property. This stream runs to the
south to an existing city ponding area on the east side of Lakewood Drive and then into Beaver
Lake. The developer's engineer told me that by using the proposed ponds as storm water
detention facilities, the development will not increase the rate of storm water runoff from the site.
That is, the runoff leaving the site would be at or below current levels.
The Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District has done a preliminary review of the proposed
project plans. Cliff Aichinger of the watershed district put his comments and concerns in the memo
on pages 31 and 32. As Mr. Aichinger notes, "the District has several major concerns with the
proposal as currently submitted." He notes the following concerns:
The proposed grading plan shows grading infringing on the buffer area to the creek.
Specifically, these are near proposed buildings 44 and 37 and the proposed pond just east
of Rosewood Estates (south of building 44).
Mr. Aichinger recommends that the buildings 44 and 37 be eliminated from the plans to
lessen the amount of grading and potential impact on the creek buffer.
The proposed grading plan has areas of potential significant erosion that would affect the
creek.
Buildings 28 -34 and 5 -9 are on the edge of or very near the required creek buffer. Grading
and construction with these units will cause ground disturbance in the required buffer
areas. All these buildings should be setback a minimum of 20 feet from the buffer edge.
- Buildings 26 -36 are located in the pine grove on the south side of Beaver Creek. This plan
will probably result in the loss of all of the pine grove. Mr. Aichinger recommends that the
developer preserve all these trees as a screen to the development.
Mr. Aichinger also notes that the watershed district allows water quality treatment ponds within the
buffer area if aesthetically designed and restored. As such, he notes that some of the proposed
storm water ponds could be shifted on the site to allow for the shifting of buildings away from the
stream corridor and buffer.
It also is important to remember that the applicant or the contractor must get a permit from the
watershed district before starting grading or construction. That is, the watershed district will have
to be satisfied that the developer's plans will meet all watershed district standards, including
providing adequate protection to the stream, wetlands and their buffer areas.
I
Public Utilities
There are sanitary sewer and water in Maryland Avenue and in Sterling Street to serve the
proposed development. The developer will need to extend the water main between the west and
east sides of the proposed development to connect and loop the water system. The Saint Paul
Water Utility will need to approve the water plan.
I had Chris Cavett and Ed Nadeu, the city sewer foreman, review the proposed utility plans. They
noted that the existing sanitary sewer fine that runs through the site near the stream is difficult to
maintain and may need repairs. They believe there is an opportunity to work with the developer to
design new sewer lines that will serve the needs of the development and that will better serve the
city as a whole.
Trees
As proposed, the applicant's contractor would grade much of the site to create the street right -of-
ways, driveways, the proposed ponding areas and the building pads. This grading would disturb
about 20 acres of the 27 -acre site while preserving many of the slopes and some of the large trees
on the site, especially near the stream and pipeline. The applicant, however, has not yet prepared
a tree plan for the property.
Before grading the site, the city should require the developer to submit a detailed tree plan to staff
for approval. Maplewood's tree ordinance requires there be at least ten trees per gross acre on the
site after grading. For this site, the ordinance requires that at least 270 large trees remain. If the
developer cannot keep that many large trees, the ordinance requires hire to plant replacement
trees. This would be up to a maximum of 10 trees per gross acre so there are at least 270 trees on
the site.
Fire Department Review
On-Street Parking standards
The applicant is proposing private driveways within the PUD with widths from 20 feet to 28 feet in
the development. I had the Fire Chief and Fire Marshall review the proposed driveways and their
widths. According to Article 9, Section 902 of the Uniform Fire Code, all fire access roads shall
have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet. As such, all the streets and driveways in this
development would have to be at least 20 feet wide with no parking on either side of the street. If
the developer or the city wants to allow parking on one side of the driveways, then they must be at
least 28 feet wide. The developer must post any driveway that would be less than 28 -feet wide for
no parking on both sides.
Driveway Design
Steve Lukin, the Maplewood Fire Chief, reviewed the proposed site plan. He had several concerns
about the driveway designs and connections for the west one -half of the proposed site. Mr. Lukin
is recommending that the city require the developer to make more driveway connections between
the driveway for the detached townhouses and those for the apartment buildings. Mr. Lukin wants
these additional driveway connections to ensure the fire and other emergency vehicles can have
adequate access to all parts of this site.
10
Developer's Engineer Response
The developer's engineer prepared a response memo (dated February 20, 2001) to our staff report
for the planning commission. (See the memo from Midwest Land Surveyors and Engineers starting
i
on page 41.) It s the applicant's contention that the issues we have outlined this staff report can
be addressed through design changes and by applying different interpretations. of parts of the city
code. City staff disagrees with this assessment of the situation.
City staff, representatives of the watershed district and the DNR have had several meetings with
the applicant and with the property owner over the last year. While the developer's engineer
indicates that the proposed plans are preliminary, these plans do not show concern or attention to
the major issues that city staff identified in the meetings and in our staff report. These include the
need for the public trail through the site, maintaining or expanding the stream and wetland corridor
and trying to preserve the trees (especially the pine grove south of the stream).
A primary way that the developer could address some, if not all, of the concerns we have raised
would be by redesigning the project plans. Such changes should include expanding the no= disturb
corridor along t o stream and wetlands, preserving more of the trees on the site and incorporating
public trails in the plans. This may require moving the proposed townhouses father away from the
corridor and trees so the plans are more sensitive to these features. Having a larger no- disturb
area next to the stream and wetland corridor also will help insure that the construction and grading
done by the developer will not negatively impact the stream and wetlands.
The developer's engineer notes that they will use proper erosion control and turf establishment
measures with the project. The risk for severe damage occurs, however, when there is a large
storm or if the contractor uses poor construction or maintenance measures. It is in these situations
when the stream and wetlands could be severely impacted by the construction and by the
development.
In paragraph A4, the developer's engineer notes our concerns with the eight proposed driveways
onto Maryland Avenue. While there are eight existing curb cuts on this part of Maryland Avenue,
the property owner has never used them. Since Maryland Avenue is now a county road and the
existing curb cuts will not work with the proposed plans, there now is an opportunity to lessen the
number of driveways onto the county road as Ramsey County prefers.
The developer's engineer notes in paragraph A5 that the stream and wetland corridor has been
altered by the pipelines and by the sanitary sewer line in the area. The existing sewer location
makes maintenance and repair of the sewer line difficult. The city is interested in abandoning the
existing sewer line and realigning it away from the stream corridor when this property develops.
Moving the sewer line will allow for easier maintenance and access and will lessen the impacts it
has on the stream and wetlands.
COMMISSION ACTION
On February 20, 2001, the planning commission recommended denial of the proposed PIED, street
and easement vacations and the proposed preliminary plat. The commission based their action on
the recommendations in the staff report.
11
RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Deny the proposed conditional use permit for a planned unit development for the Beaver
Lake Townhome development. This development would be on the south side of Maryland
Avenue between Sterling Street and Lakewood Drive. The city is denying this request
because:
1. The proposed use would not be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated
to be in conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances. This is
because:
(a) The proposed development plan is not consistent with the adopter! Maplewood
Parks Plan since the developer is not proposing to build the part of a city-planned
trail that would be within his project site.
(b) The proposed grading plan shows grading in several parts of the required 50 -foot-
wide no disturb buffer areas. These areas are near the rear of proposed buildings
4 -8, 22 -25, 29 -33, 37 and 44. The city does not allow grading or ground
disturbance in the required buffer areas.
(c) There are several existing areas on the site with steep slopes. These are next to or
in the areas where the developer has proposed buildings 4 -9, 11 -14, 23 -24 28 -36
37-42 and 44. These are all areas on the site that the shoreland code prohibits
intensive vegetation clearing.. As such, the applicant would need to revise the
project plans to ensure that they will not be doing any intensive vegetation clearing
on the steep slopes. This also means that grading cannot occur in these areas as
that would remove the vegetation.
(d) The proposed plans do not meet all the Maplewood Shoreland Ordinance
requirements, especially about the removal of vegetation from the site.
2. The proposed use would change the existing character of the surrounding area.
3. The proposed use (especially during construction) would involve activities, processes,
materials, equipment or methods of operation that could be dangerous, 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 other nuisances.
4. The proposed use could create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing streets.
The proposed driveway design would have eight driveways going onto Maryland Avenue.
Ramsey County prefers to have only one or two driveways onto their road instead of the
eight that the developer has proposed. This design change would be to minimize the
number of potential conflict points with the traffic on the county road.
5. The proposed use would not maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's
natural and scenic features into the development design. The proposed development
does not take into consideration the ecological sensitivity of the creek and the abutting
vegetation. The pine grove on the property (near the south sid6 of the stream corridor that
proposed buildings 26 -36 would encroach into) is a significant amenity to the landscape
as they are critical for water quality but also for their visual /aesthetic value. The pine
12
stand near the stream provides significant ecological benefits to the watershed district
including the wildlife habitat corridor and water quality as well as social benefits including
recreational opportunities such as trail and open space benefits to future residents.
Preserving the pine stand as open space would add significant real estate values to the
subdivision. The proposed development would require the removal of the existing conifers
(pine trees) and other plant material on the site. This, along with the damage due to
construction equipment, soil compaction and slope alteration, would further degrade the
aesthetic and ecological value of the corridor.
6. The proposed use would cause adverse environmental effects. The proposed grading
plan has areas of potential significant erosion that would affect the creek and wetlands.
B. Deny the request to vacate parts of the unused Magnolia Avenue and Sterling Street lying
west of Lakewood Drive and south of Maryland Avenue in the proposed Beaver Lake
Tawnhomes PUD. The city is denying this request because:
1. The city is denying the proposed PUD and proposed project plans.
2. It is not in the public interest to vacate these right -of -ways since the city is not approving
a project for this site.
C. Deny the request to vacate unused drainage and utility easements lying east of Lakewood
Drive, west of Sterling Street and south of Maryland Avenue in the proposed Beaver Lake
Townhomes PUD. The city is denying this request because:
1. The city is denying the proposed PUD and proposed project plans.
2. It is not in the public interest to vacate these easements since the city is not approving a
project for this site.
D. Deny the proposed Beaver Lake Townhomes preliminary plat (received by the city on January
18, 2001). The city is denying this proposed preliminary plat because the city is denying the
proposed planned unit development and the proposed street and easement vacations.
13
CITIZENS' COMMENTS
I surveyed the owners of the 65 properties within 350 feet of this site and received 15 written
replies. Those who wrote had several concerns about the proposal. I have summarized their
issues as follows:
1. Possible effects of storm water run off - drainage (potential for flooding).
2. The effects on the wildlife.
3. The proposed plans have too many homes. Perhaps half as many units would be more
acceptable.
4. Adding a driveway onto Lakewood Drive is dangerous.
5. Can the existing lift station on Lakewood Drive handle the additional sewage flow?
6. There would be too much traffic and noise.
7. Keep it as park or open space. It is our hope that this or any other development will not take
place.
8. It will ruin the nature area and destroy the quiet.
9. The plan needs a wider corridor along the stream.
10. It will alter the character and economic value of adjacent properties.
11. Townhouses are OK but completely against apartments.
12. Some town homes and /or some single dwellings, but not this number (of units).
Also see the three letters on pages 36 through 40 for samples of the written comments that I
received.
1 also received several telephone calls from nearby residents. They expressed concerns about the
lass of open space, the potential effects an the stream, corridor and wildlife, storm water drainage,
the proposed housing mix (including rental units and town houses) and increased traffic.
14
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 27 acres
Existing land use: Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Rosewood Estates and Beaver Lake Manufactured Horne Park across Maryland Avenue
South: Houses on Lakewood Drive and on Sterling Street and city ponding area
West: Rosewood Estates and Ramsey County open space across Lakewood Drive
East: Townhouses and quad -homes across Sterling Street
PLANNING
Existing Land Use Plan designations: R -3(M) (medium density residential)
Existing Zoning: R -3 (multiple - family residential)
CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL
Section 36- 442(a) of the city code states that the city council may approve or deny a CUP, based on
nine standards.
Application [date
We received the complete application materials for this request on January 18, 2001. State law
requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a proposal.
As such, the city council must take action on this proposal by March 18, 2001, unless the applicant
agrees to a time extension.
kr /p: /sec25 /beavrplt. den
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Land Use Plan Map
3. Property Line /Zoning Map
4. Area Map
5. Area Map
6. Area Map
7. Proposed Public Vacations
8. Proposed Site Plan dated 01 -18 -01
9. City - Approved 1980 Development Plan - Beaver Lake Hills
10. Memo from Ann Hutchinson and Ginny Gaynor dated 2 -01 -01
11. Memo from Bruce Anderson dated 02 -02 -01
12. Letter dated 02 -01 -01 from Alan Singer (DNR)
13. Memo from Cliff Aichinger (Watershed District) dated 02 -07 -01
14. Letter dated 02 -07 -01 from Jean Moulle (DNR)
15. Memo from Dan Soler (Ramsey County) dated 1 -23 -01
16. 01 -25 -01 letter from Rhonda Peterson -Wenz
17. 01 -31 -01 letter from Thor Nordwall
18. 01 -29 -01 memo from F. B. Klinkerfues
190 .02..:20 -01 memo from Roger Larsen of Midwest Land Surveyors
15
il". met
AVE
LOCATION MAP
16 -
4
r
1 .
in
Ej
NEXOMEMMIWAI or
Mfffiza� V�000�*l
OW .010
Irps-N PO
al ��
9 ■ !e i�
ti ! =
a� `!
R-30
Mary�
Jill 11 1q.1PINIA
a ,
F
ffi
2
-glum", "M
�
MEN
M i
loll ON
�-Harve
ivo
al L
F �. .
i, � �.► •
Ni el BC IO
o
LBC7
■
Ar•�
,. �rM1
ro
!1
j
A 0
a I G'
9
I I
Ld
' Ito }®
cr C26)N
�.� >
s (es)
2(44)
t7Z
Attachment 3
1 37.81 �
I (,44s'o,.%oj 4"+
To T#% j.
R3
I
o .
tR p : • •
1 t , � ♦ 1
Iii. X3.0. ot -t�3_ c of
Cs� I sty BEAVER LAKE MANUFACTURED HOME PAR ;
t , 1
..:: ,t3k I 1�
1
I
,9 1 (S0)
cc
Ao
t S4 7
I ;
-MARYLAND AVENUE --
-40 o n
2�T y�t,.wt''
~ 4 • 5
1 - C3.1 Cap) Csa) c'`�) cis.) u
I
0,� 1 - , -• -� r =*►' `� i 60 ie • se ie , 1. 71
i+ i OSE 00D ES ' t 14 t`�, ttr) . c41
f.6 .i.o .40 - ss.
I w w '6 , SROSE A IE.
7 � �
Y• _ _LfR. 'Si _ 01►
g 8
' � 1 •
1 t14
P s s 9 12
pROJECT SITE
L t• �. 1. G�.If i #.3 .. �.' L 6
• L i
14 .
JL
\ itc
D
l
- 1
1
1
_ 1
I li
- 380.5 - r. � .• � � S8. flic.iS S .� 6:bS � .D I
330
-- -- -� J J GERANIUM
AVE. vi _. E Deo� 77COS3 °
E . VA D 4•��•8.'. —
O 3 s_ F ' 326.2 321.i.'E N l�w (r9) �1 �)•
P�
I 44 41 A 0 ' ..
,� 40 37 �. a..a
o: Z
All 43 42 .3
Ck AI
3 39 38- PARk
Nage es.nt 0
0 c.1173367 lot
Ki N I 10 4ti. ! i3 a by n !?, "�•i ..�
1 �y� •.. "fay., :
f
■ `
PROJECT SITE os (f &2.)
1 3
a �
N I >r 1 R. 7 '108 ,1 N 21. c2
IJ1 t 5 .1 6's sai
1 ,
10 I t - 32{
l eft
of �,� �' S9
P, fi
� o 2� r l ( � . 82 oc. - W , �\Ay 16 f79) €. =,1 f Cst)14
IRS) Its 03 V (l2) �`� 33 t 133. 39. 133.97 lS3. .a
1 cx ►� 2) �r. 18 SCHOOL. � D1 S?'.
Luuj +' - a 78)17 14 ' >.. r is iT A N2t 6 ZZ
x'70
`� : G p. /•s _ • n (41) (1•) J,1 (1.41m� e t f _.
M__z -.... _:- - .. O �) o
' t1S' 37 d' ` 2i3' Se'v e� ! .}i�• 1- (x)19 1' , t '1 `� 10
- - H '33. 1lit1.
I {I�� S 1.23x:
6 . �' ,4'Q QP • . Q (3'3) Z � 11 f i 1', ) 9 ! : • • .i �'
S. //QG 'f lfe3 3 Q►
= 73
Lu Ott
` (38)
t c r 21
(4) 13400
PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP
We]
4
N
a .0 _men
j
l's. � Cie
, '� _
`�. ------------------------ - - -- --
�- r .._-
1,
1 . —RAP
::
POO
two ; I
1w :010 VIOAd
till t
man -0
1
,
11'1•. ..:
_ - - - -- - - - .. ....
lip . . __ I _ ...............
---- ----------
loops
1
'- •----------- - - - - -- -
Am
1
r
I
1
:
1
1 r .
: , 1
1 1 ,
I I
I
:
1 :
- - - --- - -------------
,
1
I
,
:
:
.�
r ,
1 ,
- '
1 . 1
1 .
I t
; I I
' i 1
' r
I
1 �
'
�
' 1 ' 1
1
I,
• ; , 1 ..
r
1 _
I\ . .....
I r
11 V
m
Ps ago
_ - --- -- 1 - --
--
--- ----- ---------------------------------------------
--------------- ---------------
RL
Limit on Liability' This document is not a legally Current Layers; ROADS96; - STRUCTURE �
recorded map or survey and is not intended to be
WATER96;HALFSEC ; LIMRSA; PARS
used as one. This snap Js 'S compilation of u M iTSP
records and infornraf►on from various state,
countr and city offices, and other sources.
Attache 6 -
.,....,. v�.....c.e W. ..1w� �...� ..& . rvc ....��. �. « how LIM1'faA; PARREAG; LIMITS
used as one. This map is a O mpiiotion of
records and information from various state,
a county, and city offices, a nd other sources.
Attach Meht 7
PRELIMINARY
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
2v
O
1% Q.
kc
PUBLIC EA
OR
sw is AL r j /# min/, sawth L j e
JFC ZA MAV. *22W 1 f — A — .
i
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1
VA'ATIONak"'
KupubhD p ts
22
f
lit
.t!
EAST ROSE
A VENUE
1 3
O
O
GERANIUM
A VENUE
i
N
Attachment S
W w EE.IiI .Mr,,
SITE PLAN
OF wuuor
(sey nt -eaee
BEAVER LAKE TO WNHDMES �,� " Aftw
{r aArsra' fwsyV•arle sa
`"..= "'" A JE COMPANIE INC. W^ W OMON
...
In The City Of Maplewood �•�,�%`�� I�.:r
leaf oar V= a MW wr4 Its► A..*
r rtw SWAM as
r 0" MAM a!
A fEF% LAi%r- MANUFAC I URED HOME PARK
1E{ARAANI t AVENUE
R f i e�461E t t E E�i !rte' r1 ! .. 1 . Ifs ly _
1
1
1
I
�o f
f •1
a
II
a �
a
I t
i
I
e �
I I
y ' 1
1
a �
� � 1
1
wow O-C
�� l I
J
J I �
J of
J Iw
J I1�
J 1
I
I W
I W
I 1
1
1
1 I 1
i N
ry
1
1 EAST
AVEI'lE
I F Ir
I
I
F
i
r I
1
GERANI UM
A
I
t
PWA7K AM WAY
PNVA?g owvsWAY PmvA= oAry Ar
SW ME rAMXr FOWMVOvE WFAX a LWr rOWMYO/rE WAX
SITE PLAN
23
Attachment 9
11 4 I'm mi 'I w
Jil NK I
Now
IUD
ip
t � . N ff � w
"
24
fit. 4 1
i- ia��.
vlo
.w IL
Ml
1*41
fn
SITE PLAN
CITY-APPROVED 1980 DEVELOPMENT PLAN - BE"ER LAKE HILLS
I
24
4
r1ern . o
To: Ken Roberts
Fromm: Ann Hutchinson and Ginny Gaynor
Dade:
2/1/01
Re:
Beaver. Creek Corridor
Attachment 10
- �► 1
RECEIVE*
We believe the proposed Beaver Lake Townhomes project will negatively impact the wetlands on the
site and lead to degradation of water quality in Beaver Creek and Beaver Lake. In addition, we are
dismayed at the prospect of losing of a potential trail and natural area that could connect several
Maplewood neighborhoods. Many excellent paints were made at the 1/25 meeting and we will focus
our statements primarily on impacts to the buffer.
❖ We believe there should be absolutely no disturbance or alteration of the wetland buffer zones
during or after construction. Can the City or Watershed District require and enforce this? No
impact would mean the following:
1. Each building site should include enough land to allow for construction activities and vehicles,
to allow for proper grading into the buffer area, and to allow for some yard space. The
proposal has several homes on or near the buffer line, which should not be permitted.
2. There should be absolutely no construction activity in the buffer area, including no access for
vehicles, no parking, and no piling soil, lumber, or other materials.
3. To protect the buffer during construction, the developer should be required to erect temporary
but secure fencing along the whole wetland border to keep vehicles out. This is in addition to
silt fences installed to catch eroding soil.
4. No soil should be removed from or added to the wetland buffer.
5. Regr� the site should not result in steeper slopes adjacent to the buffer.
6. The wetland buffer should retain its current vegetation or be restored to native vegetation.
Any alteration of vegetation in the buffer must be approved by the City or the watershed
District. No turf should be planted in the buffer areas. Turf is maimed intensively with
fertilizers and herbicides, which can be harmful to wetlands.
7. if storm water ponds are located near the buffer areas, they should fit ecologically with the
natural qualities of the buffer, i.e. be planted with native plants.
8. The proposed removal of pine trees should not be permitted because it creates serious
potential for erosion of the slope and degradation of the creek.
❖ We are also concerned about the visual impact of lighting from this project. Can the City require
that all security lights be directed downward?
25
•`• How is the buffer measured? From the edge of the creek, from the centerline, or from the high
water mark? This should be clarified for the developer as it appears they have been measuring
from the centerline of the creek.
❖
The pines come to the buffer line, not as drawn on the plans; the plans show them growing right
next to the creek. This means the developer could remove all the pines on the slope.
•3 Beaver Lake becomes loaded with thick suspended algae during June, July, and August. It covers
2/3 of the lake. The Watershed District plan recommends a reduction of total Phosphorous (see
attached). How can this happen when additional impervious surfaces are added to the drainage
area?
❖ We. are astonished that our ordinance allows for including wetland acreage in calculating
maximum allowable density on a site. As we understand it, a 10 -acre site can have ' um of
60 ,homes. -3 zoning). regardless of hove much of the site is wetlands. If the site has 6 acres of
upland and 4 acres of wetland, 60 homes can be clustered on the 6 upland acres. If the site has 2
acres of upland and 8 acres of wetland, does that mean 60 homes can be clustered on 2 acres? We
haven't read the ordinance. Does it really allow for this? Isn't there some way we can require that
the wetland acreage not be included when calculating total allowable units? This would
significantly decrease the number of units allowed on the site.
26
Attachment 11
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ken Roberts, Associate
FRONT: Bruce K. Anderson, Dire
DATE: February 2, 2001
P• r F a a 2 20o
d r a R cre lion
RECE, VED
SUBJECT: Beaver Lake Town Homes /AJ E Company Proposed Development
I have reviewed the proposed Beaver Lake town home /AJE Company proposed development
located southeast of Lakewood Drive and Maryland Avenue. The project raises a number of
serious planning concerns regarding park related issues.
The city has received a $200,000 ($100,000 match from city) grant from the State of
Minnesota to acquire property adjacent to the Beaver Lake creek corridor which runs through
the center of the proposed development. The initial grant was written with the intent to
preserve a wildlife, natural vegetation buffer strip between future development and the
ecologically sensitive creek.
The proposed development does not take into consideration the ecological 'sensitivity of the
creek and abutting vegetation. I have met with state forester Jean LeMay at the site to review
the potential impact the development might have on the stream bed relating to water quality
and tree removal. The pine grove on the southeast corner of the property is a significant
amenity to the landscape. The trees are approximately 30 -35 years old and are critical not
only to the water quality, but also the visual /aesthetic value of the property. Mr. LeMay will be
providing a report under separate cover addressing forestry issues and comments from the
fish and wildlife division. His initial comments were that the pine grove is an extremely
sensitive area and any disturbance of the soils and /or removal of the trees would ultimately
lead to the deterioration of the remaining tree stand and potentially their ultimate "death" due
to root disturbance, erosion and soil compaction. He further expressed his concerns regarding
the increased impervious surface as it relates to water runoff into the creek bed.
The specific parks and recreation issue is that this is a critical north /south trail corridor which
connects the trail corridor from the Maplewood nature center on the southern boundary to the
Priory open space property. I have included a copy of the comprehensive park master plan
which was adopted by the city council which delineates the proposed trail corridor. It is an
extremely high priority for the city's trail system to develop a north /south trail corridor and this
is a critical link. With the recent reconstruction of Harvester Avenue and Bartelmy Lane, the
city has established the trail corridor from the south and the connection is in place heading
north from Maryland Avenue to the Pondview apartments. This trail corridor then connects to
Jim's Prairie and Sterling Oaks Park, and ultimately the north to the Priory open space
property. The corridor then ties in west of Hill Murray High School, and ultimately to the
Gateway Trail.
27
In addition to the high priority for a trail corridor through the proposed development, a trail
corridor to the east to Geranium Park is critical. Geranium Park is the neighborhood park that
will serve this development. The proposed development does not have an internal trail system
which permits access to the east. I recommend that an internal trail system be included in the
project and the city require the developer to install a pedestrian bridge over Beaver Creek to
connect the two sides of the development.
The city has a number of financial means available to accomplish some of these goals to
reduce density and /or redesign the plat to preserve the forested area. Specifically, the
greenway grant in the amount of $200,000 should be used to either reduce the density,
preserve the pine trees and or expand the 50 -foot buffer to 100 feet. In addition, it is my
recommendation that park dedication in the amount of 2.7 acres or 10% of property be
considered to widen the "corridor to ensure ' the site is ecologically preserved. It should be
noted that adding an additional 50 feet on either side of the creek buffer would be 2.5 acres in
size. The cash dedication for the proposed development would be approximately $150,000 or
a cost of $60,000/acre.
Lastly, the developer should be required to include an internal trail system to the east and
between the east and west sides of the development and provide a trail along the creek
corridor throughout the length of the property to make the north /south trail connection
between Pondview apartments and the Maplewood nature center.
I will forward a copy of the state wildlife and forester's report which] anticipate to be available
no later than February 8. Should you have any questions regarding my recommendation on
this issue, please contact me at 4573.
kfteavercr. mem
Attachment 12
SR's .7,
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Metro Region
- 1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, Minnesota 55106
February 1, 2001
Ken Roberts
Community Development Director
City of Maplewood
.1830 County Road B East
Maplewood, MN 55109
Dear. Ken:
Thank you for inviting us to attend the Beaver Lake Townhomes/AJE Companies proj ect
meetin g at City f Maplewood offices on January 25, 2001. After reviewing the proposed
tY p
development plan and upon further, discussions, we offer the following comments about the
submitted plan:
The rema g non-developed stream corridor provides very limited opportunities for
p
providing significant wildlife Habitat and important open space to the site. Given the
narrow boundaries, a paved recreation trail developed within this corridor
proposed
would further reduce the ecological significance of the corridor.
The actual removal. of existing conifers and other plant material on the northeastern
portion of the site and robable destruction of more trees within this stand as a result of
p p,
damage due to construction equipment, soil compaction, and slope alteration would
further degrade the aesthetic and ecological value of the corridor.
Proposed grading will impact existing slopes and vegetation within the legal buffer area.
The density proximity and f the proposed townhomes further reduces the visual
tY p ro p
and ecological benefits of the corridor. Stormwater runoff from adjacent sloped lawns
and other im ervious surfaces not treated b . on -site stormwater detention basins may
p Y
have a negative cumulative impacts on the stream.
It may p proposed be possible to locate stormwater detention basins adjacent to effectively
p
and visually enlarge the protected corridor as opposed to locating these ponds between
the detached townhomes and the multi - family units.
Park dedication requirements should take the form of donated property adjacent to the
corridor.
29
DNR Information: 651- 296 -6157 1 -888- 646 -6367 TTY: 651 -296 -5484 1 -800- 657 -3929
An Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a
Who Values Diversity Minimum of 10% Post - Consumer Waste
Page 2
The purpose of Metro Greenways is to protect connect restore and manage a network o
si natural areas- parks and other open spaces interconnected by habitat corri
dors in the
�p p .
metropolitan region: We fully recogni that in developed areas such as Maplewood, it will
require creative approaches to balance landowner rights, economic development, environmental
protection and multiple benefits to the community. Clearly this is a challenge for all parties.
We continue to be interested in supporting the city's efforts in protecting and enhance this
important natural area and corridor. However, when Metro Greenways approved $100,000 in
f and hg` for this project, it was our hope and�-intention that the ,natural features found urid on this site
would be protected and enhanced. This proposed site plan with the apparently stated intention by
the landowner of not wanting to provide public access, would no longer meet our program
criteria and objectives. If the plan as submitted is not substantially altered 11 Ietro Greenways
funding would no longer be available for this project.
Please keep us informed about the plan review process any design modifications or other project
considerations. Feel. free to call me at (651) 772 -7952 if you have any questions or comments.
Sin ely._
Al finger, oordinator
Metro Greenways
cc. Ross Sublett, D►NR
30
Attachment 13
I O I D1 u CON
TO: Ken Roberts R E V
FROM: Miff Aichinger, Administrator
SUBJECT: Beaver Lake Townhomes.
DATE: February 7, 2001
This memo includes the Ramsey - Washington Metro watershed District comments on the
preliminary plans for the Beaver Lake Townhomes project. In summary, the District has
several maj or concerns with the proposal as currently submitted. These concerns involve
specific District regulatory standards, but also include concerns regarding the integrity of
the proposed Beaver Creek corridor through the site.
The specific District concerns involve stormwater treatment pond locations and design, as
well as erosion control.
1. The District was not provided any information or calculations on the sizing of the
proposed ponds to determine if they meet the Districts ponding standards.
2. The pond located south of Maryland Ave. just east of Rosewood Estates is located
on the hillside and would involve considerable alteration and grading of the
hillside. This grading also appears to infringe on the buffer area to the creek.
There is a potential for significant erosion from this grading. We would require
considerable extraordinary erosion control if this were included in the final plan.
3. A similar concern for erosion control exist with townhouse units 1 -9 off
Lakewood Drive.
Other concerns of the District relate to the potential greenway through the site and the
consistency of this proposal with previous concepts for the greenway corridor.
1. The basic intention of the greenway corridor through this site was to secure the
creek valley from the top of the slope on each side of the creek. This proposal
significantly infringes on this concept. Recognizing the owner's unwillingness to
offer the city a reasonable price for preserving additional open space, this may not
be possible, but should be pursued. Some progress toward this concept may be
possible with design changes mentioned in the following comments.
31
Ken koberts N4EMO
February 7 2001
:Page 2
2. Unit 44 significantly infringes on the buffer due to grading needs. This unit
should be eliminated from the plans ad should not be considered a loss of units by
the developer. The multiple housing units next to Maryland Ave. could be
retained or replaced with several townhouse units. Townhouse unit number 37
also infringes on the buffer and should be eliminated.
3. Units 25 -34 are located at the edge of the buffer and would result in disturbance
within the buffer. These units should be setback at least 20 feet from the buffer
edge.
4. Grading from units 5 -9 will infringe on the buffer due to the steep slopes in this
area and the need to work around these units during construction. These units
should be setback a minimum of 20 feet from the buffer edge.
5. Units 26-36 are located in the pine tree grove on the south side of Beaver Creek.
It was the unanimous opinion of District and City staff that these trees should be
preserved as a screen to the development. The plan shows the units intruding
about half way into these trees. with disturbance around these units during
construction, the entire grove would most likely be lost. These units should be
moved to the south to preserve the grove.
I believe the adjustments proposed above could be accomplished by some changes to the
project plans that shift the location of the on -site treatment ponds. The District rules
allow the location of water quality treatment ponds within the buffer area if aesthetically
design and restored.
The ponds in the project are off Sterling street could be shifted to the southwest behind
units 1922. This would allow all the townhouse units to be shifted to the east and south
away from the corridor.
The internal ponds in the area off Lakewood could be relocated to the southeast corner of
this site allowing the townhouse units to be shifted to the west away from the buffer edge.
All these unit shifts would be easier with less site density. I would encourage the City to
pursue buying down the density. If the developer were reasonable, the City would only
be paying the "potential profit margin" on each unit, which may allow the elimination of
an apartment building or two.
32
Attachment 14
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Metro Forestry, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106 -6793
Telephone: (651) 772- 7567 Fax: (651) 772 -7925
)01
Mr. Bruce Anderson
Park and Recreation Director
1830 E County Rd B. 0 g =1
Maplewood, MN 55109
RECEIVED
RE: Beaver Lake Tovvnhomes Preliminary Plat, Beaver Lake (62 -16P) Shoreland District, City of
Maplewood, Ramsey County
Dear Mr. Bruce Anderson;
Thank you for the opportunity to review and provide comments on the potential social and ecological
impacts /benefits of removing the pine stand from the proposed Beaver Creek Townhomes development
site in Maplewood. The pine stand is located on a relatively steep slopes and the tree canopy extends to
Beaver Creek.
The pine stand does not offer greater timber production values. However, it provides significant
ecological benefits to the watershed district including wildlife habitat corridor and water quality as well
as social benefits including recreational opportunities such. as trail and open space benefits to future
residents. Preserving the pine stand as open space will add significant real- estate values to the
subdivision. Due to time constraint, comments are limited to water quality issues from the DNR Division
of Waters.
There are standard comments that DNR Waters often gives to Cities regarding proposed developments
that are near to DNR Protected Waters. These comments generally cover DNR Waters Programs:
Protected Waters Permits, Water Appropriation Permits, Shoreland Management Advisory Capacity, and
Floodplain Advisory Capacity.
Unfortunately, Beaver Creek is not a DNR/State Protected Water and does not have a shoreland
classification, therefore, a DNR Permit is not required for work within the Creek. However, Beaver Lake
is a DNR/State Protected Water (DNR # 62 -16P) and has a shoreland classification of Type 5 (City of
Maplewood Shoreland Management Ordinance). However, since the proposed Beaver Creek townhomes
development is within the 1000' shoreland District of Beaver Lake, the development is required to
comply with regulations that are found in the Maplewood Shoreland Management Ordinance.
We contend that the proposed development does not qualify for the reduction of development standards
that is mentioned in Section 36.565 of the City of Maplewood Shoreland Management Ordinance due to
the fact that the buildings of the proposed development will be visible from the surface of Beaver lake
and that the impact of the proposed structures will be large.
It appears that single family townhomes with walkout are proposed to be placed within the valley of
Creek. The location of the townhomes in. the valley is questionable due to the possibility that the
33
DNR Information: 651- 296 -6157 9 1- 888 - 646 -6367 a TTY 651 -296 -5484 * 1 -800- 657 -3929
An Equal Opportunity Employer Aft, Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a
Who Values Diversity Minimum of 20% Post - Consumer Waste
structures will be flooded by Beaver Creek. It is our recommendation that the 1% flood elevation of
Beaver Creek be determined and the proposed structures be placed back and well above that elevation in
accordance with the regulations of the City of Maplewood.
It has come to our attention that a trail is proposed to be constructed within the Beaver Creek Corridor. -
Such. a trail would p ass within 10 - 20' of the townhomes in the present proposal. In addition, there will be
no vegetation left between the townhomes and the trail to screen the homes from view on the trail. we
recommend that the townhomes be constructed further out from the trail, and trees be left standing or
planted between the townhomes and the trail. These trees will preserve the privacy of the people within
the townhomes. In addition, trees will improve the quality of the trail and also protect the water of
preventing soil erosion actin as a filter to surface runoff to the creek and using nutrients
Beaver Lake by p g � g g
in the _
near surface groundwater that would otherwise pollute and encourage algal growth in Beaver Lake.
Steeps p es
to and possible bluffs exist in the ,proposed site that .drain i nto Beaver Creek which then drains
p
• k that is done on the steep slopes in to Beaver Lake. The wor p must comply with the standards listed in
C i t y p
Section
36 -566 of the of Maplewood Shoreland Ordinance. This section allows the City Engineer to
attach conditions to building permits on steep slopes that will reduce the visibility of the subdivision from
Beaver L Lake and protect Beaver Lake from the impacts of erosion and sedimentation. The clearing of
vegetation within steep slopes is also regulated by Section 36 -567 of the City of Maplewood Shoreland
Ordina p
Ordinance. This section prohibits intensive vegetative clearing on steep slopes. In addition, the vegetative
property rop e �Y
that is done on the must be in compliance with a sedimentation and erosion control plan
that is approved by the City Engineer.
Th e proposed p may ro osed develo ment be required to comply with the Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.)
Y
requirements that are listed in the Shoreland Management Ordinance of the City of Maplewood (Section
36 - 57) appears 4 . It a that the proposed development is taking advantage of the density multipliers offered
p ro p
in the P.U .D. Section of the Ordinance as a trade for preserving the shoreline of the lake. Unfortunately, it
is not
clear whether the owner of the Beaver Lake Townhomes property also owns the shoreline that
,
p
should
be reserved or if the developer signed an agreement with the owners of the shoreline that should
be preserved. If the shoreline that is being preserved is not owned by the developer of the Beaver Lake
Townhomes then it would appear that the intent of the property multipliers is not being met and we
would recommend that the density of the proposed development be reduced or building design and sites
be modified to meet the intended density and reserve the pine stand as open space for wildlife habitat
corridor and/or trail.
p
If you
need additional assistance, lease contact me at 651772 -7567 or Joe Richter from the division of
Waters at 651- 772 - S. I have enclosed two copies of the Best Management Practice guidebook. I
wo appreciate reciate if ou can share this material with other staff and local decision makers. A three panel
pp y.
display showing tree q
in reservation techniques is also available from our office. You can check it out for
p
display at special local meetings and events.
Once again, thank you for the opportunity to work with you.
Sincerely,
Jean Mouelle
Urban BMPs Conrrlinatnr
34
Attachment 15
Department of Public Works
Paul L. Kirkwold, P.E., Director and County Engineer
ADMINISTRATIONA AND SURVEY
50 West Kellogg Blvd., Suite 910
St. Paul, MN 55102 * (612) 266 -2600 • Fax 266 -2615
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ken Roberts
.City of Maplewood
FROM: Dan Soler `
Ramsey County Public Works
SUBJECT: Beaver Lake Townhomes
DATE: January 23, 2001
ENGINEERING /OPERATIONS
3377 N. Rice Street
Shoreview, MN 55126
(612) 484 -9104 • Fax 482 -5232
The Ramsey County Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed PUD and preliminary
plat for Beaver Lake Townhomes off of Lakewood Drive and Maryland Avenue. Ramsey
County has the following comments regarding this proposal.
1. The proposed development will create 162 new residential units in the southeast quadrant of
McKnight Road and Maryland Avenue. This level of development will have a measurable
impact on traffic operations in the area. The intersection of McKnight Road/Lakewood Drive
and Maryland Avenue is currently controlled by an all way stop. The addition of traffic from
this development will move this intersection closer toward the need for traffic signals.
2. The west side of -the development will access Lakewood Drive via a new entrance and the
existing Rosewood Estates entrance. This should be adequate with good spacing between
access points.
3. The north. side of the development adds eight access points onto Maryland Avenue. Ramsey
County would like to see a private roadway constructed in this area with direct access to the
homes. This private roadway would have one or maybe two access points onto Maryland
Avenue.
4. The new access points will require permits from Ramsey County for construction onto
County right of way. The developer will also need permits for any utility work within County
right -of -way.
Thanks for the opportunity to make comments regarding this issue. If you have any questions or
need any additional information please give me a call.
REC MVED
F
35
Minnesota's First Horne Rule Coun
F� :is_";�,�- 4rttUwlt.'is:.s+A'
printed on recycled paper with a minimum of 10% post- consumer content
Attachment 16
OU01Z " w4mz
2517 Gerartsmt Ave fast
Maplewood MN 55119
January 25, 2001
Kenneth Roberts, Associate Planner
City of Maplewood
1834 East County Road B
Maplewood MN 55109
RE: Neighborhood Survey
Dear Mr. Roberts
As an owner of property to the immediate Est of the proposed Beaver Lake Tvwnhome
project, I would like to take this opportunity to express my opinion and bring light to
my concerns. Thy information sent out to the surrou; nd ng homeowners did not include
whether or not the units are to be rentals or privately owned. Nor was any mention
made of the anticipatec! market value of the unite Both of the matters are major
concerns and will directly affect the property value of our nearby homes.
Some of my other concerns are as follows:
i. Despite the urge number of multi- family buildings already in the immediate
vidbity (townhome a twin- homes, manufactured homy perks,
Rosewood Est�tes and other apartm+ent buildings), we have had 1f e pleasure of
�cperiencing a quiet enough environment that a variety of wildlife has felt
comfortable to take up residency. I highly doubt that with yet another influx of
additional population and the destruction of the remaining natural surroundings,
that the fragEle ecosystem will remain status quo. As landscaping takes place,
the opportunity increases ft3r ch+�mfeal ran -off to contaminate the adjacent and
surrounding wetlands. Which mikes me wonder if the DNR is aware of this
project.
z. Thy placement of the single dwelling units propose to be the same "'cleared and
open spite" requirements for manufactured home parks, as state- d in Minn. Stet.
Sect. 327.20 Subd. 3. Though.that area may be sufficient in a park scenario, it
hardly seems adequate for permanently structured dwellings.
3. It is my understanding the present water and sewer systems were found to be
overtaxed when the latest new construction of homes on McKnight Road
occurred: Whit is the proposal so further problems do not occur or result in a
need for an immediate expansion or complete replacement of the present utility
systems?
4. The schematics do not clearly show the exact location of any ingress /egress
scheduled for Lakewood Drive, but it appears they will be in such close proximity
to the existing four -way stop at Maryland, and in a lower -lying road area, that
36
the potential for traffic backup and accidents will be hi It is also. unclear
regardin the access planned for Sterlin Street (which is alread considered a
challen corner when exitin Sterlin Street and enterin Mar Avenue
due to limited visibilit Are there . an plans,, not rela as of y et, re
the t ins
e tallation of traffic li -
58 TO date, we have. had the pleasure of bein able to remain blanketed in
darkened surroundin and vieM the stars without the 'hindrance of
illumination, . We have felt that it is because of this lack of li there is less
traffic after dark and Gerar►ium Park has neve- r biome a late ni "han
for j uveniles, With more multi - famil dwellin will come the necessit of street
li
6. Geranium Park is presentl bein used to near maximum with schools utilizin
the fields for various practices and g ame- s,. Other communit or even
schedulin usa durin the.-da and ,'L the g eneral public bein able to use the
courts- in the evenin The availabilit of the Park's time will become
increasin strained as more people are v for ur
7. I befieve the fire station located on Geranium Avenue and Stillwater Road a1read
covers a lar area consistin of multii-famil dwellin Does a project of this;
ma that would potentiali increase their workload., need to g ain the Fire
Marshal's approval?
I look forward to bein informed of the schedulin re the communit meetin
After hearin of other peopie's concer I anticipate it to be an interestin and
informative collection of opinions.
Sincerely,
RPW/rw
37
i ' � _f
47-
�}
JAN J 1 2001
Z 1A , IVED
06
yo � �''
. r.
r.
1 •t. ' � JZ
- �� �••'" '• � fib► - �!" . . . . � � ._
1 tr
/0
Of
0040
Ar
e-e-
.96
X
4 ,! l ee
�, w , �� �_.� � 4� f .�' F' f � �6•�?�' I.C., , � ��>��wr ��J���."�i f/ • � - _ _ �i .. � ._ __ .. %r-:� -.i ,'
4-
1-4
01-
L
2183653142
Attachment 17
'0
w e*
:730-01 030.32 PM E E h 2183653142
P-02
t
0 -1
oll
o
714& j000�te7a
12-61:414 (100
oo�
s Z I � .
0; 7
00
651
39
tr
t- unon minKerrues V 651-714-3883
W/31/01 0 5 1-17 PM 2/2
Attachment 18
Date: 1/29/01
To: Kenneth Roberts, Associate Planner
Fr: F. B. Ktinkerfues JAN 3 1
Re: Proposed Beaver Lakes Town home and Apartment Complex R C r:1 VED
We live at 1051 No, Mar St. and also own the lot behind us that fronts onto
Bartelm Lane.
Simply 'stated, the area in question will be developed. The land is too
valuable to remain in its current state. That's a g iven.
We have no ob to the proposed,stated development as outlined b
Mr. Tony Emmerich. The use of space seems wise and the buildin as plotted
and proposed b Mr. Emmerich will in all likelihood enhance the area visuatt
I have nothin to g o b in determinin the human densit issue once all the
structures are completed. That grill be left for the Council . or plannin g roup
to ne with Mr, Emmerich.
The fact that it will not be rezoned "commercial" pleases us. Also we betleve
that the price scale of the proposed structures should probabl be middle of
the road. There is much tow income housin in the area surroundin the
proposed development e. g . Beaver Lake Estates and the mobile home park
alon Centur Middle of the road pricin would make a nice socio-economic
mix for the area and that would be health %
40
Attachment 19
MIDWEST
Lund Surveyors &civil Engineers, Inc.
710 East River Road 9 Anoka, MN 55303
(763) 712 -9099 e Fax (763) 712 -9055
Toll Free (888) 786 -6909
TO: City of Maplewood Planning Commission C ; 3 f
FROM:
Mr. Tony Emmerich, AJE Companies
SL)EJECT: RESPONSE TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
BEAVER LAKE TO WNHOWS — Dated. February 14, 2001
LOCATION: Maryland Avenue and Sterling Street
Date: February 20, 2001
The following comments are in response to the RECOMMENDATIONS of the Planning Department
regarding the above referenced proposal for development in the City of Maplewood. The responses refer to
the recommendations to the Planning Commission as presented on pages I 1 and 12 of the review packet
provided to the developer from the Planning Department.
A.1 Conformity to the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances.
(a) The plan presented is preliminary. Negotiations between the developer and the city
regarding the city - planned trail and the park dedication requirements are not complete
and should continue to resolution. Several possible scenarios are available to both
parties.
(b) Grading is shown within the streat/wetland buffer in several locations as indicated. In
each of the locations where grading is proposed there are alternatives to grading within
the buffer area. The following address the locations as described by building numbers:
4 -8 The townhomes proposed can be constructed as fall basement look out (FBLO)
units in lieu of the indicated full basement walk out (FBWO) units. As a second
alternative a retaining wall can be constructed outside the buffer area to avoid
grading within the buffer area.
22 -25 A retaining wall can be constructed outside the stream /wetland buffer area to
eliminate grading within the buffer area.
29 -33 No grading is needed within the stream/wetland buffer area as the FBWO lower
floors of the townhomes are proposed to be very near to the existing ground
elevation.
37 A retaining wall can be constructed outside the stream/wetland buffer area to
eliminate grading within the buffer area.
44 A retaining wall can be constructed outside the stream /wetland buffer area to
eliminate grading within the buffer area.
COMMENT: The developer and his engineer proposed the minor grading in these
areas because it was felt that a slope with vegetation possibly including trees and shrubs
would be less intrusive to the stream corridor and buffer area.
41
(c) Concern for "steep slopes" in areas being graded within the proposed construction area
outside the stream/wetland buffer area.
An interpretation of the intent of the city ordinance is as follows:
+ "Steep slopes" under the Shoreland Section of the Zoning Ordinance are areas of
concern for soil erosion into, and visibility from Public waters.
♦ Beaver Creek is not Public Water and the areas referred to are not visible from
Beaver Lake, the closest Public water to the site.
♦ The definition of "intensive vegetation removal" refers to tree and shrub
vegetation under the definition in the Shoreland Overlay District section of the
City zoning code. No mention is made of herbaceous vegetation.
♦ Finally, the "steep slope" reference is made to allow the city engineer to require
proper erosion control practices in these areas, not to prohibit grading.
The following address the locations as described by building numbers:
4 -9 A very small area may be tree canopy near Unit 7.
11 -14 Proposed units are outside the tree line.
23 -24 No tree /shrub vegetation is present.
28 -36 This area is within the pine woodlot area. The pines were planted 30 -35 years
age, based on the MnDNR comments. Thinning operations appear to have been
neglected throughout the life of this woodlot. Most of the inner trees are stunted
and a short life is anticipated with blow downs in the future. The developer's
intent is to replace these trees with deciduous species that will last several
hundred years throughout the development area and the stream corridor. More
than 270 trees are anticipated for the entire development.
37 -42 Minimal tree /shrub vegetation is present and a corridor would., not be created.
44 No tree /shrub vegetation is present.
COMMENT: Proper erosion control and turf /vegetation establishment methods will
alleviate the concerns for erosion impacts to the stream/wetland buffer areas.
(d) The use of retaining walls in lieu of vegetated slopes in the previously discussed
stream/wetland buffer areas will eliminate the concern for grading and vegetation
removal in the buffer. Certain locations must be disturbed to provide utility connections
for sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water. These uses of the Stream/wetland buffer are
permitted with restoration. All disturbed areas will be re- vegetated during the
construction process.
A.2 Existing character change for the surrounding area.
The surrounding area contains multi- family residences, mobile homes, attached single- family
residences (quad homes), and single family residences.
The proposed housing will provide 1 -2 person and family housing for people seeking a
maintenance free life style. Transition to this development by local residents seeking the
maintenance free housing, but who wish to remain in the area, could provide for affordable single
family living in the existing neighborhoods of the city.
0)
42
A.3 Proposed use would cause dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or nuisance activities.
The proposed use after construction is completed (normal construction activity associated with
development) would not involve activities beyond those already present in a residential
neighborhood.
A.4 Proposed use could cause increased traffic congestion. Driveway entrance concerns.
Development of this property under R -3 zoning will cause increased traffic regardless of the
proposal.
There are:currently eight (8) existing driveway entrances to the portion of the site fronting on
Maryland Avenue. These were constructed with Maryland Avenue. No additional driveways are
proposed. ReIQcjjpn .of te:.existing driveways will be necessary.
x
A.5 Non- Incorporation of the sites natural or scenic features into the design. Concern for the pine
grove. Degra 41 * �b the aesthetic and ecological values of the stream corridor.
The development proposes to provide single family detached townhomes along the stream
corridor considerably reducing the ecological impact when compared with multi- family dwelling
units.
With the exception of necessary utility connections the stream /wetland buffer area has been
carefully considered during the preliminary design of the development. An example of this
concern is the incorporation of storm water management facilities into the yard areas of the
development to avoid impacts in the stream/wetland buffer. Under current regulations of both the
city and watershed district storm water ponding is permitted within the stream /wetland buffer.
Infiltration is proposed in the t v t ement system to remove sediment and pollutants
while still providing green open sp _ ,: ace on the - multi- family sites. Additionally, the buildings have
been clustered to minimize it"ery-iousz surface _area and provide more open space.
The developer will cooperate with the city to restore the trees and intends to replace more than the
270 trees required by ordinance for the removal of the pine grove. The pine grove was planted 30
to 35 years ago and does not appear to have been properly thinned to allow for normal mature
trees to develop. Native deciduous species common to Maplewood would be used for replacement
and some pines could be incorporated into the tree plan.
The stream /wetland corridor has been altered historically with the construction of the gas pipelines
and the sanitary sewer through the corridor. Both of these utilities require periodic maintenance
access. The gas pipeline easement is regularly mowed to within a few inches of the soil and the
sanitary sewer requires periodic cleaning and maintenance.
B, C, Denial of various easement and right of way vacations.
&D
These issues will be addressed as negotiations proceed toward development.
3
43
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 200'1
A. Beaver Lake Town homes (Maryland Avenue, Lakewood Drive to Sterling Street).
Mr. Ken Roberts gave the staff report for the city. Mr. Tony Emmerich, of the AJE Company, is
proposing to develop a 162 planned unit development called the Beaver Lake Town Homes. This is
proposed for a 27 -acre site on the south side of Maryland Avenue between Sterling and Lakewood
Drive. To build this project, Mr. Emmerich made several requests of the city including:
1. A conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) fora 162 -unit housing
development. The PUD is required because of the shoreland ordinance and its regulations.
'The proposal is to have a mix of housing with 42 single family detached townhomes and 120
rental units in 15 8 -unit buildings.
2. Street right -of -way and easement vacations. These would be for the unused street right -of -way
and easements on the site.
3. A preliminary plat to create the lots in the development.
The applicant has not yet applied for design approval. If the city approves the above - listed
request, then the applicant will apply to the city for final PUD approval and design approval
(including architectural and landscape plans).
There are numerous concerns with this proposal. They include:
1. The Maplewood Open Space committee reviewed numerous sites in 1992 for possible purchase
as part of the bond referendum. Although this site was ranked 5th out of the 66 sites reviewed,
Maplewood has not included this site in its park or open space acquisition plans.
2. In 1999, the city received a $100,000 matching grant from the Minnesota DNR Greenways
Program. The purpose of the Metro Greenways is to project, connect, restore and manage a
network of significant natural areas, parks and other open spaces interconnected by habitat
corridors. The grant for this site is for the city to acquire part of this property as a natural
greenway between Beaver Lake and the city pond to the south and west of the site and the
wetland area north of Maryland Avenue. Mr. Al Singer, the Metro Greenways Coordinator,
stated that the "proposed site plan, with the apparently stated intention by the land owner of
not wanting to provide public access, would no longer meet our program criteria and
objectives. If the plan as submitted is not substantially altered, Metro Greenways
funding would no longer be available for this project."
3. Mr. Bruce Anderson, Maplewood Parks and Recreation Director, reviewed the proposed plans.
He expressed his concerns with the plan and its possible negative impacts on the stream and as
well as preserving the pine grove on the property. Jean Moulle, The Urban Best Management
Practices Coordinator of the DNR, also expressed several concerns about the proposed
development. He stated "the stand of pines near the stream provides significant ecological
benefits to the watershed district including the wildlife habitat corridor and water quality as well
as social benefits including recreational opportunities such as trail and open space benefits to
future residents. Preserving the pine stand as open space will add significant real estate values
to the subdivision ".
4. The city ordinance states there should be no intensive vegetation clearing on steep slopes.
This is defined as the complete removal of trees or shrubs in a specific patch, strip, row or block.
A slope is any land having a slope of more than 12% measured in a horizontal distance of at
least 50 feet. There are several areas that fall into this distinction along the stream corridor..
5. One site plan concern noted by Ramsey County was the area along Maryland Avenue that has
eight proposed driveways. Maryland is a county road, and the county prefers that there be only
one or two driveways coming out to Maryland Avenue.
6. There are existing easements and right -of -ways on the site. Mr. Emmerich has asked the city
to vacate all the unused street right -of -ways and easements within the project area. However,
for the city to vacate a right -of -way or easement, the council must find that there is no public
interest in keeping the right -of -way or easement.
7. Mr. Cliff Aichinger of the watershed district has done a preliminary review of the proposed
project and noted several major concerns. The proposed grading plan shows grading infringing
on the buffer areas to the creek and has areas of potential significant erosion that would affect
the creek. Also, he noted concerns with water quality and environmental issues.
Because of all the numerous concerns from the various agencies outlined in the report, staff is
recommending denial of the proposal.
Mr. Tapp er asked staff what the meaning of the $100,000 grant was and if the developer has
expressed a willingness to work with the city on preserving a portion of the site. Mr. Roberts
responded in saying the $100,000 would have to be returned if the city is not able to purchase a
portion of the site. He also noted the applicant has not spoken to any of the staff about this and
this would be a good question for the applicant. Mr. Frost clarified that at least 100 feet on each side
of the stream was needed for this Metro Greenways project.
Mr. Ledvina asked the staff when reviewing the site and grading plan if they felt the altering of the
steep slopes would require a variance to the shoreland ordinance. Mr. Roberts stated if the
proposal was approved as submitted, that would indeed be the case.
Mr. Roger Larson, Midwest Land Surveyors and Civil Engineers, Inc. from Anoka, Minnesota, was
present for the applicant. He stated they received the staff report on the 16th of February, and have
just been able to respond with a three page rebuttal (which he distributed).
Mr. Larson referred to the staff report that indicated there are four areas where there is proposed
grading within the stream buffer. The grading proposed were four narrow strips in different areas.
They have looked at the use of retaining walls to stay out of the buffer area, along with minimum
grading that could be covered with shrubs and trees rather than a man -made retaining wall.
There are also areas where a steep slope was discussed. When the applicant looked closely at the
shoreland zoning ordinance, the steep slope areas refer specifically to areas that are adjacent to
public waters. Public waters defined as Beaver Lake, but Beaver Creek is not defined as a public
water. The way the ordinance is written, those steep slopes are to be reviewed by the city engineer
and erosion control methods applied.
The definition to the intensive vegetation rule with regard to the steep slope areas, as interpreted by
Mr. Larson, was concerned mainly with tree and shrub removal. This removal would be in straight
line corridors that would open up an unobstructed view away from the lake. Some of these steep
slopes were man made and are green areas. He stated the stream corridor has been significantly
altered in the past already. He also stated the mowing along the gas pipeline has been quite wide
and felt it could be narrowed in the future.
The developer has a concern with the pine trees in that they were never properly maintained after
they were planted. He noted that the exterior trees are very short of branches on the inside. The
interior trees are quite stunted with a high canopy and the tops of the trees are quite small. The
developers are afraid those interior trees will begin to die out, and they will be responsible for the
maintenance when problems begin in 10 to 20 years.
The applicant disagrees with the statement about the development changing the character of the
surrounding area. Mr. Larson stated the surrounding area is multifamily residences, a mobile home
park, single family residences and quad homes. They feel their development will not be a
substantial change in the character of the area and that it would fit right in.
Recommendation A.3, the applicant feels, would only apply during the short term construction
period and feel the comment is completely out of context.
The applicant agrees that the 162 units of residential housing could cause increased traffic.
They state there are currently eight curb cuts on Maryland Avenue and no additional driveways are
being proposed.
The developer feels the townhomes provide a buffer along the stream so you do not have large
apartment units next to the stream. They feel this is an esthetic buffer to the steam corridor.
Mr. Larson also stated the developers are willing to negotiate and work with the city in regard to the
stream corridor either as a park dedication plus purchasing additional land. If the city wishes it, the
whole corridor is about 4.8 acres.
The developers have major concerns with the trail situation. They feel the single family home
owners would not appreciate public access within 20 feet of their back door day or night.
Mr. Trippler asked the applicant what definition he was using for public waters. The applicant is
using the definition from the city ordinance, and Beaver Creek is not listed as a public water. It is
not listed as a DNR protected water or wetland either.
Mr. Rossbach felt some of the comments made by Mr. Larson were irrelevant to the issue and
without thought to the wildlife. He pointed out the city wants to find a compromise that is workable
for both wildlife and humans. He felt the proposal was going to come down to how many people
can live within the proposed development area and still protect the wildlife area.
There are not eight driveways, as stated by the applicant, but eight curbcuts as clarified by
Commissioner Pearson. Mr. Pearson also noted the numerous attempts that have been made by
the Maplewood Police Department to slow down traffic in that area. Less than two years ago a
child was hit by a car and killed crossing Maryland Avenue due to the sun being blinding at times
during the day. He feels it is a hazardous area currently without the addition of 162 more vehicles
using that road.
Mr. Mueller was concerned there is not a child play area included in the development plans. He
was also hoping this development would be part of the future trail system. If the concern is having
a trail outside the residents back door, the solution may be to move the back door farther.away from
the trail.
Alan Singer, 49 O'day Street, Maplewood, was present. Mr. Singer is the coordinator of the Metro
Greenways project of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Metro Greenways is a
regional initiative to create a network of parks natural areas interconnected by habitat corridors
throughout the seven county metropolitan areas.
Mr. Singer explained if the corridor is going to remain in private hands, that would not agree with the
intention of Metro Greenways, and they would have to withdraw the $100,000 they were going to
bring to the project.
Mr. Frost asked how wide the corridor needed to be on each side of Beaver Creek and what type of
wildlife they expected to habitat that area. Mr. Singer stated the corridors, he felt, would need to be
250 -300 feet wide, especially if there is going to be a trail included. The type of wildlife inhabiting
the corridor is the typical suburban wildlife. Potentially, white tail deer, opossum, squirrel and
migratory birds. Mr. Trippler asked how the wildlife cross Maryland Avenue to get to Beaver Lake.
Mr. Singer explained the mammals have to take their own chance as they cross the roadway but
that critters are amazingly adaptable. Commissioner Pearson noted deer and wildlife cross Century
Avenue near the priory and follow the emergency access road to Maryland Avenue to the group of
pines on the corner of Sterling. In twenty years, he has never seen a deer hit on Maryland Avenue.
Metro Greenways is working with projects in the City of Hastings along the Vermillion River, in
Dayton along the Mississippi River, and Browns Creek in Stillwater. Mr. Frost concurred with Mr.
Rossbach that there should be a workable solution between the developer and the city in that there
should be give and take. For that to occur he feels the commission should go along with the staffs
recommendation and deny the request for the conditional use permit. That would then force the city
and developer to sit down again to find a workable solution. He then felt a "win win" situation could
occur.
Mr. Frost moved the board recommend the denial of the proposed conditional use permit for a
planned unit development for the Beaver Lake Town home development. This development would
be on the south side of Maryland Avenue between Sterling Street and Lakewood Drive. The city is
denying this request because:
1. The proposed use would not be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be
in conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances. This is because:
(a) The proposed development plan is not consistent with the adopted Maplewood Parks
Plan since the developer is not proposing to build the part of acity- planned trail that would
be within his project site.
(b) The proposed grading plan shows grading in several parts of the required 50- foot -wide no
disturb buffer areas. These areas are near the rear of proposed buildings 4 -8, 22 -2 29-
33, 37 and 44. The city does not allow grading or ground disturbance in the required
buffer areas.
(c) Several existing areas on the site with steep slopes. These are next to or in the areas
where the developer has proposed buildings 4-9,11-14, 23 -24, 28 -36, 37 -42 and 44.
These are all areas on the site that the shoreland code prohibits intensive vegetation
clearing. As such, the applicant would need to revise the project plans to ensure that they
will not be doing any intensive vegetation clearing on the steep slopes. This also means
that grading cannot occur in these areas as that would remove the vegetation.
(d) The proposed plans do not meet all the Maplewood Shoreland Ordinance requirements,
especially about the removal of vegetation from the site.
2. The proposed use would change the existing character of the surrounding area.
3. The proposed use would involve activities, processes, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, 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 other nuisances.
4. The proposed use could create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing streets. The
proposed driveway design would have eight driveways going onto Maryland Avenue. Ramsey
County prefers to have only one or two driveways onto their road instead of the eight that the
developer has proposed. This design change would be to minimize the number of potential
conflict points with the traffic on the county road.
5. The proposed use would not maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and
scenic features into the development design. The proposed development does not take into
consideration the ecological sensitivity of the creek and the abutting vegetation. The pine grove
on the,property (near the south side of the stream corridor that proposed buildings 26 -36 would
encroach into) is a significant amenity to the landscape as they are critical for water quality but
also for their visual /aesthetic value. The pine stand near the stream provides significant
ecological benefits to the watershed district including the wildlife habitat corridor and water
quality as well as social benefits including recreational opportunities such as trail and open
space benefits to future residents. Preserving the pine stand as open space would add
significant real estate values to the subdivision. The proposed development would require the
removal of the existing conifers (pine trees) and other plant material on the site. This, along with
the damage due to construction equipment, soil compaction and slope alteration, would further
degrade the aesthetic and ecological value of the corridor.
6. The proposed use would cause adverse environmental effects. The proposed grading plan has
areas of potential significant erosion that would affect the creek and wetlands.
Deny the request to vacate parts of the unused Magnolia Avenue and Sterling Street lying west of
Lakewood Drive and south of Maryland Avenue in the proposed Beaver Lake Townhomes PUD.
The city is denying this request because:
1. The city is denying the proposed PUD and proposed project plans.
2. It is not in the public interest to vacate these right -of -ways since the city is not approving a
project for this site.
Deny the request to vacate unused drainage and utility easements lying east of Lakewood Drive,
west of Sterling Street and south of Maryland Avenue in the proposed Beaver Lake Townhomes
PUD. The city is denying this request because:
1. The city is denying the proposed PUD and proposed project plans.
2. It is not in the public interest to vacate these easements since the city is not approving a project
for this site.
Deny the proposed Beaver Lake Townhomes preliminary plat (received by the city on January 18,
2001). The city is denying this proposed preliminary plat because the city is denying the proposed
planned unit development and the proposed street and easement vacations.
Mr. Pearson seconded. Ms. Fischer asked for 2a to be stricken since the commission did not agree
that the development would change the character of the surrounding area. The commission voted
on the amended motion.
Ayes -All
Motion carries. This proposal will go before the city council on March 12.
TO: City of Maplewood, City Council
- FROM:
Mr. Tony Emmerich AJE Companies
SUBJECT: ADDITIONS TO — Response to the Planning Department Recommendations
- - - -- BEAVER LAKE TOWNHOMES — Dated: - February 20, 2001
LOCATION: Maryland Avenue, and Sterling Street
Date: March 12, 2001 -
CONE WENT: The proposed development does meet the density requirements with 162 units on
27 -acres of property. In an effort to minimize disturbance of the stream /wetland buffer as it exists
today, the developer has included the following considerations in planning.
1. Minimal grading was initially proposed in the buffer area to avoid the use of retaining
walls adjacent to the stream corridor. In some locations this grading would remove
existing very steep slopes and thereby reduce erosion potential.
2. Study of the stream /wetland buffer area during preliminary design determined that storm
water management ponds could be constructed within the buffer. A storm water pond on
each. side of the creek would significantly disturb the creek corridor and remove large
areas of trees in the buffer. Storm water ponds in the buffer would require the use of
retaining walls in order to be constructed to proper dimensions in the buffer area. This is
- due to the steep slopes in the buffer and the restrictions o* f the existing pipelines through
the buffer area. This use of the buffer is permitted by ordinance.
3. The proposed development consists of 67% open space, which is significantly higher
than the required 50 %.
4. The proposed plan does cluster the buildings and impervious surfaces to provide
additional open space in accordance with Section 36 -574, Planned Unit Development's,
of the City Ordinance.
5. The proposed plan does use surface drainage extensively to reduce storm water sediment.
In addition, infiltration of storm water is proposed to remove sediment and pollutants
outside the stream /wetland buffer.
6. The developer provided City staff with a drawing showing 7.2 acres of property that
could be used for purchase /dedication for the City and MnDNR to meet their greenway
needs.
7. The developer requests that action on this preliminary plat and PUD proposal be
tabled for SO days, following the public hearing, to allow for further discussions with
City staff. &D .J
The original response to the recommendations of the Maplewood Planning Department are
presented below as addressed to the Maplewood Planning Commission on February 20, 2001.
Additions to the February 20, 2001, responses are underlined to allow for presentation of the
entire response from the developer.
T
MID `VVE S T
/wand surveyors & Civil Engineers, Inc.
-- - 710 East River Road •Anoka, MN 35303
(763) 712 -9099 Fax (763) 712 -9055
Toll Free (888) 786 -6909
TO:.
-:
SUBJECT:
RECOMME
LOCATION:
Date:
'City of Maplewood, Planning Commission
Mr. - - Tony Emmerich, AJE Companies
RESPONSE TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT
NDATIONS
BEAVER LAKE TOWNHOMES —Dated: February 14, 2001
Maryland Avenue and Sterling Street
February 20, 2001
The following comments are in response to the RECOMMENDATIONS of the Planning
Department regarding the above referenced proposal for development in the City of Maplewood.
The responses refer to the recommendations to the Planning Commission as presented on pages
11 and 12 of the review packet provided to the developer from the Planning Department.
A.1 Conformity to the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances.
(a) The plan presented is preliminary. Negotiations between the developer and the
city regarding the city - planned trail and the park dedication requirements are not
complete and should continue to resolution. Several possible scenarios are
available to both parties:
The required park dedication by ordinance is 2.7 acres or 10% of the site.
On March 6, 2001, the developer met with City staff and MnDNR and presented
a proposal for the dedication/purchase of about 7.2 acres of land along the Beaver
Creek corridor. The proposal includes area along the entire length of Beaver
Creek and a corridor to Maryland Avenue for a trail connection. The developer
is concerned for the loss of privacy the single- family townhouses will experience
from a trail in very close proximity to the backyard outdoor areas
For informational purposes the existing 50 foot stream /wetland buffer contains
approximately 4.8 acres of land. The stream centerline length is about 1680 fee
in length from Sterling Street to the south property line. The buffer area has an
average width of about 125 feet.
(b) Grading is shown within the stream /wetland buffer in several locations as
indicated. In each of the locations where grading is proposed there are
alternatives to grading within the buffer area. The following address the
locations as described by building numbers:
4 -8 The townhouses proposed can be constructed as full basement look out
(FBLO) units in lieu of the indicated full basement walk out (FBWO)
0
One alternative is - bein resented schematically on the drawings to
illustrate the removal of grading from the stream /wetland buffer area
The "steep slope in this location is addressed under A. Lc later in this
document.
22 -25 A retaining wall can be constructed outside the stream /wetland buffer
area to eliminate grading within the buffer area.
A retaining wall :with a height :of _about 5 feet at the highest point can be
constructed to avoid grading in this location. A storm sewer will have to
- - be constructed through this location to provide storm water management - -
29 -33 No grading is needed within the stream /wetland buffer area as the
FB WO lower
floors of the townhouses are proposed to be very near to the existing
ground elevation.
37 A retaining wall can be constructed outside the stream /wetland buffer
area to eliminate grading within the buffer area.
Closer examination of the Townhouse Unit 37 indicates that a shor
section of retaining wall will be needed to avoid grading in the buffer
area. The estimated height of this retaining wall is about 3 feet
44 A retaining wall can be constructed outside the stream /wetland buffer
area to eliminate grading within the buffer area.
The location of a retaining wall for avoidance of grading at this location
is shown. The retaining wall would be about 9 feet in height. The
contours proposed originally have not been adjusted on the drawing in
the event the City would select the restored slope option in lieu of the
retaining wall.
COMMENT: The developer and his engineer proposed the minor grading in
these areas because it was felt that a slope with vegetation possibly including
trees and shrubs would be less intrusive to the stream corridor and buffer area.
At the March 6, 2001, meeting with City staff the staff indicated that it preferred
retaining walls.
(c) Concern for "steep slopes" in areas being graded within the proposed
construction area outside the stream /wetland buffer area.
An interpretation of the intent of the city ordinance is as follows:
♦ "Steep slopes" under the Shoreland Section of the Zoning Ordinance are
areas of concern for soil erosion into, and visibility from Public Waters
3
The following address the locations as described by building numbers:
-- 4 -9 A very small area may be -tree canopy near Unit 7.
The existing steep - slopes in the location are manmade from the
stockpiling stripped topsoil during earthwork performed in the 1980's
These steep slopes can be partially removed by a small amount o
excavation in the stream /wetland buffer with the result being a
restoration to more natural slopes corresponding to the origina
topography.
11 -14 Proposed units are outside the tree line.
All grading proposed for this area is outside the stream /wetland buffer
area and the vegetation is herbaceous.
23 -24 No tree /shrub vegetation is present.
This area can be protected from grading with a retaining wall
28-36 This area is within the pine woodlot area. The pines were planted 3 0 -3 5
years age, based on the MnDNR comments. Thinning operations appear
to have been neglected throughout the life of this woodlot. Most of the
inner trees are stunted and a short life is anticipated with blow downs in
the future. The developer's intent is to replace these trees with
deciduous species that will last several hundred years throughout the
development area and the stream corridor. More than 270 trees are
anticipated for the entire development.
The developer still has concern for the maintenance of the planted
Norway Pine woodlot and who will be responsible in the future.
37-42 Minimal tree /shrub vegetation is present and a corridor would not be
created.
This area has been re- designed to reduce driveway entrances to Maryland
Avenue. As a result grading has been minimized due to the proposed
walkout basement floor elevations being at or very near existing ground
elevations.
4
44 No tree /shrub vegetation is present.
A retaining wall can be substituted for a restored earth slope
COMMENT: Proper erosion control and turf /vegetation establishment methods
will alleviate the concerns for erosion impacts to the stream /wetland buffer areas.
(d) The use of retaining walls in lieu of. vegetated slopes in the previously discussed
stream /wetland buffer areas will eliminate the concern for grading and vegetation
removal in the buffer. Certain locations must be disturbed to provide utility
connections for sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water. These uses of the
Stream /wetland buffer are permitted with restoration. _All :disturbed areas will be
re- vegetated during the construction process.
Variances are permitted by Section 9 -196, Wetlands and Streams, of the City
Ordinance for alterations within the stream /wetland buffer area
A.2 Existing character change for the surrounding area.
The surrounding area contains multi- family residences, mobile homes, attached single -
family residences (quad homes), and single family residences.
The proposed housing will provide 1 -2 person - and family housing for people seeking a
maintenance free life style. Transition to this development by local residents seeking the
maintenance free housing, but who wish to remain in the area, could provide for
affordable single family living in the existing neighborhoods of the city.
The developer believes that this concern was removed from the Planning Commission
recommendations. A copy of the Planning Commission recommendations from February
.. 20, 2001, to the City Council was received on March 12, 2001, by mail, and this item was
removed from the denial motion..
A.3 Proposed use would cause dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or nuisance
activities.
The proposed use after construction is completed (normal construction activity associated
with development) would not involve activities beyond those already present in a
residential neighborhood.
The developer still believes and contends this development would not create nuisances
cited in this recommendation item beyond those already in existence in the surrounding
neighborhood other than those associated with normal construction activities on a
temporary basis.
A.4 Proposed use could cause increased traffic congestion. Driveway entrance concerns.
Development of this property under R -3 zoning will cause increased traffic regardless of
the proposal.
There are currently eight (8) existing driveway entrances to the portion of the site
fronting on Maryland Avenue. These were constructed with Maryland Avenue. No
R
t
A.5 Non - Incorporation of the sites natural or scenic features into the design. Concern for the
pine grove. Degradation of the aesthetic and ecological values of the stream corridor.
The development proposes to provide single family detached townhouses along the
_ stream corridor considerably reducing the ecological: impact when compared with multi-
family dwelling units.
With the exception of necessary utility connections the stream /wetland buffer area has
been carefully considered during the preliminary design of the development. An example
of this, concern is the incorporation of storm water water management facilities into the yard
areas of the development to avoid impacts in the stream /wetland buffer. Under current
regulations of both the city and watershed district storm water ponding is permitted
within the stream /wetland buffer. Infiltration is proposed in the storm water management
system to remove sediment and pollutants while still providing green open space on the
multi- family sites. Additionally, the buildings have been clustered to minimize
impervious surface area and provide more open space. ,
The developer will cooperate with the city to restore the trees and intends to replace more
than the 270 trees required by ordinance for the removal of the pine grove. The pine
grove was planted 30 to 35 years ago and does not appear to have been properly thinned
to allow for normal mature trees to develop. Native deciduous species common to
Maplewood would be used for replacement and some pines could be incorporated into
the tree plan.
The stream /wetland corridor has been altered historically with the construction of the gas
pipelines and the sanitary sewer through the corridor. Both of these utilities require
periodic maintenance access. The gas pipeline easement is regularly mowed to within a
few inches of the soil and the sanitary sewer requires periodic cleaning and maintenance.
The developer is willing to work with the City and negotiate the relocation of the sanitary
sewer, which parallels the stream through the project site. This sewer has been in place
since the 1960s and the first mention of relocation was in the staff report to the Planning
Commission received by the developer on February 16, 2001.
A.6 The proposed use would cause adverse environmental effects. The proposed grading
plan has areas of potential significant erosion that would affect the creek and wetlands.
The developer has considered the possibility of adverse environmental effe As with
any construction of development there is a potential for environmental effects. The
project site is already significantly altered by past uses. Reduction of some steep slopes
storm water management outside the stream /wetland buffer, and reduction in proposed
impervious surfaces are some of the considerations given to reducing adverse
environmental effects. A City approved erosion control plan is a reauired Dart of the
development construction plans.
�� � ly i . 1`2 C,
OV,
I
_ i
o III
Alt,
Ki
•
•
•
ry
Irw 1
No
It
�� � �•� . sal ��� I�I I� � k� :�'�3 V a' .
z
tt Nsz�
'4 4 91
UA
,� z1�'�. Y - 'l ;; ��;� o: �1 �� ``��`ti`�'��. �., .<� tv�'• �,' tl � r t r
'{ ,r�) t 1,��Tll'�{ .5�,, r •.t� y t, 'S'S'Ai
W ",
A, 1 •G4:Z �.'y$}. 1 h � > ?�`' f�, »
eL �.�i � i•:'�.•'� ��;P A'�
�� ,� !� � 4 rxt , ' / t
�t —w
Z9
M. 1 �
.
Ms
y.
�' v 3
, vj�
ll��iv
III
jjll!;� yytFc
. . . . . . ..........
l�r NO woo M I
• A4,
' t',��tt. RthX4. r .�,� I
— is,� ' "f�9�'r�!'T'-�ii��.i �i16 �i- �P�zt,S'��i�'rt2
, ktx
zllp
MM
MYZIN M
Vo
,�Ox
BT Rcre 0
+
, Itil,
N880,
I�
v
A ll.
i
0 W
=.No R Yeu.
1�25� /Deg
.r�raa�
AGENDA ITEM NO - -
J
MEMORANDUM
Action by Council
TO: City Manager Date
FROM: Thomas Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director Endorsed
SUBJECT: Parking Waiver and Design Review — Service Engineering Modified
LOCATION: 2720 Maplewood Drive Rejected
DATE: Februa ry 22 2001
INTRODUCTION
Proposal
John Kliethermes, Jr. is proposing to build a second -story addition on Service Engineering, 2720 y .:
Maplewood Drive. Refer to the maps on pages 6 -9. The proposed addition would cover the
middle third of this southwestern -style building. Mr. Kliethermes would build wing -wall
extensions on the front elevation to give the proposed upper floor more of a full second -story
appearance from the highway. Refer to the building elevations on page 10. The addition is
needed for data storage and office space for the applicant. Mr. Kliethermes is not proposing/to
add additional personnel.
Requests
The applicant is requesting:
1. A waiver from the parking requirements. The existing building is "grandfathered" to have 15
parking spaces (11 on the site north of the building and four along the street). The code
requires 25 spaces for the existing building. With the proposed addition, the code would
require 13 additional spaces for a total of 38. Refer to the applicant's letter on pages 11 -13.
2. Approval of architectural plans.
BACKGROUND
May 22, 1995: The city council approved a conditional use permit (CUP) to allow Service
Engineering to "expand a nonconforming use" by adding the 11 -space parking lot north of the
building. The site was considered nonconforming because it exceeded the impervious- surface
requirements of the shoreland ordinance. The council also granted a seven -foot parking lot
setback variance for the north parking lot. The code required a 15 -foot setback from the front lot
line and the parking lot is set back eight feet.
DISCUSSION
Parking Waiver
Parking Needs
The applicant's parking needs are less than the number of spaces required by code. In his
parking data on page 13, Mr. Kliethermes states that he typically needs 15 spaces, and
occasionally, 17. The occasional need for two parking spaces beyond the 15 available spaces
should not be a problem since cars can park along Kohlman Avenue. The city typically does not
encourage on- street parking. Two spaces along this side street are desirable, however, under
these circumstances.
Mr. Kliethermes also added five parking spaces next to Kohlman Avenue. These five spaces
have a gravel surface and have not been approved by the city. Refer to the site plan on page 9.
The five new parking spaces violate three ordinance requirements. They do not have a 15 -foot
front setback, they are not paved and they increase the impervious- surface area of the site.
Compacted gravel is considered an impervious material. It is not considered pavement.
To resolve these code violations, the applicant should apply for a conditional use permit to
expand the impervious surface of the site and also apply for a front setback variance for the
south parking' lot. An alternative to making these applications is the removal of this parking lot
and ground restoration.
Proof of Parking
As "proof of parking," the applicant is proposing 10 future parking spaces adjacent to the
northerly parking lot. To construct these spaces, the applicant would have to remove several
mature trees, excavate into a steep hill and build substantial retaining walls. Expanding the
parking lot with these constraints is possible, but not feasible. As mentioned, there is also the
issue of the shoreland requirement for restricting the amount of impervious surface on the site.
Parking Waiver. Summary
Staff agrees with the applicant's assessment of his parking needs. Our only concern with
allowing the addition is that if building occupants change, there could be a greater parking
demand. As an alternative to denying this proposal because of the infeasibility of providing more
parking, staff suggests that the city require that the applicant sign a restrictive covenant to
assure that future occupants are low traffic generators. The city attorney feels that this method
for parking control is feasible. Mr. Kliethermes agreed with this.
Building Design and Site Esthetics
The design of the proposed second floor would be attractive. Staff has no objection as long as
all sides of the building match in material, texture and color. The back of the wing walls should
also be finished with the same material, texture and color for uniformity. The applicant has not
stated whether there would be any new roof -top mechanical equipment installed on the new
second story. If there is, the code requires that the applicant screen them from residential
neighbors.
The area behind the building should be picked up. There are presently materials being stored
there giving the site an unkept appearance. The code also requires a trash enclosure for the
dumpster. If the city council approves this proposal, they should require the construction of a
trash enclosure.
COMMITTEE ACTION
February 22, 2001: The community design review board recommended approval of the design
plans and parking waiver.
9
RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Approve a parking waiver for Service Engineering, 2720 Maplewood Drive, based on the
following reasons (1-4) and subject to conditions (5 a & b):
1. The applicant has shown that there are enough parking spaces for the building's current
parking needs.
2. The applicant is not planning to add personnel with this addition.
3. Providing more paved parking on the site would further violate the impervious surface
requirements of the shoreland ordinance. The site is currently exceeding this
requirement.
4. The applicant has verbally agreed to a restrictive covenant being recorded against his
property to regulate the types of businesses in this building based on their degree of
traffic generation.
5. This approval is conditioned upon the property owner doing the following before obtaining
a building permit for the second -story addition:
a. Submitting a signed restrictive covenant to be approved by staff. This covenant shall
ensure that future occupants of 2720 Maplewood Drive are low traffic- generating
businesses. The city shall record this document with Ramsey County.
b. Submitting complete applications for a conditional use permit and a setback variance
for the five -car parking lot on the south side of the site. As an alternative to making
these applications, the property owner may agree to remove the parking lot and
restore the ground. If the property owner chooses this alternative, he shall present
staff with a letter of intent to do so with the stipulation that he will complete the
parking lot removal and ground restoration by June 1, 2001. With either alternative,
the property owner shall give the city cash escrow to cover the cost of the parking lot
removal and ground restoration.
B. Approve the plans, date- stamped January 26, 2001, for the proposed second -story addition'
at Service Engineering, 2720 Maplewood Drive. Approval is based on the findings required
by code and subject to the following conditions:
1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this
project.
2. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall do the following:
a. Submit a signed restrictive covenant to be approved by staff. This covenant shall
ensure that future occupants of 2720 Maplewood Drive are low traffic - generating
businesses. The city shall record this document with Ramsey County.
b. Submit complete applications for a conditional use permit and a setback variance for
the five -car parking lot on the south side of the site. As an alternative to making
these applications, the property owner may agree to remove the parking lot and
3
restore the ground. If the property owner chooses this alternative, he shall present
staff with a letter of intent to do so with the stipulation that he will complete the
parking lot removal and ground restoration by June 1, 2001. With either alternative,
the property owner shall give the city cash escrow to cover the cost of the parking lot
removal and ground restoration.
c. Submit plans for staff approval showing the placement and design of a trash
enclosure. The enclosure must have a gate that extends to the ground. The
enclosure must be large enough to accommodate trash and recycling containers.
The property owner shall also submit screening plans for any new roof -top
mechanical equipment he may install that would be visible by the residential
neighbors.
d. Submit a color scheme for the building to staff for approval.
3. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building:
a. Paint any new roof -top mechanical equipment to match the building that would be
visible. Screen any roof -top mechanical equipment that would be visible by
residential neighbors.
b. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure with a closeable gate.
C. Finish the back of the wing walls to have the same material, texture and color as the
building for uniformity.
4. The property owner shall remove the items being stored behind the building.
5. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if :
a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or
welfare.
b. The city receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work.
The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the unfinished work. Any unfinished
landscaping shall be completed by June 1 if the building is occupied in the winter or
within six weeks of occupancy if the building is occupied in the spring or summer.
c. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished
work.
6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may
approve minor changes.
21
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: acres: .70 acres
Existing land use: Service Engineering
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Don's Auto Body and Maplewood Imports
South: ., Kohiman Avenue, Angus Meats, and a single dwelling
West: Maplewood Drive (Highway 61)
East: Single dwellings
PLANNING
Land Use Plan designation: M1 (light manufacturing)
Zoning: M1
Ordinance Requirements
Section 25 -70 of the city code requires that the CDRB make the following findings to approve
plans:
1. That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring,
existing or proposed developments and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of
investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the
use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not
create traffic hazards or congestion.
2. That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of
the surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive
development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan.
3... That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable
environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically f good
Y 9
composition, materials, textures and colors.
p:sec4lservice.eng
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Property Line/Zoning Map
3. Property Line /Address Map
4. Site Plan
5. Building Elevations
6. Applicant's Narrative
7. Plans date - stamped January 26, 2001 (separate attachment)
5
Attachment 1
VgDNAIS HEIGHTS 61
COUWY
Q COt*M RD. D
U
ST d011N'S �Y
2. Z COUNTRYVM CIR.
J .3. 3. DUI.M Cr-
4. LYDIA AVE
BEAM AVE
BEN1 � AVE
waraz �
CoWay
KCHLMW
COUNW an= C AVE.
�a'K'10R ��i►vE. NoR j ��}#11 RD.
� �� AVE '� OE1�10Nr AVE
IINE. iii BROM
� AVE'
CT. � � � A
Gown AVE. �. CERMAtS I IF
ORAlAVIEN AVE CT
VR�K' OR
-1 AVE
Oi AVE Kn ��!j /IN
COPE L. AVE CO PE
` ��� � �� � � � AVE LW � AVE ti � �► L C06 *%
,. & Ewa Rc.
(,) c�+�we�s�sr c , AVE AVE. � � 1"M/ AVE.
LIL o.oR pGE AVE � �r•••n , n s� f
�o • � EVE BElJ�IONT AVE � � u ft •�
SKILL w" N! E SKILL AVE. MYifiPoS AVE aY Nr
ROISEwoOO AVE N.
i
i
1
LOCATION MAP
4
N
6
Attachment 2
97
N. 8.8. CO.
o �� Q MAPLEWOOD IMPORTS
00 •� � / 5 9m-t � — —
ZO 5. 95
x.18 a C gat. 1
-
I
2 I DON'S AUTO BODY
� ago
_ 7
{
4 i! I
I I 1 T 2!0-0 1 J1
- -ISO �
94zc
LA
.S 010
%..3 t
7lG
LA
(991
19
�$O t• '
s o b
1 EL
Im 6 .
IL
EA w�«: 11 q.i �„3.t•: I
119 07. 33 + 33
4D .3o
'. o ,�' v �' , 308.31 1 -7-5 ,1
Ln
,..;�-
OL
-
f.4 C �2 4
.� ! o
-� -
taro
A.
a
i
I {
I
ud
.I
T
E
i.
Cob i 4 c%
so 2 33 1 32 i +9e 132
1 _
PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP
SERVICE ENGINEERING SITE
4
N
7
Attachment 3
PROPERTY LINE /ADDRESS MAP
li
N
i
MAPLEWOOD IMPORTS
DON'S AUTO BODY
ow
2732
/ 'i t
!.•ice ' '`�;oi�:; •:��
i
. .__- ____..._.._ ..!
`
�
� `'
1 � ,• � ',
�`�"�...
( i
J.T._ —_ —_. .__.___ --_ __..
if
i
SERVICE ENGINEERING
"
I
• l I ti 1
I ;
X720
I
I
/•
I 1 �
1 1
/ r ANGUS MEATS
�
nvrlLMAN' -AVE
2594
1
PROPERTY LINE /ADDRESS MAP
li
N
i
Attachment 4
FIVE GRAVEL
PARKING SPACES
UNDER
CONSTRUCTION
SITE PLAN
9
4
N
Attachment 5
TOP or PApwo uPPER am 12r -r+
w or rAGOE 12r -r+
4
TOP or rw.*m 11 -r+
uPPER umx nwsmw rum 113 -1•+
r L o O O
L.oM uvm nwMW n.M l
d SET wM u vu
TOP Or FAC.Pa 122 -
TOP Or FwAx 11r -t'+
worm LEVEE iMi sHw naw 11r -1
1 Lowm w#u r1mm mw 1o0• -r+
\ I O O p O O O O O B O O � CT
0 0 o o 4010r,
O 4 O 0000
�
p C�� FM � -000or
WEST ELEVATION 6
EAST ELEVATION
Tor Of PAWO uPM UVM 12 s• -ar+
uPPER u vm nmsmro now 11r -1
uaMER um n wmw noon 100' -W+
W or PAWD UPPER LM 12s• -V+
4
3
UPPER LEVEL nmsm noon 1/r -1'+
0 O O
2
1:1 El 1:1
6
LowER LEVEL iN9M noon 1 ov' -o'♦
SOUTH ELEVATION
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
10
Attachment 6
December 29, 2000
City of Maplewood
Community Design Review Board Application
1830 County Road B East
Maplewood, MN 55109
RE: 2720 MAPLEWOOD DRIVE
MAPLEWOOD, MN
Please accept our request for a building permit to replace the roof and add storage and
office space to the existing building.
Per conversation with Mr. Tom Ekstrand of the Planning Commission, it is our
understanding that the City of Maplewood believes that the existing building does not
have enough parking spaces to meet the general requirements for the city building code.
The original site consisted of a small family home which has been added onto over the past
60 years. In adding new spaces, the inside is broken up into a number of small spaces and
hallways. This type of construction has left the building with less than desirable space for
continuity of business operation. Service Engineering has operated in the building since
1993 and does not anticipate relocation. Other tenants include State Farm Insurance,
Great Garage Door, Parkview Real Estate and Jacobberger and Associates. Parkview
Real Estate and Great Garage door have been in the building since prior to 1993 and
continue with long term leases. State Farm has been in the building since 1997 and are in
the first part of a 10 year lease. Jaccobberger and Associates is a small legal group with 2
lawyers who intend to operate permanently from this building.
The parking requirements for the building are excessive for the needs of the tenants. I
have listed the tenants and the allocation of parking required on the attached table. Each
of the tenants have stated that the level of activity will not change over the course of their
leases. No other tenants are scheduled or will be recruited. If additional parking area is
required by the City in the future, the site has room to create the additional parking
spaces.. A proposed parking layout drawing has been provided. It seems contradictory to
the City's green objective for open space to require that additional parking spaces are
constructed at this time when they are not needed.
Service Engineering maintains project files for the life of the projects it is involved in. The
files consist of drawings and design documents which take up a significant amount of
space. We need an efficient area for access and storage of these documents. With the
number of computers and plotters, the office requires additional space to operate.
11
December 29, 2000
Page 2
The existing roof structure is inadequate as constructed for flat or built -up roofing. The
building has undergone at least five additions on the main level with the roof having many
drops and grade changes. These cause ice damming resulting in leaks. The roof leaks
have caused significant damage to furniture and flooring in the middle room areas. The
leaking is potential hazardous. Without a reconstruction of the roof, the leaking will
continue.
To improve the appearance of the building, the exterior has been repainted and stucco
patches repaired. We believe that the additional area in the center of the building will
improve the continuity between the many additions of the lower level. The southwestern
theme of the building will be enhanced with the addition.
In 1993, Maplewood Drive was widened and improved along the frontage of this building.
At that time, a number of parking spaces along the front of the building were removed and
replaced with 3 spots. Approximately 16 spots were lost due to the City changes. The
City had proposed a parking area in the rear of the property to offset some of the losses,
but at our request it was not constructed. At that time, those spaces were not needed and
are not required now. In 8 years the parking needs have not changed and will not in the
future.
My wife and I own the building and have resided in Maplewood for 20 years. We have 4
children 2 which are attending North High School and 2 still in Richardson Elementary. I
am also owner of Service Engineering. It is our intent to stay in Maplewood while
maintaining ownership in both the building and Service Engineering.
I request that given the above information, the City of Maplewood acknowledges and
approves the request for the building permit without construction of additional parking .
spaces at this time.
/ KWpecyuiiy,
John C. Kliethermes, Jr., P.E.
12
KLIETHERMES
Service Engineering
State Farm
ParkView Real Estate
Great Garage Door
Jacobberger
PARKING REQUIREMENTS
2720 MAPLEWOOD DRIVE
Employees
Full time Part Time
3 2
2 1
2
1
2 1
Employee Vehicles
Morning Afternoon
3 5
2 3
2 2
1
2 3
Patron Vehicles
Morning Afternoon
1
1
0.1
0.1
12/21/00
M
e-
Totals 9 5 9 14 1 1.2
* Note: These Companies do not have walk in clients and therefore have very minor parking requirements other than office staff
Available Spaces 20 spaces are available on the site with boulevard parking for delivery services
Required Parking 15 spaces are required at full site usage/ at anytime no more than 17 spots would be required
Page 1
AGENDA ITEM NO �- `^ -owm0w
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FROM: Thomas Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director
SUBJECT: AutoZone
LOCATION: 749 N. Century Avenue
DATE: March 1, 2001
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Ac tion by Council
Date
Endorsed
Modified
Rejected
CEI Engineering is proposing to build a one - story, 5,500- square -foot AutoZone auto - parts store
on the former A &W restaurant property at 749 N. Century Avenue. Refer to pages 8 -11. The
proposed building would have an exterior of split -face (textured) and single -score (flat) concrete
block. There would also be two four -inch -wide accent bands of flat concrete block. The building
would be painted light, medium and dark grey. Refer to the building elevations on page 13.
Requests
The applicant is requesting that the city approve:
1. A parking waiver to have five fewer parking spaces than the code requires. The code
requires 28 parking spaces.
2. The building design, site and landscape plans.
DISCUSSION
Parking Waiver
The applicant originally designed the site plan with the building at a 30 -foot rear yard setback.
The code requires a 50 -foot setback which would have required a 20 -foot setback variance. See
page 11. While reviewing this request, staff redesigned the site plan as shown on page 12 to
illustrate how the applicant could meet setback requirements.
On February 21, 2001, the community design review board (CDRB) denied the rear setback
variance and approved the staff - alternative site plan. Staff's site plan concept, however, fell one
parking space short of code requirements. At the CDRB meeting, the applicant stated that they
may need to eliminate two parking spaces near the driveway to allow for easier delivery-truck
circulation within the site.
The CDRBs motion allowed up to five fewer parking spaces than code requires to give the
applicant flexibility in their design. Staff's experience with other auto parts stores is that the code
requires more spaces than are actually needed.
Building Design
The building elevations are labeled incorrectly. According to the site plan, the building entrance
is in the northwest corner of the building, not the southwest corner as the building elevations
depict. With this in mind, the CDRB should be aware that the building elevations are as follows:
all have a combination of brick and decorative block. Staff recommends that the applicant
substitute the single -score block with brick on all sides of the building. This would be compatible
and consistent with the block -brick design used on Video Update and the Oakdale Tire & Auto
Center across Century Avenue.
In addition, all roof -top equipment must be screened from the residential neighbors' view. The
applicant must also provide a photometric plan showing the light spread. The code requires this
plan to protect the residential neighbors.
Landscaping /Screening
The applicant is proposing six maple trees north of the parking lot and a six- foot -tall treated -wood
screening fence. The fence would be placed on the entire north lot line and along the west lot
line to screen the parking lot. No plantings` have been proposed along the street frontage or
behind the building. A combination of evergreen and deciduous trees should be planted behind
the building to soften the appearance of the masonry wall. The existing vegetation is deciduous
which does not provide much winter screening. The applicant should also revise the landscape
plan to provide plantings in the setback area along Century Avenue. All lawn areas are proposed
to be seeded. The city typically requires sod. The plan should be revised to show sod instead.
The proposed northerly fence should be set back 20 feet from the front lot line so not to block
any driver visibility for the proposed site and for neighbors. Staff also recommends that the
applicant substitute the proposed treated wood fence with cedar for a more decorative
appearance.
The neighbors to the north have a screening fence along their south lot line. The applicant
should coordinate the fence placement with them. It may be warranted to have the neighbors
remove their fence. Perhaps the applicant could revise their fence design to take into account
this existing fence as well as the existing tree locations. With these considerations in mind, the
applicant should submit a revised fence plan.
Site Plan
The applicant should revise the site plan to meet a five -foot parking lot setback from the side lot
line as required by the code. The applicant must obtain a driveway permit from MnDOT for the
new driveway curb cut. They should also close the northerly A &W driveway properly by curbing
across this driveway opening and restoring the ground.
Drainage Concerns
Mr. Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer, has reviewed the grading, drainage and erosion control
plans and has several comments and concerns. Refer to page 14. The applicant should work
with Mr. Cavett on plan revisions. All issues should be resolved before a building permit is
issued.
COMMITTEE ACTION
February 21, 2001: The CDRB recommended denial of the setback variance. The board also
recommended approval of a parking reduction, the lot split and the plans subject to the
conditions in the staff recommendation.
2
February 23, 2001: The staff approved a lot division for the current owner of the A &VV site to
split off the southerly 52 feet of the property. This 52 -foot parcel would be combined with the
abutting property to the south. The subdivision code allows staff to approve lot divisions.
RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Approve a parking waiver for the proposed AutoZone to have up to five spaces fewer than
the code allows. This exception allows the applicant flexibility in laying out the site plan. This
waiver would still require at least 23 parking spaces which is reasonable for a building this
size.
B. Approve the architectural plans, date - stamped January 18, 2001, for the proposed AutoZone
auto parts store, 749 N. Century Avenue, and approval of the staff's - alternative site elan
concept for AutoZone as illustrated in the staff report. Approval is subject to the applicant
complying with the following conditions:
1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this
project.
2. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall:
a. Submit grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans to the city engineer for
approval. The plans shall address the concerns and issues outlined by Chris Cavett
in his report dated February 12, 2001.
b. Submit revised building elevations which substitute the single -score concrete block
with face brick on all sides of the building. The applicant shall also submit a
screening design for roof -top mechanical equipment that would be visible by
residential neighbors. Staff shall review these revisions.
c. Submit a revised site plan for staff approval which illustrates staff's alternative design
with building setback compliance. The revised site plan shall also provide for a five -
foot parking lot setback from the south lot line and compliance with all parking -lot
dimensional requirements.
d. Submit a revised landscape plan for staff approval providing for plantings in the 15-
foot setback area, a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees behind the building and
sod in all turf areas, not seed.
e. Submit a revised fence design for staff approval that uses cedar instead of treated
wood. The applicant shall coordinate their fence design with the neighbor to the north
to take their existing screening fence into account. The revised fence shall be set
back 20 feet from the front lot line so not to obstruct driver visibility. The revised
fence design shall be considered part of the landscape plan and shall be subject to
review board approval.
f. Submit a photometric plan showing the light spread from lighting fixtures. There shall
not be any lights behind the building. The lighting fixtures used shall be the type that
have recessed bulbs and lenses.
3
g. Obtain an access permit from MnDOT for the proposed driveway access and for
stormwater flow within their system. The applicant shall also follow MnDOT's
requirements for closing the old A &W driveway opening. This old opening shall be
curbed over and the ground restored.
h. Show the bollards in front of the building to be grey or tan to complement the building
color.
3. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building:
a. Install a handicap - parking sign for each handicap- parking space and a stop sign at
the driveway exit.
b. Provide continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and driveways.
This includes the area of any future driveway connection to the lot to the south.
c. Paint the roof -top mechanical equipment to match the building color if the units are
visible. (code requirement) The applicant must also screen the roof -top equipment
from residential neighbors' views.
d. Construct the trash dumpster enclosure using the same materials and color as the
building. This enclosure shall have a 100 percent opaque gate. The gate material
shall be cedar to match the screening fence.
e. Install an in- ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas (code requirement)
except for the ponding area behind the building.
f. Provide site - security lighting as required by the code. The light source, including the
lens covering the bulb, shall be concealed so not to cause any nuisance to drivers or
neighbors.
g. Properly close the old A &W driveway opening with curbing and ground restoration.
4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if:
a. The work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare.
b. The city receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the required work.
The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the unfinished work. Any unfinished
landscaping shall be completed by June 1 if the building is occupied in the fall or
winter or within six weeks if the building is occupied in the spring or summer.
5. Signs are not included in this approval. The applicant shall submit sign proposals to staff
for review.
6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may
approve minor changes.
CITIZENS' COMMENTS
I surveyed the 36 property owners within 350 feet of this site and received the following replies:
1. No objections. (Owners of 785 and 799 Century Avenue)
2. Finally something is being done with that slummy A &W. I can't believe, the city didn't order it
to be demolished. I guess anything will be better than looking at that. We are worried about
more noise. We would also like a 12 foot fence in the back so we don't have to look at it or
hear it. (Charles, 744 Mayhill Road)
3. _ 1 am pleased , o see more new construction taking place in this area. I hope this plan is
accepted. Josh, 2696 Minnehaha Avenue)
4. 1 am very, very concerned with the added vehicle traffic this proposal will contribute to the
dangerous intersections of Minnehaha, 10th Street and Century Avenue. I strongly suggest
an impact study be conducted. The request for a zoning variance is another example of how
the residential sector rights of existence is continuously being dismantled and ignored.
Please give this neighborhood a "break" for a change! (Dicker, 743 Mayhill Road)
5. AutoZone should set their proposed fence seven to eight feet from their north lot line so not
to crowd the trees on my property. Also, setting the fence in would allow AutoZone to put
plantings on my side of the fence so I am not just looking at a fence. Make sure the drainage
flow is not obstructed. (Feist, 763 Century Avenue)
6. There is currently confusing signage on Geneva Avenue. By crowding more buildings with
turn in /outs will further confuse roadway. I do not support a variance for the building setback.
(Blomquist, 360 N. Robert Street)
7. 1 know the AutoZone will probably go up anyway, but my neighbor and I are less than
enthusiastic over this development. Because of the speed and heavy traffic on Century
Avenue, and all the businesses already in place, this section of the street has frequent fender
benders and more serious accidents, due to vehicles slowing down, turning in, turning out
while passing traffic swings wide and fast to pass around these vehicles. As a pedestrian, I
walk along Century a lot and we have no sidewalk. (Reger, 779 Century Avenue)
5
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 32,296 square feet
Existing land use: The former A &W Restaurant and a vacant lot
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Single dwellings
South: Holiday Station and Maplewood Auto Service
West: Single dwellings
East: Century Avenue and commercial businesses in the City of Oakdale
PAST ACTION
November 20, 1980: The city council rezoned the northerly 76 feet of the proposed site to LBC (limited
business commercial).
PLANNING
Land Use Plan designation: BC (business commercial) and LBC
Zoning: BC and LBC (north 76 feet of the proposed site)
Ordinance Requirements
Section 36- 28(c)(6)(b) requires that commercial buildings of this size be set back 50 feet from abutting
residential property.
Section 25 -70 of the city code requires that the CDRB make the following findings to approve plans:
1. That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring,
existing or proposed developments and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of
investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use
and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will net create traffic
hazards or congestion.
2. That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the
surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive
development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan.
3. That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment
for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition,
materials, textures and colors.
X
Application Date
We received these applications on January 18, 2001. State law requires that the city take action within
60 days of receiving complete applications for a proposal. City council action is required on this
proposal by March 18, 2001.
p:sec2.51autozone.var
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Property Line /Zoning Map
3. Property Line /Address Map
4. Site Plan
5. Site Plan —Staffs Alternative
6. Building Elevations
7. AutoZone Engineering Review by Chris Cavett dated February 12, 2001
8. Plans date- stamped January 18, 2001 (separate attachments)
7
Attachment 1
[ - 3
Q
4
Z
( /Irainus
laW
AeNA
s
LOCATION MAP
X
li
N
Attachment 2
to • I • v • .+ v 1 - • I •- �- Iv
6.2 100
13.08.7
&Z)
loo
7 v
�- On
177 85 - "�` •,
.._ .....�._ .... Z . -...�. --- G 5,4,. 2 � � J�-) CZe) (4
0 32
O
A-w � kN
l 1 •
o ( N Q N 30
3
,d-
-
Q -
_
( 4j
17
-
L (5) I T 9. .
N
2 0
t
!7 - -- -- - �
z 25 �2 L) �
6 0.0
Q I �<
180.5 1 -- -- - - -- -
6°)
ISO-70
LIJ Cam)
2
ai 13
-
V
o 14
1. So
(11-5) 1 vq) i8
PROPOSED
16 ,s a 17 I t6 � _LOT
I �I I .ti
(+a _ 29 a DIVISION
G S 8.61 92.09 9 60 75 �5- 44 • • 4 9.5 3 3 �,_
- 476.5
�A
.I
PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP
PROPOSED AUTO ZONE SITE
9
4
N
Attachment 3
MINNEHAHA AVENUE
PROPERTY LINE /ADDRESS MAP
10
784 ------------
.785
.783
L"- L78--
•
-7
ui t:
777
� �
;i
` �� •�� �'
- ` _ '�������_�{
i «; W
..
�
_.
� � �
Fri .. -• .) �
i e {.�� •.�,• � �
-783
757
PROPOSED
-
AUTO ZONE
SITE
_
- .
-749 - - _...- .----- � ----
-- � : �
}.: - -
,, 3 .• A &W
i
J..
re
OPOSE
PR
F7 N
LOT
I
t
DIVISION
743
t
i
E
MINNEHAHA AVENUE
PROPERTY LINE /ADDRESS MAP
10
Attachment 4
16
i t
NN
1 CV
! W �.j � �
W 1 �,
it .�- - 1 � �
{ �Y i_. lb \5
me
It
Wj
�; + t �: 1
is
. .SITE PLAN
„ N
Pavid*"Cw
gas 4�tollv min
WNW �� �� i
S88*42"42'*W7 , , ,, E ,
183.50 1
Attachment 5
/i
•' ms' v -� ~ � .�
16
i
• i • ,,
j
1 r t
1 "+
s t�
E-o
H W =
z
f •
SITE PLAN Q
STAFF'S ALTERNATIVE ]� T
12 .( V
1
1
W
PLEWOOD, MN
REAR ELEVATION PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
c+
c+
n
(D
c+
rq
Attachment 7
N T E R
MEMO
O F F I C E
To: Tom Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director From the desk of...
From: Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer Christopher M.caven, P.E.
Subject: AutoZone Engineering Review ,assistant city engineer
City of Maplewood Count Date: February 12, 2001 1830 E MN 55109
I have completed my engineering review of the grading, drainage and (651) 770-4554
erosion control plan. Listed below are the issues and questions that I feel Fa": (651) 770-4506
need to be addressed:
1. The grading plan gives the impression as though the silt fence will installed outside the property
boundary. If that is the case, temporary grading easements with the impacted property owners
shall be required.
2. We strongly recommend draining as much of the northerly lot as possible, (especially the garbage
area), overland and into the ponding area to provide at least some form of "pre- treatment" before
the flow is allowed to enter the drainage system.
0
4.
Mn/DOT Utility Permit will be required to connect to the Mn/DOT system.
Drainage Report:
a. The applicant's proposal calls for a significant reduction in size of an informal drainage basin
and little is known about the hydraulics of this basin at this time. The drainage report gives no
indication of pre - existing or post - development high water elevations. The report also indicates
that the drainage area beyond the site is only about 0.69 Acres. From a quick estimate using an
aerial photo, we would estimate the "off- site" tributary area at approximately 5.7 ± acres rather
than the 0.69 acres shown in the report. This may have a significant impact on the site.
b. Without a more in depth determination of pond elevations, typical guidelines would require the
lowest openings of all the adjacent structures to be 1 -foot above the emergency overflow
elevation. The emergency overflow condition will be significantly altered under the applicant's
proposal. Where will the "new" emergency overflow be and who will be impacted?
Guidelines often accept lowest openings at 2 -feet above the 100 -year high water elevation.
c. There is no indication of the downstream capacity of the existing drainage system, nor of the
anticipated flow in that system. What might the likelihood of a "heading -up" pressure flow
condition be ?, and What might be its impact on the proposed drainage system and p and
elevations?
c: Jeremy Yee, CSI Engineering Assoc., Inc.
via Fax: 501-273-0844
14
Community Design Review Board
Minutes of 02 -21 -2001
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
183.0 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2001
B. AutoZone plan Review and Setback Variance -(749 N. Century Avenuel.
Mr. Tom Ekstrand gave the staff report for the city. The applicant, CEI Engineering, is proposing
to build a one - story, 5,500 square AutoZone auto parts store on the former A &W site on Century
Avenue. The proposed building would have an exterior of split face and single score concrete
block. It would also have a couple four inch wide accent bands running around the building. The
building would be painted in variations of grey so there would be light, medium and dark tones of
grey.
The applicant is requesting that the city approve a 20 -foot building setback variance from the rear
property line. The code requires a 50 -foot setback and the applicant is proposing 30 feet. They
are requesting approval of building, site and landscaping plans, and also a lot division. The
current property owner plans on retaining the southerly 52 -feet of the old A &W site to incorporate
into his own property. There are no circumstances that are unique to this site that would prevent
the applicant from meeting the 50 -foot rear setback requirement. The applicant could meet
setback requirements by taking the parking that was proposed in front of the building and shifting
it around to the north side of the building. The building could then be shifted toward Century
Avenue and a variance would not be needed. Therefore, staff is recommending denial of the
variance request.
Regarding building design, the proposed building design would be compatible with the existing
commercial development in the area, but staff is recommending that they add brick to the exterior.
All the adjacent commercial buildings in the area have brick on their exterior. That would make
the appearance of this building consistent with the buildings across the street in Oakdale. In
addition, staff is recommending that all roof equipment be screened from the residential neighbors
view, which is a code requirement, and that the applicant submit a photometric plan of the light
spread.
The landscaping plan seemed a little meager, there were only six trees proposed along the north
lot line, and all the turf was proposed to be seeded. The turf should be sod versus seed, and
trees are needed on the front and back of the site. Staff is also recommending the screening
fence be pulled back twenty feet from the front lot line and be cedar for esthetic reasons. Staff felt
there was a lot of opportunity to add evergreens and deciduous trees in the back to soften the
back side of the building.
In review of the grading plan, there were drainage concerns noted by Chris Cavett, the Assistant
City Engineer. Although they do not appear to be problematic, all the drainage issues need to be
worked out with the city's engineering department to ensure all of Mr. Cavett's concerns are
satisfied.
As for the lot division, staff is recommending the owner of the proposed southerly parcel, saw cut
and remove any pavement to the new lot line to observe the five -foot parking lot setback which
code requires. The owner of the southerly parcel should also abandon the old A& W well. They
will need to go through a licensed well drilling company to accomplish this.
Staff is recommending denial of the variance, on the basis that there are no circumstances that
are unique to the site that would prevent the applicant from meeting the 50 -foot setback. The
applicant could meet the setback requirement as demonstrated by staff in the report. The variance
would not meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance since there are options to meet code
requirements. The applicant could purchase additional land from the seller which could increase
their site layout options.
Community Design Review Board -7-
Minutes of 02 -21 -2001
Staff is also recommending approval of a parking waiver to go along with staffs proposed revision.
This would reduce the number of parking spaces required. Staff is recommending approval of
the architectural and site plans subject to the addition of the brick on the exterior and
resubmission of a landscape plan.
Chairperson Ledvina clarified that staff has not been able to discuss with the applicant the change
in the site plan and his acceptance, or not, of these changes. Mr. Ledvina also confirmed with
staff that a grading plan was submitted from the applicant.
Mr. Shankar asked if the applicant would still meet the parking requirement with the adjusted plan
that allows for the 50 -foot setback requirement. Staff said they would be short by one parking
spot. A setback variance is tougher to approve than a parking waiver (the council has more
discretion with parking issues).
Mr. Jeremy Yee, with CEI Engineering, was present for the applicant. AutoZone's headquarters is
located in Memphis, Tennessee. They are a national company with over 2500 stores across the
united states. They sell new car parts with discount prices and do not provide any kind of auto
repair service.
Mr. Yee talked with his client regarding the setback requirement and adjusting the plans to comply
with the setback. His client was comfortable with that change to comply with the ordinance.
Regarding the concrete block around the top of the building, Mr. Yee felt the need for a strong
structure to support the weight of the top brick. If the city would like to see face brick around the
top perimeter, they will change their design to comply and satisfy that requirement.
The applicant is also willing to add more landscaping to the sides and front of the building. They
will also add a cedar wood fence for screening.
A photometric lighting plan was submitted to the city with the site plan. Typically AutoZone
buildings have lights in the back of the building for safety purposes. The AutoZone sign is not
lighted and a pylon sign is also being proposed for the parking lot.
Mr. Yee has talked with Mr. Cavett regarding engineering issues. The applicant will install the silt
fence inside of the property line. The drainage that is currently flowing into the parking lot will be
redirected to the grassy area for pretreatment, then to the storm system.
Before the city signs off on the deeds for the lot division, the owner or buyer needs to provide staff
with the escrow to guarantee that this work will be completed. Mr. Yee explained AutoZone has
no problem paying the money to get the work done, but if the seller does not complete the work
they need to finish, it will hold the project up. Mr. Yee asked if the city could coordinate with the
owner of this parcel to accomplish the necessary requirements. Mr. Ekstrand does understand
another company did apply for this lot division, and what he can do is explain to this applicant
what the cities conditions are.
Mr. Ledvina asked what color the bollards would be in front of the building. Mr. Yee stated they
are typically red to match the sign. The board felt a more neutral color would be appropriate,
possibly a grey or tan color. Although Mr. Ledvina felt wheel stops may be efficient to stop a car,
Mr. Yee explained all their stores have the bollards to protect the expansive glass in the front of
the building.
Mr. Ledvina felt the landscape plan and fence design should be approved by staff prior to
receiving the building permit. Staff felt that would be workable and appropriate.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes of 02 -21 -2001
Mr. Shankar moved the board to:
A. Deny the proposed 20 -foot rear building setback variance because:
1. There are no circumstances that approve a parking waiver for the proposed
AutoZone to have up to five spaces fewer than the code allows. This exception
allows the applicant flexibility in laying out the site plan. This waiver would still
require at least 23 parking spaces which is reasonable for a building this size.
2. The applicant can meet the setback requirements by revising the site plan as
illustrated by staff in the staff report.
3. The variance would not meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance since there are
options to meeting the code requirements.
4. The applicant could purchase additional land from the seller which would increase
site - layout options.
B. Approve a parking waiver for the proposed AutoZone to have up to five spaces fewer than
the code allows. This exception allows the applicant flexibility in laying out the site plan.
This waiver would still require at lease 23 parking spaces which is reasonable for a
building this size.
C. Approve the architectural plans, date - stamped January 18, 2001, for the proposed
AutoZone auto parts store, 749 N. Century Avenue, and approval of the staff's- alternative
site plan concept for AutoZone as illustrated in the staff report.- Approval is subject to the
applicant complying with the following conditions:
1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit
for this project.
2. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall:
a. Submit grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans to the city
engineer for approval. The plans shall address the concerns and issues
outlined by Chris Cavett in his report dated February 12, 2001.
b. Submit revised building elevations which substitute the single -score
concrete block with face brick on all sides of the building. The applicant
shall also submit a screening design for roof -top mechanical equipment
that would be visible by residential neighbors. Staff shall review these
revisions.
C. Submit a revised site plan for staff approval which illustrates staffs
alternative design with building setback compliance. The revised site
plan shall also provide for a five -foot parking lot setback from the south
lot line and compliance with all parking -lot dimensional requirements.
d. Submit a revised landscape plan for staff approval providing for plantings
in the 15 -foot setback area, a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees
behind the building and sod in all turf areas, not seed.
Community Design Review Board -9-
Minutes of 02 -21 -2001
e. Submit a revised fence design for staff approval that uses cedar instead
of treated wood. The applicant shall coordinate their fence design with
the neighbor to the north to take their existing screening fence into
account. The revised fence shall be set back 20 feet from the front lot
line so not to obstruct driver visibility. The revised fence design shall be
considered part of the landscape plan and shall be subject to review
board approval.
f. Submit a photometric plan showing the light spread from lighting fixtures.
There shall not be any lights behind the building. The lighting fixtures
used shall be the type that have recessed bulbs and lenses.
g. Obtain an access permit from MnDOT for the proposed driveway access
and for stormwater flow within their system. The applicant shall also
follow MnDOT's requirements for closing the old A &W driveway opening.
This old opening shall be curbed over and the ground restored.
h. Show the bollards in front of the building to be grey or tan to complement
the building color.
3. The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building:
a. Install a handicap - parking sign for each handicap - parking space and a
stop sign at the driveway exit.
b. Provide continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and
driveways. This includes the area of any future driveway connection to
the lot to the south.
C. Paint the roof -top mechanical equipment to match the building color if the
units are visible. (code requirement) The applicant must also screen the
roof -top equipment from residential neighbors' views.
d. Construct the trash dumpster enclosure using the same materials and
color as the building. This enclosure shall have a 100 percent opaque
gate. The gate material shall be cedar to match the screening fence.
e. Install an in- ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas (code
requirement) except for the ponding area behind the building.
f. Provide site - security lighting as required by the code. The light source,
including the lens covering the bulb, shall be concealed so not to cause
any nuisance to drivers or neighbors.
g. Properly close the old A &W driveway opening with curbing and ground
restoration.
4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if:
a. The work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare.
b. The city receives a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the
required work. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the
unfinished work. Any unfinished landscaping shall be completed by June
1 if the building is occupied in the fall or winter or within six weeks if the
building is occupied in the spring or summer.
Community Design Review Board -10-
Minutes of 02 -21 -2001
5. Signs are not included in this approval. The applicant shall submit sign proposals
to staff for review.
6. All work shall follow the approved - plans. The director of community development
may approve minor changes.
D. Approval of the proposed lot division, subject to the following conditions:
1. The owner of the proposed southerly parcel shall saw -cut and remove any
pavement within five feet of the new lot line to observe afive -foot setback (code
requirement). The five -foot setback area shall then be restored and sodded.
2. The owner of the southerly parcel shall properly abandon the old A &W well in
accordance with Minnesota Department of _Health water -well codes. The .owner
must contract with a Minnesota- licensed well- drilling company for this work.
3. Obtain a demolition permit from the city, demolish the A &W building and remove
all debris from the site before the city may sign the deeds to split this parcel.
Allowing the creation of the proposed lot line before the removal of the A &W
building would result in the building traversing the lot line. This would violate
building and setback requirements.
4. The work required in Conditions One and Two shall be accomplished before the
city signs the deeds for this lot division or the property owner or buyer shall
provide staff with escrow to guarantee that this work will be completed. As stated
in Condition Three, the building must be removed and site cleaned up prior to the
city signing the new deeds.
5. The proposed southerly parcel (Parcel 2) shall be legally combined with the Mr.
Macula's property to the south.
6. Record the new deeds within one year.
Board member Johnson seconded. Ayes -All
Motion carries.
J
PUBLIC HEARING
GLADSTONE WEST NEIGHBORHOOD
IMPROVEMENT 00 -05
MARCH 12, 2001
7:15 p.m.
After hearing, return this folder to engineering
QQ
e L
H RRE
RRE
kn.0 le
co CT C OPE AVE.
�R. Kelter S LARK ki
Lake @) 01 'Co. RO. z
LAURIE t--RO* w Ispow
25 T. LIELAN(D) SAND HURST
5
CT. U ON AVE.
JRK
Par* '�` P0 �` � �� AV. UV AVE.
DOE AVE. Q a
ELID IDGE AVE.
John Gk
I A VE BELMO LN.
AV E.
CP SKILL KILLMAN
KEN
Opp X W
SH E.
0 (n
or
0 U pa#* AM AV.
z
VA L 0
t
Rr .
27 v ST AVE* CL
FE NMN AVE. Q
Q �-
rri i� d M R AV E. S
11 G a Q - W
FRISSIE U
z W Cal
W Q
RIP W
C
2
PH IA S T. kefiel
o d Lake
;N.Loke H A
Jok
FL IPRICE
Pholen
0
co
00
U")
M
M
Public Hearin General Area Map
Proposed Pro No. 00-05 Gladstone West Nei
Street/Storm Sewer Improvement
7:15 p.m. March 12, 2001
Cit of Maplewood, MN., Department of Public Works - Engineer'ing''DiVision
NOTICE OF HEARING OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
TO WHOM IT '.NZAY CONCERN:
Notice is hereby given that the Maplewood city council will meet in the council chambers of the city all
to consider the making of the improvement hereinafter described:
Proposed Improvement No. 00 -
Gladstone Nest Neighborhood Streets, Storm Sever & Utilities
DATE: March 12, 2001
TIME: 7.-15 p.m.
LOCA TtON. City Hall
Council Chambers
1830 County Road B East
1\ Mn. 55109
The general nature of the proposed improvement is for construction or reconstruction of Street and
Storm Sewers and the incidental addition or correction of sanitary sewer or water utilities where
necessary.
The properties in the general area proposed to be assessed for such improvement is as follows:
Edward Street - Laipenteur Ave. to 400' north of Ripley Ave. Both sides of street.
Frank Street - Lalpenteur Ave. to 200' north of Frisbie Ave. Both sides.
Duluth Street - Laipenteur Ave. to Ripley Ave. Both sides.
Atlantic Street - Laipenteur Ave. to Frisbie Ave. Both sides.
Larpenteur Avenue - Edvard St. to approx. 200' east of Atlantic St. North side.
Sophia Avenue - Approx. 200' west of Edward St. to Frank St. Both sides.
Ripley Avenue - Approx. 200' west of Edward St. to approx. 100' west of English St. Both sides..
Frisbie Avenue - Frank St. to English St. Both sides of Street.
THE TOTAL ESTIMA TED COST OF SAID IAIPR O VEAIENT IS $1,470,000. 00
Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § § 429.011 to 429.111, it is proposed to assess every lot, piece or parcel of land
benefited by said improvement whether abutting thereon or not, based upon benefits received without
regard to cash valuation.
A reasonable estimate of the impact of the assessment will be available at the hearing.
Such persons desiring to be heard with reference to proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting.
Dated this 27th day of February, 2001
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
City of Maplewood Minnesot
Sign language interpreters are available. You must request this service at least 96 hours in advance. Call 651- 770 -4524 to
make arrangements.
Publish in Maplewood Review: February 28 & March 7, 2001
- -- - -
TRANSMISSION REPORT
PRINT TIME 02/23/01 09:01 ID:MPPLEWOOD MFD 7704500
No. START MODE LOCATION
�F T I ME
15 02/23 09:00 TX MAPLE REVIEW
STORE
TX
RX
TOTAL CODE
PAGE
PAGE
PAGE
TIME
ADF
2
0
00'52" OK
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
NOTICE of HEARING OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
ASSESSMENT HEARING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
)SS.
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD )
Karen Guilfoile, being first duly sworn, deposed and says:
I am a United States citizen, over 21 years of age, and the city clerk of the City of Maplewood,
Minnesota;
On 27 February , 2001, acting on behalf of said city, I caused to be deposited in the United States
post office at the City of North Saint .Paul, Minnesota, copies of the attached
NOTICE of HEARING OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
on
City Project IMPROVEMENT 00 -05 Gladstone West Neighborhood Street & Storm Sewer
enclosed in sealed envelopes, with sufficiant postage thereon fully prepaid, addressed to the
following persons at the addresses appearing on the attached copy of the mailing list.
There is delivery service by United States mail between the place of mailing and the places so
addressed.
Signature '
Karen Guilfoile, Cit Clerk •
City of Maplewood, Minnsota
Subscribed and sworn to before me thi 27th day of February, 2001.
Notary Public AiP
, PATRICIA_ FRY
lz�
116- 0
E
tZ v;
ell
Dill 11TH S
ja
� �
w
4.4
A nn=
NO's
rz
ssz
Li
ogzt
7-
99Z
co
ca
c%l
ME EM NO ME IN
04
cn
_j LAJ _j
w Q
IA
73 CZ
o 0
o co
10 U)
C)
N Cl
= C
W
fi9Z
Z
Lu cr (1) UJ
w L) 0
0 <
'�
� a`�
LL
CE iL cr
< 0
0. 1 6 c r-
vml�
"3
z
E
2 CD
WM
R
CIO
(0)
00
id w
CIO
fa
,�._J�
z oo
lz�
116- 0
E
tZ v;
ell
Dill 11TH S
w
A nn=
NO's
Ca I
ssz
Li
ogzt
7-
99Z
co
6LZ
c%l
ME EM NO ME IN
04
go
99z&
9
q
fi9Z
£9Z
0
fb- r a ft
sm
lz�
116- 0
E
tZ v;
ell
Dill 11TH S
w
c%l
go
9
q
C4
r
0
fb- r a ft
sm
- 9
R
WM
R
f*ft
P%wl
r.
lz�
116- 0
E
tZ v;
S T 145
C*
co In*- 66&
r,%ft P- f*ft
...... rl ' fla.
t%
- ` #�8 L co W v' o �"�
ti low
FFMNK-ST— � o � r
E
a) M
eq SIM to 40 reoluu la CA %m
401 col to Cb
eft
Szz � j
60Z ocz LZZ
&ZZ
o oz ' N I
O
m 0
C
0
CL
co
E
19 4do
0
T
V 0
c 0
fn
0
Vm
V .2
E
Pilo
@ I
°� UM ;a - I.", I
No mo m m m m =1
to
I ssz I �i �
I N I
009 9*
I :CZ —AnMTIC-&T- «z s. � �
CU _ -
Co SIC so cm 78.S
Ml 1 :2 0
.
0 a t., , r1ft 1 4 0 0
>
L
ItUWANU ST L ,..
�' C% 10
0 CL
9D
E
Cal
1002
DO 00
in MR NO MCIM1 NO ME sm io ob m
sm
co
C
CID r
-td
WHO
f
Dill 11TH S
Szz � j
60Z ocz LZZ
&ZZ
o oz ' N I
O
m 0
C
0
CL
co
E
19 4do
0
T
V 0
c 0
fn
0
Vm
V .2
E
Pilo
@ I
°� UM ;a - I.", I
No mo m m m m =1
to
I ssz I �i �
I N I
009 9*
I :CZ —AnMTIC-&T- «z s. � �
CU _ -
Co SIC so cm 78.S
Ml 1 :2 0
.
0 a t., , r1ft 1 4 0 0
>
L
ItUWANU ST L ,..
�' C% 10
0 CL
9D
E
Cal
1002
DO 00
in MR NO MCIM1 NO ME sm io ob m
sm
co
C
CID r
-td
WHO
f
O
m 0
C
0
CL
co
E
19 4do
0
T
V 0
c 0
fn
0
Vm
V .2
E
Pilo
@ I
°� UM ;a - I.", I
No mo m m m m =1
to
I ssz I �i �
I N I
009 9*
I :CZ —AnMTIC-&T- «z s. � �
CU _ -
Co SIC so cm 78.S
Ml 1 :2 0
.
0 a t., , r1ft 1 4 0 0
>
L
ItUWANU ST L ,..
�' C% 10
0 CL
9D
E
Cal
1002
DO 00
in MR NO MCIM1 NO ME sm io ob m
sm
co
C
CID r
-td
WHO
f
°� UM ;a - I.", I
No mo m m m m =1
to
I ssz I �i �
I N I
009 9*
I :CZ —AnMTIC-&T- «z s. � �
CU _ -
Co SIC so cm 78.S
Ml 1 :2 0
.
0 a t., , r1ft 1 4 0 0
>
L
ItUWANU ST L ,..
�' C% 10
0 CL
9D
E
Cal
1002
DO 00
in MR NO MCIM1 NO ME sm io ob m
sm
co
C
CID r
-td
WHO
f
CARL T GRILL JR
ROBERT J SHANLEY
DONALD F THOMPSON
1280 FRISBIE AVE E
1264 FRISBIE AVE E
1254 FRISBIE AVE E
ARIW APLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
2922410005
162922410006
162922410007
LAURA M SORENSEN
CURRENT RESIDENT
MICHAEL P THOMPSON
1263 RIPLEY E
1279 RIPLEY AVE
7556 NOBLE AVE N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55443
162922410009
162922410010
162922410010
JUDY LYNN MACKENROTH
WILLIAM B SEILER
R A SCHNAITH
1246 FRISBIE AVE E
1230 FRISBIE AVE E
1220 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
ST PAUL, MN 55109
162922410014
162922410015
162922410016
ERNEST J HAMMER
KEVIN R VANDERBOSCH
JAMES C PETERSON
1208 FRISBIE AVE E
1198 FRISBIE AVE E
1192 FRISBIE AVE E
ST PAUL, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922410017
162922410018
162922410019
LUKMAN A JULMAT
GERALDINE J LONETTI
CURRENT RESI T
1184 FRISBIE AVE E
1193 RIPLEY AVE
0 RIPLEY E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPL OOD, MN 55109
162922410020
162922410021
1 22410021
GERALDINE J LONETTI
PAO H LEE
JANICE J PATRICK
1193 RIPLEY AVE E
1199 RIPLEY AVE E
1201 RIPLEY AVE
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922410022
162922410023
162922410024
CURRENT RESIDENT
SUSAN E BROIN
THEODORE R PURVIS
1201 RIPLEY AVE E
1221 RIPLEY AVE E
1227 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922410024
162922410027
162922410028
MARK A MOTZ
HAROLD LUND
GLORIA J ENRIGHT
1233 RIPLEY AVE E
1285 RIPLEY AVE E
1211 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922410029
162922410032
162922410033
GERGLEY SZOKOLAI
AMY B BEYER
PAJTSHENG YANG
1800 ATLANTIC ST N
1255 RIPLEY AVE E
1185 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
'- 162922410034
162922410035
162922410038
,` t
1MBERLY ANN RICE
NANCY KAYE DAHLBY
CHERSU VANE
1193 FRISBIE AVE E
1201 FRISBIE AVE E
.1209 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922410039
; ,
S�z'1�M1�G'I?xZi;n'4"+
162922410040
R a
. 62922410041
_ __ ._ .. - - -- —
GERALD T OPSE TOU XIONG SCOTT A KING
1217 FRISBIE AVE E 1225 FRISBIE AVE E 1233 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
2922410042 162922410043 162922410044
.
N THOMAS SAGISSER DAVID D BARTOL DONNA BIDON
1241 FRISBIE AVE E 1249 FRISBIE AVE E 127 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922410045 162922410046 162922410047
CURRENT RESIDENT FREDERICK O OLAGBAIYE MIE VANG
1257 FRISBIE AVE E 1265 FRISBIE AVE E 1273 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922410047 162922410048 162922410049
ANN M KOWSKI LONG KHANG JOSEPH C ELLIS
1281 FRISBIE AVE E 1289 FRISBIE AVE E 1839 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922410050 162922410051 162922420068
ROXIE T SMITH ANNETHA L DREXLER YOUA MOUA
1829 FRANK ST N 1175 RIPLEY AVE E 1149 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922420069 162922420070 162922420071
AM
CURRENT RESID ROXIE T SMITH PATRICIA TITUS
0 EDWARD N 1829 FRANK ST N 1125 RIPLEY AVE
MAP OOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
922420072 162922420072 162922420073
CURRENT RESIDE T TIMOTHY L BRISTOW CURRENT RESIDENT
0 EDWARD S 1800 EDWARD ST 1800 EDWARD
MAPL OD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPL OD, MN 55109
1 22420073 162922420074 22420074
JOHN E JACOBSON PATRICIA A TITUS CURRENT RESIDEN
1144 RIPLEY AVE E 1125 RIPLEY AVE 0 EDWARD S
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPL OD, MN 55109
162922420075 162922420092 922420093
PATRICIA A TITUS
STEVEN C DEMALIGON
. 1125 RIPLEY AVE
1795 FRANK ST N
,;MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922420093
162922430001
j) AVID E NEEDHAM ET AL
JOANN L KAPPEL
1785 FRANK ST N
1779 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
.162922430003
162922430004
T G ROUNGOU ET AL
1789 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430002
A E GALBRAITH JR ET AL
1770 EDWARD ST N
'.'MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
' . ,.16922430005
y
,,;,
( rF
1-iOWARD A PETERSON D
DOROTHY C JOHNSON LIFE ESTATE B
BRIAN D SONTERRE
` ?1774 EDWARD ST N 1
1789 EDWARD ST N 1
1777 EDWARD ST N
APLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
_
2922430006 1
162922430010 1
162922430011
WILLIAM G DUNKEL JR B
BARRY P ERICKSON S
STEVEN D QUICK
1771 EDWARD ST N 1
1763 EDWARD ST N 1
1691 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
;'!.162922430012 1
162922430013 1
162922430030
C G KETTLESON ET AL V
VIRGINIA A BUCKLEY M
MARY ANN MCFARLAND
1159 LARPENTEUR AVE E 1
1758 PHALEN PL N 1
1754 PHALEN PL N
ST PAUL, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430031 1
162922430038 1
162922430039
E M SCHAEFFER ET AL R
ROLAND C BRANDT LE T
TERRENCE L WINNING
I
1744 PHALEN PL N 1
1736 EAST SHORE DR N 1
1720 EAST SHORE DR N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430040 1
162922430047 1
162922430048
LENNA R SCOTT H
H J FORCIER ET AL M
MICHAEL BROOKS
1716 EAST SHORE DR N 1
1710 EAST SHORE DR N 1
1700 EAST SHORE DR N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430049 1
162922430050 1
162922430051
/ j/
JEFFREY J HOLMES L
LELAND B MEYER P
PAUL A EDOFF
1696 EAST SHORE DR N 1
1692 EAST SHORE DR N 1
1688 EAST SHORE DR N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430052 1
162922430053 1
162922430054
STEPHEN M REICHOW J
JEFFERY SCOTT LAUGHLIN S
SCOTT A WAS ILUK
1684 EAST SHORE DR N 1
1160 SOPHIA AVE E 1
1747 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430055 1
162922430058 1
162922430059
_CURRENT RESIDENT M
MARLENE C KASMIRSKI C
CATHRYN A STANOCH
1725 FRANK ST N 1
1383 EAST SUMMER AVE 1
1717 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430060 1
162922430060 1
162922430061
KRISTIN JO SMITH M
MARVIN J ANITZBERGER CO TRUSTE D
DAVID R MISKOWIEC
1705 FRANK ST N 1
1695 FRANK ST N 1
1728 EDWARD ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 M
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430062 1
162922430063 1
162922430064
*,EORGE M A HTON � JILL S MACIOCH
S
- 1732 EDWARD ST N 1738 EDWARD ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430065 162922430066
SHARON TRAEN
1742 EDWARD ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1.02922430067
t s
i
!d� t;
t
(rf r
PAUL NOWACKI
1758 EDWARD ST N
DOTTIE LOU BINGMAN.
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1750 EDWARD ST N
APLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430071
62922430068
CURRENT RESIDEN
CURRENT RESIDENT
1784 EDWARD N
1794 EDWARD ST N
MAPLE D, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
22430072
162922430071
.
PAUL K EDWARDS
1294 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440001
CHERYL L CHALUPSKY
1274 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440006
DAVID O YANG
1254 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440009
KENNETH J MAKI
1764 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440014
CURRENT RESID
0 CHAMBE N
MAPL OOD, MN 55109
1 22440015
JAMES A ETTEN
1739 ENGLISH ST
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440018
GREGORY M VOTEL
1730 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
'162922440019
4'
LFONSO VAZQUEZ
1251 LARPENTEUR AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440022
MELANIE A MORAN GROVER
PAUL NOWACKI
1758 EDWARD ST N
2466 COCHRANE CIR
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
WOODBURY, MN 55125
162922430069
162922430071
SUZANNE G MISKOWIC
CURRENT RESIDEN
1784 EDWARD ST
1784 EDWARD N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLE D, MN 55109
162922430072
22430072
LEEANN R EDSTROM GEORGE L RETTNER ET AL
1286 RIPLEY AVE E 1280 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440002 162922440005
LUCILLE M KUPFERSCHMIDT JOHN E JORGENSEN JR
1266 RIPLEY AVE E 1260 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440007 162922440008
JAMES L SIMPSON KENNETH J MAKI
1770 ATLANTIC ST N 1764 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440012 162922440013
CURRENT RESIDEN DIANE M DENNY
0 CHAMBERS 1754 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPL OD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 22440014 162922440015
DIANE M DENNY CHARLES R WALTON
1754 ATLANTIC ST N 1740 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440016 162922440017
CURRENT RESID CURRENT RESIDE
0 CHAMBE TN 0 CHAMBER SAN
MAP OOD, MN 55109 MAPL OD, MN 55109
922440018 i2 22440019
GREGORY M VOTEL
1730 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440020
LAKE PHALEN COMMUNITY CHURCH
1717 ENGLISH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440021
TIMOTHY E LITTLE
1791 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440038
JOHN R MONTGOMERY
1783 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440039
DUANE M MARKIE BELA HORVATH HAROLD E HEMMER
1775 ATLANTIC ST N 1769 ATLANTIC STN 1761 ATLANTIC ST N
APLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
'::y 2922440040 162922440041 162922440042
ST ANNS RESIDENTIAL SERV INC STEVEN J YOUNG. MARK N MANZELLA
1755 ATLANTIC ST N 1747 ATLANTIC ST N 1741 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440043 162922440044 162922440045
JOHN WILLY MIKE WALSH MICHAEL M KELLY
1733 ATLANTIC ST N 1727 ATLANTIC ST N 1719 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440046 162922440047 162922440048
THIDA K NEOU RICHARD W HUGHES JR ROLAND C AMEY
1713 ATLANTIC ST N 1705 ATLANTIC ST N 1699 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN -55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440049 162922440050 162922440051
VIRGINIA A DEHEN TRUSTEE CURRENT RESIDE CITY OF MAPLEWOO
1241 LARPENTEUR AVE E 0 LARPENTE AVE E 1830 COUNTY D B E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLE D, MN 55109 MAPLE D, MN 55109
162922440052 162 440054 1629 2440054
KRISTINE K ERICKSON ROGER G ROEMHILDT KURT A FOSTER
1700 DULUTH ST N 1708 DULUTH ST N 1714 DULUTH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440055 162922440056 162922440057
VERNE A BARNICK CAROL A ROSEMARK CURRENT RESIDE
.1720 DULUTH ST N 1728 DULUTH ST N 1734 DULUTH N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEW D, MN 55109
162922440058 162922440059 162 440060
RITA A VINESKI RUSSELL BALKENOL JAMES E DERKS
1734. DULUTH ST 1742 DULUTH ST N 1748 DULUTH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440060 162922440061 162922440062
RONALD A ROSEMARK JASON S MCLEVISH LESLIE W FLAHERTY
1756 DULUTH ST N 1762 DULUTH ST N 1770 DULUTH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440063' 162922440064 162922440065
J INDA MARIE HELGESEN DANIEL J CONLON DAVID M DONCH
1776 DULUTH ST N 1784 DULUTH ST N 1792 DULUTH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440066 162922440067 1629,22440068
lL
3
CLAUDE F KURTZ
JULIE M TAVERNA
JANE M PALONY
1793 DULUTH ST N
1783 DULUTH ST N
1775 DULUTH ST N
APLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
y 2922440069
162922440070
162922440071
MORGAN L THAO
EUGENE J SPIESS ET AL
MARY E MEYENBURG
1769 DULUTH ST N
1761 DULUTH ST N
1753 DULUTH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440072
162922440073
162922440074
EDWARD L OLSON
PHILLIP L FINBERG ETAL
LINDA M HELGESON
1745 DULUTH ST N
1737 DULUTH ST N
1729 DULUTH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440075
162922440076
162922440077
HAROLD L OLSON ET AL
SHAUN P COGGINS
WALTER J PETERS
.1717 DULUTH ST N
1709 DULUTH ST N
1703 DULUTH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440078
162922440079
162922440080
CURTIS R NORDRUM ET AL
ROBERT J RYAN
GREGORY P LINDHOLM
1199 LARPENTEUR AVE E
1173 LARPENTEUR AVE E
1700 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440081
162922440082
162922440083
ROBERT J VAUGHT
MAI CHONG VANG
CURRENT RESIDENT
1694 FRANK ST N
1714 FRANK ST N
1716 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440084
162922440085
162922440086
WILLIAM HEJNY
RAYMOND J SVOBODA
DARLENE C BENEDICT
936 PALM CIR C
1718 FRANK ST N
1754 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440086
162922440087
162922440089
CURRENT RESIDENT
MAXWELLS HOUSE CO RON PROP LLC
JUDITH A WEGWERTH
1764 FRANK ST N
3755 GOODWIN CT
1772 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
ST PAUL, MN 55128
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440090
162922440090
162922440091
CURRENT RESIDENT
ARNE L STEFFERUD TRUST
HAROLD C SCHNOBRICH
1780 FRANK ST N
1780 FRANK ST
1186 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922440092
162922440092
162922440093
I HARLOTTE P WASILUK LE
SANDRA A DICKE
WALTER J HAYDE
1.740 FRANK ST N
1742 FRANK ST N
1776. ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLE,WOOD, MN 55109
1 62922440094
162922440095
162922440098
is
DELORES E JASPER
8641 WENTWORTH AVE S APT 105
BLOOMINGTON, MN 55420
162922440100
CURRENT REST
0 ATLANTI
MAP OOD, MN 55109
922440100
PROPOSED SESSMENT ROLL MAPLEWOOD IMPROVEMENT 00.05 STREETS /STORM Page 1
GLADSTONE WEST AREA
D
Proposed Assessments Imp. 00-05
PQQ Q & PIN's
Fee Owner or Tax payer
Parcel or Owner Address
City /State/Zip
St. - A
St. - B
Curb - C
Storm - D
Srw Svc
Wtr Svc
proposed
96292241
$3,885
$2,685
$1,000
$615
$1,825
$1,225
Parcel Totals
162922410005
162922410006
162922410007
ICARL T GRILL JR
1 ROBERT J SHANLEY
IDONALD F THOMPSON
11280 FRISBIE AVE E
11264 FRISBIE AVE E
1254 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
$10,825
$4,500
$4,500
162922410009
1 LAURA M SORENSEN
1263 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410010
CURRENT RESIDENT
1279 RIPLEY AVE
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
A
D
$0
162922410010
MICHAEL P THOMPSON
1 7556 NOBLE AVE N
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55443
1
1
$4,500
162922410014
JUDY LYNN MACKENROTH
1246 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410015
WILLIAM B SEILER
11230 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410016
R A SCHNAITH
11220 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
2
2
1
$10,825
162922410017
ERNEST J HAMMER
11208 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410018
KEVIN R VANDERBOSCH
11198 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410019
JAMES C PETERSON
11192 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410020
LUKMAN A JULMAT
11184 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410021
GERALDINE J LONETTI
11193 RIPLEY AVE
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
0
0
$0
162922410022
GERALDINE J LONETTI
11193 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410023
PAO H LEE
11199 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410024
JANICE J PATRICK
11201 RIPLEY AVE
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410027
SUSAN E GROIN
11221 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410028
THEODORE R PURVI3
11227 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410029
MARK A MOTZ
11233 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410032
HAROLD LUND
11285 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410033
GLORIA J ENRIGHT
11211 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410034
GERGLEY SZOKOLAI
11800 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410035
AMY B BEYER
11255 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922410038
PAJTSHENG VANG
11185 FR ISBIE A VE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410039
KIMBERLY ANN RICE
11193 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410040
NANCY KAYE DAHLBY
11201 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410041
CHERSU VANG
11209 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410042
GERALD T OPSE
11217 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410043
ITOU XIONG
11225 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410044
SCOTT A KING
11233 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410045
N THOMAS SAGISSER
11241 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410046
DAVID D BARTOL
11249 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410047
DONNA BIDON
11257 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410048
FREDERICK 0 OLAGBAIYE
11265 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410049
MIE VANG
11273 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410050
ANN M KOWSKI
11281 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
162922410051
LONG KHANG
1289 FRISBIE AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
$3,885
QQ 16292241
38
0
0
24
2
0
$166,040
St. -A
St. - B
Curb - C
Storm - D
Srw Svc
Wtr Svc
QQ 16292242
$3,885
$2,685
$1,000
$615
$1,825
$1,225
162922420068
JOSEPH C ELLIS
1839 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922420069
ROXIE T SMITH
11829 FRANK ST N
MAPLEW MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922420070
ANNETHA L DREXLER
11175 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922420071
YOUA MOUA
11149 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPL MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922420072
1 ROXIE T SMITH
11829 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
0
1
$615
162922420073
1 PATRICIA TITUS
11125 RIPLEY AVE
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
0
1
$615
162922420074
ITIMOTHY L BRISTOW
1800 EDWARD ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922420075
IJOHN E JACOBSON
1144 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEW M N 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922420092
PATRICIA A TITUS
1125 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
$4,500
162922420093
PATRICIA A TITUS
1125 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
0
1
$615
QQ 16292242
7
0
0
10
$33,345
2/23/01
P�2
X76292243
r_.__
Srw Svc Wtr Svc --
$615
$1,825 $1,225
162922430001
162922430002
STEVEN C DEMALIGON
T G ROUNGOU ET AL
1795 FRANK STN `
MAPLEWOOD, MN - 55109
162922430003 DAVID E NEEOHAM ET AL
1789 FRANK STN
1785 FRANK STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430004
JOANN L KAPPEL
1779 FRANK STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
16292243000
A E GALBRAITH JR ET AL
1770 EDWARD STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430006
HOWARD A PETERSON
STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1629224.30010
DOROTHY C JOHNSON. LIFE ESTATE
17879 ED WARD
WARD STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 551.09
162922430011
BRIAN D SONTERRE
1777 EDWARD. Sfi N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430012
WILLIAM G DUNKEL JR -
1771 EDWARD STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
16292243001
BARRY P ERICKSON
1763 EDWARD ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430030
STEVEN D QUICK
1691 FRANK STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430031
C G KEITLESON ET AL
1159 LARPENTEUR AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55iD9
162922430038
VIRGINIA A BUCKLEY
1758 PHALEN PL N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
16292243003
MARY ANN MCFARlANO
1754 PHALEN PL N
MAPLE WOOD, MN 55109
162922430040
E M SCHAEFFER ET AL
1744 PHALEN PL N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430047
ROLAND C BRANDTLE
1736. EAST SHORE DR N
MAPLEW000, MN 55109
162822430048
TERRENCE L WINNING
1720 EAST SHORE DR N
MAPLEW000, MN 55109
16292243004
LENNA R SCOTT
1716 EAST SHORE DR N
MAPLEW DOD, MN 55109
162922430050
H J FORCIER ET AL
1710 EAST SHORE DR N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430051
MICHAEL BROOKS
1700 EAST SHORE DR N
MAPLEWOOD , MN 55109
162922430052
162922430053
JEFFREY J HOLMES
ISLAND B MEYER
1696 EAST SHORE DR N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD M N 55109
162922430054
PAUL A EOOFF
1692 EAST SHORE DR N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
16292243005.
STEPHEN M REICHOW
1688 EAST SHORE DR N
1684 EAST SHORE DR N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430058
JEFFERY. SCOTT LAUGHLIN
1160 SOPHIA AVE E
MAPL EWOOD, MN 55109
.16292243005
SCOTT A 1NASILUK
1747 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1fi2922430060
CURRENT RESIDENT
1725- FRANK STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430060
162922430061
MARLENE C KASMIRSKI
CATHRYN A STANOCH
1383 EAST SUMMER AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430062
KRISTIN JO SMITH
1717 FRANK ST N
1705 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430063
TRUSTS
1695 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430064
DAVID R MISKOWIEC
1728 EDWARD STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
GEORGE M ASHTON
1732 EDWARD STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430066
JILL S MACIOCH
1738 EDWARD STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430067
SHARON TRAEN
1742 EDWARD STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430068
DOTTIE LOU BiNGMAN
1750 EDWARD ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
16292243006
MELANiE A MORAN GROVER
1758 EDWARD STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430071
CURRENT RESIDENT
1794 EDWARD STN.
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
162922430071
162922430072
PAUL NOWACKI
SUZANNE G MISKOWiC
2466 COCHRANE CIR
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
WOODBURY, MN - 55125
1784 EDWARD STN
MAPLEW000, MN 55109
��.
QQ 16292243
St. - A St. - B
$3,8 $2,685
--
�_
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
�'
v
v
v
v
�_�
+�
��
39 + 0
Curb - C
$1,000
0
e
6��'
2/23/01
Storm - D
r_.__
Srw Svc Wtr Svc --
$615
$1,825 $1,225
1
1
$4,500
1
$4,500
�
$4,500
1
$4,500
1
$4,500
1
$4,500
1
$4,500
1
$4,500
0
$4,500
0
$3,ess
0
$3,885
0
$3,885
0
$3,885
0
$3,885
0
$3,885
0
$3,885
0
$3,885
�
$3,885
0
$3,885
0
$3,885
0
$3,885
0
$3,885
0
$3,885
1
$3,885
1
$4,500
D
$4,500
1
$0
1
$4,500
1
$4, 500
0
$4,500
0
$7,770
0
$3, 885
0
$3,885-
0
$3,885
0
$3,885
0
$3,885
D
$3, 885
1
$0
1
$4,500
$4,500
16
0 0 161355
` �` �" '�= 'a`"�"�cL-H���-��N►�NT`ROCL` NIAPLEINOOD IMPROVEMENT 00 -05 STREETS /STORM
GLADSTONE WEST AREA
T
P•
ge 3
2r23ro1
QQ 16292244
1 62922440001 PAUL K EDWAROS'
162922440002 LEEANN R EOSTROM
1294. RIPLEYAVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109.
St. - A St. - B Curb - C
X3,885 $2685 X1,000
Storm - D Srw Svc Wtr Svc
X615 $1,825 � - -�`
16292244000 GEORGE L RETTNER ET Al
� 286 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109.
0
1
X1,225
0
162922440006 CHERYL L CHALUPSKY
1280 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
i $0
162922440007 LUC1LlE M KUPFERSCHMIDT
1274 RIPLEY AVE E
1266 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEW000, MN 55109
1
4
1 $ ,500
162922440008 JOHN E JORGENSEN JR
162922440009
1260 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
� $4,500
DAVID O VANG
162922440012 JAMES L SIMPSON
1254 RIPLEY. AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109.
MAPlE1NOOD, MN 55109
1
1 $4,500
1 $4,500
162922440013 KENNETH J MAKI
1770 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
�
$4 500
1 '
162922440014 KENNETH J MAKI
1764 ATLANTIC -STN
MAPLEWOOp, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,500
162922440015 DIANE M DENNY
1764 ATLANTIC. ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,300
162922440016 DIANE M DENNY
1754 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
0 0
1 $4,300
162922440017 CHARLES R WALTON
7754 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
0 0
1 $615
162922440018 JAMES A ETTEN
1740 ATLANTIC. STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $615
16292244001 GREGORY M VOTEL
1739 ENGLISH. ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109.
1 1
1 $4, 300
162922440020 GREGORY M VOTEL
1730ATi.ANTIC -STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
0 0
1 $4,300
162922440021 CHURCH
1730: ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
� 1 $615
162922440022 AIFONSO VAZQUEZ
1717 ENGLISH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
0 0
r
1 $4,300
162922440038 TIMOTHY E LITTLE
1251 LARPENTEUR AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
3 3
3 $615
162922440039 JOHN R MONTGOMERY
1791 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 0
0 $12,900
162922440040 DUANE M MARKIE
1783- ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $2,685
162922440041 BELA HORVATH
1775 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,300
162922440042 HAROLD E HEMMER
1769 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,300
.162922440043 ST ANNS RESIDENTIAL SERV INC
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,300
162922440044 STEVEN J YOUNG
1755 ATLANTIC STN
N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,300
16292244004 MARK N MANZELLA
1747 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,300
162922440046 JOHN WILLY
1741 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN.55109
1 1
4 3
1 $ 00
162922440047 MIKE WALSH
1733 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,300
16292244004. MICHAEL M KELLY
1727 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,300
16292244004 THIDA K NEOU
1719 ATLANTIC ST N
MAPIEWOOD, MN 55109.
1 1
1 $4,300
162922440050 RICHARD W HUGHES JR
1713. ATLANTiC•ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,300
162922440051 ROLAND C AMEY
1705 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,300
16292244005 VIRGINIA A DEHEN TRUSTEE
1699 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,300
.162922440054 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
1241 LARPENTEUR AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1 $4,300
162922440055 KRiSTINE K ERICKSON
1830 COUNTY ROAD. B E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 0
0 $4,300
16292244005 ROGER G ROEMHILDT
1700 DULUTH STN
1708 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
0 0
1
0 $2,685
.1 KURT A FOSTER
162922440058 VERNE A BARNICK
1714 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
1 $ 0
1 $4,300
16292244005 CAROL A ROSEMARK
1720 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
4 3
1 $ , 00
1 62922440060 RITA A VINESKI
1728 DULUTH STN
1734 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1
1 $4,300
162922440061 RUSSELL BALKENOL
162922440062 JAMES E DERKS
1742 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109.
1
1 1
7 $4,300
1 $4,300
162922440063 RONALD A ROSEMARK
1748 DULUTH STN
1756 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1 1
1
1 $4,300
162922440064 JASON S MCLEVISH
� � � �
1762 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOQp, MN 55109
1
1
1 $4,300
$4,300
_
•.: � • `, ; •
MAPLEWOOD MN 55109
1
1 1
1
$4,300
1
$4,300
:.�..� _ .
.. � ,. `-
r l`�"�7-
ULAL
00.05 STREETS /STORM P
e 4
1629224400651
162922440066.
LESLIE W FLAHERTY
MARIE HELGESEN
1770 DULUTH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
162922440067
,LINDA
DANIEL J CONLON
1776 DULUTH ST N
1784 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
1 1
162922440068
DAVID M DONCH
1792 DULUTH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
162922440069
ICLAUDE F KURTZ
1793 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD. MN 55109
1
1
16292244007
JULIE M TAVERNA
1783 DULUTH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
162922440071
JJANE M PALONY
1775 DULUTH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
162922440072
MORGAN L THAO
1769 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
162922440073
JEUGENEJ SPIESS ETAL
1761 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
162922440074
MARY E MEYENBURG
1753 DULUTH. ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
1fi292244007
EDWARD L OLSON
1745 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
16292244007
PHILLIP L FiNBERG ETAL
1737 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
162922440077
LINDA M HELGESON
1729 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
162922440078
lHAROLD L OLSON ETAL
11717 DULUTH STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
16292244007
SHAUN P COGGINS
1709 DULUTH 'ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
162922440080
WALTER J PETERS
1703 DULUTH ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
162922440081
16 2922440082
CURTIS R NORDRUM ET AL
1199 LARPENTEUR AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
162922440083
ROBERT J RYAN
GREGORY P LINDHOLM
1173 LARPENTEUR AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1
0 0
0
162922440084
ROBERT J NAUGHT
1700 FRANK STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
0
0
16292244008
MAI CHONG VANG
1694 FRANK STN
1714 FRANK STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
1
0 1
162922440086
CURRENT RESIDENT
1716 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
.1
0
0 1
16292244008
WILLIAM HEJNY
936 PALM CIR E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
A
0
0 D
162922440087
RAYMOND J SVOBODA
1718 FRANK STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
0 1
16292244008
DARLENE C BENEDICT
1754 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
0 i
162922440090
CURRENT RESIDENT
1764 FRANK STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
0 1
162922440090
LLC
3755 GOODWIN CT
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
q
1
1 D
162922440091
JUDITH A WEGWERTH
1772 FRANK STN
ST PAUL, MN 55128
1
0
0 1
162922440092
CURRENT RESIDENT
1780 FRANK STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
0 1
162922440092
ARNE L STEFFERUD TRUST
1780 FRANK STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
q
p
0 D
162922440093
HAROLD C SCHNOBRICH
E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
0 1
162922440094
CHARLOTTE P WASILUK LE
1740 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
0 1
16292244009
SANDRA A DICKE
1742 FRANK ST N
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
0 1
162922440098
WALTER J HAYDE
1776 ATLANTIC STN
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
0
0 1
162922440099
CHRISTINE M BAITER
1246 RIPLEY AVE E
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
1
1 1
162922440100
DELORE E J p R
8641 WENTW TH AVE
MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109
BLOOMINGTON, MN 55420
1
p
0 1
QQ 16292244
19
55
1
1 1
1 1
51
73
RECAPITULATION TABLE
St Units • A
St Units • B
Curb Units • C
Storm Units
San Svc
16292241
38
0
0
Wtr Svc
16292242
39
0
0
24
2
0
_
16292243
39
0
0
16
0
0
QQ 16292244
19
55
51
16
0
0
'
Unit Price by Type
135
$3,885
55
$2,685
73
1
1
51
$1,000
129
3
1
Unit Totals by Type
$524,475
$147,675
$51,000
$615.
$79,335
$1,825
$1,225
$5,475
$1,225
2/23/01
$4,300
$4,300
$4,300
$4,300
$4,300
$4,300
$4,300
$4,300
$4,300
$4,300
$4,300
$4,300
_ $4,300
$4,300
$4,300
$4,300
$2,685
$2,685
$4,500
$4,500
$4,500
$0
$4,500
$4,500
$4,500
$0
$4,500
$4,500
$0
$4,500
$4,500
$4,500
$4,500
$4,300
$4,500
$7,350
$316,750
$166,040
$161,355
$161,355
$316,750
$805,500
ltal Recovery
$809,185 :�_l
0 02/26/200103:08 PM1
Proposed Improvement 00 -05
Parcel Assessment Area Map
QQ 16 -29 -22-41
, PM1
Proposed Improvement 00 -05
Parcel Assessment Area
Map
r '� (73) (68)
r '2 1 (7721
Cu I l c
r 0 W
C i
)
( 70 I
Ripley Ave,
75 74
L
LL
Frisbie
QQ 16- 29 -22 -42
• PM1
Proposed Improvement 00-05
Parcel Assessment Area Map
V
r
- — - .� Ripley Ave.
ti
' 1 ( i
Cu
r
1
(13) ( 11.1 (
.� ❑
� r '
Sophia Ave.
k (69) ,
+ r
.� (68 ) a
W e
Hi C
Cu
(47) (ss) (61)
(49) (64) 62
( )
(50)
I (52) I
I i � (53)
' (31)
QQ 16 -29 -22-43
o,-
02 / 27 /200108:35 AM
Proposed Improvement 00 -05
QQ 16- 29 -22 -44
V'
Parcel Assessment Area Map
--- _.- - - - - --
Ripley Ave.
1 (93) (69)
I ,
(68)
a
(
(99) 9
( )
t
(8) F (-6) ] (5 (2)
( ) I
(92)
I �
KO)l
a
❑
1
i (91 )
(71)
(66)
(40)
(100
t
90
a
a
(
( )
I
CO (89)
� �
(
(64)
(63
(42)
43
............. 'l 27)
CO
U
(13
0
14
D
(95)
I I 94
(�
(
(Z)
a
(61)
(44)
a
(45)
CO
Q 16
( )
� I
I
15
(60)
(46)
E(17)
ZO
(18) a. CO
' Cn
ti I (86)
(
D
(59)
(47 )
'
Cn
L I
A�
57
(49)
F
(21)
Lu
1
156)
(
f r` w
r 1
(83)
(
a
a
(54)
(52)
( )
1
1 - - -_ --
— _
-
Larpenteur Ave.
"-- '------- -_ - -._ I
QQ 16- 29 -22 -44
V'