Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2007 03-12 City Council Packet
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M. Monday, March 12, 2007 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 07 -05 A. CALL TO ORDER B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Acknowledgement of Maplewood Residents Serving the Country C. ROLL CALL Mayor's Address on Protocol: "Welcome to the meeting of the Maplewood City Council. It is our desire to keep all discussions civil as we work through difficult issues tonight. If you are here for a Public Hearing or to address the City Council, please familiarize yourself with the Policies and Procedures and Rules of Civility, which are located near the entrance. When you address the council, please state your name and address clearly for the record. All comments /questions shall be posed to the Mayor and Council. I then will direct staff, as appropriate, to answer questions or respond to comments." D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Minutes from the February 26, 2007 Council /Manager Workshop 5 p.m. 2. Minutes from the February 26, 2007 Council /Manager Workshop 6 p.m. 3. Minutes from the February 26, 2007 City Council Meeting F. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS G. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS 1. Resolution of Appreciation — Michael Grover 2. Introduction of Robert Mittet, Finance and Administration Manager H. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 7:00 p.m. Proposed Right of Way Ordinance — First Reading 1. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Claims 2. Final Plat — Cottagewood (Ferndale Street, south of Highwood Avenue) 3. Conditional Use Permit Review (for PUD) — Three and Four - plexes (1349/1359 County Road C) 4. CarMax /Mogren Addition, City Project 06 -14, Approve Mogren Development Contract 5. Maplewood — Oakdale Lions Club — Acknowledgement of Donation to Citizen Services Recreation 6. Resolution Establishing Roadway as County Road D Court and Deleting Old County Road D Name from Official Mapping 7. Approval of Spring Clean -up Event Schedule for April 28, 2007 8. 2007 City Hall Campus Plan Implementation 9. Mogren Street Improvements, Beam to County Road D, City Project 06 -17, Resolution Approving No Parking Along Beam Avenue 10. Approval of 2007 Fuel Purchases 11. Approve Vehicle Replacement Purchases — Public Works 12. Public Works Building Improvements, City Project 03 -19, Approve Contract Revision for Reduction in Retainage 13. CarMax /Mogren Addition, City Project 06 -14, Approve CarMax Development Contract 14. Mogren Street Improvements, Beam to County Road D, City Project 06 -17, Resolution Approving Plans and Authorizing Receiving Bids 15. Temporary Gambling Permit Resolution — Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary 16. Expenditure of Buffer Zone Protection Grant Money 17. Roseville School District 623 All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City 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. J. AWARD OF BIDS K. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Gladstone Redevelopment Plan (English Street and Frost Avenue Area) (4 Votes) L. NEW BUSINESS 1. On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License — Brian Harney, New Owner and Manager, The Chalet, 1820 N. Rice Street. 2. On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License — Robert Michael Jacob, New Owner and Manager, Jake's City Grille, 1745 Beam Avenue 3. Wine and Strong Beer Intoxicating Liquor License — Brad Behnke, The Ponds at Battle Creek Golf Course, 601 Century Avenue South 4. Off -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License — Khue Thi Dang, New Owner and Manager, Big Bear Liquor, LLC, 2223 White Bear Avenue 5. Request to Hire Consultant — South Maplewood Moratorium Study Area (South of Carver Avenue) 6. Brookview Area Street Improvements, City Project 07 -01, Resolution Accepting Feasibility Study and Ordering Public Hearing 7. Interstate 94 Corridor Alliance — Approve Resolution of Support for State Funding 8. Pond Overlook Public Improvements (2161 County Road D), City Project 07 -08, Resolution Ordering Preparation of Feasibility Study 9. County Road D East Improvements, TH 61 to Southlawn Drive, City Project 02 -07, Resolution Approving Modification of Existing Construction Contract, Change Orders 32 -39 10. County Road D Realignment (West) Improvements (TH61 to Walter Street) City Project 02 -08, Resolution for Modification of the Existing Construction Contract, Change Order Nos. 29 -40 (T.A. Schifsky Contract), 4 -5 (Palda Contract, 10 -11 (Imperial Contract) 11. Kenwood Area Street Improvements, City Project 05 -16, Resolution Approving Modification of Existing Construction Contract, Change Order No. 12 12. Access to Finance Safe Deposit Boxes at Premier Bank 13. Planning Commission Rules of Procedure M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 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) 249 -2001 to make arrangements. Assisted Listening Devices are also available. Please check with the City Clerk for availability. RULES OF CIVILITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY Following are some rules of civility the City of Maplewood expects of everyone appearing at Council Meetings - elected officials, staff and citizens. It is 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 principles: Show respect for each other, actively listen to one another, keep emotions in check and use respectful language. Agenda Item El MINUTES CLOSED SESSION COUNCIL /MANAGER WORKSHOP 5:00 p.m. Monday, February 26, 2007 Council Chambers, City Hall A. CALL TO ORDER A workshop of the City Council was held in the Council to order at 5:00 p.m. by Mayor Longrie. B. ROLL CALL Diana Longrie, Mayor Rebecca Cave Councilmember Erik Hjelle, Councilmember Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Will Rossbach, Councilmember C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Longrie moved to approve the a Seconded by Councilmember Cave Mayor Longrie moved into closed session. D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Discussion on Pending Litigatic City Hall and was called r vs. City of Maplewood Mayor Longrie re-opened the meeting at 5:49 p.m. 2. Interview of Community Design Review Board candidate John Demarco. E. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Longrie adjourned at 6:00 p.m. February 12, 2007 City Council Workshop Agenda Item E2 MINUTES CLOSED SESSION COUNCIL /MANAGER WORKSHOP 6:00 p.m. Monday, February 26, 2007 Council Chambers, City Hall A. CALL TO ORDER A workshop of the City Council was held in the Council Chambers at City Hall and was called to order at 6:09 p.m. by Mayor Longrie. B. ROLL CALL C. Diana Longrie, Mayor Rebecca Cave Councilmember Erik Hjelle, Councilmember Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Will Rossbach, Councilmember APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Longrie moved to approve the agenda as submitted. Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes -All Mayor Longrie moved into closed session. D. NEW BUSINESS vs. City of Maplewood May at 7:10 p.m.. 7:12 p.m. February 12, 2007 City Council Workshop 1. Discussion on Pendi Agenda Item E3 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 p.m. Monday, February 26, 2007 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 07 -04 A. CALL TO ORDER A A 41 A meeting of the City Council was held in the City Hall Council Chambers and was called to order at 7:15 by Mayor Longrie. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Diana Longrie, Mayor Present Rebecca Cave Councilmember Present Erik Hielle, Councilmember Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Will Rossbach, Councilmember APPROVAL OF AGENDA Move Item L4 to 1 1. Add items: G1 Proclamation G2 Balloting for Community Design Review Board 110 Police Department K -9 Purchase M1 Work at Sandy Lake M2 Burning of Wood M3 Highway 49 M4 Dispatch Policy Update M5 Birthday /Anniversary of Maplewood Mayor Longrie moved to approve the agenda as amended. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes -all E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes from the February 12, 2007 5 p.m. Council Manager Workshop Mayor Longrie moved to approve the minutes of February 12, 2007 5 p.m. Council Manager workshop as amended. Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes -all 2. Minutes from the February 12, 2007 6 p.m. Council Manager Workshop Councilmember Cave moved to approve the minutes of February 12, 2007 6 p.m. Council Manager workshop as submitted. February 26, 2007 City Council Meeting Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes -all 3. Minutes of February 12, 2007 City Council Meeting F. Mayor Longrie moved to approve the minutes of February 12, 2007 as amended. Seconded by Councilmember Cave VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Ayes- Councilmembers Juenemann, Rossbach, Cave, Mayor Longrie Abstentions- Hjelle nutes and the policy on closed council regarding her belief that the city has coke regarding the litigation on the 1. Bob Zick, 2231 Penn Place, commented on council meetings. 2. Nancy Lazaryan, 10734 West Lake Road, Rice; spoke lied to her regarding the Applewood property litigation. 3. Bill Kayser, 6408 81 Avenue North, Brooklyn Pa Applewood property in southern Maplewood. 4. Jamie Jenson, 2483 15 Street N, the south Maplewood moratorium 5. Ron Cockriel, 943 Century Avenue, spt noted information on the city's website G. APPOINTMENTSIPRE 1. Maplewood 50 A Victoria Reinli Senator Chuc Slawik. 2. Approve New a. Public 3 TIONS niversary Celebratio Maplewood moratorium and )proximately 250 people attended the city's anniversary and shared proclamations received from Representative msey County Board of Commissioners, a proclamation from roclamation from Representatives Leon Lillie and Nora nt to TH 49 (Rice Street) Task Force from Planning Commission. Director Ahl presented the staff report. Councilmember Juenemann moved to appoint Harlan Hess to the Rice Street Corridor Task Force and Dale Trippler as the alternate. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes -all Balloting for Appointment to the Police Civil Service Commission Ballots were counted for the Police Civil Service Commission and Community Design Review Board Commission appointments, the results to be announced later in the meeting under item N. 1.- Administrative Presentations. righton, requested the city remove five items from I stated his desire that the process move faster. 2 February 26, 2007 City Council Meeting H. PUBLIC HEARINGS None 1. CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Hjelle moved moved to adopt consent agenda items 1, 3, 5, 8, 9, 10. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -all Mayor Longrie moved to adopt consent agenda item 2. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -all Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt consent agenda item 4. Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -all Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt consent agenda item 6. Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -all Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt consent agenda item 7. Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -all 1. Approval of Claims $ 220,175.95 Checks # 72014 thru $ 119,604.84 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 02 /02/07 thru 02/08107 $' 113,186.80 Checks # 72054 thru # 72122 dated 02 /15 /07 thru 02/20/07 $ 277,145.96 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 02/09/07 thru 02/15/07 $ 730,113.55 Total Accounts Payable PAYROLL Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated $ 285,690.77 02/09/07 3 February 26, 2007 City Council Meeting Payroll Deduction check # 1001292 thru # $ 3,175.84 1001295 dated 02/09/07 $ 288,866.61 Total Payroll $ 1,018,980.16 GRAND TOTAL 2. Carryover of 2006 Appropriations to 2007 Approved the recommended carryover of 2006 appropriations to 2007. 3. Approval to Pay for Street Light Repair Approved the replacement of the damaged light pole and authorized payment to Sternberg Lighting. 4. Application for Use Deed Approved the following resolution requesting that Ramsey County grant the city a use deed for the parcel on the southeast corner of English Street and County Road B: RESOLUTION 07 -02 -014 USE DEED REQUEST WHEREAS, Ramsey County has given the City of Maplewood of the opportunity to attain a use deed on a tax forfeited lot. WHEREAS, this property is located at the southeast corner of County Road B and English Street, legally described as follows: LOT 14, BLOCK 12, SABIN ADDITION TO GLADSTONE, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA, EXCEPT ROAD RIGHT -OF -WAY. PID # 10- 29 -22 -33 -0040. WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood, has determined that having a use deed on this parcel would serve the city's best interests by making it available to the city for street right -of -way expansion purposes. The City of Maplewood would use this parcel for the expansion of the intersection, the continuation of the English Street sidewalk and for burying public utilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Maplewood City Council hereby formally requests that Ramsey County grant a use deed to the City of Maplewood for the parcel legally- described above. The use deed would allow the city to use this parcel for future right -of -way needs consisting of the expansion of the County Road B1English Street intersection, the continuation of the English Street sidewalk and for burying public utilities. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on February 26, 2007. 4 February 26, 2007 City Council Meeting 5. Conditional Use Permit Review — Maplewood Toyota (2973 Maplewood Drive North) K. Approved the conditional use permit for the two -level parking ramp at the NW corner of Highway 61 and Beam Avenue on Maplewood Toyota's northerly sales lot and approved the conditional use permit for the Maplewood Toyota parking lot south of Gulden's Roadhouse. 6. Conditional Use Permit Review — Menard's (2280 Maplewood Drive North) Approved the conditional use permit for Menard's at 2280 Maplewood Drive North. 7. Employee Safety Training — On -Call Service Agreement a. Approved ILC to assist the City of Maplewood with the On -Call Services Agreement for the Health and Safety Program. This program is broken down into multiple steps that we can chose from as needed. The total package if we did all of the steps would not exceed $8,563 which is billable at $713 per month. b. Authorized the City Manager to sign the service agreement contract on behalf of the city. 8. Turnout Coat and Pant Replacement Purchase — Fire Department Approved the purchase of the turnout gear in the amount of $6,236 plus $407 tax for a total of $6,643 from Jefferson Fire and Safety. These funds are in the 2007 budget. 9. Approval of 2007 Street Striping Authorized Ramsey county to provide pavement striping of roadways at a cost not to exceed $22,000. 10. K -9 Purchase - Police Department Approved the purchase of two police department K -9 dogs. OF UNFINISHED BUSIN 1. Desoto Skillman Area Street Improvements, City Project 06 -16, Report on Existing Street Conditions and Proposed Improvements a. City Engineer Erin Laberee presented the report. b. Council discussed viable street widths, the possibility of striping the street for a biking /walking lane, discussed creating a center area for drainage /runoff and adding a trail connection to the Gateway Trail. Councilmember Rossbach moved to direct staff to research the feasibility of constructing a median on the northern portion of Desoto Street due to the fact that the street is wide. February 26, 2007 City Council Meeting Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes - Councilmembers Rossbach, Cave, Juenemann Nays -Mayor Longrie, Councilmember Hjelle Councilmember Cave moved to request a street -width variance from Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue on Desoto Street. Seconded by Mayor Longrie Ayes -Mayor Longrie, Councilmember Cave Nays - Council members; Juenemann, Hjelle, Rossbach 2. Kenwood Area Street Improvements, City Project 05 -16, Approval of Budget Adjustments and Project Overruns a. Public Works Director AN presented the report. Councilmember Cave moved to approve a budget increase as follows to increase the final proiec St. Paul Regional Water Services $110,000 Ramsey Washington Watershed District 10,000 Driveway program 60,000 Interest of investments 20,000 WAC Fund 45,000 Sewer Fund 80,000 EUF Fund 15,000 Transfer from other closed projects 300,000 Total $640,000 Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -all 3. County Road D East Improvements (TH 61 to Southlawn), City Project 02 -07, Approval of Revised Purchase Agreement (Xcel Parcel) and Budget Adjustments a. Public Works Director AN presented the report. Councilmember Hjelle moved to authorize the $292,500 for County Road_ D Improvements, ( of $850,000 in Municipal State Aid Street (MS. of the BP Pioeline expense. and the acauisitic uisition from Xcel Energy in the amount of 'roiect 02 -07, and authorize a budget increase Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -all 4. County Road D West Improvements (TH 61 to Highridge Court), City Project 02 -08, Approval of Budget Adjustments a. Public Works Director AN presented the report. Councilmember Hjelle moved to authorize a budget increase of $305,000 in Municipal State Aid Street (MSAS) expenses to cover the added construction expenses and acquisition of the 6 February 26, 2007 City Council Meeting LaMetry — McDaniel ponding area for the County Road D West Improvements (TH 61 — Highridge Court), City Project 02 -08. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -all L. NEW BUSINESS Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Gladstone Redevelopment Plan (English Street and Frost Avenue Area) a. Planner Finwall presented the report. b. Planning Commissioner Harlan Hess addressed the Council. Mayor Longrie invited the public to address the council regarding this item. David Bartol, 1249 Frisbee Avenue, handed out maps to the council and spoke regarding density issues in the Gladstone neighborhood. Edward Lundblad,1824 English Street, spoke regarding the density in his neighborhood. Alber Galbraith, 1770 Edward Street, said the council has accepted a Gladstone neighborhood plan and should get on with the process. Sharon Kambeitz- Lumphrey, 1817 Clarence Street, asked the council to reconsider the zoning of the property along Clarence Street adjacent to the Vento Trail. Kim Schmidt, 1800 Phalen Place, asked council how they will deal with the open space property contamination in the Gladstone neighborhood. Public Works Director AN discussed previous study results of contamination found on this property and said that this issue will be discussed at a meeting scheduled on Monday, March 5, at city hall. Barry Starr, 1784 Phalen Place, asked staff to explain the 770 density number referred to in the staff report. Planner Finwall explain how that number was calculated. David Bartol, 1249 Frisbee Avenue, again addressed the council about reducing density. Sharon Kambeitz- Lumphrey, 1817 Clarence Street, again addressed the council regarding rezoning. Sue Broin, 1221 Ripley, commented on densities. Barry Starr, 1784 Phalen Place, again addressed the council. John Nephew, 628 County Road B, spoke regarding the Gladstone redevelopment area. Jan Sundgaard, 1865 Clarence Street, spoke in favor of the proposed neighborhood densities. The council discussed the Gladstone master plan density classifications and numbers and their relationship to the land use plan. 7 February 26, 2007 City Council Meeting Mayor Longrie moved to adopt the comprehensive land use plan and map amendment resolution and to also include the Planninq Commission's recommendation items 1 and 2 as outlined on page five of the staff report dated February 21, 2007. Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes -Mayor Longrie, Councilmembers Cave, Hjelle Nays-Council members Rossbach, Juenemann The motion, requiring four votes, failed. Councilmember Juenemann moved to continue the meeting until co Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle A five- minute break was taken. The meeting was resumed at 11:20 p.m. Councilmember Juenemann said she will ask staff to assemble Gladstone density numbers regarding the master plan and the land use plan for consideration at one of the two March council meetings. 2. Heights Avenue Cul -de -sac, City Project 07 -06, Resolution Authorizing Preparation of Feasibility Study on Making Temporary Cul -de -sac Permanent a. Public Works Director Ahl presented the report. b. George Gonzales, 2359 Heights, asked the council to take no action on this item. C. Carl Erb, 2354 Heights, asked to withdraw the petition previously submitted and to take no action on this item. Councilmember Hjelle moved to take no action on this item and refer it to the city engineer for inclusion in a future street reconstruction project. Seconded by Councilmember Cave seconded Ayes -all 3. Rainbow /Mapleridge Driveway Reconstruction, City Project 07 -03, Resolution Authorizing Preparation of Feasibility Study' Public Works Director Ahl presented the staff report. Councilmember Hjelle RESOLUTION 07 -02 -015 ORDERING PREPARATION OF A FEASIBILITY STUDY WHEREAS, it is proposed to make improvements to the Rainbow -Maple Ridge Shopping Mall Driveway, City Project 07 -03, and to assess the benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 8 February 26, 2007 City Council Meeting That the proposed improvement be referred to the city engineer for study and that he is instructed to report to the council with all convenient speed advising the council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is necessary, cost effective and feasible and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement, and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended. FURTHERMORE, funds in the amount of $2,500 are appropriated to prepare this feasibility report. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -all 4. Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Act Grant Agreement (Gladstone Redevelopment) a. Planner Finwall presented the staff report. Mayor Longrie moved approval of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Agreement showing the City of Maplewood's intent to comply with the Livabl Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -all 5. City Auditor a. City Manager Copeland presented a'propoal to hire Dave Mol of Tautges Redpath as city auditor to complete three required reports for the city. The council discussed hiring Dave Mol, a partner with Tautges Redpath, to complete three reports for the city at a cost of no more than $16,000. Councilmember Cave moved to approve the hiring of Dave Mol of Tautges Redpath to ,complete the required reports at a cost of no more than $16,000. Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -all M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS 1. Work at Sandy Lake Councilmember Rossbach reported he received an email regarding work being done at Sandy Lake. 2. Wood Burning Councilmember Rossbach suggested that city ordinances be reviewed to possibly strengthen regulations regarding inappropriate types of burning in the city. City Attorney Kantrud responded that he has researched information on other cities' regulations on burning and he will forward this information to Councilmember Rossbach. 9 February 26, 2007 City Council Meeting 3. Highway 49 Technical Advisory Committee Councilmember Juenemann reported on the February 15 Highway 49 committee meeting which was held to begin creating a 15 -year plan to create a "footprint" that will be designed to last into the future, to identify features or issues, and that cost is a key factor and will affect the ultimate design. 4. Dispatch Councilmember Juenemann reported on this committee, that there are dispatch issues that need to be resolved by the city of St. Paul and the Maplewood Fire Department, and also with the hiring of sufficient staff for the dispatch center. 5 50 Maplewood Anniversary The council thanked all those involved in the planning and preparation of the successful celebration event held at the Maplewood Community Center on February 24. Mayor Longrie thanked the Maplewood Historic Preservation Commission and the Maplewood Historic Society for their work on this celebration. N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 1. City Manager Copeland reported the commission balloting results as follows: Police Civil Service Commission: Deborah Birkholtz — Ayes -2, Nays -3 Community Design Review Board: John Demco - Ayes -4, Nays -1 O. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Longrie adjourned the meeting at 12:09 a.m. 10 February 26, 2007 City Council Meeting Agenda Item G1 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner SUBJECT: Planning Commission Resignation DATE: February 26, 2007 INTRODUCTION Michael Grover has resigned from the planning commission. I have attached his letter of resignation and a resolution of appreciation for him. As a side note, with this resignation, there are now two vacancies on the planning commission. COMMISSION ACTION On February 20, 2007, the planning commission recommended approval of the attached resolution. RECOMMENDATION Approve the resolution of appreciation on page three for Michael Grover. kr /p:planning commission /peresig6.mem Attachments: 1. Michael Grover Letter of Resignation 2. Michael Grover Resolution of Appreciation A-11-tachnent I While I regret having to make this choice, I have g ueatly enjoyed my time on the commission and have learned a great deal about planning and development from my fellow commissioners, city staff (especially you and Lisa), applicants and the public. f wish you and the commission well in the wming year, Michael Grover N Attac�.ient 2 JOINT RESOL UTION OF APPRECIA TION W Michael Grover has been a member oj'the Afaple Planning Comadssion sinceAfa,v 24, 2004, and has in (licit Capacay to fhe present time, and Jf the Planning Colninlswiow has appreciated his exper, enc insi and gof,;id iuti -wient and RULREAS, he hcisfi-eelil . cZiven rat 'h is time and enm I'vitnolit Con'l p ellsalioll, /61 (he hetterment of 'the C(,ty ny"Maplewot)d: and KWEREAS, he has shu silicere dedication to his duties and has consiStentl contribwed his leciderShip. tinte and qj'Ortf%r the be'ne ofthe CiIY' NOR", THEREFORE, IT IS HFREBY RESOL VED and onlichci?, f'the CitY oJ'A'fuplelvood, Minnesota and its citizens, thcv.-Vichael Grover is hereb eXtOnded our heartIZ-1(aratitude and appreciatOnjo'r his dedicated service, und hur conti I nued we "visa 7 ' success ill theftaure. Passed kv the Akiplevvood M0 City� Council on Diana Lon—rie, Afa Passed b ; the Allaple:voejal Planning Commission on F e 1) ru a i -k . 0, 20 0 7 Lorraine Fischer, Chairperson Karen Guil oile. Cit Clerk 3 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2007 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 11. ROLL CALL Vice - Chairperson Tushar Desai Present Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Present Commissioner Michael Grover Absent Commissioner Harland Hess Present Commissioner Gary Pearson Present Commissioner Dale Trippler Absent Commissioner Joseph Walton Present Commissioner Jeremy Yarwood Absent Staff Present: Ken Roberts Planner Michael Thompson Staff Engineer present until 7:30 p.m. Lisa Kroll Recording Secretary b. Resolution of Appreciation — Michael Grover Mr. Roberts said Michael Grover has resigned from the Planning Commission. Staff has attached his letter of resignation and a resolution of appreciation for him. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the resolution of appreciation for Michael Grover. Commissioner Desai seconded. Ayes — Desai, Fischer, Hess, Pearson, Walton The motion passed. This item will go to the City Council on March 12 or March 26, 2007. Agenda Item G2 ROBERT A. M ITTET PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE LUNDOV|S[K]LLEEN,POTV{N & BEmDERNdC.-20O1tupmsomt Controller " Responsible for all accounting arid financial functions for engineering consulting professional services firm, ~ Implemented new accounting sysionn Various IT Consulting Firms —193Qto2U01 Chewt Wells Fmrnn — Texhr'gAoglys/ � ��oorNnatadtest p,ocoouresdu merQer0[VVeQsFarQwandNonma��8nnKaysksms �0mnL N�8mFmryo/�N�nx�o�8aok—Ouo0y�ym/xancoAnokm� = Reviewed test documentation for major banking applications to deterinine compliance will internal and regulatory standards for Y2Ktesting. Client Cudoonk%,7gonU/ Travel — Testing Analyst ~ part of a teann responsible for the \esUngofa new back o(�oeaocoondngays(e/n lldsvvasm multi-million dollar critical project with impoctW over 18ODbranches. RH!K*ANAGEKAENT RESOURCES —189Tho199U Consultant Client: VaAunRX— April /D97hoApril 1998 ° Designed, on�ged.andre�or�don\he�c*ounUnghor�hepurchneeo|M�onompeny n� 4VEN|R, INC. —1A84bu19B7 President ~ Founded and incorporated the company as a building contractor and distributor of three season enclosure building products 0z other contractors SUMMIT ENV|RQSDLUT|ONS, INC. —1902to1394 Director of Corporate Development / Finance Director * Directed the hunnan resources hunoUonfor o rapidly grovv(ng.nnuki'nffico'pnuYous�m�a| ee/v|oesfinm Designed information systems = Es<abUshed^organized and managed all accounting and financial |uocUone� Consulted on all accounting arid finance matters fromthe company's inception in19SO, EXPO GRAPHICS, INC. —18B1 to 1992 Chief Financial Officer ° 0irac�UaUaocoonUng anUOmanceiunoUons/o,ah/Uaem/ioopnUtioQandbimder mpe/oikzn employing 180 people. ° Designed and imp|omen�dsysbsu�sand po|ic�sand nieinio�edbanWngre|s4|onuh��m� PORT AUTHORITY 8F THE CITY [3P ST. PAUL —1984to1G91 Financial Reporting Manager and Assistant Director of Finance ° Supervised preparation of financial reports and budgets for the principal ououomkz development organization in the city, Streamlined external auditing procedures, Prepared proposals for 9&P. Managed debt service, construction and other funds. CENEX-19O2tu1984 Internal Audit Staff " Pe�oumodupena�una|audits cnmnnun|ca(iog�md|ngsand reuommendaUonaio�hePrasid�n\ and department management. ARTHUR ANDERSEN & M-1S79ke1g82 Audit Staff 0 Served companies in rnanufactu ring, construction, service and other industries, Agenda Item G2 SUMMARY OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS AccoutI109 and Finance 04 istants. 9 - 4 Mana&d accodritiqffinance" deOAAellts kith LIP to s e ass nents and other reports as Managed, prepared and interpreted monthly financial stater requested by chief executive. Th coordinated assistance to external auditors, was able t a ccelerate completion of the audit by weeks over the y ear prior to hit ; joining the organization, Prepared proposal packages and negotiated bank, SBA and alternative financing arrangements, that enabled the company to grow to meet the demands for its services. Negotiated three increasingly larger bank lines of credit and purchase of an office building. Acquisition accounting f $ billion health care company Developed financial budgets, projection-,; arid cash flow analysis. • Assisted treasury management for an organization w ill, $Sa million in cash resources Information systerns Acceptance testing in structured user test environment installed complete job-cost accounting system for Professional services firma. Designed and installed complete accounting system for .1 start-up business which grew to generate $3.5M annually. d and package accounting software systems. Implemented combination custom- designe Hurnan Resources • Coordinated the Human Re source function f a s t ar t - up company with multi operations and multiple Offices. • Authored Affirmative Action pl will, city human rights department enabling government contracts. implemented 401K, Pension and Section 125 Cafeteria benefits plans. Implemented, negotiated and administered company health plans. TECHNICAL SUMMARY Applications: MS Access, MS Excel, MS Word. MS Query, Lolus'123, WordPerfect TimeSheel Accounting Systems: 'Timberline, Axiurn Protrax, Lawson. 8131", Peachtree, Quick Books, Matrix, Logic Associates EDUCATION University of North Dakota Grand Forks, North Dakota — 1977 to 1979 _�, in accounting All course work completed towards t4aster of Science degree University of North Dakota Grand Forks, North Dakota — 1970 to 19'7 B Of Science in Public Administration Professional Certifications: Passed the Uniform Certified Public Accountant Exam, May 1979 Passed the Certificate in Management Accounting Exam, June - 1981 VOLUNTEER NORTH SUBURBAN SOCCER ASSOCIATION 2004 to Present — Treasurer 199710 21)03 — Coach 2001 to Present - Referee Agenda Item H1 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works /City Engineer DuWayne Konewko, Environmental Manager Jon Jarosch, Civil Engineer I SUBJECT: Proposed Right of Way Ordinance — First Reading DATE: February 27, 2007 INTRODUCTION The public rights -of -way are used to locate public utilities such as storm sewer, sanitary sewer, watermain, telephone, electric, gas, and other utilities. Sharing these same rights -of -way are the City's street, sidewalk, and trail networks. During the course of a year there are numerous intrusions into the right -of- way that are necessary to install, repair, or remove utilities. Each intrusion into the right -of -way has the potential to degrade the useful life of the right -of -way. This ordinance is necessary to provide for the safety of the public, protect the structural integrity of our streets, and ensure the appropriate use of the right -of -way. By adopting this ordinance, the City will be able to maintain its right -of -way in a state of good repair and free from unnecessary encumbrances. A copy of the proposed ordinance is included as an attachment. The Right of Way Ordinance imposes reasonable fees and regulations on the placement and maintenance of utilities and equipment in the right -of -way. The proposed ordinance also requires restoration of the right - of -way upon completion of the work. The fees charged will allow the City to recover the costs associated with the management of the City's right -of -way. In drafting this ordinance, staff reviewed a number of existing cities' Right of Way Ordinances and visited with personnel in those cities that were responsible for administering the ordinance. Staff also utilized the template that was developed by the League of Minnesota Cities. The proposed Right of Way Ordinance has been reviewed by the City Attorney and staff has incorporated the recommended changes as advised by the attorney. BACKGROUND Currently, the City's rights -of -way have been managed without the use of an ordinance and thus, it has been very difficult to place restrictions on work to be performed in the right -of -way. This lack of control results in the early deterioration of our street network and rights -of -way in general. The proposed ordinance will establish standards that right -of -way users must adhere to. The City of Maplewood holds the right -of -way within its geographical boundaries as an asset in trust for its citizens. The City and other public entities have invested millions of dollars in public funds to build and maintain the right -of -way. It also recognizes that some persons, by placing their equipment in the right -of- way and charging the citizens of the City for goods and services delivered thereby, are using this property held for the public good. Although such services are often necessary or convenient for the citizens, such persons receive revenue and/or profit through their use of public property. Although the installation of such Agenda Item H1 service delivery facilities are in most cases necessary and a proper use of the right -of -way, the City must manage and regulate such uses. DISCUSSION Permitting and Registration The Right of Way Ordinance is centered on a permitting process. A permit will be required before any intrusion into the right -of -way or obstruction of the right -of -way may occur. By implementing a permit process the City will obtain, prior to any work being done in the right -of -way, location of the work, information regarding the work to be performed and the name of the contractor performing the work. It will also allow the City to coordinate projects with other right -of -way users to minimize intrusions and obstructions of the right -of -way. All contractors will be required to fill out a registration form along with posting a $75,000 performance bond with the City prior to performing any work in the right -of -way. A copy of the proposed fee schedule is also attached for your review. Standards of Construction The ordinance implements standards of construction which will ensure that the work performed will not reduce the life of the right -of -way, nor will it endanger the safety of the public. Work performed will be inspected by the City to ensure its compliance with these standards. Drawings and details for the reconstruction and repair of Maplewood's right -of -way are attached and included in the proposed Right of Way Ordinance. These standard plates, 1 -13, were drafted by the Minnesota Office of Pipeline Safety. The City in turn modified these plates to feature various provisions and specifications outlined in the ordinance. Right -of -Way Restoration The Right -of -Way Ordinance applies set standards for the restoration of the right -of -way. The level of restoration necessary for a particular portion of the right -of -way is dependent on the age of that portion and whether it falls in the two or five year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). If the pavement is newer the level of restoration work will be high. If it is older the level of restoration will be less. The level of restoration of the right -of -way is defined within the thirteen standard plates. The goal of the restoration is to return the pavement and foundation to the same condition and life expectancy that existed before the excavation. Mapping and Reporting The ordinance requires right -of -way users to provide mapping data that includes the location, depth, size, and type of facilities installed within the right -of -way. This will give us a better idea of what is installed in our rights -of -way and the ability to coordinate installations of other facilities in the future. Due to a recent change in the law regarding location of utilities (Minnesota Office of Pipeline Safety — Gopher State One Call) the City is responsible for locating all utilities in the right -of -way which were built after January 1, 2006. The adoption of the Right of Way Ordinance will provide the City with the necessary information to begin the task of mapping the activity in the City's right -of -way. This information will allow the City to better manage and respond to emergencies in the right -of -way. Proposed Timeline Schedule The timeline schedule for council adoption of the Right of Way Ordinance is as follows: • Publish notification for public hearing in official city newspaper on February 28 and March 7, 2007; • First reading of proposed Right of Way Ordinance will occur on March 12, 2007; • Second reading and adoption will take place on March 26, 2007; • Effective date of ordinance will be April 30, 2007. Agenda Item H1 Applicability of Ordinance This ordinance is necessary to ensure the longevity of our rights -of -way throughout the City and for the safety of the public. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that council consider adoption of the Right of Way Ordinance. Direction on the revisions to this draft will be incorporated by staff and the final revision prepared for review and publication as part of the final (second) reading on March 26, 2007. The effective date of adoption is April 30, 2007. Attachment: 1. Proposed Right of Way Ordinance 2. Permit Fee Schedule 3. Maplewood Standard Plates (1 -13) I.. City of Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota An ordinance to enact a new Section of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances to administer and regulate the public rights -of -way (Generally hereinafter called ROW) in the public interest, and to provide for the issuance and regulation of ROW permits. THE COUNCIL OF MAPLEWNOOD ORDAINS: Article I. In General, Section 32 -4 through Section 32 -26, City of Maplewood, County of Ramsey, Minnesota, "Right -of -Way Ordinance" is herewith adopted into city code. Any and all previously adopted sections or articles which may appear contrary or in conflict with this ordinance are hereby replaced or modified by this code. SEC. 32-4. FINDINGS, PURPOSE AND INTENT. The City of Maplewood holds the ROW within its geographical boundaries as an asset in trust for its citizens. The City and other public entities have invested millions of dollars in public funds to build and maintain the ROW. It also recognizes that some persons, by placing their equipment in the ROW and charging the citizens of the City for goods and services delivered thereby, are using this property held for the public good. Although such services are often necessary or convenient for the citizens, such persons receive revenue and/or profit through their use of public property. Although the installation of such service delivery facilities are in most cases necessary and proper use of the ROW, the City must regulate and manage such uses. To provide for the health, safety and well -being of its citizens and to ensure the structural integrity of its streets and the appropriate use of ROW, the City strives to keep its ROW in a state of good repair and free from unnecessary encumbrances. Although the general population bears the financial burden for the upkeep of the ROW, one of the causes for the early and excessive deterioration of its ROW is frequent excavation or other intrusions into its sub - surface area. This Article imposes reasonable fees and regulations on the placement and maintenance of equipment currently within its ROW or to be placed therein at some future time. It is intended to complement the regulatory roles of state, federal and other agencies. Under this Article, persons I.. disturbing and obstructing the ROW will bear a fair share of the financial responsibility for its integrity. This Article also provides for recovery of the City's costs associated with managing its ROW. SEC. 32 -5. DEFINITIONS. The following words, terms and phrases, as used herein, have the following meanings: Abandoned Facility - (1) a facility no longer in service and physically disconnected from a portion of the operating facility, or from any other facility, that is in use or still carries service; or (2) a facility that is deemed abandoned by the ROW user. City - means the corporate municipality, its elected officials, its manager and/or appointed employees to include the Director of Public Works or his /her designee, City of Maplewood, Minnesota. City Management Costs - the actual costs incurred by the City for public ROW management; including, but not limited to, costs associated with registering applicants seeking permission to excavate or obstruct a ROW; issuing, processing and verifying ROW permit applications; inspecting job sites and restoration projects; maintaining, supporting, protecting or moving user equipment during public ROW work; determining the adequacy of ROW restoration; restoring work inadequately performed after providing notice and opportunity to correct the work; mapping of "as built" locations of facilities located in ROW; and revoking ROW permits and performing all other functions required by this Article, including other costs the City may incur in managing the provisions of this Article. Degradation — means a decrease in the useful life of the ROW caused by excavation in or disturbance of the ROW, resulting in the need to reconstruct such ROW earlier than would be required if the excavation or disturbance did not occur. This condition is only applicable in ROW's that are not included in the current 5 -year street replacement plan scheduled for full removal and reconstruction. Degradation Cost — subject to Minnesota Rules 7819.1100 means the cost to achieve a level of restoration, as determined by the city at the time the permit is issued, not to exceed the maximum restoration shown on Maplewood plates 1 to 13, and set forth in Minnesota Rules parts 7819.9900 to 7819.9950. 2 I.. Degradation Fee — Means the estimated fee established at the time of permitting by the city to recover costs associated with the decrease in the useful life of the ROW caused by the excavation, and which equals the degradation cost. Delay Penalty - the penalty imposed as a result of unreasonable delays in ROW construction. Director - the City's Director of Public Works or his /her designee. Emergency - a condition that (1) poses a clear and immediate danger to life or health, or of a significant loss of property; or (2) requires immediate repair or replacement in order to restore service to a customer. Emergency Hole - excavation of a hole necessitated by a condition creating a clear and immediate threat to life, health, safety or property or requiring immediate repair or replacement in order to restore service to a customer. Engineer — the City's Director of Public Works or his /her designee. Equipment - any tangible asset used to install, repair or maintain facilities in any ROW. Excavate - to dig into or in any way remove or physically disturb or penetrate any part of a ROW. Excavation Permit - a permit which must be obtained before a person may excavate in a ROW. An excavation permit allows the holder to excavate only in that part of the ROW described in the permit. Facility or Facilities - any tangible asset in the ROW required to provide utility service. Franchise — any person or entity with tangible assets or equipment in the ROW for the purpose of providing utility service to the general public having been previously approved by the city by written agreement, contract or by franchise ordinance. Hole - an excavation having a length on the long side that is less than 2 times the dimension of the width of the excavation and that conforms to O.S.H.A. standards. Obstruct - to place any tangible object in a public ROW so as to hinder free and open passage over that or any part of the ROW for an aggregate period of five (5 ) hours or more in conjunction with the issuance of a ROW permit. I.. Obstruction Permit - a permit which must be obtained before a person may obstruct a ROW, allowing the holder to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of that ROW by placing equipment described therein on the ROW for the duration specified in the permit. Patch or Patching - a method of pavement replacement that is considered temporary in nature. A patch consists of (1) the compaction of the sub base and aggregate base, and (2) the replacement in kind, to match the existing pavement per Maplewood Plates 1 -13. A patch shall be considered "full restoration" only if the pavement is included in the City's five year project plan. Pavement Repair Plates — Drawings and details for the reconstruction and repair of Maplewood ROW pavements (all types) that are herewith copied and adopted from the original thirteen (13) plates as suggested and provided by the Minnesota Office of Pipeline Safety and any supplemental additions as provided by the City of Maplewood. Permit Holder - any person to whom a permit to excavate or place equipment or facilities in a ROW has been granted by the City under this Article. Person — a private individual or authorized representative or agent of an entity subject to all laws and rules of this state, however organized, whether public or private, whether domestic or foreign, whether for profit or nonprofit, and whether natural, corporate, or political. Registrant - any person or entity that digs, excavates, intrudes or has or seeks to have its facilities or equipment located in any ROW for temporary or permanent placement. Restoration or "Full Restoration" - the process by which the ROW and surrounding area, including pavement, foundation, and turf areas is returned to the same or better condition and life expectancy that existed immediately before excavation. Restoration Cost - the amount of money paid to the City by a permit holder to have the city or its designated contractor perform the work to achieve the required level of restoration according to Maplewood plates 1 to 13, which are attached hereto and incorporated herein. ROW — (Right -of -Way) - the area on, below, or above a public roadway, highway, street, cart way, bicycle lane, and public sidewalk in which the City has an interest, including other dedicated ROW for travel purposes andlor utility easements of the City. 4 I.. ROW Engineer — that person or persons appointed, directed and empowered by the Director of Public Works to administrate the management of the Office of the Right -of -Way Engineer and those necessary responsibilities empowered by the City ROW Ordinance. ROW Permit - either an excavation permit or obstruction permit, or both, depending on the context required by this Article. ROW User - (1) a telecommunications ROW user as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 237.162, subdivision 4; or (2) a person owning or controlling a facility in the public ROW that is used or is intended to be used for providing utility service, and who has a right under the law, franchise or ordinance to use the public ROW. Trench - an excavation having a length that is in excess of two (2) times the width of the excavation for the sections of roadway where the work is occurring, including a directional bore. Utility or Utility Service — means services provided by: (1) a public utility as defined in Minnesota Statutes; (2) a telecommunications, pipeline, community television antenna system, fire and alarm communications, water, sewer, storm sewer, electricity, light, heat, cooling energy, or power services including wind generation; (3) a corporation organized for the purposes set forth in Minnesota Statutes; (4) a district heating or cooling system; or (5) a cable communication system as defined in Minnesota Statutes. Wireless Telecommunication Facility - a tangible asset used to provide wireless telecommunication or data services, including all antennas, support devices, equipment including ground equipment, associated cables, and attachments. SEC. 32 -6. REGISTRATION. (a) Registration Required Prior to Work. No one shall construct, install, repair, remove, relocate or perform any work within any ROW without first being registered pursuant to this Section. Such registration shall be made on an application form provided by the City's Department of Public Works and shall be accompanied by the registration fee set forth in this Code. Registration and the accompanying fee shall be required each calendar year. A franchised service or utility service operating under this section shall be registered pursuant to this Section but need not annually 10110M provide registration information as required by subsection (c) of this Section if such information has been submitted pursuant to a franchise agreement or ordinance. Further, a franchised service or utility service operating pursuant to a franchise agreement or ordinance shall be exempt from payment of an annual registration fee providing said franchise fee has been paid per written agreement or ordinance. (b) Exceptions. The following are not subject to the requirements of this Section: (1) Person or Persons planting or maintaining pre - approved boulevard surface plantings or gardens. (2) Person or Persons installing mail boxes or private sidewalk from street or curb to dwelling or commercial structure. (3) Person or Persons engaged in commercial or private snow removal activities. (4) Person or Persons installing street furnishings. (5) Person or Persons installing irrigation systems. (6) City of Little Canada* (7) City of Maplewood (8) City of North Saint Paul* (9) City of Oakdale* (10) City of Saint Paul* (11) City of Woodbury* (12) Saint Paul Regional Water Services* (13) Persons acting as agents, contractors or subcontractors for a registrant who has properly registered in accordance with this Section. * See Appendix I (c) Registration Information. The registrant shall provide the following at the time of registration and shall promptly notify the City of changes in such information: (1) Registrant's name, address, telephone number, facsimile number and Gopher One Call registration certificate number if required by state law. z 110110M (2) Name, address, telephone number and facsimile number of the person responsible for fulfilling the obligations of the registrant. (3) Unless exempted by previous or existing agreements or ordinance, a current Certificate of Insurance from a company licensed to do business in the State of Minnesota providing minimum coverage in the following amounts: GENERAL LIABILITY: Public Liability, including premises, products and complete operations Bodily Injury Liability - $1,000,000 each person, $3,000,000 each occurrence Property Damage Liability - $3,000,000 each occurrence In lieu of (1) and (2) Bodily Injury and Property Damage Combined - $3,000,000 single limit COMPREHENSIVE: Automobile Liability Insurance, including owned, non -owned and hired vehicles. Bodily Injury Liability - $1,000,000 each person, $3,000,000 each occurrence Property Damage Liability - $3,000,000 each occurrence In lieu of (1) and (2) Bodily Injury and Property Damage Combined - $3,000,000 single limit Such certificate shall verify that the registrant is insured against claims for personal injury, including death, as well as claims for property damage arising out of the (i) use and occupancy of the ROW by the registrant, its officers, agents, employees and permit holders, and (ii) placement and use of equipment or facilities in the ROW by the registrant, its officers, agents, employees and permit holders, including but not limited to, protection against liability arising from completed operations, damage of underground equipment and collapse of property. Such certificate shall also name the City as an additional insured as to whom the coverage required herein are in force and applicable and for whom defense will be provided as to all such coverage. Such certificate shall require that the City be notified thirty (30) days prior to cancellation of the policy. (4) A 24 hour emergency number. (5) An acknowledgment by the registrant of the indemnification pursuant to this Code. 7 I.. (6) Such additional information as the City may require. SEC. 32 -7. FRANCHISE REPORTING OBLIGATIONS. Each franchise registrant shall, at the time of registration and not later than November 1 st of the preceding year, file a proposed construction and major maintenance plan for underground facilities with the City. Such plan shall be submitted using a format designated by the City and shall contain the information determined by the City to be necessary to facilitate construction coordination and reduction in the frequency of excavations and obstructions of ROW. The plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following information: (a) To the extent known, the locations and the estimated beginning and ending dates of all projects to be commenced during the next calendar year; and (b) To the extent known, the tentative locations and estimated beginning and ending dates for all projects contemplated for the five years following the next calendar year. The City will have available for inspection in the Engineer's office a composite list of all known or planned projects that have been adopted for the next calendar year. All registrants are responsible for keeping themselves informed of the current status of this improvement list. Each franchise registrant must notify the City immediately of any change in its list of planned projects. SEC. 32 -5. PERMIT REQUIREMENT. (a) Permit Required. No person may obstruct or excavate any ROW without first having been issued the appropriate ROW permit pursuant to this Section, except as otherwise provided in this Code. (1) Excavation Permit. An excavation permit is required by the registrant to excavate that part of the ROW described in each permit that may hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of the ROW when placing or repairing facilities therein, to the extent and for the duration specified in the permit. (2) Obstruction /Aerial /Interduct Permit. An obstruction /aerial /interduct permit is required by a registrant if the work proposed may hinder free and open passage over the specified portion 8 I.. of ROW by placing or repairing equipment described therein within the ROW, to the extent and for the duration specified in the permit. An obstruction /aerial /interduct permit is not required if a registrant has been issued a valid excavation permit for the same project. (3) Pole Attachment Permit. A pole attachment permit is required by the registrant in order to attach a wireless telecommunication facility to an existing public utility structure in the public ROW. A pole attachment permit is not required if a registrant has been issued a valid excavation permit for the same project. (b) Permit Extension. No person may excavate or obstruct the ROW beyond the date or dates specified in the permit or do any work outside the area specified in the permit unless such person makes a supplementary application before the expiration of the permit. Payment of all fees for an extension of the permit is required before extension may be granted by the City; If the work could not be completed because of circumstances beyond the control of the permit holder or the work was delayed or prohibited by unseasonable or unreasonable conditions, the City may grant and extend the completion date of the work. (c) Delay Penalty. Notwithstanding Subsection (b) of this Section, the City may impose a delay penalty where excavating or obstruction work in the ROW is not completed within the time specified if no permit extension application has been made prior to the expiration date of the permit. A delay penalty will not be imposed if the delay is due to circumstances beyond the control of the applicant, including without limitation inclement weather, acts of God, or civil strife. (d) Application and Fee. An application for a ROW permit shall be made on forms provided by the City and shall be accompanied by a fee as set forth in this Code established to reimburse the City for costs. A person who pays a franchise fee to the City in accordance with a franchise agreement shall be exempt from the payment of permit fees. If the work is to be performed by an agent, contractor, or subcontractor on behalf of the registrant, such application shall be signed by the registrant. The application shall also be accompanied by the following: (1) Scaled drawings showing the location of all known existing facilities and improvements proposed by the applicant. The applicant will be requested to submit in English measurement two (2) paper copies at 1" = 50' scale plans at the smallest and /or one (1) I I.. copy in Auto CAD format (Ramsey County Coordinate system) with X, Y, Z dimensions to 1 foot accuracy electronic plan. All plans must be dimensional and show existing utilities, curb and gutter, sidewalks, bikeways, signal poles, driveways, boxes, relevant structures, property lines and corners and property addresses. (2) A description of the methods that will be used for installation. (3) A proposed schedule for all work. (4) The location of any public streets, sidewalks or alleys that will be temporarily closed to traffic during the work and proposed detour route with appropriate signage. (5) A description of methods for restoring any public improvements disrupted by the work. (6) Any other information reasonably required by the City. (e) Security. A performance bond and cash deposit in an amount determined by the City shall be required from each applicant. The applicant, at its option, may post security sufficient to cover all projects contemplated for the current calendar year. The performance bond must be approved by the City Attorney. Security required pursuant to this Subsection shall be conditioned that the holder will perform the work in accordance with this Article and applicable regulations and will pay to the City any costs incurred by the City in performing work pursuant to this Article. Said conditions will indemnify and save the City and its officers, agents and employees harmless against any and all claims, judgment or other costs arising from any excavation and related work covered by the ROW permit. And to include further indemnification by reason of any accident or injury to persons or property through the fault of the permit holder, either for improperly fencing and guarding the excavation or for any other injury resulting from the negligence or willful actions of the permit holder. The bond or any unused portions of a cash deposit shall be released by the City upon completion of the work and compliance with all conditions imposed by the ROW permit. For permits allowing excavations within public streets, such bond or unused part of a cash deposit shall be held for a period of twenty -four (24) months to guaranty adequacy of all restoration work. (f) Permit Issuances; Conditions. The City shall grant a ROW permit upon finding the work will comply with the requirements of this Article. The City may impose reasonable conditions upon the issuance of the permit and the performance of the applicant there under to protect the public 10 I.. health, safety and welfare, to insure the structural integrity of the ROW, to insure completion of restoration of the ROW within a specified period, to protect the property and safety of other users of the ROW and to minimize the disruption and inconvenience to the traveling public. If it is determined by the Office of the ROW Engineer that the proposed ROW intrusion or use is not in the best interest of the city and no agreement or alternative compromise solution is feasible, the applicant may appeal the Engineers decision to the Director of Public Works. Should the issue there remain un- resolved, the applicant may then request to address the case before the Maplewood City Council for final disposition. If the applicant's ROW permit application is terminated at any given level, the city may at its discretion, elect to grant a partial refund of fees that may have been paid but shall not disburse any part of the basic Registration Fee nor more that 50% of the Administrative Fees. No ROW permit shall be issued to any person who has failed to register pursuant to this code. (g) Exceptions. No permit shall be required for the following: (1) Approved surface landscaping work. (2) Approved private sidewalks, street furnishings, posts and pillars. (3) Snow removal activities. (4) Irrigation systems provided that the system does not connect directly to water mains in the ROW installed at the property owner risk. (5) Activities of the City of Maplewood. (6) If granted approval by the city, piercing, drilling or opening a street or sidewalk/trail pavement for the purpose of exploratory examination or utility depth determination. SEC. 32 -9. TIMELINESS OF WORK. The work to be done under the ROW permit and the patching and restoration of the ROW as required herein, must be completed within the dates specified in the permit. It may be increased by as many days as work could not be done because of circumstances beyond the control of the permit holder or when work was prohibited as unseasonable or unreasonable. 11 I.. SEC. 32 -10. STANDARDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OR INSTALLATION. (a) General Standards. The permit holder shall comply with the following standards when performing the work authorized under the permit: (1) Take such precautions as are necessary to avoid creating unsanitary or unsafe conditions. Observe and comply with all laws, rules and regulations of the State and local governments. (2) Conduct the operations and perform the work in a manner as to insure the least obstruction to and interference with traffic. (3) Take adequate precautions to insure the safety of the general public and those who require access to abutting property. (4) Notify adjoining property owners prior to commencement of work which may disrupt the use of and access to such adjoining properties. (5) Comply with the Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices at all times during construction or installation. (6) Exercise precaution at all times for the protection of persons, including employees and property. (7) Protect and identify excavations and work operations with barricade flags and if required, by flagmen in the daytime and by warning lights at night. (8) Provide proper trench protection as required by O.S.H.A.. (9) Protect the root growth of trees and shrubbery. (10) Where possible, provide for space in the installation area for other telecommunication ROW users and companies which install facilities in public ROW. (11) Maintain maximum access to all properties and cross streets as possible during construction operations and maintain emergency vehicle access at all times. (12) Maintain planned alignment and grade unless otherwise authorized by the City. Field changes not approved by the City will require removal and reconstruction. (13) During trenching of facilities, a warning tape must be placed at a depth of twelve (12) inches above all copper cables with over two hundred (200) pairs and above any fiber facilities. 12 I.. (14) Beneath concrete or bituminous paved road surfaces, directional bore facilities shall be installed in conduit of a type approved by the city. (15) The placing of all telecommunications facilities must comply with the National Electric Safety Code, as incorporated by reference in Minn. Stat. Sec. 326.243. (16) Locate all property lines near ROW lines and replace any disturbed property corner markers or judicial monuments. A Minnesota licensed surveyor must be used. (17) Excavations, trenches and jacking pits off the roadway or adjacent to the roadway or curbing shall be sheathed and braced depending upon location and soil stability and as directed by the City. (18) Excavating, trenches and jacking pits shall be protected when unattended to prevent entrance of surface drainage. (19) All backfilling materials must be placed in 1 foot (12 ") lifts (maximum) at optimum moisture and compacted with the objective of attaining ninety -five percent (95 %) of Standard Proctor Density. Compaction shall be accomplished with hand, pneumatic or vibrating compactors as appropriate. (20) Backfill material shall be subject to the approval of the City. The City may permit backfilling with the material from the excavation provided such material is granular in nature and acceptable to the City. (21) Compacted Backfill shall be brought to bottom of the gravel of the approved street section. (22) All work performed in the ROW shall be done in conformance with Maplewood Plates 1 to 13, unless a less stringent standard is approved by the City. (23) Street and pedestrian traffic shall be maintained throughout construction unless provided otherwise by the permit. (24) No road surface damaging lugs, cleats or equipment may be used or driven upon paved city street surfaces. (25) Dirt, trash or other debris must be periodically removed during construction (26) Other reasonable standards and requirements of the City. 13 I.. (b) Standards for Installation of Underground Utilities. The permit holder shall comply with the following standards when installing facilities underground: (1) Underground facilities must be placed as far off the roadway as possible to provide access from outside of the paved area. (2) Buried fiber facilities shall be at a minimum depth of three (3) feet and a maximum depth of four (4) feet unless an alternate location is approved by the City. Buried copper facilities beneath concrete or bituminous paved road surfaces must be placed at no less than three (3) feet but no more than four (4) feet deep. Other buried copper facilities must be placed at a minimum depth of thirty (30) inches and a maximum depth of four (4) feet. (3) Crossing of streets and hard surfaced driveways shall be directional bored unless otherwise approved by the City. (4) If construction is open cut, the permit holder must install the visual tracers approximately twelve (12) inches above buried facilities. If other construction methods are used, substitute location methods will be considered. (5) The permit holder shall register with Gopher State One Call and comply with the requirements of that system. (6) Compaction in trench backfill material shall be ninety -five percent (95 %) of the standard proctor density and copies of test results shall be submitted to the City. All tests and their locations shall be determined by the City. Tests must be conducted by an independent testing firm approved by the City. Street pavement replacement will not be permitted until sub -base densities are approved by the city. Testing shall be performed at the discretion of the ROW engineer. Street Pavement structure and materials shall be as specified by the city and re -paved in accordance with Maplewood plates 1 -13. All pavement replacement shall be done in the presence of a City inspector with certified pavement material to City specifications. 14 I.. (7) The facilities shall be located so as to avoid traffic signals and signs which are generally placed a minimum of five (5) feet behind the curb. (8) When utilizing trenchless installation methods to cross an area in which a municipal utility is located, and /or when directed by the City, the permit holder shall excavate an observation hole over the utility to ensure that the City utility is not damaged. Observation holes shall not be backfilled until viewed and approved by the city ROW Inspector. (9) All junction boxes or access points shall be located no closer than ten (10) feet from municipal fire hydrants, valves, manholes, lift stations or catch basins unless an alternate location is approved by the City. (10) Underground facilities shall not be installed between a hydrant and an auxiliary valve. (11) Underground facilities shall not be installed within five (5) feet of hydrants, valves, lift stations or manholes in areas where utility easements exist beyond the ROW. In those areas in which no utility easement exists, placement of an underground facility shall be between the edge of pavement and no closer than three (3) feet to an existing municipal utility appurtenance unless approved by the City. (12) In areas where an extensive effort to determine the location of municipal utility lines will be required to accommodate the installation of private facilities, the City's representative for Gopher State One Call must be contacted by the permit holder two (2) weeks prior to the beginning of the work to schedule meetings. (13) Buried telecommunication facilities must have a locating wire or conductive shield, except for di- electric cables. (14) Buried fiber facilities must be placed in a conduit of a type determined by the ROW user unless the permit holder obtains a waiver from the City. (c) Standards for Installation of Overhead Facilities. The permit holder shall comply with the following standards when installing facilities overhead: (1) All wires must be a minimum of eighteen (18) feet above ground and at a location that does not interfere with traffic signals, overhead signs, or street lights. 15 I.. (d) Standards for Wireless Telecommunication Facilities. (1) Purpose. The City of Maplewood desires high quality wireless communication services to accommodate the needs of residents and businesses. At the same time, the City strives to minimize the negative impacts that wireless telecommunication facilities can have on aesthetics and public safety. Due to the many services that must be delivered within its limited area, the City also strives to avoid unnecessary encumbrances within the public ROW. The City allows and regulates wireless telecommunication facilities outside of the public ROW through performance standards and height limits. The purpose of this Section is to regulate wireless telecommunication facilities within the public ROW in a manner that balances desire for service with aesthetic, public safety, and ROW flexibility concerns. Public ROW are appropriate locations for wireless telecommunication facilities that present minimal impacts (i.e. small pole attachments that do not require new poles, do not require pole extensions, and do not have associated ground mounted equipment). Wireless telecommunication facilities that require greater heights than can be afforded by existing poles in the public ROW and that require ground mounted equipment are more appropriately sited outside the public ROW in accordance with adopted performance standards of this Code. However, the City recognizes that as wireless technology advances, some residential areas of the City may be hard to serve with wireless technology due to the lack of acceptable siting alternatives in the immediate vicinity. In such areas, where no alternative non -ROW locations are available, wireless telecommunication facilities that require pole extensions and ground equipment will be allowed in the public ROW subject to the requirements of this Section which are meant to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. (2) Wireless Telecommunication Facilities as Pole Attachments. Wireless telecommunication facilities that comply with the following requirements may be attached to existing public utility structures within the ROW after issuance of a pole attachment permit. (A) The wireless telecommunication facility shall not extend above the top of the existing public utility structure and the height of the existing public utility structure shall not be increased to accommodate the wireless telecommunication facility. 16 I.. (B) If the public utility structure must be replaced to structurally accommodate the wireless telecommunication facility, the replacement public utility structure height shall not exceed the existing public utility structure height and the replacement public utility structure diameter shall not exceed the existing public utility structure diameter by more than 50 percent. (C) The wireless telecommunication facility shall not be larger than three (3) cubic feet and shall have no individual surface larger than four (4) square feet. (d) The wireless telecommunication facility shall not extend outward from the existing pole or tower or arm thereof by more than two and one half (2 112) feet, except that an antenna one half inch in diameter or less may extend an additional six inches. (E) The wireless telecommunication facility shall include no ground mounted equipment. (F) The wireless telecommunication facility shall not interfere with public safety communications and shall meet the requirements of this Code. (G) Wireless telecommunication facilities in the ROW shall be removed and relocated at City request subject to the provisions of this Article. (H) The wireless telecommunication facility shall not block light emanating from the public utility structure and shall not otherwise interfere with the original use of the public utility structure. (3) Wireless Telecommunication Facilities as Pole Extensions or with Ground Mounted Equipment. Wireless telecommunication facilities that require increased public utility structure height or that have ground mounted equipment may be erected in the public ROW only when in compliance with the following provisions and after issuance of a pole attachment permit or excavation permit: (A) The applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City or his/her designee that the wireless telecommunication facility cannot be placed in a Code complying location outside the ROW within one quarter (1/4) mile of the proposed location. 17 I.. (B) The replacement public utility structure, including lightning rods and all other attachments, shall not exceed the height of the existing public utility structure by more than fifteen (15) feet. Once the height of a public utility structure has been increased under the provisions of this Section, the height shall not be further increased. (C) The replacement public utility structure diameter shall not exceed the existing public utility structure diameter by more than fifty (50) percent. (d) The wireless telecommunication facility shall not extend outward from the public utility structure by more than two (2) feet. (E) If feasible and desirable, as determined by the City, the replacement public utility structure shall match the original and surrounding public utility structures in materials and color. (F) The wireless telecommunication facility shall not interfere with public safety communications and shall meet the requirements of this Code. (G) A pole attachment or excavation permit for a wireless telecommunication facility that has ground mounted equipment will be issued only if the Issuing Authority finds the following: (i) the ground mounted equipment will not disrupt traffic or pedestrian circulation; (ii) the ground mounted equipment will not create a safety hazard; (iii) the location of the ground mounted equipment minimizes impacts on adjacent • ••- • (iv) the ground mounted equipment will not adversely impact the health, safety, or welfare of the community. (H) Ground mounted equipment associated with the wireless telecommunication facility shall meet the following performance standards: (i) be set back a minimum of ten (10) feet from the edge of street or curb line; (ii) be separated from a sidewalk by a minimum of three (3) feet; (iii) be set back a minimum of fifty (50) feet from the nearest intersecting ROW line; In I.. (iv) be separated from the nearest ground mounted wireless telecommunication equipment installation on the same block face by a minimum of 330 feet unless the equipment is placed underground; (v) if located adjacent to residential uses, ground mounted equipment shall be limited to three (3) feet in height above grade and twenty seven (27) cubic feet in cumulative size; (vi) if located adjacent to non - residential uses, ground mounted equipment shall be limited to five (5) feet in height above grade and eighty -one (81) cubic feet in cumulative size; (Vii) ground mounted equipment located outside the public ROW shall conform to the requirements of this Code. (viii) vegetative or other screening compatible with the surrounding area shall be provided around the ground mounted equipment if deemed necessary by the City. (1) Wireless telecommunication facilities in the ROW shall be removed and relocated at City request subject to the provisions of this Article. (4) New Poles. The construction in the ROW of a new pole to support wireless telecommunication facilities is not allowed, except as a replacement of an existing public utility structure subject to the requirements of this Section. (5) Charges. In addition to the permit fees outlined in this Code, the City reserves the right to charge telecommunication providers for their use of the public ROW to the extent that such charges are allowed under state law. Telecommunication providers shall be responsible for payment of property taxes attributable to their equipment in the public ROW. SEC. 32 -11. PATCHING OR FULL RESTORATION OF ROW. The permit holder shall patch its own work. The City may choose either to have the permit holder complete a full restoration of the ROW or the City may elect to restore the ROW itself. 19 110TIUM (a) City Restoration. If the City restores the ROW, the permit holder shall pay the costs thereof within thirty (30) days of billing. If, during the twenty -four (24) months following such surface restoration, the pavement settles due to the permit holder's improper backfilling and compaction, the permit holder shall pay to the City, within thirty (30) days of billing, all costs associated with having to correct the defective work. (b) Permit Holder Restoration. If the permit holder restores the ROW, it shall at the time of application for a ROW permit post a performance bond or cash deposit in an amount determined by the City to be sufficient to cover the cost of restoration and any associated erosion and sediment control measures. The performance bond or letter of credit must be approved by the City Attorney. If, within twenty -four (24) months after completion of restoration of the ROW, the City determines the ROW has been properly restored, the posted security will be released. (c) Standards. The permit holder shall perform patching and restoration according to the Maplewood standards specified in Plates 1 to 13, which are attached hereto and incorporated herein. (d) Guarantees. If the permit holder performs the restoration work, the permit holder shall guarantee such work and its maintenance for twenty -four (24) months following its completion. During this twenty -four (24) month period it shall, upon notification from the City, promptly and within 7 working days from receipt of notification, correct all faulty restoration work to the extent necessary, using the method required by the City. SEC. 32 -12. JOINT APPLICATIONS. (a) Joint Application. Registrants may jointly apply for permits to excavate or obstruct the ROW at the same place and time. (b) Shared Fees. Registrants who apply for permits for the same obstruction or excavation may share in the payment of the obstruction or excavation permit fee. Registrants must agree among themselves as to the portion each will pay and indicate the same on their applications. SEC. 32 -12. OTHER OBLIGATIONS. (a) Compliance With Other Laws. The permit holder must obtain all other necessary permits, licenses and approvals and pay all fees required. The permit holder shall comply with all 20 110110M requirements of local, state and federal laws, including Minn. Stat. Secs. 216D.01 -.09 ( "One Call Excavation Notice System "). A permit holder shall perform all work in conformance with all applicable codes and established rules and regulations and is responsible for all work done in the ROW pursuant to its permit, regardless of who does the work. Applicants obtaining Ramsey County, local Water Shed Districts, Minnesota Department of Transportation or other state agency excavating permits for facilities in their ROW or easements located within the City must provide a copy of each permit to the City. (b) Prohibited Work. Except in an emergency, and with the approval of the City, no ROW excavation or obstruction may be done when seasonally prohibited or when conditions are unreasonable for such Work. (c) Interference with ROW. A permit holder shall not so obstruct a ROW that the natural free and clear passage of water through the gutters or other waterways shall be interfered with. SEC. 32 -13. DENIAL OF PERMIT. The City may deny a permit based on any of the following grounds: (a) Failure to register pursuant to requirements of this Code. (b) The applicant is subject to revocation of a prior permit issued pursuant to this Article. (c) The proposed schedule for work would conflict or interfere with an exhibition, celebration, festival or any other similar event. (d) The proposed schedule conflicts with scheduled or total or partial reconstruction of the ROW. (e) The applicant fails to comply with the requirements of this Article or other provisions of this Code. (f) The City determines that denial is necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public or protect the ROW and its current use. SEC. 32 -14. EMERGENCIES AND WORK DONE WITHOUT A PERMIT. Each registrant shall immediately notify the City and all other affected parties or property owners of any event regarding its facilities which it considers to be an emergency. The registrant may proceed to take whatever actions are necessary to respond to the emergency. If the registrant has not been issued 21 T.. the required permit, the registrant shall, within two (2) business days after the occurrence of the emergency, apply for the necessary permits, pay the permit fees (where necessary) and fulfill the remaining requirements necessary to bring itself into compliance with this Article for the actions it took in response to the emergency. If the City becomes aware of an emergency regarding a registrant's facilities, the City shall attempt to contact the local representative of each registrant affected, or potentially affected, by the emergency. The City may take whatever action deemed necessary to respond to the emergency, the cost of which shall be borne by the registrant whose facilities occasioned the emergency. Except in an emergency, any person who, without first having obtained the necessary permit, obstructs or excavates a ROW must subsequently obtain a permit and (where appropriate) as a penalty, pay twice the normal fee for the permit and shall deposit with the City the fees determined to correct any damage to the ROW. SEC. 32 -15. INSPECTION. (a) Site Inspection. The permit holder shall make the work site available to the City and to all others authorized by law for inspection at all reasonable times during the execution of and upon completion of the work. (b) Authority of City (1) At the time of inspection, the City may order the immediate cessation of any work which poses a serious threat to the life, health, safety or well -being of the public. (2) The City may issue a stop work order to the permit holder for any work which does not conform to the terms of the permit or other applicable standards, conditions or codes. The order shall state that failure to correct the violation within a stated deadline will be cause for revocation of the permit. If the violation is not corrected within the stated deadline, the City may revoke the permit. SEC. 32 -16. REVOCATION OF PERMITS. (a) Substantial Breach. The City may revoke a ROW permit, without a fee refund, if there is a substantial breach of the terms or conditions of any statute, this Code, rule or regulation, or any 22 I.. condition of the permit. A substantial breach of a permit holder shall include, but not limited to, the `• • • (1) The violation of any material provision of the permit. (2) Any material misrepresentation of fact in the application for a permit. (3) The failure to maintain the required bonds or other security and insurance. (4) The failure to complete the work in a timely manner. (5) The failure to correct, in a timely manner, work that does not conform to applicable standards, conditions or codes, upon inspection and notification by the City of the faulty condition. (6) An evasion or attempt to evade any material provision of the ROW permit, or the perpetration or attempt to perpetrate any fraud or deceit upon the city or its citizens. (7) The failure to comply with the terms and conditions of any applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations, including any provision of this Article. (b) Notice of Breach. If the City determines that a permit holder has committed a substantial breach of a term or condition of any statute, this Code, rule or regulation or any condition of the permit, the City shall make a written demand upon the permit holder to remedy such violation within a reasonable period of time or be subject to potential revocation of the permit. The City may impose additional or revised conditions on the permit to mitigate or remedy the breach. (c) Reimbursement of City Costs. If a permit is revoked, the permit holder shall reimburse the City for its reasonable costs, including restoration costs and the costs of collection and reasonable attorney fees incurred in connection with the revocation. SEC. 32 -17. APPEAL. (a) Filing of Appeal. Any person aggrieved by, (i) the denial of a permit application; (ii) the denial of a registration; (iii) the revocation of a permit, or (iv) the application of the fee schedule imposed by this Code, may appeal to the City Council by filing a written notice of appeal with the City Clerk. Said notice must be filed within twenty (20) days of the action causing the appeal. 23 T.. (b) Notice of Hearing. The City Council shall hear the appeal at its next regularly scheduled meeting, unless the time is extended by agreement of the parties. Notice of the date, time, place and purpose of the hearing shall be mailed to the appellant. (c) Hearing and Decision. The City Council shall, at the hearing, consider any evidence offered by the appellant, the City and any other person wishing to be heard. The Council shall issue a written decision within thirty (30) days of the completion of the hearing. SEC. 32 -18. MAPPING DATA. (a) Information Required. Each registrant shall provide mapping as required by the City and which shall include the following information: (1) Location and approximate depth of registrant's mains, cables, conduits, switches and related equipment and facilities, with the location based on: (A) offsets from property lines, distances from the centerline of the public ROW and curb lines as determined by the City; or (B) Ramsey County Coordinate System; or (C) Any other system agreed upon by the ROW user and the City; (2) The type and size of the utility; (3) A description showing above - ground appurtenances; (4) A legend explaining symbols, characters, abbreviations, scale and other data shown on the .• . We (5) Any facilities to be abandoned, if applicable, in conformance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 216D.04, subdivision 3. (b) Submittal Requirement. (1) Within two (2) years after the effective date of this ordinance, all telecommunication ROW users shall submit comprehensive detailed maps, if available, in accordance with Subsection (a) of this Section, for all facilities and equipment installed, used or abandoned within the public ROW. 24 T.. (2) Subsequent to providing the required comprehensive facility map, interim mapping data shall be submitted by all registrants for all equipment and facilities which are to be installed or constructed after the effective date of this ordinance at such time as permits are sought pursuant to this ordinance. (c) Trade Secret Information. At the request of any registrant, information requested by the City which qualifies as "trade secret" data under Minnesota Statutes, Sec. 13.37(b) shall be treated as trade secret information as detailed therein. SEC. 32 -19. RELOCATION OF FACILITIES. A ROW user shall promptly and at its own expense, with due regard for seasonal working conditions, remove and relocate its' facilities in the ROW when it is necessary to prevent interference or obstruction, but not merely for the convenience of the City, in connection with: (1) a present or future City use of the ROW for a public project or facility, (2) the public health or safety; or (3) the safety and convenience of travel over the ROW. The registrant shall restore any ROW to the condition it was in prior to removal and relocation. SEC. 32 -20. DAMAGE TO OTHER FACILITIES. When the City does work in the ROW and finds it necessary to maintain, support, or move registrants' facilities to protect it, the City shall notify the registrant as soon as possible. The costs associated therewith shall be billed to the registrant and must be paid within thirty (30) days from the date Each registrant shall be responsible for the cost of repairing any facilities in the ROW which it or its facilities damage. Each registrant shall be responsible for the cost of repairing any damage to the facilities of another registrant caused during the City's response to an emergency occasioned by that registrants' facilities. SEC. 32 -21. ROW VACATION. (a) Reservation of Right. If the City vacates a ROW which contains the equipment or facilities of a registrant or permit holder, and if the vacation does not require the relocation of the registrant's or 25 I.. permit holder's equipment or facilities, the City shall reserve, to and for itself and all registrants or permit holders having equipment and facilities in the vacated ROW, the right to install, maintain and operate any equipment and facilities in the vacated ROW and to enter upon such ROW at any time for the purpose of reconstruction, inspecting, maintaining or repairing the same. (b) Relocation of Facilities. If the vacation requires the relocation of the registrant's or permit holder's equipment or facilities; and (i) if the vacation proceedings are initiated by the registrant or permit holder, the registrant or permit holder must pay the relocation costs; or (ii) if the vacation proceedings are initiated by the City, the registrant or permit holder must pay the relocation costs unless otherwise agreed to by the City and the registrant or permit holder; or (iii) if the vacation proceedings are initiated by a person or persons other than the registrant or permit holder, such person or persons must pay the relocation costs. SEC. 32 -22. ABANDONED AND UNUSABLE EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES. (a) Discontinued Operations. A registrant who has determined to discontinue operations in the City must either: (1) Provide information satisfactory to the Director that the registrant's obligations for its equipment and facilities in the right -of -way under this Article have been lawfully assumed by another registrant; or (2) Submit to the Director an action plan for the removal or abandonment of equipment and facilities. The Director shall require removal of such equipment and facilities if the Director determines such removal is necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare. The Director may require the registrant to post a bond in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for reasonably anticipated costs to be incurred in removing the equipment and facilities. (b) Abandoned Facilities. A ROW user shall notify the City when any of its facilities or portions thereof, are proposed to be abandoned, ceased being used or requiring incidental work or repair in part or in total. Excepting where prior written agreements, contracts or ordinances qualify or preclude the following requirements or conditions: 26 I.. (1) If in conjunction with a city approved facility abandonment, re- construction, replacement or if a damaged or obsolete component or is a part of incidental maintenance or routine repair work, said facilities or components thereof shall not be deemed abandoned in place. As may be determined by the city, said facility shall be removed at an approved time or may be designated to be left in place for later removal as may be necessary during the next scheduled city public works improvement construction project. (2) If immediate removal is denied by the city at the time of the request by the ROW user, said ROW user may then be required to render to the city a reasonable fee, as determined by the city, for future removal or salvage by city contracted forces retained for a public improvement. (3) If immediate removal is permitted by the city at the time of request for abandonment by the ROW user, said ROW user shall then be required to pave and/or restore said excavation in accordance with Maplewood Plates 1 -13. Further, said ROW user shall be required to render any and all permit fee or degradation fees as appropriate. (4) Fees for future removal or salvage of abandoned or damaged facilities, in part or in total will be determined by the city at such time as proposed by the ROW user. Considerations for determination will be based on: a. Age, status and condition of road bed and related ROW. b. Location, depth, type, size and length etc. of facility. C. Complexity and logistical problems in each situation. (5) Fees paid and all necessary information, when collected under this article shall be accurately described and noted and maintained for record by the city. Said Fees shall be deposited in an appropriate ROW Reconstruction Fund as determined by the city. Said ROW user and /or its successors or owners shall be deemed fully harmless and non- liable or responsible for future costs or penalties of all necessary construction actions, removals or salvages or emergency repairs of said facilities as described in record. SEC. 32 -23. INDEMNIFICATION AND LIABILITY. By registering with the City or by accepting a permit granted under this Article, a registrant or permit holder agrees as follows: (a) Limitation of Liability. By reason of the acceptance of a registration or the grant of a ROW permit, the City does not assume any liability (i) for injuries to persons, damage to property or loss 27 101MM of service claims by parties other than the registrant or the City, or (ii) for claims or penalties of any sort resulting from the installation, presence, maintenance or operation of equipment or facilities by registrants or permit holders or activities of registrants or permit holders. (b) Indemnification. A registrant or permit holder shall indemnify, keep and hold the City, its officials, employees and agents, free and harmless from any and all costs, liabilities, and claims for damages of any kind arising out of the construction, presence, installation, maintenance, repair or operation of its equipment and facilities, or out of any activity undertaken in or near a ROW, whether or not any act or omission complaint of is authorized, allowed or prohibited by a ROW permit. The foregoing does not indemnify the City for its own negligence except for claims arising out of or alleging the City's negligence in issuing the permit or in failing to properly or adequately inspect or enforce compliance with a term, condition or purpose of a permit. This section is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the registrant, permit holder or the City, and the registrant or permit holder, in defending any action on behalf of the City, shall be entitled to assert in any action every defense or immunity that the City could assert on its own behalf. If the registrant or permit holder is required to indemnify and defend, it shall thereafter have control of the litigation, but the registrant or permit holder may not settle the litigation without the consent of the City. Such consent will not be unreasonably withheld. SEC. 32 -24. FRANCHISE HOLDERS. If there is a conflict in language between the franchise of a person holding a franchise agreement with the City and this Article, the terms of the franchise shall prevail. SEC. 32-25. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Article is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court or administrative agency of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. M [HIMM APPENDIX ESSENTIAL MUNICIPAL SERVICES Special conditions and provisions to regulate and control ROW intrusions by essential service providers for which previous agreements or ordinances have been enacted and approved by the City in concurrence with the respective service providers. 01 Article Participating Municipal Provider A. City of Little Canada B. City of North Saint Paul C. City of Saint Paul D. City of Oakdale E. City of Woodbury F. Saint Paul Regional Water Service 29 ROW Ordinance Proposed Fee Schedule Summary The proposed fees displayed in the table below were calculated to reflect the estimated costs associated with the administration of the ROW Ordinance. A report shall be submitted to Council this fall to determine the effectiveness of this fee schedule at recuperating the administrative costs of the ROW Ordinance. Yearly Registration Fee $40 Excavation Permit Fee (Hole) $100 Excavation Permit Fee (Trench) Hole Fee Plus $60 / 100 Lineal Feet Emergency Excavation Permit Fee $100 Obstruction Permit Fee $80 Permit Extension Fee $35 Delay Penalty Fee(Up to 3 days late) $35 Delay Penalty Fee(after 3 days late) $10 / day Directional Boring/Underground Piercing $ 100 for 1st 100 Lineal Feet $.70 / Lineal Foot thereafter Degradation Fee Determined Case by Case Franchise Fee To be determined The two items in the fee schedule without dollar amounts are determined on a case by case basis. The degradation fee is charged to recuperate costs associated with the loss of useful life of the pavement due to intrusions into the ROW. These fees will be determined on a case by case basis, factoring in the existing life expectancy of the pavement. The franchise fee is a yearly fee paid by franchise holders to operate within the ROW. Franchise agreements will be pursued with the major utilities in the area (Xcel Energy, Comcast, Qwest, Etc.). Staff will work with council and the City's attorney this year to develop a franchise fee schedule. Ld � \� 3 \ L11 L'i Ld LLJ E < 0� z Lo cn > < < z V) m 0 -j m z < L m ui < ® m < \� \ 0 Li y 0 LLJ < < 0 0 LLJ 0 LLJ Of 0� cr cf) < U < LLJ Li Ld U LJ Q� < L'i < LLJ cn LLJ 0 Li 0 0 z z Ui w 3 / ® (10 < m > < Li �j Li V) Li < < Of UJ w 0 0� < > UJ < 0 77 y Li U _ -i LU t'i U J \� 3 3 Of W , _j UJ Li C) < a_ z < z < cr af :�F �- < ui \ / / \� Li U) w a_ U Li a u 0 =1 D D o" LL LL U- z 0 z \.. u < W w Li F- 0 c) 0 0 DESIGN: DATE: 12-06 CITY OF VIAPLEWOOD— ENGINEERING DEPT. PLATE FlLENAME:P:W0RKS\ NO. DRAWN: JEJ CAD\PLATES\ROW TRENCH RESTORATION REVISIONS TYPICAL PAVEMENT 0 TO 5 YEARS OLD \ \ m Ld Ld j \ ) ° z © j \ / \ \ \ e / / } z( § ± \J G Ld \\ ~ } g / of o Elf \\ � \ \ - \ % / / / 4 . /z g z\ ye °/ G \/ Ld Ld / z m LL, / « / « _ / b K § Ld ( \ \ '-'f j \ \ 2 \\ \� \ /\ 6< \$ 0 \z /\ \ o � m zz e \3 \ �� \ °° \// z \\ \ \z Q o- \/ \/ \ \\ 2 z o \ \ (D -j / 2� ^ \ \/2 C) G\ Ld §.. \. /. \ F-- F-- \ DESIGN: DATE: 12 -06 CITY OF VAPLEWOOD- ENGI NEERI NG DEPT. PLAN mLEN &eP: R6\ NC DRAwVUD aSPLATE\Rm TREN RESTORATION REV ~ TYPICAL PAVEMENT \ TO \ % /% // OLD 2 z \ \ \ j \ } Of 0 § 3 % \ \ 0 \ \ / § / 6 \ ^ < \ 0 ( — ~ — z 0 / S \_ 3 of Ld ° < \ a = S < a y \ 0 \ \ \ \ / Ld w / \ / \ D ± 4 < 4 y 0 w ® § z q \ G Ld y \ } z d m z G w / | 0 / \ \ ^ I \ / z \j a _ z =_ < \ / a b S § < \ 2 0 z e % § 2 \\ ` \ §\ Ld j b < §_ © z \ 2 2 // GL b\ z /§ � /> je a a S& }z >3 z < < Jz Jz ( j af� e % z o \ j / \ u0 �2 /2 (/ / /2 §2 G& y \. \. \. t a & a 0 0 0 0 z z z z DESIGN: DATE: 12 -06 CITY OF VAPLEWOOD- ENGI NEERI NG DEPT. PLAN rE wEP. R«\ T R E K C H R E S T O R ATIO N NC DRAWN: uD aSP� E1 m REV ® ƒ% /I /%§ PAVEMENT 5 % /$ // /§/ TO 5 YEAR /I/ � \ \ ) } Ld Ld V) Of of 3 5 ui { \ \ \ \z - 5 ~ � (n ® U) } \\ \ / of CD % / c oe / \\ F- \ \ P LLJ / / / a - / s w o / \ z \ « $ e 5 ? \ } z / / < 2 Ld Ld LLJ \ z - P LLJ / \ ® }j > - z 3 = z Ld Lf) y- j ( < / { \ » / 2 \/ t L, 62 \ - <Z G / O\ Ld Of m \\ �� + Ld K / { z < )� \\ L \/ z ® Ld / \ \ \ z0 (/ ° » \( E} \, /, � § / & + z z z z DESIGN: DATE: 12 -06 CITY OF VAPLEWOOD- ENGI NEERI NG DEPT. PLAN rE wEP. R«\ T R E K C H R E S T O R ATIO N NC DRAWN: uD aSP� E1 m REV ® TYPICAL PAVEMENT 5 % /$ // OLD TO 5 YEAR /I/ 4 DESIGN: DATE: 12 -06 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD- ENGINEERING DEPT. PLATE CAE ROW TRENCH RESTORATION N° D\PLA DRAWN: JEJ caENAMEES \Row REVISIONS7 IN 5 YEAR C I P OR UTILITY TRENCH PATCH 5 w z g U W W LL, 0 ° m W 0 O Q Z m m W W J 9 ° m D p V v) J d LY Z_ W U S H [if 0 O W [if Wp W O O p m m w v) w W d m W Q N Q m W a v) O W W 0 J Q Z Q a Of d J W U c d p Ld ?i d q U 0 W U W W (n z ° ° o U w W w W J -< cn to �( Ld - W W w w = _ Q m of w 0 Z W Z w d U 0 w0 L d� W Of Z ¢ W W (n .. W N Z N W H i. (n a (n Z Q � p J J U d W U W W N H S L S - O W of W H d' H p p =:) p W m � O m m Z w m Z S W S O U Z UJ p Lj w U W W LLI U) > d Lu w of ° a ¢ Vz a d }~ d w dw H w z m = o� og �� cn H p 00 Z d w �w Hw 0, iz U m W Z O J Z m • U • d N M LJ W W W H O H O H O H O Z Z Z Z DESIGN: DATE: 12 -06 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD- ENGINEERING DEPT. PLATE CAE ROW TRENCH RESTORATION N° D\PLA DRAWN: JEJ caENAMEES \Row REVISIONS7 IN 5 YEAR C I P OR UTILITY TRENCH PATCH 5 / z ( \ \ \ \ \ V) / § 3 \ / — e z \ V) / \ \ \ 0 / / (D / ~ \ / 4 2 4 / ƒ § G / 3 / % / / L \ ƒ zy » 9 ~ I~ / §% Of Ld � \ \ }/ ~ \ § kj / y / 3 }\ K } 3 / Ld 6 �} § ° g «� Kz 2 /® 3z = El §5 } k \= � �� of �: \ // \\ [\ }\ ° 0 j[ oz G[ y 5, /, ). « z c w G G G t DESIGN: DATE: 12 -06 CITY OF VAPLEWOOD- ENGI NEERI NG DEPT. PLAN rE wEP. R«\ T R E K C H R E S T O R ATIO N NC DRAWN: uD aSP� E1 m REV ® TYPICAL PAVEMENT / IN 2 YEAR \I/ OR TEMPORARY /\ / /$\/ DESIGN: DATE: 12 -06 CITY OF VAPLEWOOD- ENGINEERING DEPT. PLATE CAE ROW HOLE RESTORATION NO D\PLA DRAWN: JEJ caENAMEES \Row REVISIONS TYPICAL PAVEMENT 0 TO 5 YEARS OLD 7 TYPICAL HOLE EXCAVATION � � N N r O TYPICAL RESTORATION w m z wZ 0 �w ^ TREET WIDTH (MAX. U a z z v? 0 SAW CUT � O 0 MILLED EDGE 00 0 CONSTRUCTION LANE LINE m JOINT m CONSTRUCTION JOINT LANE LINE N a 0 CONSTRUCTION U JOINT LANE LINE ;. CONSTRUCTION JOINT LANE LINE CONCRETE JOINT CONCRETE JOINT NOTE 1: BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT • FULL LANE REPLACEMENT OF BASE AND BINDER TO THE NEAREST CONSTRUCTION JOINT OR TRANSVERSE CRACK • FULL STREET WIDTH MILL AND OVERLAY OF WEARING COURSE NOTE 2: CONCRETE PAVEMENT • FULL PANEL REPLACEMENT FOR CONCRETE PAVEMENT NOTE 3: ALL OTHER TYPES OF SURFACES AND PAVEMENTS REPLACEMENT WITH IN —KIND MATERIALS DESIGN: DATE: 12 -06 CITY OF VAPLEWOOD- ENGINEERING DEPT. PLATE CAE ROW HOLE RESTORATION NO D\PLA DRAWN: JEJ caENAMEES \Row REVISIONS TYPICAL PAVEMENT 0 TO 5 YEARS OLD 7 TYPICAL HOLE EXCAVATION mow � � N N N O TYPICAL RESTORATION w w H _ V) Z wZ o ^ TREEf WIDTH (MAX.) -I J z aQ U ? O SAW CUT 0-0 O MILLED EDGE 00 U H LANE LINE Q CD m LANE LINE - a N O CONCRETE JOINT CONCRETE JOINT U LANE LINE CONCRETE JOINT LANE LINE NOTE 1: BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT • FULL LANE REPLACEMENT OF BASE, BINDER, AND WEAR COURSE TO THE NEAREST CONSTRUCTION JOINT OR TRANSVERSE CRACK NOTE 2: CONCRETE PAVEMENT • FULL PANEL REPLACEMENT FOR CONCRETE PAVEMENT NOTE 3: ALL OTHER TYPES OF SURFACES AND PAVEMENTS • REPLACEMENT WITH IN —KIND MATERIALS DESIGN: DATE: 12 -06 CITY OF VAPLEWOOD— ENGINEERING DEPT. PLATE CAD\PLA ROW HOLE R E S T O R AT I O N N° DRAWN: JEJ cAD \PLATES \Row REVISIONS TYPICAL PAVEMENT 5 YEARS OLD TO 5 YEAR CIP 8 TYPICAL HOLE EXCAVATION CV N O TYPICAL RESTORATION w m w� N wZ E o I- ----STREET WIDTH (MAX. J `z z_ z a� o �0 0 00 0� o LANE LINE m m LANE LINE - a N O U LANE LINE LANE LINE NOTE 1: BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT • REPLACE BASE, BINDER, AND WEARING COURSE FOR WIDTH OF HOLE PLUS 2 FEET ON EITHER SIDE OF CUT NOTE 2: CONCRETE PAVEMENT • REPLACE WIDTH OF HOLE PLUS 2 FEET ON EITHER SIDE OF CUT NOTE 3: ALL OTHER TYPES OF SURFACES AND PAVEMENTS • REPLACE WIDTH OF HOLE PLUS 2 FEET ON EITHER SIDE OF CUT DESIGN: DATE: 12 - 06 CITY OF IVAPLEWOOD- ENGINEERING DEPT. PLATE LENA ROW HOLE RESTORATION N° ca DRAWN: JEJ FI ENAME:ES \Row REVISIONS TYPICAL PAVEMENT IN 5 YEAR CIP OR HOLE PATCH 9 DESIGN: DATE: 12 -06 CITY OF VAPLEWOOD- ENGINEERING DEPT. PLATE CAD\PLA ROW HOLE RESTORATION NO DRAWN: JEJ cAD \PLATES \Row REVISIONS TYPICAL PAVEMENT IN 2 YEAR CIP OR TEMPORARY SURFACE 1 TYPICAL HOLE EXCAVATION N N O TYPICAL RESTORATION w m w0 Zw 4Z wZ W o K p J - ��TREET WIDTH (MAX. t J z as � o � o a� g O O O O Q CONSTRUCTION LANE LINE a JOINT m '...'_ N CONSTRUCTION JOINT LANE LINE a o CONSTRUCTION JOINT LANE LINE CONSTRUCTION JOINT LANE LINE NOTE 1: BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT • REPLACE BASE, BINDER, AND WEARING COURSE FOR WIDTH OF HOLE ONLY NOTE 2: CONCRETE PAVEMENT • REPLACE WIDTH OF HOLE ONLY NOTE 3: ALL OTHER TYPES OF SURFACES AND PAVEMENTS • REPLACEMENT WITH IN —KIND MATERIALS FOR WIDTH OF HOLE ONLY DESIGN: DATE: 12 -06 CITY OF VAPLEWOOD- ENGINEERING DEPT. PLATE CAD\PLA ROW HOLE RESTORATION NO DRAWN: JEJ cAD \PLATES \Row REVISIONS TYPICAL PAVEMENT IN 2 YEAR CIP OR TEMPORARY SURFACE 1 o J 0 H � BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY v v ROW W DRIP LINE 0 J O W (J) m Cn W Ld d O ~ Z GRAVEL ROAD DRIP LINE d d m m UTILI m CONCRETE r DRIVEWAY ~_ U U J H UTILITY 0 d O GRAVEL Li ° DRIVEWAY q m m m rt � � � NOTE: ALL UTILITY LINES MUST BE PUSHED UNDER ROADS, SHOULDERS, AND DRIVEWAYS UNLESS OTHER CONSTRUCTION METHODS ARE APPROVED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT DESIGN: DATE: 12 - 06 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD- ENGINEERING DEPT. PLATE DRAWN: JEJ FILENAME:P:WORKS\ NO. CAD \PLATES \ROW REVISIONS TYPICAL ROAD PLAN 11 SECT A—A RESTORE GRAVEL SURFACE TRENCH G GRAVEL SURFACE TO ORIGINAL oswsnr ����������^o� nz~— � l ORIGINAL DENSITY SECTION B—B RESTORE GRAVEL SURFACE (PLOW OR TRENCH) SECTION A—A RESTORE GRAVEL SURFACE PLOW Q � D ATH NOTE: RESTORE ALL SURFACES TO ORIGINAL CONDITION WITH MATERIALS (IMPORTED OR FOUND ON SITE) DESIGN: DATE: 12 R E V 17S 1707N 7S C|TY OF MAPLBWDOD—ENG|NEER|N� DEPT. TYPICAL �[�—' DRIVEWAY, 4| �4� —— OR PATH RESTORATION PLATE NO. 1� � � n�������� TRENCH INSTALLATION i RESTORE SHOULDER TO ORIGINAL CONDITION WITH IN -KIND MATERIALS TOP SOIL SEED AND /OR SOD REPLACE SUBGRADE WITH W APPROVED COMPACTED FILL 1 OR GREATER TRENCH COMPACT SUBGRADE TO ORIGINAL DENSITY PLOW INSTALLATION 1 OR GREATER PLOW COMPACT SUBGRADE TO ORIGINAL DENSITY RESTORE SHOULDER TO ORIGINAL CONDITION WITH IN -KIND MATERIALS TOP SOIL SEED AND /OR SOD NOTE: RESTORE ALL SURFACES TO ORIGINAL CONDITION WITH IN -KIND MATERIALS (IMPORTED OR FOUND ON SITE) DESIGN: DATE: 12 -06 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD- ENGINEERING DEPT. PLATE DRAWN: JEJ FILENAME:P:WORKS\ NO. CAD \PLATES \ROW TYPICAL ROAD SHOULDER RESTORATION REVISIONS SECTION D -D 13 AGENDA NO. 1 -1 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council FROM: Finance Director Zil�l,'j1[$1 WQ I1�'I1►4L DATE: March 12, 2007 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: $ 46,544.61 Checks # 72123 thru # 72167 dated 02/27/07 $ 135,930.22 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 02/16/07 thru 02/22/07 $ 636,604.46 Checks # 72168 thru # 72227 dated 03/01/07 thru 03/06/07 $ 335,801.82 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 02/23/07 thru 03/01/07 $ 1,154,881.11 Total Accounts Payable PAYROLL $ 484,138.74 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 02 /23/07 $ 2,799.85 Payroll Deduction check # 1001428 thru # 1001431 dated 02/23/07 $ 486,938.59 Total Payroll $ 1,641,819.70 GRAND TOTAL Attached is a detailed listing of these claims. Please call me at 651- 249 -2903 if you have any questions on the attached listing. This will allow me to check the supporting documentation on file if ds attachments S: \CTY_CLRK\Agenda Lists and Reports 2007\Agenda Reports \03- 12 -07 \I1 Approval of Claims Check Register City of Maplewood 02/2312007 Check Date 72123 72124 72125 72126 72127 72128 72129 72130 72131 72132 72133 72134 72135 72136 72137 72138 72139 72140 72141 72142 72143 72144 72145 72146 72147 72148 72149 72150 72151 72152 72153 72154 72155 72156 72157 72158 72159 72160 72161 72162 72163 72164 72165 72166 72167 72167 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 02127/2007 0212712007 02/27/2007 0212712007 Vendor 01337 01360 01504 01504 03831 01811 01811 01811 01811 00494 00415 00589 00645 00660 02995 00789 00813 00820 00820 00393 00393 02393 03122 01001 01035 01088 01961 01175 00001 00001 00001 00001 00001 00001 00001 01941 01254 01254 01345 03359 03830 03832 01387 01463 01489 01489 03829 01545 01570 01580 03103 01750 01750 01750 RAMSEY COUNTY -PROP REC & REV REINHART FOODSERVICE CITY OF ST PAUL CITY OF ST PAUL JEREMY BARTA BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC CHILDREN HOME & FAMILY SERVICE DON'S PAINT & BODY SHOP DAVE GRAF HEALTH PARTNERS HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE INTEGRATED LOSS CONTROL INC KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE CO JIM KRACHE KUSTOM SIGNALS INC KUSTOM SIGNALS INC DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY MIKE LOCHEN MEDPRO MIDWEST GROUP MIDWEST LOCK & SAFE INC MN CHAPTER IAAI MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS CITY OF NORTH ST PAUL ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR PATRICK GRAPHICS & TROPHIES PEPSI -COLA COMPANY PEPSI -COLA COMPANY RAMSEY COUNTY RECYCLING ASSN OF MN RIVERLAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE CAMERON ROLLAND DR. JAMES ROSSINI SISTER ROSALIND GEFRE SPARTAN PROMOTIONAL GROUP INC. SPARTAN PROMOTIONAL GROUP INC. STEFFEN SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY SWIMOUT OVERFLOW COMPONENTS TSE, INC. WASHINGTON CTY CHIEF OF POLICE THE WATSON CO INC THE WATSON CO INC THE WATSON CO INC 45 Checks in this report. Description ANNUAL BRIDGE INSPECTION MDSE FOR RESALE STREET LIGHT REPAIR TRAINING - TACTICAL REIMB FOR FF11 TEST 213 MDSE FOR RESALE MDSE FOR RESALE MDSE FOR RESALE MDSE FOR RESALE YOUTH DIVERSION PROG - JAN REPAIR DAMAGE TO SQUAD - CN KARATE INSTRUCTOR 216 - 2127 MEDICAL SUPPLIES TRAINING - LINE OFFICER BASIC RIGHT -TO -KNOW TRAINING - FIRE UNLEADED MID -GRADE (89 OCT) SPEAKER FOR FUR TRADE UNIT RADAR UNIT REPAIR RADAR UNIT REPAIR SEMINAR FOR BLDG INSPECTORS - 5 SEMINAR FOR BLDG INSPECTORS - 3 REIMB FOR FF11 TEST 2115 PM INSPECTION - COTS & LOCKDOWN REPLACE & RECODE LOCKS REGISTRATION FEE WASTEWATER OPERATOR CELL PHONE 119 - 218 MONTHLY UTILITIES REFUND BLUE PLUS -HAD PIF AMB REFUND WPS- MEDICARE DUP PMT REUND K ECKER - BCBS REIMB REFUND S HELGESEN - BCBS REIMB REFUNDJSONTERRE - CANCELLED REIMB B KNAPP - MILEAGE REFUND J GARCEAU - BCBS REIMB BASKETBALL TROPHIES & MEDALS MDSE FOR RESALE MDSE FOR RESALE MEMBERSHIP DUES MEMBERSHIP DUES TRAINING REIMB FOR OAK WILT TREATMENT FITNESS PROGRAM ADMIN FEE - FEB MCC MASSAGES - JAN PRESERVATION COMMISSION - PRESERVATION COMMISSION - HYD POST POUNDER FOR SIGN MEMBERSHIP ASSESSMENT - 1ST HALF SWIMOUT GRATES JANITORIAL SERVICES 12124 - 1120 MEMBERSHIP DUES MDSE FOR RESALE MDSE FOR RESALE MDSE FOR RESALE Amount 570.00 311.49 651.56 200.00 55.00 252.00 189.00 126.00 126.00 3,526.08 3,011.63 61.75 171.33 257.62 484.00 12, 534.27 120.00 329.45 233.00 175.00 105.00 55.00 720.00 1,898.49 120.00 23.00 36.04 3,090.14 553.26 280.54 40.00 40.00 30.00 9.72 4.04 3,119.68 958.70 587.85 60.00 150.00 700.00 400.00 100.00 2,534.00 260.90 216.31 1,997.77 1,600.00 2,020.00 792.00 50.00 261.33 216.69 128.97 40.344.0 I N CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Disbursements via Debits to Checking account Transmitted Settlement Date Date Payee Description 02/15/07 02/16/07 MN State Treasurer Drivers License /Deputy Registrar 02/15/07 02/16/07 MN Dept of Natural Resources DNR electronic licenses 02/16/07 02/20/07 MN State Treasurer Drivers License /Deputy Registrar 02/16/07 02/20/07 MN Dept of Revenue Sales Tax 02/20/07 02/21/07 MN State Treasurer Drivers License /Deputy Registrar 02/20/07 02/21/07 US Bank VISA One Card* Purchasing card items 02/21/07 02/22/07 MN State Treasurer Drivers License /Deputy Registrar 02/21/07 02/22/07 MN Dept of Revenue Fuel Tax TOTAL *Detailed listing of VISA purchases is attached. 13,649.00 963.00 9,394.68 10, 734.00 8,735.22 57,302.17 34,720.75 431.40 135,930.22 Cl Visa transactions 2 -3 -07 to 2 -16 -07 Trans Date 02/07/07 02/08/07 02/02/07 02/06/07 02/12/07 02/13/07 02/13/07 01/17/07 01/23/07 01/29/07 02/01/07 02/01/07 02/03/07 02/05/07 02/07/07 02/12/07 02/13/07 02/13/07 02/15/07 02/12/07 02/13/07 02/14/07 02/15/07 02/01/07 02/05/07 02/07/07 02/08/07 02/09/07 02/09/07 02/09/07 02/09/07 02/09/07 02/10/07 02/11/07 02/12/07 02/12/07 02/12/07 02/13/07 02/14/07 02/03/07 02/06/07 02/08/07 02/09/07 02/02/07 02/09/07 02/13/07 02/08/07 02/05/07 02/03/07 02/08/07 02/08/07 02/08/07 02/08/07 02/09/07 02/09/07 )sting Date Merchant Name 02/08/07 VZWRLSS *APOCC VISN 02/09/07 TI *TASER INTL 02/05107 WALGREEN 00073882 02/07/07 TCT *M &N INTERNATIONAL 02/13/07 WALGREEN 00073882 02/15/07 JOANN ETC #1970 02/15/07 MICHAELS #2744 02/09/07 NUCO2 02/09/07 NUCO2 02/09107 NUCO2 02/05/07 AQUA LOGIC INC 02/09/07 NUCO2 02/09/07 NUCO2 02/06/07 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE 02/08/07 GREEN LIGHTS RECYCLING IN 02/14/07 OLYMPICS POOLS 02/14/07 TRI -DIM FILTER CORP 02/14/07 TRI -DIM FILTER CORP 02/16/07 E L REINHARDT COMPANY IN 02/13/07 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 02/15/07 MICHAELS #9401 02/15/07 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 02/16/07 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 02/05/07 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 02/07/07 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 02/08107 GSI /ENVELOPE MALL.COM 02/09/07 PS PRINT 02/12/07 SPARTAN PROMOTIONAL GRP 02/12/07 SPARTAN PROMOTIONAL GRP 02/12/07 SPARTAN PROMOTIONAL GRP 02/12/07 SPARTAN PROMOTIONAL GRP 02/12/07 MINNESOTA MONTHLY 02/12/07 DEX EAST - LOCKBOX 02/12/07 CORBIS PROFESSIONAL LICEN 02/13107 PIONEER PRESS ADVERTISIN 02/13/07 FEDEX KINKO'S #0617 02/13/07 DGI *DYNAMIC GRAPHICS 02/14/07 SPARTAN PROMOTIONAL GRP 02/15/07 FAMILY TIMES 02/05/07 FRATTALLONE'S ACE HDWE 02/08/07 THE HOME DEPOT 2810 02/09107 G & K SERVICES 006 02/12/07 TWIN CITY HARDWARE HALE 02/05/07 UNITED RENTALS #D09 02/12/07 DIAMOND VOGEL PAINTS #807 02/15/07 OFFICE MAX 02/09/07 DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 02/06/07 ICI- DULUX- PAINTS #0092 02/05/07 TARGET 00006940 02/09/07 G & K SERVICES 006 02/09107 G & K SERVICES 006 02/09/07 WMS *WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY 02/09/07 WMS *WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY 02/12/07 THE HOME DEPOT 2802 02/12/07 THE HOME DEPOT 2804 1173ra -ffl - 1 0lft"ilil'f.Ti rA $44.09 R CHARLES AHL $450.00 SCOTT ANDREWS $8.23 MANDY ANZALDI $93.61 MANDY ANZALDI $6.09 MANDY ANZALDI $229.34 MANDY ANZALDI $85.32 MANDY ANZALDI $87.33 JIM BEHAN $70.29 JIM BEHAN $41.54 JIM BEHAN $1,133.15 JIM BEHAN $57.78 JIM BEHAN $87.33 JIM BEHAN $24.25 JIM BEHAN $116.84 JIM BEHAN $173.28 JIM BEHAN $82.71 JIM BEHAN $482.79 JIM BEHAN $53.92 JIM BEHAN $96.19 OAKLEY BIESANZ $13.88 OAKLEY BIESANZ $5.15 OAKLEY BIESANZ ($5.15) OAKLEY BIESANZ $113.89 TROY BRINK $52.13 TROY BRINK $264.95 HEIDI CAREY $327.07 HEIDI CAREY $191.57 HEIDI CAREY $545.02 HEIDI CAREY $910.29 HEIDI CAREY $398.24 HEIDI CAREY $795.00 HEIDI CAREY $35.95 HEIDI CAREY $100.00 HEIDI CAREY $40.00 HEIDI CAREY $466.73 HEIDI CAREY $79.00 HEIDI CAREY $216.31 HEIDI CAREY $85.00 HEIDI CAREY $2.56 CHARLES DEAVER $31.13 CHARLES DEAVER $87.21 CHARLES DEAVER $44.76 CHARLES DEAVER $264.08 THOMAS DEBILZAN $2.13 THOMAS DEBILZAN $10.11 RICHARD DOBLAR $190.00 ROBERT J DOLLERSCHELL $28.76 DOUG EDGE $24.00 LARRY FARR $525.60 LARRY FARR $214.78 LARRY FARR $347.96 LARRY FARR $347.96 LARRY FARR $101.22 LARRY FARR $218.37 LARRY FARR 4 Visa transactions 2 -3 -07 to 2 -16 -07 Trans Date 02/12/07 02/12/07 02/12/07 02/13/07 02/14/07 02/14/07 02/14/07 02/08/07 02/02/07 02/02/07 02/03/07 02/05/07 02/07/07 02/12/07 02/13/07 02/13/07 02/14/07 02/02/07 02/05/07 02/06/07 02/07/07 02/09/07 02/09/07 02/13/07 02/14/07 02/01/07 02/06/07 02/07/07 02/07/07 02/02/07 02/02/07 02/03/07 02/06/07 02/13/07 02/01/07 02/09/07 02/13/07 02/13/07 02/07/07 02/07/07 02/10/07 02/14/07 02/07/07 02/07/07 02/08/07 02/14/07 02/01/07 02/05/07 02/11/07 02/12/07 02/01/07 02/10/07 02/08/07 02/06/07 02/07/07 )sting Date Merchant Name 02/13/07 PREMIUM WATERS INC 02/14/07 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 02/14107 THE HOME DEPOT 2810 02/14/07 WMS *WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY 02/15/07 A.P.I., INC 02/15/07 AP.I., INC 02/16/07 DAVIS LOCK & SAFE 02/09/07 APA ON -LINE MEMBERSHIPS 02/05/07 SPRINTPCS- CUSTCAREPMT 02/05107 AVANGATE BV 02/05/07 QWESTCOMM *TN651 02/06/07 CABLING SERVICES CORPORA 02/08/07 QQEST ASSET MANAGEMENT 02/14/07 SPRINT PCS- 995 -SP WEB 02/14/07 PAYPAL INC 02/15/07 CITY OF ROSEVILLE CITY HA 02/15/07 GOVDOCS.COM, INC. 02/05/07 HP DIRECT- PUBLICSECTOR 02/08/07 HP SERVICES 02/12/07 HP SERVICES 02/09/07 CIRCUIT CITY SS #3137 02/13/07 SOFTWARE HOUSE INTL 02/13/07 SOFTWARE HOUSE INTL 02/14/07 MTI *CRUCIAL TECHNOLOGY 02/15/07 MTI *CRUCIAL TECHNOLOGY 02/05107 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 02/07/07 PAKOR INC 02/08/07 SUBWAY #5215 02/09/07 WHITE BEAR DODGE INC 02/05/07 FIGAROS PIZZA Q56 02/05/07 CLOVER SUPER FOODS 02/05/07 CVS PHARMACY #1751 Q03 02/07/07 FIGAROS PIZZA Q56 02/15/07 ARAMARK REF SVS #6013- 02/05/07 BLUE RIBBON BAIT & TACKLE 02/12/07 BLUE RIBBON BAIT & TACKLE 02/14/07 WALGREEN 00031229 02/15/07 BLUE RIBBON BAIT & TACKLE 02/08/07 MINNESOTA CLE 02/08/07 BACHMAN'S INC #0002 02/12/07 PROPERTYKEY.COM, INC. 02/15107 VZWRLSS *APOCC VISN 02/09/07 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 02/08/07 CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPM 02/09/07 LESCO SC 0530 02/16/07 GANDER MOUNTA100104802 02/05/07 DE LAGE LANDEN OP01 OF 01 02/07/07 FORESTRY SUPPLIERS, INC. 02/12/07 SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS 02/13/07 KNOWLANS #2 02/05107 IMAGE TECH SERVICES 02/12/07 CUB FOODS, INC. 02/12/07 CENTURY BOOKSTORE 02/07/07 MECA 02/09/07 FITNESS WHOLESALE INC Trans Amount Name $5.33 LARRY FARR $82.49 LARRY FARR $238.58 LARRY FARR $1,767.97 LARRY FARR $1,900.00 LARRY FARR $1,584.24 LARRY FARR $100.33 LARRY FARR $319.00 SHANK FINWALL $122.52 MYCHAL FOWLDS $39.99 MYCHAL FOWLDS $66.45 MYCHAL FOWLDS $1,655.00 MYCHAL FOWLDS $389.00 MYCHAL FOWLDS $81.39 MYCHAL FOWLDS $59.95 MYCHAL FOWLDS $865.00 MYCHAL FOWLDS $820.00 MYCHAL FOWLDS $1,178.67 NICK FRANZEN $288.90 NICK FRANZEN $251.46 NICK FRANZEN $26.61 NICK FRANZEN $118.00 NICK FRANZEN $27.00 NICK FRANZEN $111.64 NICK FRANZEN $123.69 NICK FRANZEN $86.21 PATRICIA FRY $413.65 PATRICIA FRY $70.23 CLARENCE GERVAIS $115.02 CLARENCE GERVAIS $43.60 MIKE GRAF $277.44 MIKE GRAF $7.43 MIKE GRAF $43.60 MIKE GRAF $269.53 MIKE GRAF $3.09 JANET M GREW HAYMAN $3.09 JANET M GREW HAYMAN $8.00 JANET M GREW HAYMAN $5.48 JANET M GREW HAYMAN $55.00 KAREN E GUILFOILE $75.56 KAREN E GUILFOILE $50.00 KAREN E GUILFOILE $50.51 KAREN E GUILFOILE $62.29 MARK HAAG $775.30 PATRICK HEFFERNAN $434.52 GARY HINNENKAMP $3.72 RON HORWATH $206.61 ANN E HUTCHINSON $219.22 ANN E HUTCHINSON $34.02 ANN E HUTCHINSON $9.24 ANN E HUTCHINSON $300.78 SCOTT JACOBSON $28.72 KEVIN JOHNSON $17.00 TOM KALKA $225.00 LOIS KNUTSON $201.30 MARY B KOEHNEN Visa transactions 2 -3 -07 to 2 -16 -07 Trans Date Posting Date Merchant Name Trans Amount Name 02102/07 02105107 ECI *GOTOMYPC.COM SVCS $19.95 ERIN M LABEREE 02110107 02112107 SPRINTPCS AUTOPYMT RC1 $54.36 ERIN M LABEREE 02105107 02109/07 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $668.92 MICHAEL LIDBERG 02/07/07 02/16/07 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $23.60 MICHAEL LIDBERG 02/08/07 02/09/07 FRATTALLONE'S ACE HDWE $51.21 MICHAEL LIDBERG 02109/07 02112107 NORTHERN TOOL EQUIP -MN $74.54 MICHAEL LIDBERG 01131107 02105/07 ASPEN MILLS 8005717343 $31.95 STEVE LUKIN 01/31/07 02/05/07 ASPEN MILLS 8005717343 $130.00 STEVE LUKIN 01/31/07 02/05/07 SEARS ROEBUCK 1122 $74.51 STEVE LUKIN 02102107 02105/07 TOUSLEY FORD 127228006 $1,070.01 STEVE LUKIN 02105107 02106107 WMS *WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY $266.04 STEVE LUKIN 02/05/07 02/07/07 EAT INC $191.01 STEVE LUKIN 02/06/07 02/08/07 PERKINS FAMILY RESTAURANT $54.07 STEVE LUKIN 02107107 02108/07 VALLEY TROPHY $113.53 STEVE LUKIN 02107/07 02108107 DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY $190.00 STEVE LUKIN 02/08/07 02/09107 AIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL $136.85 STEVE LUKIN 02/08/07 02/12/07 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $17.02 STEVE LUKIN 02111107 02112107 SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS $771.65 STEVE LUKIN 02115107 02116/07 DE LAGE LANDEN OP01 OF 01 $379.14 STEVE LUKIN 02/15/07 02/16/07 VZWRLSS *APOCC VISN $24.73 STEVE LUKIN 02/15/07 02/16/07 METRO FIRE $1,300.00 STEVE LUKIN 02106/07 02107107 TARGET 00011858 $4.78 DAN MARTIN 02106107 02107/07 KOHL'S #0052 $26.61 DAN MARTIN 02/06/07 02/08/07 WOLF CAMERA #1530 $6.81 DAN MARTIN 02/13/07 02/15107 CUB FOODS, INC. $10.28 DAN MARTIN 02115107 02116/07 BATTERIES PLUS $45.24 DAN MARTIN 02105107 02106107 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE $83.95 MARK MARUSKA 02/08/07 02/09/07 G & K SERVICES 006 $268.18 MARK MARUSKA 02/08/07 02/12/07 ON SITE SANITATION INC $63.90 MARK MARUSKA 02112107 02115/07 AMERICAN FASTENER & SUPPL ($2.41) MARK MARUSKA 02115/07 02116107 VZWRLSS *APOCC VISN $36.76 MARK MARUSKA 02/10/07 02/12/07 SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS $618.95 BRYAN NAGEL 02/12/07 02/13/07 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS $7.28 JEAN NELSON 02107107 02109107 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $151.66 AMY NIVEN 02108107 02109/07 G & K SERVICES 006 $480.04 AMY NIVEN 02/08/07 02/09/07 G & K SERVICES 006 $182.84 AMY NIVEN 02/08/07 02/09/07 G & K SERVICES 006 $165.37 AMY NIVEN 02109/07 02112107 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $369.84 RICHARD NORDQUIST 02107107 02108/07 MINNESOTA LAW ENFORCEMENT $60.00 JULIE OLSON 02/07/07 02/08/07 MINNESOTA LAW ENFORCEMENT $1,410.00 JULIE OLSON 02/08/07 02/09/07 HEJNY RENTAL $38.11 ERICK OSWALD 02102107 02105/07 TARGET 00021352 $5.63 MARY KAY PALANK 02106107 02108107 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $26.97 KATHLEEN PECK HALL 02/05/07 02/08/07 GANDER MOUNTA100104802 $159.98 ROBERT PETERSON 02/13/07 02/15/07 RADIO SHACK 00161455 $36.16 PHILIP F POWELL 02114107 02115/07 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE $11.61 PHILIP F POWELL 02114/07 02115107 CC MILITARY SURPLUS LL $63.74 PHILIP F POWELL 02/14/07 02/15107 MEDCO SUPPLY $102.99 PHILIP F POWELL 02/14/07 02/16/07 OFFICE MAX $69.37 PHILIP F POWELL 02115107 02116107 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC $356.80 ROBERT PRECHTEL 02102107 02105/07 SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS $354.73 WILLIAM J PRIEFER 02/01/07 02/05/07 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $97.37 STEVEN PRIEM 02/01/07 02/05/07 EAT INC $19.17 STEVEN PRIEM 02101/07 02105107 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC $65.12 STEVEN PRIEM 02102107 02105/07 KATH AUTO PARTS LC $27.67 STEVEN PRIEM Visa transactions 2 -3 -07 to 2 -16 -07 Trans Date Posting Date Merchant Name Trans Amount Name 02102/07 02105107 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS #19 $91.38 STEVEN PRIEM 02105107 02106107 ASPEN EQUIPMENT C/O CINDY $199.15 STEVEN PRIEM 02106107 02107/07 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE $14.82 STEVEN PRIEM 02/06/07 02/07/07 ICI- DULUX- PAINTS #0092 $571.69 STEVEN PRIEM 02/07/07 02/08/07 ASPEN EQUIPMENT C/O CINDY ($199.15) STEVEN PRIEM 02107/07 02108107 FORCE AMERICA $30.37 STEVEN PRIEM 02107107 02109/07 KATH AUTO PARTS LC $36.68 STEVEN PRIEM 02/07/07 02/09/07 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $125.40 STEVEN PRIEM 02/08/07 02/09/07 PARTS ASSOCIATES INC $103.98 STEVEN PRIEM 02108107 02112/07 KATH AUTO PARTS LC $72.53 STEVEN PRIEM 02108107 02112107 TOUSLEY FORD 127200039 $49.91 STEVEN PRIEM 02/09/07 02/14/07 TRI STATE BOBCAT INC $118.97 STEVEN PRIEM 02/12/07 02/14/07 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $22.65 STEVEN PRIEM 02112107 02114/07 TOUSLEY FORD 127200039 $18.61 STEVEN PRIEM 02113/07 02115107 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP ($0.85) STEVEN PRIEM 02/13/07 02/15107 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $81.48 STEVEN PRIEM 02/14/07 02/16/07 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $4.10 STEVEN PRIEM 02114107 02116107 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $73.59 STEVEN PRIEM 02115107 02116/07 BAUER BULT TRE33200023 $421.74 STEVEN PRIEM 02/02/07 02/05/07 ACCURINT EOM AUTO} P $30.00 KEVIN RABBETT 02/02/07 02/05/07 GRAFIX SHOPPE $175.73 KEVIN RABBETT 02105/07 02107107 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED $2,434.18 KEVIN RABBETT 02107107 02112/07 SHRED -IT $126.54 KEVIN RABBETT 02/14/07 02/15/07 DON' PAINT & BODY SHOP ($861.46) KEVIN RABBETT 02/14/07 02/15107 DON' PAINT & BODY SHOP $861.46 KEVIN RABBETT 02102107 02105/07 THE STAR TRIBUNE - ADVERTIS $757.00 TERRIE RAMEAUX 02102107 02105107 THE STAR TRIBUNE - ADVERTIS $104.40 TERRIE RAMEAUX 02/08/07 02/09/07 PIONEER PRESS ADVERTISIN $1,646.53 TERRIE RAMEAUX 02/09/07 02/12/07 THE STAR TRIBUNE - ADVERTIS $104.40 TERRIE RAMEAUX 02109107 02112/07 THE STAR TRIBUNE- ADVERTIS $757.00 TERRIE RAMEAUX 02105/07 02109107 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $129.35 MICHAEL REILLY 02/06/07 02/07/07 HILLYARD INC MINNEAPOLIS $1,769.47 MICHAEL REILLY 02/02/07 02/05/07 FACTORY CARD OUTLET #284 $44.63 AUDRA ROBBINS 02104107 02105107 BYERLY'S ROSEVILLE $44.61 AUDRA ROBBINS 02106107 02107/07 CUB FOODS, INC. $7.09 AUDRA ROBBINS 02/07/07 02/08/07 RAMSEY COUNTY HISTORICAL $127.50 AUDRA ROBBINS 02/09/07 02/12/07 TARGET 00011858 $94.71 AUDRA ROBBINS 02109/07 02112107 DOLRTREE 2396 00023960 $76.68 AUDRA ROBBINS 02110107 02112/07 WONDER/HOSTESS #63 $10.68 AUDRA ROBBINS 02/10/07 02/12/07 MILLS FLEET FARM #27 $62.61 AUDRA ROBBINS 02/13/07 02/14/07 TARGET 00021014 $7.98 AUDRA ROBBINS 02113107 02114/07 MAPLEWOOD PARKS AND RECRE $4.50 AUDRA ROBBINS 02114107 02116107 ORIENTAL TRADING CO $94.18 AUDRA ROBBINS 02/12/07 02/14/07 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $99.49 ROBERT RUNNING 02/14/07 02/15/07 LTG POWER EQUIPMENT $38.76 ROBERT RUNNING 02114107 02116/07 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 ($35.11) ROBERT RUNNING 02114/07 02116107 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $50.86 ROBERT RUNNING 02/05/07 02/08107 YARUSSO BROS $40.31 HARRIET J RYDEL 02/12/07 02/14/07 THE OLIVE GARD00012005 $102.03 HARRIET J RYDEL 02108107 02109107 DATA BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC $48.02 DEB SCHMIDT 02102107 02105/07 FONDDULAC TRBL CCLG BS $25.00 MICHAEL SHORTREED 02/06/07 02/07/07 CALIBRE PRESS LLC $199.00 MICHAEL SHORTREED 02/07/07 02/09/07 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC $22.26 MICHAEL SHORTREED 02114/07 02115107 RAY ALLEN MFG CO INC $811.60 MICHAEL SHORTREED 02102107 02105/07 SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS $417.84 ANDREA SINDT 7 Visa transactions 2 -3 -07 to 2 -16 -07 Trans Date 02106/07 02108107 02103107 02/09/07 02/15/07 02106/07 02112107 02/15/07 02/02/07 02107107 02108107 02/08/07 02/14/07 02115107 02108/07 02/09/07 02/09/07 02102107 02112107 02/12/07 02/12/07 02112/07 02112107 02/12/07 02/12/07 02112107 02112107 02/12/07 02/06/07 02107107 02107/07 02/08/07 )sting Date Merchant Name 02/07/07 METRO SALES INC 02112107 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 02105/07 WOODBURY CLEAN'N' 02/12/07 GOPHER STAGE LIGHTING INC 02/16/07 USPS 2663650015 02108107 OFFICE MAX 02113/07 CUB FOODS, INC. 02/16/07 DE LAGE LANDEN OP01 OF 01 02/05/07 OVERHEAD DOOR OF NORTH 02108/07 GREEN LIGHTS RECYCLING IN 02109107 MUSKA LIGHTING CENTER 02/09/07 MUSKA LIGHTING CENTER 02/16/07 STATE SUPPLY COMPANY 02116/07 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE 02112107 METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY 02/12107 SPARTAN PROMOTIONAL GRP 02/12/07 METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY 02105107 FSH COMMUNICATION01 OF 01 02113/07 QWESTCOMM *TN612 02/13/07 QWESTCOMM *TN612 02/13/07 QWESTCOMM *TN612 02113107 QWESTCOMM *TN612 02113/07 QWESTCOMM *TN612 02/13/07 QWESTCOMM *TN612 02/13107 QWESTCOMM *TN612 02113/07 QWESTCOMM *TN612 02113107 QWESTCOMM *TN612 02/13/07 QWESTCOMM *TN612 02/07/07 CUB FOODS, INC. 02108/07 DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 02109107 PIZZA MAN 02/12/07 PIZZA MAN Trans Amount Name $216.61 ANDREA SINDT $82.61 ANDREA SINDT $129.29 PAULINE STAPLES $229.40 PAULINE STAPLES $78.00 PAULINE STAPLES $39.35 JOANNE M SVENDSEN $39.00 JOANNE M SVENDSEN $626.43 JOANNE M SVENDSEN $198.00 LYLE SWANSON $124.31 LYLE SWANSON $77.50 LYLE SWANSON $436.03 LYLE SWANSON $9.93 LYLE SWANSON $633.21 LYLE SWANSON $1,150.22 DOUGLAS J TAUBMAN $169.22 DOUGLAS J TAUBMAN $1,150.22 DOUGLAS J TAUBMAN $58.58 JUDY TETZLAFF $140.58 JUDY TETZLAFF $70.29 JUDY TETZLAFF $99.68 JUDY TETZLAFF $70.29 JUDY TETZLAFF $99.68 JUDY TETZLAFF $99.68 JUDY TETZLAFF $371.73 JUDY TETZLAFF $263.80 JUDY TETZLAFF $99.68 JUDY TETZLAFF $70.29 JUDY TETZLAFF $65.98 SUSAN ZWIEG $190.00 SUSAN ZWIEG $55.00 SUSAN ZWIEG $4.00 SUSAN ZWIEG $57,302.17 Check Register City of Maplewood 03/0212007 Check 72168 72169 72170 72171 72172 72173 72174 72175 72176 72177 72178 72179 72180 72181 72182 72183 72184 72185 72186 72187 72188 72189 72190 72191 72192 72193 72194 72195 72196 72197 72198 72199 72200 72201 72202 72203 72204 72205 72206 72207 72208 72209 72210 72211 72212 72213 72214 72215 72216 72217 72218 72218 Date 03/01/2007 03106/2007 03/0612007 0310612007 03/0612007 03106/2007 03/0512007 03106/2007 0310612007 03106/2007 03/0612007 0310612007 03/0612007 03106/2007 03/0612007 03106/2007 0310612007 03106/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 03/0612007 03/06/2007 Vendor 03835 01949 01819 02410 01190 01190 00412 01622 00058 03824 03513 02929 03580 03516 00668 00755 00755 00788 00789 00393 00917 03655 03818 00985 02617 03270 01035 03838 01085 01126 03622 02175 00001 00001 00001 00001 00001 00001 00001 00001 00001 00001 00001 00001 00001 01240 03834 00396 01345 01341 01340 03830 01418 01418 01418 01418 01418 01418 KELLY BENNETT GARY L FISCHLER & ASSOC PA MCLEOD USA WELLS FARGO LEASING INC XCELENERGY XCELENERGY DONALD SALVERDA & ASSOCIATES 3M SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA CRAIG AICHELE ASSURANT EMPLOYEE BENEFITS BRIAN BIERDEMAN CNAGLAC LARRY FARR ANTHONY GABRIEL STEVEN HIEBERT JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC FLINT KARTS KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE CO DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY MAC QUEEN EQUIPMENT INC MAUERS YARD UNLIMITED MEDICA METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ALESIA METRY MIKE MILLER MN CHAPTER IAAI MN FIAM BOOK SALES MN LIFE INSURANCE MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE MN OFFICE OF ENTERPRISE TECH AMY NIVEN ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR ONE TIME VENDOR STEVEN T PALMA PERFORMANCE KENNELS, INC. DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY RAMSEY COUNTY RAMSEY CTY FIRE CHIEFS ASSN REGIONS HOSPITAL RIVERLAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE SAM'S CLUB DIRECT SAM'S CLUB DIRECT SAM'S CLUB DIRECT SAM'S CLUB DIRECT SAM'S CLUB DIRECT SAM'S CLUB DIRECT Description REIMB OVERCHARGED FOR DRIVERS CANDIDATE SCREEN LOCAL PHONE SERVICE 1116 - 2115 COPIER LEASE 2109 - 3109 ELECTRIC UTILITY GAS UTILITY TRAINING CONCERT-JAN REIMB FOR MILEAGE 2121 MONTHLY PREMIUM - MARCH K -9 MAINTENANCE - MARCH LONG TERM CARE INS - MARCH REIMB FOR JIG SAW BLADES MCC K -9 MAINTENANCE - MARCH K -9 MAINTENANCE - MARCH SAFETY EQUIP - COBRA CLASSIC SAFETY EQUIP - COBRA CLASSIC REIMB FOR MEALS & PARKING 2/21 - POLAR PLUS DIESEL FUEL- ULTRA MONTHLY SURTAX - FEB 1287092514 2006 PELICAN SE DUAL STREET INSTALL FENCE MONTHLY PREMIUM - MARCH WASTEWATER - MARCH REIMB - DARE PRIZES & MEALS 2/18 - BASKETBALL OFFICIALS 2/3 - 3/3 MEMBERSHIP FIRE OFFICERS PRINCIPLES & MARCH PREMIUM PERA LIFE INS - FEB WIDE AREA NETWORK - JAN REIMB FOR MILEAGE - JAN REEFUND A SPOCK - BCBS CR BAL REFUND D ADER - MEMBERSHIP REFUND J AMEY - BCBS CR BAL REFUND J SZONDY - BCBS CR BAL REFUND R GARCEAU - BCBS CR BAL REFUND S SANDIFER - BCBS CR BAL REFUND E CHRISTIANSON -BCBS CR REFUND J GRISWOLD - BCBS CR BAL REFUND M KLEFSTAD - BCBS CR BAL REFUND R LARKIN - BCBS CR BAL REFUND S LEKO - BCBS CR BAL REFUND S O'CONNOR - BCBS CR BAL REFUND L QUINN - BCBS CR BAL REIMB FOR MEALS & PARKING 2/21 - IMPORTED "GREEN" GERMAN SPECIALTY LICENSE PLATES - POLICE COUNTY LICENSE FEE FIREFIGHTER TRAINING MEDICAL DIRECTION FEE TRAINING VENDING MACHINE SUPPLIES PROGRAM SUPPLIES MDSE FOR RESALE / BIRTHDAY FROG MDSE FOR RESALE /BDAY & FITNESS MDSE FOR RESALE / BIRTHDAY FROG MDSE FOR RESALE / BIRTHDAY FROG Amount 10.50 250.00 2,097.37 1,467.57 12,562.62 11,666.14 600.00 133.50 18.43 9,480.84 35.00 495.78 79.48 35.00 35.00 64.00 32.00 20.57 12,714.89 1,444.67 115,549.31 2,022.00 141,133.00 201,847.06 75.34 1,824.00 25.00 651.45 3,482.16 372.00 392.00 11.15 71.00 47.93 40.00 40.00 34.00 34.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 18.41 14,055.80 72.00 205.83 2,612.50 30,581.00 170.00 856.81 393.04 308.93 295.55 274.35 169.32 Check Register City of Maplewood 03/0212007 Check Date Vendor Description Amount 0310612007 01418 SAM'S CLUB DIRECT 4 SHELF CABINET 150.63 72219 03106/2007 03837 ST CLOUD TECHNICAL COLLEGE TRAINING 255.00 72220 03/0612007 00198 ST PAUL REGIONAL WATER SRVS WATER UTILITY 1,175.02 72221 0310612007 03836 CITY OF STILLWATER TRAINING 100.00 72222 03/0612007 01538 STREICHER'S GLOCK 22 HANDGUNS 1,826.46 72223 03106/2007 01550 SUMMIT INSPECTIONS ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS 1,717.00 72224 03/0612007 01995 TAC COURT SYSTEMS GLASS DOOR - RACQUETBALL COURT 2,290.62 72225 03106/2007 03828 TURFWERKS JACOBSEN MODEL 9016 LAWN MOWER 53,242.55 72226 0310612007 00529 UNION SECURITY INSURANCE CO LTD PLAN 4043120 -2 MARCH 3,069.14 03106/2007 00529 UNION SECURITY INSURANCE CO STD PLAN 4043120 -1 MARCH 1,715.19 72227 03/0612007 03378 MATT WOEHRLE REIMB FOR MILEAGE 2122 - 2123 14.55 60 Checks in this report. im CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Disbursements via Debits to Checking account Transmitted Settlement Date Date Payee 02/22/07 02/22/07 02/22/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/26/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/28/07 02/28/07 02/26/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/26/07 02/26/07 02/26/07 02/26/07 02/26/07 02/26/07 02/27/07 02/27/07 02/27/07 02/27/07 02/27/07 03/01/07 03/01/07 03/01/07 MN State Treasurer ICMA (Vantagepointe) Orchard Trust MN State Treasurer U.S. Treasurer P.E.R.A. ICMA (Vantagepointe) Pitney Bowes MN Dept of Natural Resources MN State Treasurer WI Dept of Revenue MN State Treasurer MidAmerica - ING Labor Unions MN State Treasurer US Bank ARC Administration TOTAL Description Drivers License /Deputy Registrar Deferred Compensation Deferred Compensation Drivers License /Deputy Registrar Federal Payroll Tax P. E.R.A. RHS Postage DNR electronic licenses Drivers License /Deputy Registrar State Payroll Tax State Payroll Tax HRA Flex plan Union Dues Drivers License /Deputy Registrar Credit Card fees DCRP & Flex plan payments Amount 20,334.85 6,008.66 24,614.04 16,721.75 89,605.56 64,063.42 33,659.02 2,985.00 1,353.50 21,966.80 1,029.01 16, 889.43 3,077.96 4,372.11 23,428.75 1,102.88 4,589.08 335, 801.82 ill CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT 02/23/07 CAVE, REBECCA 397.80 02/23/07 HJELLE, ERIK 397.80 02/23/07 JUENEMANN, KATHLEEN 397.80 02/23/07 ROSSBACH, WILLIAM 397.80 02/23/07 COPELAND, EUGENE 3,090.00 02/23/07 RYDEL, HARRIET 1,579.85 02/23/07 FARR, LARRY 1,970.19 02/23/07 SWANSON, LYLE 1,761.17 02/23/07 ARNOLD, AJLA 504.00 02/23/07 RAMEAUX, THERESE 2,693.26 02/23/07 SCHMIDT, DEBORAH 1,695.75 02/23/07 ANDERSON, CAROLE 2,413.46 02/23/07 BAUMAN, GAYLE 3,898.34 02/23/07 DEBILZAN, JUDY 900.00 02/23/07 JACKSON, MARY 1,928.56 02/23/07 KELSEY, CONNIE 2,059.20 02/23/07 TETZLAFF, JUDY 2,477.75 02/23/07 FRY, PATRICIA 1,791.66 02/23/07 GUILFOILE, KAREN 3,366.86 02/23/07 MORSON, JOHN 448.50 02/23/07 SPANGLER, EDNA 993.69 02/23/07 ANDERSON, SUZANNE 960.00 02/23/07 JAGOE, CAROL 1,728.46 02/23/07 KELLY, LISA 1,624.85 02/23/07 MECHELKE, SHERRIE 1,114.89 02/23/07 MOY, PAMELA 1,123.95 02/23/07 OSTER, ANDREA 1,766.77 02/23/07 WEAVER, KRISTINE 1,893.35 02/23/07 CORCORAN, THERESA 1,726.15 02/23/07 POWELL, PHILIP 2,466.23 02/23/07 RICHIE, CAROLE 1,748.83 02/23/07 THOMALLA, DAVID 4,429.00 02/23/07 ABEL, CLINT 2,400.11 02/23/07 ALDRIDGE, MARK 2,551.23 02/23/07 ANDREWS, SCOTT 3,439.73 02/23/07 BAKKE, LONN 2,650.42 02/23/07 BARTZ, PAUL 2,659.57 02/23/07 BELDE, STANLEY 2,624.56 02/23/07 BIERDEMAN, BRIAN 2,532.55 02/23/07 BOHL, JOHN 2,993.49 12 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT 02/23/07 BUSACK, DANIEL 2,400.11 02/23/07 COFFEY, KEVIN 2,532.55 02/23/07 CROTTY, KERRY 2,830.77 02/23/07 DOBLAR, RICHARD 1,522.57 02/23/07 GABRIEL, ANTHONY 2,217.28 02/23/07 HEINZ, STEPHEN 2,770.78 02/23/07 HIEBERT, STEVEN 2,929.57 02/23/07 JOHNSON, KEVIN 5,389.01 02/23/07 KALKA, THOMAS 706.28 02/23/07 KARIS, FLINT 4,004.48 02/23/07 KONG, TOMMY 2,422.18 02/23/07 KROLL, BRETT 2,400.11 02/23/07 KVAM, DAVID 3,523.42 02/23/07 LANGNER, TODD 1,874.47 02/23/07 LARSON, DANIEL 2,499.44 02/23/07 LU, JOHNNIE 2,455.29 02/23/07 MARINO, JASON 2,400.11 02/23/07 MARTIN, DANIEL 673.48 02/23/07 MARTIN, JERROLD 2,703.34 02/23/07 MCCARTY, GLEN 2,598.76 02/23/07 METRY, ALESIA 2,753.27 02/23/07 NYE, MICHAEL 2,186.57 02/23/07 OLSON, JULIE 2,598.76 02/23/07 RABBETT, KEVIN 3,587.70 02/23/07 RHUDE, MATTHEW 1,874.47 02/23/07 STEFFEN, SCOTT 3,566.61 02/23/07 STEINER, JOSEPH 2,245.78 02/23/07 SYPNIEWSKI, WILLIAM 1,874.47 02/23/07 SZCZEPANSKI, THOMAS 2,560.59 02/23/07 TRAN, JOSEPH 2,400.11 02/23/07 WENZEL, JAY 2,422.18 02/23/07 XIONG, KAO 2,400.11 02/23/07 BERGERON, JOSEPH 4,47791 02/23/07 DUGAS, MICHAEL 2,576.08 02/23/07 ERICKSON, VIRGINIA 3,133.80 02/23/07 FLOR, TIMOTHY 3,165.69 02/23/07 FRASER, JOHN 2,912.24 02/23/07 LANGNER, SCOTT 2,445.82 02/23/07 PALMA, STEVEN 3,096.05 02/23/07 THEISEN, PAUL 2,445.82 13 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT 02/23/07 THIENES, PAUL 2,858.65 02/23/07 BARTA, JEREMY 2,692.45 02/23/07 DAWSON, RICHARD 2,853.54 02/23/07 DUELLMAN, KIRK 2,509.05 02/23/07 EMERSON, PAUL 2,223.60 02/23/07 HALWEG, JODI 2,031.08 02/23/07 JOHNSON, DOUGLAS 2,324.30 02/23/07 NOVAK, JEROME 2,433.36 02/23/07 PARSONS, KURT 2,307.57 02/23/07 PETERSON, ROBERT 2,492.12 02/23/07 PRECHTEL, ROBERT 2,335.78 02/23/07 SVENDSEN, RONALD 3,388.21 02/23/07 GERVAIS -JR, CLARENCE 2,868.34 02/23/07 BAUER, MICHELLE 1,913.39 02/23/07 BURAU, JAMES 1,603.75 02/23/07 FLAUGHER, JAYME 2,072.11 02/23/07 HERMANSON, CHAD 1,738.35 02/23/07 HUBIN, KENNARD 1,851.41 02/23/07 KNAPP, BRETT 1,677.75 02/23/07 LINK, BRYAN 2,330.64 02/23/07 PACOLT, MARSHA 2,529.68 02/23/07 RABINE, JANET 1,917.35 02/23/07 STAHNKE, JULIE 1,930.86 02/23/07 LUKIN, STEVEN 4,016.18 02/23/07 ZWIEG, SUSAN 1,951.48 02/23/07 DOLLERSCHELL, ROBERT 293.39 02/23/07 AHL, R. CHARLES 4,500.69 02/23/07 KNUTSON, LOIS 1,616.57 02/23/07 KONEWKO, DUWAYNE 3,059.51 02/23/07 NIVEN, AMY 1,305.12 02/23/07 PRIEFER, WILLIAM 2,601.27 02/23/07 BRINK, TROY 2,06999 02/23/07 BUCKLEY, BRETT 1,53895 02/23/07 DEBILZAN, THOMAS 1,952.55 02/23/07 EDGE, DOUGLAS 1,952.55 02/23/07 FREBERG, RONALD 1,988.28 02/23/07 JONES, DONALD 1,976.33 02/23/07 MEYER, GERALD 2,031.39 02/23/07 NAGEL, BRYAN 2,486.01 02/23/07 OSWALD, ERICK 2,141.26 14 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT 02/23/07 RUNNING, ROBERT 1,946.15 02/23/07 TEVLIN, TODD 1,879.75 02/23/07 DUCHARME, JOHN 2,486.06 02/23/07 ENGSTROM, ANDREW 1,828.55 02/23/07 ISAKSON, CHAD 327.87 02/23/07 JACOBSON, SCOTT 1,828.55 02/23/07 JAROSCH, JONATHAN 2,191.75 02/23/07 KUMMER, STEVEN 2,524.55 02/23/07 LABEREE, ERIN 2,882.35 02/23/07 LINDBLOM, RANDAL 2,486.07 02/23/07 MEINHOLZ, WILLIAM 86.24 02/23/07 SCHREMPP, ANTHONY 151.75 02/23/07 THOMPSON, MICHAEL 2,299.77 02/23/07 ANDERSON, BRUCE 37,843.29 02/23/07 HALL, KATHLEEN 1,873.09 02/23/07 MARUSKA, MARK 2,837.03 02/23/07 NAUGHTON, JOHN 1,875.75 02/23/07 SCHINDELDECKER, JAMES 1,950.86 02/23/07 BIESANZ, OAKLEY 1,571.00 02/23/07 DEAVER, CHARLES 572.80 02/23/07 GERNES, CAROLE 361.08 02/23/07 HAYMAN, JANET 1,451.22 02/23/07 HUTCHINSON, ANN 2,400.32 02/23/07 GAYNOR, VIRGINIA 2,121.35 02/23/07 EKSTRAND, THOMAS 3,341.32 02/23/07 KROLL, LISA 1,38898 02/23/07 LIVINGSTON, JOYCE 1,038.46 02/23/07 SINDT, ANDREA 1,796.55 02/23/07 THOMPSON, DEBRA 690.46 02/23/07 YOUNG, TAMELA 1,676.55 02/23/07 FINWALL, SHANN 2,45895 02/23/07 ROBERTS, KENNETH 2,841.28 02/23/07 BRASH, JASON 1,589.35 02/23/07 CARVER, NICHOLAS 2,939.21 02/23/07 FISHER, DAVID 3,823.36 02/23/07 RICE, MICHAEL 2,172.55 02/23/07 SWAN, DAVID 2,27895 02/23/07 WELLENS, MOLLY 1,460.42 02/23/07 WORK, ALICIA 160.00 02/23/07 WORK, BRANDON 307.50 15 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT 02/23/07 FRANK, PETER 60.00 02/23/07 GOODRICH, CHAD 305.25 02/23/07 MCBRIDE, PATRICK 60.00 02/23/07 OHLHAUSER, MEGHAN 343.00 02/23/07 ROBBINS, AUDRA 2,356.64 02/23/07 SHERRILL, CAITLIN 296.00 02/23/07 TAUBMAN, DOUGLAS 2,854.34 02/23/07 UNDERHILL, KRISTEN 333.00 02/23/07 GERMAIN, DAVID 1,957.79 02/23/07 NORDQUIST, RICHARD 1,948.55 02/23/07 SCHULTZ, SCOTT 2,210.29 02/23/07 ANZALDI, MANDY 487.03 02/23/07 CAREY, HEIDI 2,243.79 02/23/07 COLLINS, ASHLEY 74.25 02/23/07 CRAWFORD - JR, RAYMOND 284.00 02/23/07 EVANS, CHRISTINE 864.01 02/23/07 GRAF, MICHAEL 2,157.23 02/23/07 HER, CHONG 340.00 02/23/07 HOFMEISTER, MARY 847.05 02/23/07 PELOQUIN, PENNYE 632.72 02/23/07 SCHULZE, BRIAN 940.76 02/23/07 STAPLES, PAULINE 3,028.20 02/23/07 TOLBERT, FRANCINE 191.00 02/23/07 ZIELINSKI, JUDY 16.65 02/23/07 BRENEMAN, NEIL 341.45 02/23/07 BRUSOE, CRISTINA 229.26 02/23/07 BUCKLEY, BRITTANY 108.84 02/23/07 DUNN, RYAN 491.10 02/23/07 EVANS, KRISTIN 219.50 02/23/07 FONTAINE, KIM 947.29 02/23/07 GREDVIG, ANDERS 382.63 02/23/07 HASSENSTAB, DENISE 151.05 02/23/07 HORWATH, RONALD 2,336.05 02/23/07 IRISH, GRACE 16.00 02/23/07 IRISH, PETER 141.38 02/23/07 KERSCHNER, JOLENE 39.10 02/23/07 KOEHNEN, AMY 104.20 02/23/07 KOEHNEN, MARY 1,373.25 02/23/07 KROLL, MARK 403.75 02/23/07 KRONHOLM. KATHRYN 781.03 i[� CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK # CHECK DATE 1001309 1001310 1001311 1001312 1001313 1001314 1001315 1001316 1001317 1001318 1001319 1001320 1001321 1001322 1001323 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 02/23/07 EMPLOYEE NAME MATHEWS, LEAH PROESCH, ANDY SMITH, ANN TRUE, CAROLINE TUPY, HEIDE TUPY, MARCUS WOLFGRAM, MARY GROPPOLI, LINDA HER, SHILLAME HOLMGREN, STEPHANIE ODDEN, JESSICA PARAYNO, GUAI STEVENS, PATTI BEHAN, JAMES PATTERSON,ALBERT PRINS, KELLY REILLY, MICHAEL SCHOENECKER, LEIGH VANG,HUE AICHELE, CRAIG PRIEM, STEVEN WOEHRLE, MATTHEW BERGO,CHAD FOWLDS, MYCHAL FRANZEN, NICHOLAS LONGRIE, DIANA JAHN, DAVID MORIN, TROY GENNOW, PAMELA PALANK, MARY SVENDSEN, JOANNE SHORTREED, MICHAEL WELCHLIN, CABOT BAUMAN, ANDREW STELLA, JAMES EDSON, DAVID HELEY, ROLAND HINNENKAMP, GARY LINDORFF, DENNIS NOVAK, MICHAEL AMOUNT 132.05 313.04 256.10 106.80 190.80 407.93 111.88 317.50 110.70 101.50 24.54 279.90 104.30 1,884.83 1,182.52 1,108.62 1,756.55 177.74 118.15 1,997.36 2,392.90 1,887.15 2,355.82 2,561.82 1,942.76 452.00 1,686.86 153.00 159.25 1,728.46 1 ,909.79 3,268.81 2,583.94 960.00 392.00 1,989.36 1,990.59 1,958.27 1,953.17 1,948.55 if CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT 1001324 02/23/07 SOUTTER, CHRISTINE 363.13 1001325 02/23/07 ABRAHAMSON, TYLER 114.00 1001326 02/23/07 BERGER, STEPHANIE 439.69 1001327 02/23/07 BONKO, NICHOLAS 110.00 1001328 02/23/07 BROZAK, KATHERINE 385.00 1001329 02/23/07 BURNS, BETH 56.00 1001330 02/23/07 CHEZIK, CARLEY 54.00 1001331 02/23/07 CORBETT, CAITLIN 19.50 1001332 02/23/07 CYLKOWSKI, LANCE 135.00 1001333 02/23/07 DAHL, SAMUEL 66.00 1001334 02/23/07 DEGREE, AMANDA 83.13 1001335 02/23/07 GAVIN, BENJAMIN 32.25 1001336 02/23/07 GEBHARD, MADELINE 140.00 1001337 02/23/07 GOODRICH, DANIELLE 74.25 1001338 02/23/07 GREEN, DANIEL 42.00 1001339 02/23/07 GREENER, DOUGLAS 96.00 1001340 02/23/07 HANNIGAN, BRADY 72.00 1001341 02/23/07 HANNIGAN, TYLER 64.50 1001342 02/23/07 HOLDER, MOLLY 34.50 1001343 02/23/07 JOHNSON, ALEXANDER 144.00 1001344 02/23/07 JUETTNER. MICHAEL 47.25 1001345 02/23/07 KLEIN, AARON 67.50 1001346 02/23/07 KOHLMAN, JENNIFER 76.56 1001347 02/23/07 LANCETTE, JOSHUA 77.00 1001348 02/23/07 LINDA, KELLIE 575.13 1001349 02/23/07 LUKIN, CASSANDRA 48.00 1001350 02/23/07 MALLET, AMANDA 150.25 1001351 02/23/07 MORRISETTE, WILLIAM 54.00 1001352 02/23/07 MORRISETTE, ZACHARY 43.00 1001353 02/23/07 NELSON, KIRSTEN 90.00 1001354 02/23/07 NICHOLS, SAMUEL 31.50 1001355 02/23/07 NICHOLSON, COLIN 94.50 1001356 02/23/07 ROBBINS, EMERALD 459.38 1001357 02/23/07 ROELLER, MICHAEL 32.25 1001358 02/23/07 RUNNING, DUSTIN 279.00 1001359 02/23/07 SCHALLER, SCOTT 130.00 1001360 02/23/07 SERGOT, COLLIN 160.00 1001361 02/23/07 STACKPOLE, QUINN 78.00 1001362 02/23/07 STODOLA, JONATHAN 60.00 1001363 02/23/07 TARR -JR, GUS 45.00 iE:3 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT 1001364 02/23/07 YORKOVICH, BENJAMIN 360.00 1001365 02/23/07 ZIELINSKI, JESSICA 240.00 1001366 02/23/07 HAAG, MARK 1,972.33 1001367 02/23/07 NADEAU, EDWARD 3,06198 1001368 02/23/07 ANDERSON, ANTHONY 78.65 1001369 02/23/07 GLASS, JEAN 1,924.86 1001370 02/23/07 HANSEN, LORI 1,866.16 1001371 02/23/07 NAGEL, BROOKE 439.55 1001372 02/23/07 SIMPSON, JOSEPH 296.00 1001373 02/23/07 VELASQUEZ, ANGELA 63.00 1001374 02/23/07 ANDERSON, JOSHUA 42.60 1001375 02/23/07 ANDERSON, JUSTIN 42.60 1001376 02/23/07 BENJAMIN, AYLA 71.50 1001377 02/23/07 BRENEMAN, SEAN 76.00 1001378 02/23/07 BRUSOE, AMY 136.38 1001379 02/23/07 BUCIIMAYER, NICOLLET 108.50 1001380 02/23/07 CHASTAN, ADAM 74.75 1001381 02/23/07 CLARK, PAMELA 24990 1001382 02/23/07 COSTA, JOSEPH 277.20 1001383 02/23/07 DEMPSEY, BETH 147.00 1001384 02/23/07 FENGER, JUSTIN 317.30 1001385 02/23/07 GIEL, NICOLE 42.00 1001386 02/23/07 GRANT, MELISSA 156.00 1001387 02/23/07 GRUENHAGEN, LINDA 58095 1001388 02/23/07 HERM, BREANNA 42.25 1001389 02/23/07 JOHNSON, JAMES 66.03 1001390 02/23/07 KOVACS, BREANNA 42.25 1001391 02/23/07 LEMAY, KATHERINE 41.10 1001392 02/23/07 NWANOKWALE, MORDY 87.75 1001393 02/23/07 PEHOSKI, JOEL 10399 1001394 02/23/07 RICHTER, DANIEL 34.00 1001395 02/23/07 RICHTER, NANCY 319.50 1001396 02/23/07 ROSTRON, ROBERT 219.43 1001397 02/23/07 RYAN, ERICA 54.60 1001398 02/23/07 SAUCERMAN, MICHAEL 294.32 1001399 02/23/07 SCHMIDT, EMILY 173.51 1001400 02/23/07 SCHMIDT, JOHN 126.75 1001401 02/23/07 SCHRAMM, BRITTANY 178.40 1001402 02/23/07 SCHUNEMAN, GREGORY 113.75 1001403 02/23/07 TAYLOR, JASON 94.50 IF CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT 1001404 02/23/07 WARNER, CAROLYN 352.10 1001405 02/23/07 WEDES, CARYL 112.50 1001406 02/23/07 WARNER, REBECCA 267.07 1001407 02/23/07 WHITE, NICOLE 511.68 1001408 02/23/07 WILLIAMS, KRISTINE 119.00 1001409 02/23/07 WOODMAN, ALICE 138.00 1001410 02/23/07 ZALK, IDA 94.25 1001411 02/23/07 BOSLEY, CAROL 330.53 1001412 02/23/07 LEWIS, AMY 140.23 1001413 02/23/07 OIE, REBECCA 180.50 1001414 02/23/07 SATTLER, CASSANDRA 58.43 1001415 02/23/07 SATTLER, MELINDA 103.50 1001416 02/23/07 STODGHILL, AMANDA 25.38 1001417 02/23/07 ZAGER, LINNEA 111.78 1001418 02/23/07 BIRKHOLZ, TYLER 132.05 1001419 02/23/07 DOUGLASS, TOM 1,427.32 1001420 02/23/07 GADOW, ANNA 229.83 1001421 02/23/07 HER, CHEE 57.15 1001422 02/23/07 HER, PETER 25.40 1001423 02/23/07 O'GRADY, VICTORIA 163.70 1001424 02/23/07 SCHULZE, KEVIN 242.73 1001425 02/23/07 VANG, KAY 56.65 1001426 02/23/07 VANG, TIM 111.00 1001427 02/23/07 VUE, LOR PAO 271.05 484,13 8.74 ic7 Agenda Item 12 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner SUBJECT: Final Plat PROJECT: Cottagewood LOCATION: Ferndale Street, south of Highwood Avenue DATE: March 1, 2007 INTRODUCTION Phil Soby is requesting that the city council approve the final plat for Cottagewood. Mr. Soby represents the builder and development company, Lauren and Company. This final plat will create 15 lots for town houses and two outlots for common areas. This plat will be south of Highwood Avenue, east of Dennis Street on a new private cul -de -sac called Ferndale Street. (See the maps on pages two - six.) BACKGROUND On August 28, 2006, the city council made several approvals for this development. They included a revision to the planned unit development, a preliminary plat and a resolution ordering the public improvements. These approvals were subject to several conditions. (Please see the city council minutes starting on page eight.) On September 19, 2006, the community design review board approved the design plans for Cottagewood (subject to several conditions of approval). DISCUSSION The developer is progressing with the construction of the plat. The contractor has completed the rough grading of the site, the installation of the ponding areas and stone retaining walls and has installed the utilities. The developer has finished all the conditions the council required for final plat approval. RECOMMENDATION Approve the final plat for Cottagewood date - stamped February, 2007. This approval is subject to the county recording the deeds, deed restrictions and covenants required by the city and the developer meeting all the conditions of the city engineer. p:sec13- 281Cottagewood fin plat - 2007.doc Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Address Map 3. Land Use Map 4. Property Line /Zoning Map 5. Proposed final plat dated February 2007 6. Approved Preliminary Plat 7. 8 -28 -06 City Council Minutes 8. Proposed Final Plat (Separate Attachment) VVDRI FT Cl ........... 77, Location Map Cottagewood 2 N Ln 1 VALLEY ' VIEW AVE 9,32 93, 943 940 953 9b3 Lu gg Lu LL 1007 1015 I 2 98 1000 1 (IM 1016 102A --:17 zQ c -657 6 ry e . ... ... 2,kxl4i 7,� f 6 2 ? F o 7 1 2 ,6 )o 622 —A F c F 264 'h2 r2o' 2 fi 264 26� 26 1.- 2 C48 HIGHVVOOD AVE 1024 N MITZ AVE ......... 351 I - Su 923 CENTURY LN .............. -7 F ---------- 1?'7 04 2 TI'4' 2 1 r 6 9 2.9 100 2 �6 . ............ . 1077 107 Address Map Cottagewood 3 N 64 64 ter 64 W! 64 Z t j HIGHWOOD AVE fl Q0 Cq '67 966 ---------- N EM ITZ AVE 1012 1018- 1024 Cell Tower Land Use Map Cottagewood 4 y. N 27 %081 653 262 684 26 - Rio 2 6 A 0 6 2 /1 2.660 2 651 68 f- - 1� j2764 2712 6 Fos 0 6 C/R AN 2058 0-02 2rl S 2649 . 270 0 t 2654 2 goo 64z— 2 9 2 2 � 074 2652' H4 2 5_1' ........... 2 9 . 64 2650 '2648 w 641 Z t HIGHWOOD AVE fl Q0 C HN 966 7 ........... y . -------- -- N EM ITZ AVE 1 012 I 1M. 1 1 024 1 Zoning Map Cottagewood 5 Attachment 5 R V` P 0" S E D F It I JA L PPP L A T Li N 6 4.r 3 "+ y �: - - - - - - - - - - - - - R V` P 0" S E D F It I JA L PPP L A T Li N 6 Attachment 6 Aztacnmen 19A o. A Zd SWA z I-dts ill— ri Lo 165" s U T L A —1:�— I 10 X, —1:�— I Attachment 7 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M. Monday, August 28, 2006 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 06 -22 A. CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the City Council was held in the Council Chambers, at City Hall, and was called to order at 7:10 P.M. by Mayor Longrie. B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE C. ROLL CALL Diana Longrie, Mayor Present Rebecca Cave Councilmember Present Erik Hjelle, Councilmember Present Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present Will Rossbach, Councilmember Present H. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Cottagewood Subdivision Public Improvements, City Project 06 -10 Public Hearing 7:10 pm Cottagewood Town Houses (2666 Highwood Avenue) Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development Revision Preliminary Plat Resolution Ordering Improvement (4 votes) a. Environmental Manager Konewko presented the public improvement report. b. Civil Engineer Kummer provided further specifics from the report. C. Commissioner Pearson presented the Planning Commission report. d. Planner Roberts presented the project approval report. e. Phil Soby, the applicant, 200 East Chestnut Street, Stillwater, was present for council questions. Mayor Longrie opened the public hearing (9:03 p.m.), calling for proponents or opponents. The following persons were heard: Kip Johnson, Project Engineer for the Developer Chris Gerke, 2660 Highwood Avenue East, Maplewood Sharon Soby, Realtor and applicants wife g. Mayor Longrie closed the public hearing. Councilmember Cave moved to approve the following resolution. This resolution approves a conditional use permit revision for a planned unit development for the property at 2666 Highwood Avenue to be known as Cottagewood. This site is on the south side of Highwood Avenue, east of Dennis Street. The city bases this approval on the findings required by code: City Council Meetigg 08 -28 -06 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION RESOLUTION 06 -08 -105 WHEREAS, Mr. Phil Soby, representing the project developers, applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) revision for the Cottagewood residential planned unit development (PUD). WHEREAS, this permit applies to the Cottagewood town house development plan the city received on July 7, 2006 for the property at 2666 Highwood Avenue. The legal description is: Subject to State TH 1001117 and HWY 393, the north 1100 feet of the West 173 feet of the East 198 feet of the West Y12 of the NE'14 of the SE'14 of Section 13, Township 28, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota. (This is the property to be known as Lots 1 -15 of the proposed Cottagewood) WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On August 7, 2006, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave persons at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The commission also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the conditional use permit. 2. On August 28, 2006, the city council discussed the proposed conditional use permit. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. 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 any activity, process, 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. 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. City Council McEing 08 -28 -06 Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the plans for 49 15 detached town houses as approved by the city. The city council may approve major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes to the plans. Such changes shall include: a. Revising the grading and site plans to show: (1) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation. (2) All driveways at least 20 feet wide. If the developer wants to have parking on one side of the main driveway, then it must be at least 28 feet wide. However, widening of the driveway must not lessen the side setback of the driveway from the east property line. (3) All parking stalls with a width of at least 9.5 feet and a length of at least 18 feet. Also, review and possibly revise the parking spaces and the turn - around area at the south end of the site to maximize the number of trees to be saved and to minimize the amount of hard surface area. (4) Revised storm water pond locations and designs as suggested or required by the watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the city's design standards. (5) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation including keeping and protecting as many of the large trees in the undisturbed area south of the town houses and parking areas. 2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall meet all the conditions and changes noted in the engineer's memo dated July 28, 2006. These shall include: driveway and narking lot plane a. The grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, streets, trails, tree, retaining walls, driveway and parking plans. This approval includes the design of the proposed private cul -de -sac. b. Showing no grading or ground disturbance in the conservation easement. This land is to be preserved for open space purposes. The developer and contractors shall protect this area, including the large trees that are in and near the south side of the site, from encroachment from equipment, grading or filling. c. Include a storm water management plan for the proposal. 4. The design of all ponds shall meet Maplewood's design standards and shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. If needed, the developer shall be responsible for getting any off - site pond and drainage easements. 5. The developer or contractor shall: a. Complete all grading for the site drainage and the ponds, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. City Council Megi Mg 08 -28 -06 b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Remove any debris or junk from the site, including the conservation area d Provide the city with verification that the town houses on the proposed site plan will meet the state's noise standards. This shall be with a study, testing or other documentation. If the noise on this site is a factor, then the contractor will have to build the town houses so that they can meet the noise standards. This may be done with thicker walls, heavier windows, requiring air conditioning or other sound - deadening construction methods. The developer shall provide the city with this documentation before the city will issue a building permit for the town houses. 6. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Cottagewood PUD shall be: a. Front -yard setback (from a public street or a private driveway): minimum - 20 feet, maximum — 35 feet b. Rear -yard setback: 12 feet from any adjacent residential property line c. Side -yard setback (town houses): minimum of six feet from a side property line and at least 12 feet between units. 7. The developer or builder will pay the city Park Access Charges (PAC fees) for each housing unit at the time of the building permit for each housing unit. 8. Submit the homeowner's association documents to city staff for review and approval. 9. The developer shall provide a permanent means to preserve and maintain the common open space. This may be done by conservation easement, deed restrictions, covenants or public dedication. The developer shall record this document with the final plat and before the city issues a permit for grading or utility construction. 10. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 11. This approval does not include the design approval for the townhomes or any signs The project design plans, including architectural, signs site, lighting, tree and landscaping plans, shall be subject to review and approval of the community design review board (CDRB). The projects shall be subject to the following conditions: a. Meeting all conditions and changes as required by the city council. b. For the driveways: (1) Minimum width - 20 feet. (2) Maximum width - 28 feet. (3) All driveways less than 28 feet in width shall be posted for "No Parking" on both sides. Driveways at least 28 feet wide may have parking on one side and shall be posted for No Parking on one side. c. Showing all changes required by the city as part of the conditional use permit for the planned unit development (PUD). City Council Megqng 08 -28 -06 12. The city shall not issue any building permits for construction on an outlot (per city code requirements). The developer must record a final plat to create buildable lots in the preliminary plat before the city will issue a building permit. Seconded by Mayor Longrie Ayes -Mayor Longrie, Councilmembers Cave, Hjelle, and Juenemann Nay- Councilmember Rossbach Mayor Longrie moved to approve the Cottagewood preliminary plat (received by the city on July 7, 2006). The developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final plat: 1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Have Xcel Energy install Group V rate street lights in two locations - primarily at the street intersection and near the south end of the driveway. The exact style and location shall be subject to the city engineer's approval. d. Pay the city for the cost of traffic - control, street identification and no parking signs. e. Provide all required and necessary easements, including any off -site easements. f. Demolish or remove the existing house and garage from the site, and remove all other buildings, fencing, trailers, scrap metal, debris and junk from the site. g. Cap and seal all wells on site that the owners are not using; remove septic systems or drainfields, subject to Minnesota rules and guidelines. h. Complete all the curb and gutter on Highwood Avenue on the north side of the site. This is to replace the existing driveways on Highwood Avenue and shall include the restoration and sodding of the boulevards. i. Install a sign where the new driveway intersects Highwood Avenue indicating that it is a private driveway. j. Install survey monuments and signs along the edges of the conservation easement area. These signs shall explain that the area beyond the signs is a conservation easement area and that there shall be no building, fences, mowing, cutting, filling, dumping or other ground disturbance in that area. The developer or contractor shall install these signs before the city issues building permits in this plat. 2. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, driveway, trail, tree, and street plans. The plans shall meet all the conditions and changes listed in the memo from Michael Thompson dated July 28, 2006, and shall meet the following conditions: a.The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code. City Council Meg12tg 08 -28 -06 b.The grading plan shall show: (1) The proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each building site. The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat. (2) Contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb. (3) Building pads that reduce the grading on sites where the developer can save large trees. (4) The proposed street and driveway grades as allowed by the city engineer. (5) All proposed slopes on the construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. On slopes steeper than 3:1, the developer shall prepare and implement a stabilization and planting plan. At a minimum, the slopes shall be protected with wood -fiber blanket, be seeded with a no- maintenance vegetation and be stabilized before the city approves the final plat. (6) All retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls taller than four feet require a building permit from the city. The developer shall install a protective rail or fence on top of any retaining wall that is taller than four feet. (7) Sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. (8) No grading beyond the plat boundary without temporary grading easements from the affected property owner(s). (9) As little grading as possible west and south of the town houses. This is to keep as many of the existing trees on the site as is reasonably possible. c. The street, driveway and utility plans shall show: (1) The driveway shall be a nine -ton design with a maximum grade of eight percent and the maximum grade within 75 feet of the intersection at two percent. (2) The street (driveway) with continuous concrete curb and gutter, except where the city engineer determines that curbing is not necessary for drainage purposes. (3) The removal of the unused driveways and the completion of the curb and gutter on the south side of Highwood Avenue and the restoration and sodding of the boulevards. (4) The coordination of the water main alignments and sizing with the standards and requirements of the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS). Fire flow requirements and hydrant locations shall be verified with the Maplewood Fire Department. (5) All utility excavations located within the proposed right -of -ways or within easements. The developer shall acquire easements for all utilities that would be outside the project area. (6) The plan and profiles of the proposed utilities. (7) A detail of any ponds, the pond outlets and the rainwater gardens. The contractor shall protect the outlets to prevent erosion. City Council Megll3tg 08 -28 -06 (8) The minimum cul -de -sac size to meet the public safety needs while preserving as many trees as possible. d. The drainage plan shall ensure that there is no increase in the rate of storm water run -off leaving the site above the current (predevelopment) levels. The developer's engineer shall: (1) Verify inlet and pipe capacities. (2) Submit drainage design calculations. e.* The tree plan shall: (1) Be approved, along with the landscaping, by the Community Design Review Board (CDRB) before site grading or final plat approval. (2) Show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site. (3) Show the size, species and location of the replacement and screening trees. The deciduous trees shall be at least two and one half (2 Y2) inches in diameter and shall be a mix of red and white oaks, ash, lindens, sugar maples or other native species. The coniferous trees shall be at least eight (8) feet tall and shall be a mix of Black Hills Spruce, Austrian pine and other species. (4) Show no tree removal in the buffer zones, conservation easement, or beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (5) Include for city staff a detailed tree planting plan and material list. (6) Group the new trees together. These planting areas shall be: (a) near the ponding areas (b) on the slopes (c) along the west side of the site to screen the proposed buildings from the homes to the west (7) Show the planting of at least 37 trees after the site grading is done. 3. Change the plat as follows: a.Add drainage and utility easements as required by the city engineer. This shall include showing a 20 -foot -wide drainage and utility easement along the north side of Lot 15. b. Show drainage and utility easements along all property lines on the final plat. These easements shall be ten feet wide along the front and rear property lines and five feet wide along the side property lines. c. Label the common areas as an outlot or as outlots. d. If allowed, show the conservation easement on the final plat. 4. Pay for costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans. 5. Secure and provide all required easements for the development including any off -site drainage and utility easements. These shall include, but not be limited to, an easement for the culvert draining the pond at the northwest corner of the plat. City Council Megt4ng 08 -28 -06 6.The developer shall complete all grading for public improvements and overall site drainage. The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that the developer or contractor has not completed before final plat approval. 7. Sign a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Provide for the repair of Highwood Avenue (street, curb and gutter and boulevard) after the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the private driveway. 8. Record the following with the final plat: a. All homeowner's association documents. b. A covenant or deed restriction that prohibits any further subdivision or splitting of the lots or parcels in the plat that would create additional building sites. c. A covenant or deed restriction that prohibits any additional driveways (besides the one new driveway shown on the project plans) from going onto Highwood Avenue. d.The conservation easement for the undisturbed area of the site. The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions to the city for approval before recording. The city will not issue a building permit until after the developer has recorded the final plat and these documents and covenants. 9* Submit the homeowners association bylaws and rules to the director of community development. These are to assure that there will be one responsible party for the maintenance of the common areas, outlots, private utilities, driveways, retaining walls and structures. 10. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey - Washington Metro Watershed District for grading. 11. If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the interim director of community development may waive any conditions that do not apply to the final plat. 12. The developer shall complete all grading for public improvements and overall site drainage. The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that the developer or contractor has not completed before final plat approval. *The developer must complete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit or approves the final plat. Seconded by Mayor Longrie Ayes -Mayor Longrie, Councilmembers Cave, Hjelle, and Juenemann Nay- Councilmember Rossbach City Council Megbig 08 -28 -06 Agenda Item 13 MEMORANDUM TO FROM SUBJECT LOCATION DATE: INTRODUCTION Project Description Greg Copeland, City Manager Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner Nonconforming Three -Plex and Four -Plex Conditional Use Permit Review 134911359 County Road C March 2, 2007 for the March 12 City Council Meeting The conditional use permit for a planned unit development (PUD) for two nonconforming structures located at 1349 and 1359 County Road C is due for review. The PUD was approved by the city council in order to allow the duplexes, which were illegally converted to a three -plex and four -plex in the 1970s, to remain until the properties were sold, at which time they must be converted back to duplexes. In 1968 the City of Maplewood approved the construction of two duplexes on these properties. At that time the properties were zoned and guided in the city's comprehensive plan as double dwelling residential (R -2). Some time after the city's initial approval of the duplexes (approximately 1970), previous owners converted the duplexes to a three -plex (1349 County Road C) and a four -plex (1359 County Road C) without the required city approvals. The city discovered the illegal three -plex and four -plex in 2004 and required the owners to apply for a comprehensive land use map and zoning change from double dwelling residential to high multiple dwelling residential. This change would have allowed the properties to remain as a three -plex and a four -plex, and would also have allowed future redevelopment of the lots with a higher density. Due to concerns about the possibility of future redevelopment of the lots to higher density, the city council ultimately approved a conditional use permit for a PUD to allow the properties to remain as a three -plex and a four -plex until the properties were sold, at which time the properties must be converted back to duplexes. The city council also approved a comprehensive land use plan map change for the properties from double - dwelling residential (R -2) to high multiple - dwelling residential (R -31-1). This change was required in order to have consistent land use designations as the existing uses, as required by state statute. (Refer to the July 11, 2005, city council meeting minutes attached.) DISCUSSION The city council approved the PUD with three conditions as follows: The planned unit development for three dwelling units to be located at 1349 County Road C and four dwelling units to be located at 1359 County Road C will expire once the properties are sold. Once the properties are sold, either consecutively or individually, they will be converted back to double dwelling residential (R -2) zoning which allows for two dwelling units per property. In order to ensure this is accomplished, the property owners must file appropriate title work indicating such, and provide such notice to any potential buyer and notify the city of the sale. Appropriate title work to be approved by city staff prior to recording. 2. The property owners must submit and maintain a landscape /screening/ parking plan to the Community Design Review Board for approval. The plan must ensure adequate landscaping /screening and parking is existing or installed 3. The property owners must have each individual unit inspected by the city's building official and fire marshal to ensure life /safety issues are addressed. On June 21, 2006, both property owners signed a declaration of restrictions which requires the properties to be converted back to duplexes (2 units each) once the properties are sold. This declaration was recorded with Ramsey County so all prospective buyers and their financial institutions will be aware of the requirement. On September 25, 2006, the city's building department conducted a life /safety inspection on the two properties. The building inspector found two code violations including the need for a fire extinguisher in the laundry room of 1349 County Road C and the installation of additional smoke detectors in each bedroom on 1359 County Road C. The property owners installed the required equipment and have complied with the life /safety inspection. On February 13, 2007, the community design review board approved the landscape /screening /parking plan for the two properties. This plan was required to ensure adequate landscaping /screening from adjacent single family properties and ensure adequate parking on the site. Based on neighbor comments and review of existing conditions, the community design review board determined that there was no need for additional landscaping or screening and that parking on the site was adequate. Staff recommends that the city council extend the conditional use permit for the planned unit development on the two properties located at 1349 and 1359 County Road C and review again in one year to ensure continued compliance with all conditions. p \com- dev \sec3 \march 12, 2007, cc meeting Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Existing Landscape /Screening /Parking Plan 3. July 11, 2005, City Council Minutes 2 A L /-xitachment 1 lit . P ON aL EDE) LU Oun. oa I Three-Plex and Four -Flex 7 T LA I QI) EI L, g E-72, U AOW& Loudoov"tior Map Attachment 2 City Code Requires the Following: Landscape/Screening: A landscaped and possible screened area of not less than 20 feet in width shall be provided where a multiple dwelling abuts a property zoned for single or double dwellings. 4:p Screening shall be satisfied by the use of a screening fence, planting screen, berm or combination thereof. Parking: Two parking stalls per unit. I a 0 ■ l®rtg)" gxw III M C' A � (n a. 1 C- B O M777r�. YY IN ......... LL Existing Landscape/ Screen i ng/Parki ng Plan Attachment 3 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota was duly called and held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 11 of July, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the following resolution approving the attached comprehensive land use change plan from double dwelling residential to high multiple dwelling residential for the properties located at 1349 and 1359 County Road C East: RESOLUTION 05 -07 -109 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Fred Richie and Craig Anondson applied for a change to the city's land use plan from Double Dwelling Residential (R -2) to High Multiple - Dwelling Residential (R -3H). C East. WHEREAS, this change applies to the properties at 1349 and 1359 County Road WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: On June 6, 2005, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements prior to their recommendation. 2. On July 11, 2005, the city council discussed the land use plan change. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approved the above - described change to the land use plan for the following reasons: This site is proper for and consistent with the city's policies for high - density residential use. This includes: a. Include a variety of housing types for all types of residents, regardless of age, ethnic, racial, cultural or socioeconomic background. A diversity of housing types should include apartments, town houses, manufactured homes, single- family housing, public- assisted housing and low- to moderate- income housing, and rental and owner - occupied housing. b. Disperse low- and moderate- income developments throughout the city, rather than concentrating them in one area or neighborhood. C. Have a balanced housing supply, with housing available for people at all income levels. d. Have a variety of housing types for ownership and rental for people in all stages of the life - cycle. e. Have a community of well - maintained housing and neighborhoods, including ownership and rental housing. f. Add to and preserve the affordable housing in the city. g. The properties are located on a collector street, with no additional traffic added to local streets. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes -All Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the following resolution approving a conditional use permit for a planned unit development for the properties located at 1349 (3 units) and 1359 (4 units) County Road C East. At change of ownership, they would revert to R(2) Duplexes: Conditional Use Permit Resolution 05 -07 -110 WHEREAS, Fred Richie and Craig Anondson applied for a conditional use permit for a planned unit development to allow three dwelling units to remain on 1349 County Road C and four dwelling units to remain on 1359 County Road C. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the properties at 1349 and 1359 County Road C. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: On June 6, 2005, the planning commission held a public hearing. City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission prior to their recommendation. 2. On July 11, 2005, the city council discussed the conditional use permit. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. 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 any activity, process, 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 runoff, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not 2 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. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The planned unit development allows for three dwelling units to be located at 1349 County Road C and four dwelling units to be located at 1369 County Road C. Any additional dwelling units must be approved by the city council. 2. The planned unit development for three dwelling units to be located 1349 County Road C and four dwelling units to be located at 1359 County Road C will expire once the properties are sold. Once the properties are sold, either consecutively or individually, they will be converted back to double dwelling (R -2) zoning which allows for two dwelling units per property. In order to ensure this is accomplished, the property owners must file appropriate title work indicating such, and provide such notice to any potential buyer and notify the city of the sale. Appropriate title work to be approved by city staff prior to recording. 3. Any exterior modifications including additions and accessory structures which require building permits must be reviewed by the Community Design Review Board. 4 The property owners must submit and maintain a landscape /screening /parking plan to the Community Design Review Board for approval. The plan must ensure adequate landscaping /screening and parking is existing or installed. 5 The property owners must have each individual unit inspected by the city's building official and fire marshal to ensure life /safety issues are addressed. 6 The city council shall review this permit in one year. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes -All Agenda Item 14 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Chuck Ahl, Director of Public Works / City Engineer SUBJECT: CarMax /Mogren Addition, City Project 06 -14, Approve Mogren Development Contract DATE: March 1, 2007 INTRODUCTION The development contract for the Mogren Development is complete and ready for approval from the City Council. DISCUSSION On December 18, 2006, the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development at the CarMax /Mogren Development. A development contract is necessary to insure that the conditions for approval are met and to secure the payment of the assessments for the improvements related to the development. Attached is the development contract. Included with the contract are the minutes of the Council meeting from December 18, 2006. By attaching the minutes the conditions are secured. This agreement, in combination with the CarMax Development Contract, provides security in the form of a letter of credit in the amount of $2,994,600 to guarantee the conditions. The final language is still being reviewed by attorneys for Mr. Mogren. These revisions are anticipated to be minor and will be reviewed with the City Attorney. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the council approve the attached Development Contract with Mr. Bruce Mogren for the CarMax /Mogren Addition, as approved on December 18, 2006 and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the agreement signifying City Council approval. Minor revisions as approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney are authorized as needed. Attachments: 1. Development Contract 2. Project Location Map CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Ramsey County, Minnesota Development Agreement for Mogren Retail Addition City Project 06 -14 THIS AGREEMENT, made this day of , 2007, between the City of Maplewood, a Minnesota municipal corporation, acting by and through its mayor and city manager, herein called the CITY and Country View Golf, Inc. herein called the DEVELOPER. IN CONSIDERATION of the following mutual agreements and covenants, the parties hereby agree as follows: In consideration of the CITY accepting Mogren Retail Addition, the DEVELOPER shall provide all internal water systems, storm water management facilities, sanitary sewers and street improvements, including concrete curb and gutter, street lighting, signing, landscaping and other improvements as specified herein, all in conformance with current City standards, more specifically outlined in the Special Conditions, Plans and Specifications attached to this contract. All internal improvements constructed by the DEVELOPER shall be considered private utilities and /or improvements and shall be maintained by the DEVELOPER or his assign. The exception to the private improvements are the improvements to Beam Avenue, the construction of Mogren Drive, the wetland mitigation and the associated sanitary sewer, water main and storm drainage improvements as detailed in the Feasibility Study and Report for Carmax /Morgren Addition, City Project 06 -17, dated November 2006. The DEVELOPER warrants that he is the owner of the property proposed for the construction of the Mogren Retail Addition development and maintains all rights and obligations necessary to construct the said improvements and to incur any property obligations. 2. The DEVELOPER agrees to perform the earthwork/grading and necessary soils corrections required for the construction of Mogren Drive and the associated wetland mitigation. The earthwork/grading shall be as detailed in the Feasibility Study and Report for Carmax / Morgren Addition, City Project 06 -17, dated November 2006. The grading shall be completed to within a 0.2 foot tolerance of the required design grades. The earthwork/grading for the wetland mitigation may need to extend beyond property owned by the DEVELOPER in the right of way along Beam Avenue. Any earthwork/grading within the Beam Avenue right of way shall be subject to CITY and Ramsey County review and approval. Upon the completion of the earthwork/grading, the DEVELOPER shall provide the CITY with an as -built field survey confirming that the earthwork /grading meets the required 0.2 foot tolerance. The DEVELOPER agrees to provide the CITY with a stockpile of sand according to specifications to be supplied by the City Engineer that is available on site. The quantity of sand is estimated to be 30,000 cubic yards. Should the sand material not be acceptable to the City Engineer or a quantity of less than 30,000 cubic yards is provided, then the DEVELOPER agrees to an increase in the assessment equal to the CITY bid price for granular burrow material from within the City Project 06 -17 bid price. 3. The DEVELOPER agrees to sign an assessment waiver prepared by the CITY waiving the right to appeal the proposed assessments for the Mogren Street Improvements, City Project 06 -17, as detailed in the Feasibility Study ON and Report. The total amount of the proposed assessments to the DEVELOPER for these improvements has been estimated at $3,394,600.00. The assessment amount is hereby agreed to be reduced by the amount of grading work completed by the DEVELOPER. Current estimates of the grading work to be completed are $400,000. The final estimate of the improvements and the amount of the assessment shall be as determined by the City Engineer but shall not exceed $3,394,600 less the amount of grading work completed by the DEVELOPER. The DEVELOPER shall provide the City Engineer with cost summaries of the grading work. 4. The DEVELOPER agrees to provide the CITY a cash escrow in the form of a letter of credit for 100% of the amount for the Mogren Drive Improvements, City Project 06 -17, as detailed in the Feasibility Study and Report estimated to be $2,994,600.00. Said letter of credit shall be effective until the CITY conducts an assessment hearing noted in 3. above. Developer shall provide to the CITY the letter of credit or other security on or about March 9, 2007. 5. The DEVELOPER agrees to provide the city a Park Availability Charge (PAC) fee consistent with City Ordinance prior to the issuance of any building permits on the subject properties. DEVELOPER agrees that said PAC fee shall be calculated as 9% of the market value of the purchase price of each parcel. CITY agrees that no PAC fee is collected on property Outlots until said Outlots are re- platted. There shall be no PAC fee charged for parcels of land purchased by the DEVELOPER from the CITY under option agreements. 6. The CITY acknowledges that the DEVELOPER is entitled consideration for work provided by the DEVELOPER for Mogren Drive and the wetland mitigation. The CITY shall determine a "Credit" to be applied to the 3 assessments of the DEVELOPER based on work performed by the DEVELOPER to the benefit of Mogren Drive construction and the wetland mitigation. Work performed shall be based on takeoff quantities, mutually agreed upon between the CITY and the DEVELOPER. Financial credit will be determined by calculating the sum of the quantities times the respective unit prices of the DEVELOPER'S low bid contractor. The CITY has preliminarily estimated the credits for the street and street and storm water treatment facility performed by the DEVELOPER, at approximately $400,000, based on preliminary information provided by the DEVELOPER. The DEVELOPER agrees that all improvements to be constructed for Mogren Drive and/or the wetland mitigation shall be accomplished according to CITY specifications and approved by the City Engineer. 7. The DEVELOPER agrees to dedicate the right -of -way for Mogren Drive to the CITY. This dedication shall be provided at no cost to the CITY. 8. The DEVELOPER agrees to purchase the Xcel parcel, north of Outlot B from the CITY for $292,500. Through Option Agreements, the DEVELOPER has already paid to the CITY the sum of $242,320. At the time of closing, to be arranged by the CITY attorney's office, the DEVELOPER shall pay to the CITY the sum of $50,180. 9. The DEVELOPER agrees to deed, through a Warranty Deed, Outlot A to the CITY for public drainage and utility purposes. This dedication shall be provided at no cost to the CITY as consideration for 8. above. 10. The DEVELOPER agrees to dedicate, at no cost to the CITY, the necessary drainage and utility easements over the wetland mitigation areas, as detailed in the Carmax /Mogren Feasibility Study and Report, City Project 06 -17. This dedication shall be provided at no cost to the CITY. 19 11. The DEVELOPER agrees to grant a right -of -entry to the CITY to access private property within Mogren Retail Addition as needed to construct the improvements included as a part of the Carmax/Mogren Addition Improvements, City Project 06 -17, as detailed in the Feasibility Study and Report. The right -of -entry shall be provided at no cost to the CITY. 12. The DEVELOPER agrees to complete landscaping improvements to the wetland mitigation area within the city's drainage and utility easement and in Outlot A. The landscaping shall be in accordance with design concepts established by the CITY and shall be subject to the review and approval of the CITY. The CITY hereby grants the DEVELOPER and his assigns a right of entry to Outlot A from the date of this agreement through December 31, 2009. The DEVELOPER agrees to assume a two -year warranty on all planting within Outlot A. 13. The DEVELOPER agrees to install and maintain all required erosion control practices necessary for private construction and work done by the DEVELOPER on Mogren Drive and the wetland mitigation, including but not limited to silt fence, sediment ponds, floating silt curtain, inlet protection and rock construction entrances. 14. Cash escrows shall be a letter of credit or cash deposit. If the surety is in the form of a letter of credit, the letter of credit must clearly indicate that it is an irrevocable letter of credit {from a financial institution approved by the City Attorney} in the name of the City of Maplewood, payable on demand, to assure compliance with the terms of this development agreement. The letter of credit shall be of a one -year duration and must have a condition indicating automatic renewal with notification to the CITY a minimum of 60 days prior to its expiration. 15. The DEVELOPER shall reimburse any costs incurred by the CITY for engineering, legal, and administrative services, associated with the project. A $168,000 cash escrow has been established by the DEVELOPER for these services. Said cash escrow will not be refunded to the DEVELOPER and has been included in final letter of credit and assessment calculations previously referenced within this agreement. 16. The DEVELOPER shall complete the work covered by this contract by the date given in the Special Conditions of this contract. No deviation from the required completion date shall be permitted unless approved in writing by the CITY. After receipt of written notice from the DEVELOPER of the existence of causes over which the DEVELOPER has no control which will delay the completion of the work, the CITY, at its discretion, may extend the completion date and any financial sureties required shall be continued to cover the work during the extension of time. The DEVELOPER and CITY hereby agree that said work shall be completed by June 1, 2007. This date may be extended by mutual agreement of the DEVELOPER and the City Engineer. 17. The DEVELOPER shall furnish all engineering, architectural and administrative services for the private improvements and building projects. 18. The DEVELOPER agrees that the work shall be done and performed in the best and most workmanlike manner; and all materials and labor shall be in strict conformity with respect to the approved Plans and Specifications and improvement standards of the City of Maplewood, and shall be subject to the inspection and approval of the CITY or a duly authorized engineer of the CITY; and in case any material or labor supplied shall be rejected by the CITY or engineer as defective or unsuitable, then such rejected material shall be removed and replaced with approved material to the satisfaction and A approval of the CITY or engineer and at the sole cost and expense of the DEVELOPER. 19. After completion of any private work required by the DEVELOPER within public right -of -way or easements, the City engineer or the City engineer's designated representative and a representative of the DEVELOPER's engineer will make a final inspection of the work. This provision shall apply only to work within public right -of -way or easements. The City engineer will not inspect or warrant any private work conducted by the contractor or contractors hired by the DEVELOPER. 20. It is further agreed, anything to the contrary herein notwithstanding, that the City of Maplewood City Council and its agents or employees shall not be personally liable or responsible in any manner to the DEVELOPER, the DEVELOPER's contractor or subcontractor, material suppliers, laborers or to any other person or persons whomsoever, for any claim demand, damages, actions or causes of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the execution of this agreement or the performance and completion of the work or the improvements provided herein, which the DEVELOPER will save the CITY harmless from all such claims, demands, damages, actions or causes of action or the costs disbursements and expenses of defending the same, specifically including, without intending to limit the categories of said costs, cost and expenses for CITY administrative time and labor, costs of consulting engineering services, and costs of legal services rendered in connection with the defending such claims as may be brought against the CITY. It is further agreed that the DEVELOPER will furnish the City of Maplewood proof of insurance in the amount as required by the approval specifications covering any public liability or property damage by reason of 7 the operation of the DEVELOPER's equipment, laborers, and hazard caused by said improvement. 21. Breach of any terms of this agreement by the DEVELOPER shall be grounds for denial of building or occupancy permits for buildings within Mogren Retail Addition until the DEVELOPER corrects such breach. 22. In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions contained herein and any other application thereof shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. 23. The terms and conditions of this agreement shall be binding on the parties hereto, their respective successors and assigns and the benefits and burdens shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. 24. Notices. Whenever it shall be required or permitted by this Agreement that notice or demand be given or served by either party to or on the other party, such notice or demand shall be delivered personally or mailed by United States mail to the addresses hereinafter set forth by certified mail. Such notice or demand shall be deemed timely given when delivered personally or when deposited in the mail in accordance with the above. The addresses of the parties hereto for such mail purposes are as follows, until written notice of such address has been given: As to the City: City of Maplewood 1830 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 As to the Landowner: Country View Golf, Inc. Bruce Mogren 1801 Gervais Avenue Maplewood, MN 55109 A SIGNATURES FOR COUNTRY VIEW GOLF, INC. Bruce Mogren, its managing agent m TITLE STATE OF MINNESOTA } ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY } la TITLE The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2007, by of the Developer. and Notary Public SIGNATURES CITY OF MAPLEWOOD: Diana Longrie, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA } ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY } The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2007 by Diana Longrie of the City of Maplewood, a municipal corporation. Notary Public SIGNATURES CITY OF MAPLEWOO©: Greg Copeland, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA } ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY } The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2007, by Greg Copeland of the City of Maplewood, a municipal corporation. Notary Public IN SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 1. Project Information: a. Name: Mogren Retail Addition b. Developer: Bruce Mogren for Country View Golf, Inc. C. Engineer: Landform d. General Contractor: Frattalone e. Financial Guarantees: (1) Type: Cash Escrow (Engineering and Legal Expenses) Amount: $168,000 (posted June 30 2006) (2) Type: Letter of Credit or Cash Surety Amount: $2,994,600 (Carmax /Mogren Drive Improvements) 2. Scope of work contemplated under the terms of this contract and covered by escrow guarantee are outlined in the conditions of development approval from the December 18, 2006, city council meeting (see attached minutes). 11 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M. Monday, December 18, 2006 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 06 -34 H. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:00 p.m. Carmax /Mogren Addition a. Senior Planner Ekstrand presented the report. b. Brandon Bourdon, Kimley Horn & Associates, addressed council. C. Bruce Mogren, Mogren Development Company, was present for council questions. d. Dave Sellegren, Land Use Attorney representing Carmax, addressed council. e. Joe Jagdmann, Real Estate Manager representing Carmax, addressed council. Chuck Patterson, Architect for the project, answered council questions. g. Dan Hughes, Landscape Engineer, was presented for council questions. Boardmember Shankar presented the Design Review Board report. i. Mayor Longrie opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following persons were heard: ►= j. Mayor Longrie closed the public hearing. Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following resolution approving a conditional use permit for a planned unit development for the CarMax/Mogren Addition Development to include all 18 conditions: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 06 -12 -156 FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, Carmax and Bruce Mogren applied for a conditional use permit for a planned unit development to develop a Carmax used -car dealership on the former Country View Golf Course property; WHEREAS, this permit applies to the northeast corner of Beam Avenue and Highway 61. The legal description is: 12 Lot 1, Carmax /Mogren Addition WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: On December 5, 2006, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve this conditional use permit. 2. The city council reviewed this request on December 18, 2006. The council considered the reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approved the above - described conditional use permit revision because: 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 any activity, process, 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. 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. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 13 1. The development shall follow the plans date - stamped October 20, 2006, except where the city requires changes. 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 end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. This approval permits the development of the Carmax site subject to the conditions of the city council. The future development sites are not approved at this time. The developers of these sites must submit all necessary applications and materials for evaluation of those plans as required by the city ordinance. 5. If the watershed district allows their twin drainage pipes to be relocated above grade as an open channel, the PUD shall also require that all developments within the Carmax /Mogren Addition actively and regularly pick up all litter from their parking lots to keep debris from entering this open channel. 6. The applicants shall comply with the requirements in the Engineering Plan Review dated November 21, 2006, by Erin Laberee and Michael Thompson. 7. The applicants shall also comply with the requirements listed in these plan - review reports as follows: • The Drainage and Wetland Report by DuWayne Konewko dated November 22, 2006. • The wetland and rainwater garden landscaping comments by Ginny Gaynor dated November 22, 2006. • The watershed district comments by Tina Carstens dated November 21, 2006. 8. The outdoor vehicle storage area is allowed. The outward- facing fagade of the screening wall shall be brick to match the building. 9. The pervious paving method proposed within the shoreland boundary area shall meet the requirements of the shoreland ordinance. This shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. 10. Vehicle transports shall not use public right -of -way for loading or unloading. 11. The site plan shall be revised for the city engineer's approval relocating the Highway 61 driveway to the north at County Road D. This driveway shall be W located as far east as possible. This driveway shall remain gated at all times except when needed for vehicle test drives which is its proposed and permitted use. 12. The dealership shall not store any materials or supplies on the outside of the building, except for what they store in the dumpster enclosure. 13. The dealership shall only park vehicles on designated paved surfaces. 14. The applicants shall obtain any required permits from the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District, Ramsey County and the State of Minnesota and meet the requirements of those agencies. 15. The site plan shall be revised to move the driveway on Beam Avenue as far to the east as possible. This revision shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. 16. The city engineer shall get the necessary approvals for wetland mitigation from the watershed district as part of the public improvements needed for this subdivision and development as stated in the report by DuWayne Konewko, Environmental Management Specialist. 17. All buildings, paving, unneeded utilities, etc. within the proposed subdivision shall be demolished and removed from the site by the applicants. 18. The applicants shall provide all development agreements, maintenance agreements and escrows required by the city. These agreements shall be executed and escrows paid before the issuance of building permits. Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes -All Councilmember Hjelle moved to approve the preliminary plat for the CarMax /Mogren Addition, subiect to the following conditions: 1. Signing of the following agreements with the city: • A maintenance agreement, prepared by the city, for the rainwater gardens, ponds and sumps. The project plans shall clearly point out the maintenance access route to each garden, pond and basin. The developer /owner of the property will be responsible for all such maintenance. • A development agreement with the city for the construction of the public road within the development site that will connect Beam Avenue to County Road D. 2. Revising the plat to rename all Outlot B with a lot and block number. 15 3. The applicants shall dedicate any easements that the city may require for drainage and utility purposes. 4. The name of the street shall be subject to the approval of the city's public safety staff and city engineer. 5. The applicants shall pay the city escrow for any documents, easements and agreements that the city engineer may require that may not be ready by the time of plat signing. 6. The applicants shall comply with the requirements in the Engineering Plan Review dated November 21, 2006, by Erin Laberee and Michael Thompson. 7. The applicants shall also comply with the requirements listed in these plan - review reports as follows: • The Drainage and Wetland Report by DuWayne Konewko dated November 22, 2006. • The wetland and rainwater garden landscaping comments by Ginny Gaynor dated November 22, 2006. • The watershed district comments by Tina Carstens dated November 21, 2006. Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes-All Councilmember Rossbach moved to direct the applicant provide a three dimensional cad drawing of the building elevations for submission to the Design Review Board for their approval based upon previous suggestions by the board and city staff. Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes-All Councilmember Hjelle moved to adopt the following resolution ordering improvement after a public hearing for the proposed public improvements for the CarMax/Moaren Addition Imorovements: RESOLUTION 06 -12 -157 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AFTER PUBLIC HEARING WHEREAS, a resolution of the city council adopted the 27th day of November, 2006, fixed a date for a council hearing on the proposed public improvements for the CarMaxlMogren Addition Improvements, City Project 06- 17. AND WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was duly held on December 18, 2006, and the council has heard all persons desiring to be heard on the matter and has fully considered the same; m 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 public improvements to the proposed CarMax /Mogren Addition Improvements, City Project 06 -17. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in this council resolution adopted the 18th day of December 2006. 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 $4,416,000 shall be established. The proposed financing plan is as follows: Developer Assessments $ 3,394,600 (76.9 %) City of Maplewood — MSAS Bond Funds $ 517,550 (11.7 %) Ramsey County $ 292,550 (6.6 MnDOT $ 211,300 (4.8 %) Total $ 4,416,000 Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes -All A Comment from Councilmember Rossbach for the record: Although the Landform letter states otherwise, Councilmember Rossbach clarified that this site does and will generate traffic onto local streets. 9.35 p.m. Mayor Longrie announced a 10 minute recess. 17 Stormwater /Wetland Report By DuWayne Konewko, Maplewood Environmental Management Specialist November 22, 2006 A. Storm Water Management 1) Existing Drainage System and Features The existing drainage system consists of a regional treatment pond at the north end of the site which collects and treats runoff from portions of County Road D. The existing pond has treatment capacity for a portion of the proposed development south of County Road D, including portions of the proposed public road and the private development east of the proposed road. The treated storm water from the regional pond discharges to a two -cell constructed wetland system immediately to the west before entering a section of what is referred to as North County Ditch 18 (or Willow Creek). The drainage system is routed to the road ditch on the north side of Beam Avenue and then crosses Beam and TH 61 before entering Kohlman Lake. The existing wetland system was designed and constructed in conjunction with the Maplewood Mall Area Transportation Improvements (MMATI) to mitigate both public and private wetland impacts throughout the MMATI project area. The created wetland credits are all accounted for and no additional credits are available for future impacts in the CarMax /Mogren Site. The wetland also has a buffer area, including minimum setback distances of 100 feet on the north, east, and south sides, and 50 feet on the west. Another feature of the existing drainage system is the existing twin 48 -inch pipes that connect the wetland complex north of County Road D to the pond and wetland complex south of Beam Avenue. This is an important feature of the site from both a site design and long -term operational standpoint. This system is not hydraulically connected to the drainage system on the immediate CarMax /Mogren site, although both systems ultimately drain to Kohlman Lake. As will be discussed later in the section, there may be an advantage to replacing the existing pipes with ditch section to better meet the site design goals for treatment and wetland mitigation and to reduce long -term operational concerns with the existing pipes. 2) Proposed Storm Water Treatment Systems The proposed treatment system consists of a combination of regional and on -site treatment areas. Both existing and proposed systems will be designed to meet City and RWMWD design standards for pollutant removal efficiencies and for volume control (i.e., infiltration requirements). The majority of the public road portion of the site will be routed to the existing storm water pond system on the north end of the site through a conventional storm sewer system. IN A small portion of the south end of the new public road will be routed to a treatment system in the northwest corner of the intersection of the Beam and the new road. A rain garden or infiltration feature in this area is recommended, although coordination with the adjacent development will determine the ultimate size and location of the treatment area. If an infiltration area is incorporated, the system would include a pre- treatment component such as a sump manhole or mechanical sediment removal device. For the purpose of this feasibility report, we have assumed that a more effective mechanical sediment removal device would be installed for pre - treatment. 3) Proposed Storm Water Routing and System Capacity The proposed storm sewer system for the public road will be routed as illustrated in Exhibit 7. The northern section will route to the existing regional pond to the north and southern section will route to the south toward the Beam Avenue ditch system after treatment. Storm sewer catch basins with concrete curb and gutter are proposed to accommodate the runoff from Beam Avenue Developers of the sites on the west side of the proposed public road will be responsible for meeting City and RWMWD rate and volume controls on their individual sites. The overall routing of these systems will be coordinated by City staff throughout the design and development review stages. 4) Proposed Open Ditch /Wetland Section The proposed north -south swale traversing the CarMax site runs parallel and immediately west of the existing twin 48 -inch pipes connecting the wetland basin north of County Road D to the wetland basin south of Beam Avenue. Based on preliminary analyses, the proposed swale system and wet pond could be combined to achieve a larger storm water detention and overall water quality treatment volume. Furthermore, from a hydraulic standpoint, it is also possible to replace a segment of the twin 48 -inch pipes with an open channel which would collect a portion of the runoff from the CarMax area and from the parcel immediately to the east of CarMax. In this case, the runoff from both of these areas would eventually be routed across Beam Avenue. The CarMax site would route through the larger 60" by 136" elliptical pipe at the Beam Avenue 1 Trunk Highway 61 intersection the southwest. The remainder of the site, including the wetland mitigation system, would route through the existing 58" by 91" concrete elliptical pipe. The City, RWMWD, and the Developer have evaluated this as an option. This option would achieve: 1) reduction in the long -term maintenance issues that will likely be needed in the area of the twin 48 -inch pipes; 2) an opportunity to create more wetland mitigation area on -site; 3) additional water quality benefits; and 4) the potential for additional live storage capacity of the regional routing system. Prior to implementation of this approach, the RWMWD will need to review the detailed design and approve the modifications. The critical issue for this ditch m creation is the need to maintain the current response of the wetland areas north of County D and south of Beam. D. Wetlands Management Wetland areas currently exist on the site, primarily along the north Beam Avenue ditch which will be impacted by the overall site development. A small area of wetland impact will also occur along a section of the North County Ditch 18 system. However, this area has already been mitigated for as part of the MMATI project. As discussed previously, the main wetland feature in the immediate area is the created wetland system just south of County Road D. This section discusses the anticipated impacts and mitigation plan for the impacted wetlands in the CarMax /Mogren site. Because the most feasible location for mitigation is adjacent to the existing created wetland area, the City intends to lead the overall coordination, design and operation efforts for the proposed mitigation site, while the developers will remain financially responsible for their portion of the impacts and mitigation. Having the City lead the process will allow for consistency in the overall design and long -term monitoring and operation of the mitigation area. The following table summarizes the anticipated wetland impacts and mitigation needs. These existing and proposed wetland and buffer areas are illustrated in Exhibits 8 and 9. Table 1. Summary of Wetland Impacts and Mitigation Area Wetland (Acres) Buffer (Acres) Existing Mitigation Area South of County D 1.90 3.60 Existing Wetlands Adjacent to Beam 1.25 *1.60 Total Existing Areas 3.15 5.20 Existing Mitigation Area South of County D 1.90 3.60 Expanded Area South of County D 1.60 4.30 Area Adjacent to Beam 0 0 Existing Buffer Modified to Wetland (Loss) 0 (1.10) Total Proposed Areas 3.50 6.80 Net Increase (Decrease) 0.35 1.30 * A portion of this assumed buffer is currently road surface. As shown in Table 1, the existing wetland and buffer areas include the mitigation area to the north and the areas along Beam delineated in 2006. Based on the preliminary review of the proposed project, the improvement can result in a net increase of up to about 0.35 acres of new wetland and 1.30 acres of new buffer. As part of the wetland permitting process, this estimated 1.30 acres of new buffer would be proposed as the public value credit portion of the wetland impacts. The 20 numbers presented in Table 1 assume that the second cell of the treatment system in the CarMax site will not be considered new wetland. If designed to meet the wetland requirements, this area may result in a further increase the extent of new wetlands throughout the site. 1) Wetland Impacts A combination of the private development, the new public road from Beam to County Road D, and improvements to Beam Avenue, will result in impacts to the entire 1.25 acres (54,424 square -feet) of wetlands located adjacent to Beam Avenue. The areas were delineated and boundaries approved by the RWMWD as described in the July 18, 2006 Wetland Delineation Report (SEH). The existing buffer area estimate of 1.60 acres around the wetland system adjacent to Beam is conservative, as the number represents a 25 -foot buffer around the entire wetland. In reality, the buffer extends into portions of the Beam Avenue right -of -way. The total proposed wetland and buffer areas presented in Table 1, are illustrated in Exhibit 9. Only buffer areas outside of the existing mitigation site easement were included in the new buffer calculations. In addition, existing buffer area used to expand new wetland areas inside the easement, were subtracted from the total buffer area calculations. Additional 2) Wetland Mitigation Plan The primary goal of the mitigation plan is to achieve the entire mitigation requirement on -site, including new wetland, public value credits, and buffer areas. The primary mitigation area is the expansion of the current wetland system in the northern portion of the project site. Additional wetland mitigation will be created along the eastern border of the CarMax site, and mitigation credits may also be obtained in the second cell of the pond - wetland system in the south portion of the CarMax site. Final design will need to conform to the state requirements for wetland mitigation sites, include side -slope limitations and maximum bounce. Planting will be consistent with the existing wetland area to the north. 3) Wetland Buffers The wetland areas along Beam Avenue are classified Manage C which means that 25 foot buffer areas will apply. The maximum buffer area for this area is 69,853 square -feet. The actual existing buffer area is somewhat less than this as portions of the 25 -foot zone extend onto Beam Avenue pavement and the gravel shoulder. The required buffer area for the expanded mitigation site will include creation of up to 1.60 acres (69,853 square -feet) of buffer, with an average buffer of 100 feet and a minimum of 50 feet. The RWMWD also had buffer requirements for the 21 created wetland, although to a lower level than the stated City requirements. The RWMWD requires a 75 -foot average and 37.5 -foot minimum. The required buffer area is intended to minimize future impacts resulting from development encroaching on the wetland areas. While adequate surface area is available to meet the buffer requirements, obtaining a minimum 50 foot buffer along the east side of the proposed wetland area /ditch section may be difficult without further encroachment onto the parcel to the east and beyond the existing easement over the twin 48 -inch pipes. Given that one of the overall goals of this project is to obtain all wetland (and buffer) replacement on -site, we recommend that the design use the 50 -foot minimum as a goal, but that the RWMWD distance of 37.5 feet be considered acceptable if site conditions limit the full 50 -foot distance in all areas. The average buffer around the entire wetland system, as proposed, is approximately 110 -120 feet. 22 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: CarMax / Mogren Addition PROJECT NO: 06 -14 REVIEWED BV: Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer, City of Maplewood Michael Thompson, Civil Engineer I, City of Maplewood SUBMITTAL NO: 2 (First Submittal Comments on June 8, 2006) DATE: November 21, 2006 Bruce Mogren is proposing to develop the old Country View Golf Course property at the northeast corner of Highway 61 and Beam Avenue. The development includes Carmax, a major retail center, a fitness center and office facilities. At this time the only portion of the development under consideration is the Carmax site. Mr. Mogren petitioned the city to prepare plans for a public road that would run north and south through the development and connect Beam Avenue to County Road D. Several wetlands will also be impacted by this development. The city will also lead the wetland mitigation process as part of the public improvements project. Runoff from the Carmax site will be treated in several rainwater gardens, a storm water detention basin and an infiltration basin The developer shall address the following questions and comments. Drainage Two 48 inch pipes owned and maintained by the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) run through the proposed development. The developer is also proposing a swale system downstream of the wetlands created as part of the County Road D project. The swale is located parallel to the twin pipes. The city in conjunction with RWMWD is considering the replacement of a segment of the twin pipes with an open channel. This would be a better design hydraulically and from a water quality standpoint. The developer shall work with the city and RWMWD and consider this option. Comments from SEH also address this issue. 2. Please address the comments from the SEH memorandum to Erin Laberee dated November 2, 2006 (updated November 9, 2006). 3. The engineer shall detail how the rainwater gardens, swale, detention basin are to be prepared and constructed. Due to the poor soils in the area, the engineer shall address how runoff is to be infiltrated in the gardens, whether it be through a rock sump or an under drain system. 4. It shall be noted in the plans that sumps are to be 3 feet deep. Most sumps catch basins have been noted with the exception of catch basin 23. 5. The curb cuts at the southwest corner of the site shall be replaced with catch basins with a 3 foot sump. 23 6. Catch basin #77 should have a minimum 3' depth sump in order to catch sediment and other debris prior to flowing into the rain garden. 7. The intersecting storm pipes 61 -62 and 56 -57 do not provide enough separation. Refer to city plate number 320 for concrete block support if at least 1 -ft of separation is not achieved. Wetlands 1. The applicant shall work closely with the city to accomplish the goal of wetland replacement on the development site to mitigate the proposed development impact of the 54,000 sq -ft wetland along the Beam Avenue ditch. The city will lead this process. Please refer to comments from the city's environmentalist, Duwayne Konewko. Grading 1. The developer's engineer shall provide a phased grading plan to include items such as stockpiling, haul routes, etc. 2. If any retaining walls end up being 4 -feet or taller then a required submittal to the City of Maplewood building department is required. Please show a typical detail of the retaining wall on the plans. 3. All rainwater gardens and infiltration basin shall be excavated to final bottom elevation after major grading is complete. Care must be taken to avoid compaction of bottom area in order to avoid losing the infiltration characteristics of the soil. If rainwater gardens or infiltration basins do not perform as designed, it is the responsibility of the developer's engineer and/or contractor to correct the problem. The city will withhold all escrow monies until such time all storm water BMP's work as proposed. Erosion & Sediment Control Plan 1. Identify erosion and sediment protection on slopes and sediment controls at top and toes of slopes and base of stockpiles. Heavy duty silt fence shall be placed 100 -ft east and west of the Beam Avenue entrance. 2. Identify locations for equipment/material storage, debris stockpiles, vehicle /equipment maintenance, fueling, and washing areas. Address measure to contain area and specify that all materials stored on site shall have proper enclosures and /or coverings. 3. Identify the quantity of materials to be imported or exported from the site (cu -yd). 24 4. Describe measures (e.g ... sediment basin, sediment trap, etc) taken during the rough grading process to intercept and detain sediment laden run -off to allow the sediment to settle and how the settled stormwater will be de- watered and introduced to the public drainage system. 5. Describe measures of onsite dust control (i.e .... water as needed) and also provide a sweeping plan for adjacent streets with the sweeping schedule also incorporated into the storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP). 6. The erosion control notes reference using straw bales under note 12; however the city encourages use of bio logs embedded in the ground to contain sediment. Wood chips scattered at the edge of disturbed areas has also has proven effective in controlling sediment. 7. In Outlot A, the wetland edge shall be shown along with the wetland delineator and date wetland was delineated. A 100 -ft buffer shall clearly be shown on the plans. Silt fence and orange construction fencing shall be placed around the wetland area. 8. The following verbiage shall be added to the plan: "Effective erosion and sediment controls shall be in place prior to any storm events." Failure do such shall result in the deduction of escrow funds (the city requires the developer or contractor to post escrow prior to issuance of the grading permit). The funds will be deducted at the discretion of the city inspector upon notice to the developer or contractor. 9. All emergency overflow swales shall include permanent erosion control blanket such as Enkamat or NAG 350. IES0 f s 1. What is the developer's plan for the existing maintenance garage near the holding ponds? This should be shown and addressed on the demolition plans. Landscape 1. The landscape plan does not include seeding or restoration details for lot 3. Orange fencing must be placed around this area to ensure no disturbance. Please shown the plans as fenced with a "no disturb area" text. 2. The landscape plan is subject to the review and approval of the city's naturalist, Ginny Gaynor. See attached comments from Ginny. Sanitary Sewer 25 On sheet C4.1 all of the CarMax sanitary sewer pipe is shown as 6" diameter, but on sheet C4.2A (close up view) it is shown as 8" from SANMH #2 to the existing sanitary manhole. Please clarify which is correct. 8" sanitary sewer pipe shall be SDR 35. Agency Submittals 1. The applicant must apply for permits through Tina Carstens at Ramsey - Washington Metro Watershed District. Also, the applicant shall coordinate all necessary permits associated with the twin 48" storm water pipes running through the proposed CarMax development site. 2. Submit all potable water related design for the development site to Mike Anderson at Saint Paul Regional Water Services ( SPRWS). Is there any specific reason the water service pipe proposed to service the CarMax building is connecting to the main from the south (435 -ft) instead of the east (240 -ft)? Insulation should be shown at all water service crossings in accordance with SPRWS standards. 3. Coordinate with Dan Soler at Ramsey County for all traffic related permits on Beam Avenue. 4. Mn /DOT approval for the entrance /exit on T.H.61 is required. 5. The developer or project engineer shall obtain a MPCA's construction stormwater permit (SWPPP). 6. Agency submittals are not limited to those listed above. Traffic Traffic comments provided by Jon Horn, Brandon Bourdon, and Chadd Larson from Kimley Horn and Associates. The access onto TH 61 from the proposed CarMax site (Lot 1) shall be gate controlled and shall only be used by those that have clearance to open the gates via AVI tag or other form of control. The details and requirement of the gate control and degree of access allowed will be included in the conditional use permit. The use of this access will be reviewed on a yearly basis by the City of Maplewood. The City will solicit comments from Mn /DOT during this yearly review to determine if any modifications to this access need to be implemented. 2. The right -in /right -out access to the proposed CarMax site (Lot 1) from Beam Avenue shall be located as far to the east as possible. The exact location will be determined based upon the wetland mitigation required, the ultimate 26 configuration of the existing storm sewer pipes owned by the Ramsey - Washington Metro Watershed District, and intersection spacing to the proposed public roadway. 3. The access locations for the warehouse retail site on Lot 2 shall be consolidated to two locations on the proposed public roadway. The southern access shall be located at least 300 feet north of Beam Avenue (measured centerline to centerline). Striping shall be installed on the two accesses to the proposed public road from Lot 2 so that there is one entering lane and two exiting lanes. 4. The access from Lot 3 onto the proposed public roadway shall be aligned with one of the access points to the warehouse retail site on Lot 2. Right of Way /Easements Right of way and easement comments provided by Jon Horn, Brandon Bourdon, and Chadd Larson from Kimley Horn and Associates. 1. The preliminary plat does not show the existing Ramsey - Washington Metro Watershed District easement across Lot 1. 2. Proposed public improvements include the possible removal of the existing watershed pipes and the construction of an open ditch. The developer shall dedicate any additional easement required for the construction of this open ditch. 3. Wetland mitigation is currently being investigated on the project site. The developer shall dedicate any additional easement required for wetland mitigation. 4. The preliminary plat shows the dedication of an approximate 88 foot wide right of way for the new north -south roadway. This right of way width should be revised to an 80 foot width. 5. The alignment of the proposed north -south roadway right of way should be revised at the County Road D intersection. Field survey information confirmed that this intersection location is east of the intersection shown in the development plans. 6. Outlot A should be shown as a drainage and utility easement together with Lot 1 rather than a separate lot as the area is needed to meet the maximum impervious area percentage requirements of the shoreland zoning rules for development. Miscellaneous 1. The developer or project engineer shall submit a copy of the MPCA's construction stormwater permit (SWPPP) to the city before the city will issue a grading permit. 27 2. The owner and project engineer shall satisfy the requirements of all permitting agencies. 3. The developer or developer's engineer shall incorporate a preliminary lighting plan into the plans. 4. The owner shall sign a maintenance agreement, prepared by the city, for all stormwater treatment devices (list devices i.e....sumps, basins, ponds, etc). The city shall prepare this agreement upon plan approval. 5. The developer shall enter into a development agreement with the city. The city will prepare this agreement which will cover items such as cost sharing for public improvements (signal lights, Beam Avenue road improvement, etc.). 6. Approval of the site plan is contingent upon the completion of the necessary public improvements to support the proposed development as identified in the Feasibility Study and Report for the Carmax/Mogren Addition improvements, City Project 06 -17. These public improvements include the new north -south public roadway, sanitary sewer and watermain improvements within the public right -of- way, and improvements along Beam Avenue and at the TH 61 /Beam Avenue intersection. The developer shall provide the City with a letter of credit in the amount of 125% of the estimated assessments identified in the Feasibility Study and Report. 7. The developer shall complete the overall mass grading of the project site including areas within the public right -of -way. Grading within the public right -of- way shall be completed to within a 0.2' tolerance of the design grades. The developer shall perform field surveying to verify that the grading meets the specified tolerance before the City commences the construction of any public improvements within the right -of -way. The mass site grading shall be completed and verified by June 1, 2007. 8. The developer shall enter into a developer's agreement with the city for all public improvements including easements. The agreement will require the developer to post a letter of credit for 125% of the cost of the public improvements for the new public road and a portion of the costs for the Beam Avenue improvements as detailed in the feasibility study. The developer's agreement will also detail requirements for the site grading as mentioned previously. 28 SEH MEMORANDUM TO: Erin Laberee, PE Assistant City Engineer City of Maplewood FROM: Dan Cazanacli, PE Ron Leaf, PE SEH Water Resources DATE: November 2, 2006 (updated November 9, 2006) RE: CARMAX Plan Review — Storm Water / Drainage Submittal SEH No. A- MAPLE0612.00 Background We have reviewed the Storm Water Narrative and Calculation and Drainage Plans for the CARMAX — MOGREN site in Maplewood. Landform, submitted a set of plans, narratives, and HydroCAD model printouts, dated October 18, 2006. The set of plans, titled MOGREN RETAIL AND CARMAX MAPLEWOOD, covers the area south of County Road D and north of Beam Avenue, east of Highway 61. We also participated in meetings with representatives for developer and with the Ramsey- Washington -Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) and Ramsey SWCD staff on November 8, 2006. Landform plans indicate that there two development areas: 1. LOT 1 (west): CARMAX area to be located on the western side of the site, immediately east of Highway 61. 2. LOT 2 (east). Warehouse Retail area to be located further east, east of a proposed Public Road connecting County Road D and Beam Avenue. According to the plans, the area between these two sites will remain undeveloped. We believe the intent here is that Landform intends to refer to the land to the north, currently the pond and wetland system for the County Road D and a portion of the future Warehouse Site. The submittal indicates that the north - central area (OUTLOT A) and south - central area (LOT 3) will not be graded or modified. Although the narratives include runoff values for both sites mentioned above, the HydroCAD model for the proposed conditions appears to reflect the CARMAX area (LOT 1) only. Therefore, our review has focused on the details of the CARMAX site, but has also generally considered the overall storm system in the area. For the CARMAX site, the plans indicate a storm water detention, treatment, and infiltration chain consisting of four rain gardens, a wet pond and an infiltration pond. With the exception of a smaller rain garden, these drainage features are located along a K9 north -south strip, east of the proposed CARMAX parking lot. Three rain gardens collect the runoff from approximately half of the impervious surface and overflow into the wet pond. The remaining impervious surface discharges either to a fourth rain garden and then to the wet pond or directly into the wet pond. The wet pond overflows into the infiltration basin. Based on our meeting at the RWMWD on November 8 ", the second cell of this system may be eligible as wetland credits. The plans also include a channel section to serve as the outlet for the wetland mitigation site to the north and also to serve as a portion of the wetland mitigation area. Review Questions and Comments The following review comments are separated into four categories: treatment system, rate controls, infiltration systems and wetlands. Water Quality Treatment When the CARMAX site (LOT 1) only is considered, the proposed drainage plan appears to provide adequate dead storage volume for storm water quality treatment in terms of total phosphorus (TP) and suspended solids (TSS) to meet the City's standards. Submittal of computations for the removal efficiencies of these systems are needed prior to making a final determination. In general, the cumulative volume of the four rain gardens, wet pond, and "infiltration" basin is fairly large relative to the total impervious CARMAX area surface. Our understanding is that these computations have been completed by the developer's engineer and are available. 2. In general, we recommend that the developer remove as many pipes for the rain gardens system as possible and identify what types of pre - treatment will be included in the design. We anticipate the RWMWD will also have questions /comments along these lines. Flow Rate Control 3. The proposed model indicates that the design provides adequate runoff detention and reduces the peak flow rates for 2, 10, and 100 -year events, below the corresponding existing levels. However, the model assumes free - discharge at the downstream end, an assumption that may not be entirely correct. The model should be updated to consider a downstream water level that corresponds to the 2, 10 and 100 -year design storms. 4. The infiltration basin discharges into the ditch north of Beam Avenue through a culvert 1 overflow system. The ditch on the north side of Beam Avenue flows west. A 27 -inch culvert is proposed along the ditch under the CARMAX driveway at Beam Avenue. A 60 -inch by 136 -inch elliptical culvert located on the northeastern corner of the Beam Avenue - Highway 61 intersection collects the runoff from the ditch. Neither the proposed 27 -inch culvert nor the large elliptical culvert has been included in the HydroCAD model. The inverts of these culverts are also not shown on the plan. 5. In talking with the developer's engineer on November 8 ", we understand that the hydrologic modeling was limited to the sites and not beyond the boundaries of the site. Therefore, we recommend that a combine model of the area be updated to evaluate any potential upstream or downstream impacts. The timing of this model should coincide with the selection of the final site storm water routing — with the 30 major unknown at this time being the determination of creating a ditch section to replace the existing twin 48 -inch pipes operated by RWMWD. Infiltration Systems 6. The proposed drainage plan provides runoff volume reduction through infiltration practices. However, the infiltration volume may not be as high as estimated in the submittal due to the uncertainties associated with the soils and ground water elevation in this area. The bottom of this infiltration basin is near elevation 863.0, which is likely near the normal (ground) water level. Plan Sheet C3.2A shows a normal water level (NWL) of 864.25 for the infiltration basin while the HydroCAD model reflects no such assumption. Therefore, because the bottom of the basin is at or near water table the infiltration rates may not be as high as claimed (i.e. 1 -inch of rainfall contained on site). The HydroCAD model assumes certain infiltration rates for the proposed infiltration basin which, as discussed below may not be entirely correct. Note that the RWMWD new rules will require specific soils information in the areas of each basin to demonstrate the design infiltration rates and will require some form of pre - treatment of runoff prior to discharge into the rain gardens /infiltration areas. As stated above, this infiltration basin may be eligible to be counted towards wetland mitigation credits. 7. Clarification with respect to the function of the infiltration basin and the downstream routing are needed. The proposed design has a good chance of satisfying the flow rate and runoff volume reduction requirements when the CARMAX area only is considered. 8. A detailed review of the infiltration systems show in the Retail Warehouse areas to the east was not completed. However, these same questions will arise at the time a project is proposed on that property. Storm Water Routing — Other Considerations 9. The proposed routing scheme indicates that the runoff from the CARMAX area would be entirely directed into the ditch north of Beam Avenue. According to the plans, the central wetland mitigation area, drains through a proposed north -south swale into the same ditch north of Beam Avenue. Both the infiltration basin and the swale are connected to the Beam Avenue ditch through culverts which would have to cross a sanitary sewer pipe. The plans do not provide the elevation (i.e., inverts) information for these culverts. 10. The proposed north -south swale runs parallel and immediately west of the existing twin 48 -inch pipes connecting the wetland basin north of County Road D to the wetland basin south of Beam Avenue. The proposed Swale system and wet pond could be combined to achieve a larger storm water detention and overall water quality treatment volume. Furthermore, from a hydraulic standpoint and based on our preliminary analysis, it is also possible to replace a segment of the twin 48 -inch pipes with an open channel which would collect of the runoff from the CARMAX area and from the central area that would remain undeveloped. In this case, the runoff from both these areas would be eventually routed across Beam Avenue through the existing 58" by 91" concrete elliptical pipe and not through the larger 60" by 136" elliptical pipe at Beam Avenue 1 Highway 61 intersection. 31 The City, RWMWD and developer should consider this as an option which would achieve: 1) reduction in the long -term maintenance issues that will likely be need in the area of the twin 48 -inch pipes; 2) an opportunity to create more wetland mitigation area on -site; 3) some addition water quality benefits; and 4) the potential for additional live storage capacity of the regional routing system. Wetland Impacts and Mitigation 11. This issue was discussed with RWMWD, Ramsey SWCD, City staff and developer's representatives on November 8 At this time, it appears that the site will impact the roughly 54,000 square feet of wetland present along Beam Avenue. The initial wetland permit application submitted to the RWMWD will be revised to reflect comments provided including: a. The City will be identified as the ownerlpermittee and will lead the wetland mitigation process. The details of financial responsibilities of the City versus developer will be discussed as the project proceeds. b. The project will have the goal of replacing all wetland impacts on -site instead of using the bank described in the initial application. c. The developer's engineer will prepare the accounting of wetland impacts and mitigation areas (including buffer area requirements) and work with the City to develop the permit application materials. The City will lead the design and construction process for wetland mitigation efforts. For any questions please email me at dcazanacli&sehinc.com or call me at 651.490.2112. sacolm\map1eV06120Q1earmaa storm system memo I 1- 2- 06.doc 32 Email comments from Virginia Gaynor November 22, 2006 Here are comments regarding the landscape plan for Carmax. Plant selection. Two of the plants in the plan, Barberry and Miscanthus, are potentially invasive and may spread to natural areas. Both of these are on the city's list of plants to avoid (see attached). Because this site is adjacent to wetland complexes, different plant species should be selected. 2. Native seed mix. Mn /DOT mix 328 is the economy native ditch mix. It is 113 bluegrass for quick establishment, and 213 prairie grasses. Because of the wetlands adjacent it would be preferable to use a mix that is more similar to a native prairie. Better choices for the slopes and upland would be Mn /DOT mixes 340 or 350. 3. Rain gardens along Beam and along Highway 61. These are in very visible gardens that need to be successful. Because 1) these are relatively narrow gardens, and 2) they are surrounded by sod, and 3) it takes so long to establish native seedings, and 4) success is not assured with seeding, these gardens should be planted with plants rather than seed. Plants can be perennials and/or trees and shrubs. If native perennials are selected, plugs can be used to keep cost of materials down. Most planted rain gardens are mulched with shredded hardwood mulch. If mulch is not used, blanket and frequent weeding will be needed. 4. Pond, infiltration basin, and 3 rain gardens east of building and parking lot. a. It is difficult to establish the bottom of a rain garden or infiltration basin with seed since the seed is washed away as water flows into the garden. Thus, the bottom of the rain gardens and infiltration basin should be planted with plugs rather than seed. b. Seeding the slopes and upland areas is fine. c. It can be difficult to establish native vegetation from seed when turf is seeded adjacent. Site managers often end up mowing as if it is turf and the natives don't establish. On the east side of the rain gardens, pond and infiltration basin, there is a strip of seeded turf between two strips of native vegetation. I recommend that the native vegetation extend from the gardens, pond and basin all the way eastward. If the goal is to have a more manicured look around the pond, this might be achieved by featuring a couple of focal areas of turf and planting beds on the west side of the pond. d. Maintaining areas of native seed. On sheet L2.2A, Raingarden note #22 indicates garden areas should be free from weeds and other invasive plant material. This language is fine for areas planted with plugs or containers. It would be helpful to include a note on the landscape plan regarding management of areas seeded with natives to ensure these areas are properly managed the first few years. Areas seeded with native prairie mixes are typically maintained by mowing and spot herbicide treatments. The first growing season (and sometimes the second season), these areas should be mowed 4 " -6" high when plants reach 15" high. 33 5. Parking lot medians. It's great to see some planted medians. But, it would be nice to have even more to provide shade and cooling. If this is not possible, it would be help to have more trees along the parking lot edges. In addition, many of the trees along Seam and Hwy 61 are shown centered between the road and parking lot. It might make sense to put those closer to the parking lot to take advantage of the shade they will provide. Please let me know if you have questions. Ginny 34 Timm & Associates 952-932-9787 -- .LlGIHXj'VS'dV-LO - 1 e30Z'a3SNR.Lc�s `4 ! !1 a ® 5 Agenda Item 1 -5 MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, Citizen Services Manager DATE: March 8, 2007 SUBJECT: Citizen Services Department - Recreation Donation INTRODUCTION Citizen Services - recreation division received an $800 donation check from Maplewood - Oakdale Lions Club. The donation is for financial assistance for a joint program with Carver Elementary School called "Walk to New York ", which was created to positively impact the childhood obesity problem. This program is a "virtual trek" across the country walking from Maplewood to New York City, a total of 1,284 miles. Each fifth -grade Carver student will wear a pedometer to calculate steps taken and individual mileage. This $800 donation will be used to purchase the pedometers and incentive offerings for these students. Staff requests that the city council formally accept the $800 Maplewood - Oakdale Lions Club donation and authorize the finance department to make the necessary budget adjustment. A letter of appreciation was sent to the Maplewood - Oakdale Lions Club. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the city council accept the $800 donation from the Maplewood - Oakdale Lions Club and direct the necessary budget adjustment. Agenda Item 16 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Establishing Roadway as County Road D Court and Deleting Old County Road D Name from Official Mapping DATE: March 1, 2007 INTRODUCTION Old County Road D is located just south of 694 and east of T.H. 61 (north of the car dealers). The extension of County Road D from Hazelwood Street to Highway 61 has created some confusion over the roadway names, whereby we potentially have two locations of County Road D. The City Council shall consider renaming Old County Road D to County Road D Court. Background Two businesses are located along Old County Road D, Northern States Power and General Sprinkler Corporation. Ramsey County mapping identifies both properties by County Road D addresses, although the street is signed Old County Road D. General Sprinkler has contacted the city and requested that the roadway name be changed. Customers are having difficulty finding the business due to the extension of County Road D between T.H. 61 and Hazelwood. Old County Road D should be deleted from official mapping and renamed County Road D Court. Approval of the proposed change is recommended. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution establishing roadway as County Road D Court and deleting Old County Road D from the official mapping. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Location Map RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING ROADWAY AS COUNTY ROAD D COURT AND DELETEING OLD COUNTY ROAD D FROM OFFICIAL MAPPING WHEREAS, the City Council order the construction of County Road D between T.H. 61 and Southlawn in September 2003, and WHEREAS, the roadway name Old County Road D shall be deleted from official mapping and renamed County Road D Court, and WHEREAS, the roadway name change is necessary to distinguish Old County Road D from County Road D, and WHEREAS, no Maplewood residents are adversely impacted by said name change. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, as follows: That Old County Road D shall be deleted from official mapping. 2. That said roadway shall be renamed County Road D Court. 2. The City Engineer is hereby directed to submit a certified copy of this resolution to the Ramsey County surveyor for initiation of said name change. Approved this 12 day of March 2007. LLJ WW I I I I zzz LLJ I I I I I I CD C) C) 000 u U (_) MO- 6-) U� CD C-D LLJ _j > E= 'is G�JVNNI>l - > cn U < CD L 0 0> cn �� 00 w IN 0 u z _j it U lu < < 0 LLJ Z 0 7' 3: LLJ U>U � - T - 0 < QCD LLJ LLJ C-) 0 = 0 < L( F C6 u cn u Q LLI < j 0 ry o Lj _ _ z ral I D 0 U U Lli 'is Himna N is z l- x - is mlvmCil > LLI - - -- --------- — < 'is < Illn Agenda Item 17 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works /City Engineer DuWayne Konewko, Environmental Manager SUBJECT: Approval of Spring Clean -up Event Scheduled for April 28, 2007 DATE: February 22, 2007 INTRODUCTION The 2007 Maplewood Spring Clean -Up Event is scheduled to take place on April 28 at Aldrich Arena, 1850 White Bear Avenue, from 7a.m. to 1 p.m. Staff is recommending that the fees remain the same as last year. These fees allow Maplewood residents to pay for approximately 25 to 35% of disposal costs. In the past, the City has typically targeted a subsidy rate of approximately 65 to 75% of these disposal costs. Attached is a copy of the fee schedule for your review. Maplewood's Spring Clean -up Event is being scheduled at the same time as Ramsey County's Household Hazardous Waste collection program. Household hazardous waste including oil, paint and related items, antifreeze, and household chemicals will be accepted free of charge. The household hazardous waste collection program will run from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Combining these two services will offer residents the opportunity to participate in both events without making additional trips for disposal of these items. Maplewood's Environmental and Natural Resource Commission members will also be present at this collection event to answer questions and distribute educational information to the residents. In addition, commission members will be charged with the task of persuading residents to attend the Maplewood Celebrates Arbor Day and Environmental Day in conjunction with the festivities associated with "Maplewood Celebrates 50 Years ". The Arbor /Environment Day celebration will take place at the Nature Center from 1 p.m to 4 p.m., also on April 28 . This event will provide residents with the opportunity to learn how to incorporate environmental sustainable practices into everyday life. Crafts, live music, food and door prizes will be available at this event. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Spring Clean -Up Event scheduled for April 28 at Aldrich Arena from 7a. m. to 1p.m. Attachment: 1. Spring Clean -Up Event Fee Schedule /information Fact Sheet i a so I The city will be holding a Spring Clean-Up Event from 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. on April 28 in the Aldrich Arena parking lot (18 5 0 White Bear Ave). Maplewood residents (proof of residency is required) will be able to dispose of old appliances, computers, monitors, TVs, tires, construction debris, mattresses, old furniture, car parts, scrap metal, and other assorted junk (refer to charges below for disposal cost). No brush or tree waste will be accepted. Maplewood's spring clean-up event is being scheduled at the same time as Ramsey County's Household Hazardous Waste collection program. Hazardous waste including oil, antifreeze, paint and other hazardous waste items will be accepted free of charge. The Household Hazardous Waste collection program will run from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Combining these two services will offer residents the opportunity to participate in both events without making additional trips for disposal. In conjunction with the clean up, the city will be sponsoring a food drive for the Second Harvest Food Bank. Containers will be set up to collect food items. Tuna, peanut butter, macaroni and cheese, canned soups, stews, infant items, dried foods, and cash are needed. CLEAN — UP DAY COLLECTION FEES: Cash or check on1v Cars without a trailer ................................................... Pick-up trucks and cars with trailers ................................. Exceptionally large loads (determined by the city) ................ Computer/monitor (in addition to above costs) ........ ............ Car tire with or without rims (in addition to above costs) ....... TVs all sizes (in addition to above costs) ........................... VCRs (in addition to above costs) ............................. Printers (in addition to above costs) ................................... Residential appliances (in addition to above costs) ............ Example fees: Car without trailer plus console TV .................. $20 Pick-up truck with appliance and computer...... $40 The fees remain unchanged from last year. $10 $15 $25 plus $15 $3 $10 $10 $10 $10 Please call 651-249-2400 with any questions you may have regarding the spring collection event. Agenda Item 18 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works /City Engineer DuWayne Konewko, Environmental Manager Ginny Gaynor, Open Space Naturalist SUBJECT: City Hall Campus Plan Implementation — 2007 Projects DATE: February 23, 2007 INTRODUCTION At the July 10, 2006 City Council meeting, staff was directed to provide council with an update on the City Hall Campus Improvement Plan. To that end, staff has included for your review and comment, a list of projects for 2007 for the City Hall Campus Improvement Plan. Ginny Gaynor has been championing these efforts with assistance from Bryan Nagel, Jon Jarosch, Ann Hutchinson, Mark Maruska, and Shann Finwall. Ms. Sherri Buss, Landscape Architect from Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates was also on board to assist staff in the design aspects of the Campus Plan. Staff is not requesting any formal action on this item. BACKGROUND In reviewing residential and commercial development projects, the City is responsible for ensuring that developers comply with all applicable rules and regulations. Minimizing environmental degradation and mitigating impacts are key elements in this review process. For example, the City requires drainage and erosion control plans for all new developments. These plans must specify how the developer is going to ensure that the proposed project does not increase the rate of runoff (non -point source pollution) from the development site. The developer can choose to implement a practice outlined in the Urban Best Management Practices Manual (UBMP) or submit an engineered plan that meets the objectives of the UBMP and is approved by the City. Rain gardens, porous parking lots, native plantings, reduction of impervious surfaces are all techniques that a developer can use and that the City could showcase at City Hall and Public Works. The Environmental Utility Fund is also targeted at protecting and preserving Maplewood's surface water resources. The Environmental Utility Fund is a method of financing the administration, planning, implementation, and maintenance of storm water management programs. The utility is a service charge or fee applied to all developed parcels based on the premise of "contributors pay ". Where land is in a natural state, most rain soaks into the ground or is retained in small depressions. Where development has occurred, rooftops, driveways, and parking lots prevent rain from soaking into the ground. The rain runs off into streets, ditches, ponds, streams, and lakes carrying with it possible sources of pollution. This creates the need for provisions to be put in place to curtail runoff and protect the quality of our water resources. Rain gardens, porous parking lots, and native plantings are all possible preventative measures that can be used to lessen or prevent runoff. DISCUSSION At the City Council meeting on July 10, 2006, the City Council spoke to four major concerns /issues associated with the approval and implementation of the City Hall Campus Improvement Plan. The first Agenda Item 18 concern was ensuring that the Environmental and Natural Resource Commission was involved in the process. The second concern was ensuring that City staff assumed a leadership role in the design and implementation of the outcomes. The third concern was that staff needed to be involved in the actual completion of these projects and the final concern was that staff needed to secure grants to assist the City in paying for these improvements. Staff has discussed these concerns and they are committed to working within this framework. The vast majority of the projects that have already been completed, as well as those that are planned for 2007, have been driven and implemented by City staff and volunteers. In addition, approximately $35,000 of grant monies have been secured for these improvement projects and staff continues to explore other venues for additional resources. The Environmental and Natural Resource Commission, formerly Environmental Committee, were very involved in the planning and development of the City Hall Campus Improvement Plan. City staff was involved in the planning of this project and will remain involved with the implementation of the outcomes. RECOMMENDATION No formal action on this item is required at this time. Attachment: 1. Campus Plan Implementation Projects for 2007 Campus Plan Implementation — 2007 Projects What Is Campus Plan All About? The goal of this project is to make Maplewood's City Hall campus a more environmentally - friendly landscape. Some of the objectives include: 1) reduce amount of turf grass, 2) enhance native habitat, 3) clean stormwater, and 4) restore Wicklander pond. This first phase of the project does not include redoing the landscape in front of city hall. Photo: View from City Hall across the pond to Community Center. Funding and Partners Project funding for 2007 -2008 is through CIP funds and grants from Minnesota Department of Natural Resources ($20,000) and Ramsey - Washington Metro Watershed District ($14,773). Design work, prairie seeding and herbicide work will be contracted. All other projects will be done by staff and volunteers. Photo: Butterfly garden on campus planted by children in MCC daycamp in 2005. Community Planting Day — June 23! In conjunction with Maplewood's 50 Anniversary Celebration, celebrate Maplewood's natural heritage by planting native plants at City Hall. Volunteers will plant native perennials, trees, and shrubs on east side of Wicklander and near the trail to Public Works. An additional planting day will be set aside for staff to participate. Crew. Community volunteers led by Maplewood Nature Center Photo: Youth volunteers planting Sherwood Park wetland buffer in 2006. Plant Rain Gardens Plant entry -drive rain garden with prairie grasses and flowers. Plant shrubs in rain garden on east end of Public Works parking lot. Crew. Volunteers led by Maplewood Nature Center Photo: Rain garden on entry drive ready for planting. (Over) Restore Wicklander Pond Shoreline Thin trees to let more sunlight reach shoreline. Cut willow and prepare live stakes. Insert live stakes on south shoreline. Plant shoreline and emergent vegetation. Crew: Public Works, community volunteers and Century College volunteers Photo: Volunteers planting Sherwood Park shoreline in 2006. Seed and Plant Prairie /Savanna Hillside Kill existing vegetation and seed prairie grasses and wildflowers on the hillside between city hall and public works building, including: 1) herbicide hillside one or two times, 2) seed, 3) install fencing to deter geese, 4) plant shrubs and trees. Crew: contractor, staff, volunteers Photo: Contractor seeding Prairie Farm Preserve. Restore Woodland Manage weeds in woodland to prepare for planting in 2008. Activities may include: 1) prescribed woodland burn, 2) cutting or pulling weeds, 3) herbiciding weeds. Crew. contractor, staff, volunteers Plant White Bear Avenue Hillside Continue prairie plantings along White Bear Avenue by planting bottom part of hillside between MCC and White Bear Avenue. Crew. Eagle Scout volunteers Install Erosion Control Products Repair erosion on north side of pond using product such as compost pillows. Install energy dissipation product such as ScourMat near stormwater outlet. Crew. staff and volunteers Photo: Century College students installing compost pillows and live stakes at Maplewood's Kohlman Creek Preserve in 2006. Install Sump Structures Install two sump structures in storm sewer to trap sediment before it reaches Wicklander Pond. Crew: Public Works Photo: Public Works crew installing sump structure east of Wicklander Pond in 2006. Install Sedimentation Basin Create sedimentation basin in Public Works Yard to trap sediment on its way to Wicklander Pond. Crew. Public Works Photo: Constructing salt shed in 2006. Sedimentation basin will be south of the salt shed. Install Memorial Sitting Area Create sitting area along trail between City Hall and Public Works building as memorial to Maplewood staff. This project was t initiated by staff after the death of colleagues that were very dedicated to the city and their jobs. The memorial will be general R: and not specify individuals. Staff is raising money for this area to include: bench, planting, plaque, and rock. Crew: Staff volunteers Photo: Landscape design for memorial. Develop Brochure and Signage Develop brochure explaining Campus Plant project. Develop text for interpretive signage. Signage is a requirement of the DNR grant and will be installed in 2008. Crew. Maplewood Nature Center staff, contractor Photo: Rain garden sign at Maplewood Nature Center and other city sites. Staff Planning Team for Campus Plan project: DuWayne Konewko, Jon Jarosch, Ginny Gaynor, Bryan Nagel, Mark Maruska, Ann Hutchinson. Shann Finwall For more information, contact Ginny Gaynor, 249 -2416. Agenda Item 19 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer Jon Jarosch, Civil Engineer I SUBJECT: Mogren Street Improvements, Beam Ave to County Road D, City Project 06 -17, Resolution Approving No Parking Restrictions along Beam Avenue DATE: March 1, 2007 INTRODUCTION The City Council shall consider the approval of parking restrictions necessary to meet state aid standards on Beam Avenue as part of the Mogren Street Improvements. DISCUSSION Roadway improvements are necessary on Beam Avenue from 600 feet west of Highway 61 to Hazelwood Street as part of the CarMax /Mogren Development. Beam Avenue is a 4 lane roadway with heavy traffic volumes and does not facilitate parking. Beam Avenue is a state aid route and the improvements are to be partially funded through State Aid Funds. Due to the design and funding requirements set on state aid projects, No Parking restrictions must be set by council resolution. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the council approve the attached resolution adopting No Parking restrictions on Beam Avenue between Highway 61 and Hazelwood Street. Attachments: 1. Resolution Approving No Parking Restrictions 2. Project Location Map RESOLUTION BEAM AVENUE - NO PARKING RESTRICTIONS WHEREAS, the City Council approved the preparation of plans and specifications for the construction of the Mogren Street Improvements, City Project 06 -17 in December 2006 and WHEREAS, the city will be expending Municipal State Aid funds on the improvement of Beam Avenue; and WHEREAS, segments of said improvement do not conform to the approved State Aid standard for unrestricted parking; and WHEREAS, release of MSA funds is dependent on specified parking restrictions. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that the City of Maplewood shall ban the parking of motor vehicles on both the north and the south sides of Beam Avenue from 600 feet west of Highway 61 to Hazelwood Street. Dated at Maplewood, Minnesota this 12 day of March, 2007 (0 1 9. COTTAGE LANE LN. VADNAIS HEIGHTS 10, COTTAGE LANE LN. 11. COTTAGE LANE LN. III LYDIA` AVE. ` � f I -- ------ co 2 0. 5 \ ✓� 3 BEAM AVE. 1. SUMMIT CT.1 2. COUNTRYVIEJq CIR. 3. DULUTH CJF W Kel 1� (n VILLAGE T�R Z LEGACY t]ji 091 E L2 L I Legacy WOODLYNN AVE, Village 11. i Scul pture P. ST. JOHN'S_ to BLVD, 1 1 V) T-0 OR N " 'Project JI L ocation V) U KohIman Lake w ry KOHLMAN ULAVE. ITJ COUNTY i t`} Kohiman Park P LC TGp C7 1'- Manufactured o V) I Housing —J1 i I I :D! 2 Oil LLJ U) C� 3 LJJ CONbNOR ' Z AVE, N1 AVE. (1 COUNTY ROAD D COUNTY ROAD COUNTY ROAD D CT. 1 I KS ic) D CIR. 61 < SEXTANT AVE. Sun HIGHRIDGE CT, QI i Ridge Park 5. CHAMBERLAIN ST. 6. b < 0 MINGV�Ay T 8. COTTAGE LONE LN. C) H COUNTY ROA D III LYDIA` AVE. ` � f I -- ------ co 2 0. 5 \ ✓� 3 BEAM AVE. 1. SUMMIT CT.1 2. COUNTRYVIEJq CIR. 3. DULUTH CJF W Kel 1� (n VILLAGE T�R Z LEGACY t]ji 091 E L2 L I Legacy WOODLYNN AVE, Village 11. i Scul pture P. ST. JOHN'S_ to BLVD, 1 1 V) T-0 OR N " 'Project JI L ocation V) U KohIman Lake w ry KOHLMAN ULAVE. ITJ COUNTY i t`} Kohiman Park P LC TGp C7 1'- Manufactured o V) I Housing —J1 i I I :D! 2 Oil LLJ U) C� 3 LJJ CONbNOR ' Z AVE, N1 AVE. 1 /JJJ KS ic) SEXTANT AVE. Q `f /V GERVAIS AVE. p�Wy no scale I 0 0 LJJ \ o N �,, P on d < ona ,l X 0 �Jz � 5 North (n Hazelwood Park LLJ LJ C L-2 L E k1 1-H Z Ii X31 -J LLJ < V) Lli DEMONT 11 AVE. m 1 [ BROOKS E. Harvest 0 Park Of Fo ur < a Seasons ur P! rk AVE. _ Park ,SEXTANT I L lL �GRANDVIEW] AVE, Project Location Mogren Street Improvement 06-17 1 •- •. AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer Ed Nadeau, Fleet Superintendent SUBJECT: Approval of 2007 Fuel Purchases DATE: February 26, 2007 INTRODUCTION The Fleet Management Division will be purchasing all fuel products for 2007 under the State Contract. Fuel products are purchased approximately 15 times per year. Each purchase will exceed the ordinance allowed expenditure of $5,000. The normal purchase is approximately 7,000 gallons at each purchase. In an average year, gasoline is purchased 10 times and diesel is purchased 5 times. Each of the purchases is approximately $13,000 to $16,000 depending upon the price of fuel on the State Contract at the time of our need. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the city council approve all 2007 fuel purchases at the State Contract pricing rates. It is recommended that all purchases for 2007 be approved at this time. Therefore, each individual purchase will not be required to be brought before council. All purchases would be authorized by Fleet Superintendent Ed Nadeau. Agenda Item 111 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer Ed Nadeau, Utility /Fleet Superintendent SUBJECT: Approve Vehicle Purchases DATE: February 26, 2007 INTRODUCTION The 2007 Fleet Management capital outlay fund has funding for the replacement of two (2) one ton trucks. Background The two 1995 one -ton trucks have high mileage and are in need of replacement. These trucks are high usage for snow plowing; hauling of materials; equipment hauling; and material handling. They are used by the streets, storm maintenance, sewer maintenance and park maintenance divisions. The state bid price from Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet to replace both truck chassis is $57,260.30. This amount includes tax, license and registration. State bid pricing was received from Aspen Equipment for $25,807.63 to equip both trucks with bodies. The total cost to replace two (2) one ton trucks is $83,067.93. This price is within the budget allocation. The 1995 trucks will be sold at the state auction, with funds used to offset the purchase price. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the city council give approval to enter into the following contracts State Contract 436979 with Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet for the purchase of two (2) 2007 one ton truck chassis for $57,260.30 State Contract 437073 with Aspen Equipment for the purchase of two (2) truck bodies for $25,807.63 Attachments: 1. Bid Proposal from Thane Hawkins 2. Bid Proposal from Aspen Equipment City of Maplewood 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Attn: Ed Nadeau January 26, 2007 Regarding your request for a contract price quote for a 2007 Chevrolet Silverado 3500 4x4 chassis, we have itemized the information you require: STATE CONTRACT 436979: ITEM/MODEL: 12G Chevrolet Silverado CK31003 $22,143.45 CONTRACT EQUIPMENT: N/C 6.0 liter gas V8 included 6 spd electronic automatic trans included 4,10 Locking rear axle included 6) LT215/85R -16 all season tires included Engine block heater included Camper -style mirrors included Tilt steering wheel included AM /FM Stereo radio included Air conditioning included Full vinyl cab floor included Vinyl split bench with center storage /armrest included REVISIONS REQUESTED: Cloth split bench with center storage /armrest N/C 6.6 liter turbo diesel 5,756.00 6 spd Allison HD Electronic trans 960.00 Delete OnStar -(160.00) Snowplow prep pkg 396.00 Interior dome & reading lamps STD Daytime running lamps STD Wheatland yellow ext/gray int N/C TOTAL IMAXIMUM VEHICLE PRICE: $29,095.45 Specializing in Slate, county and local municipal sales Tax Exempt license 39.75 Sales tax 1.891.20 TOTAL PRICE with tax & license: $31,026.40 APPROXIMATE DELIVERY: 120 days A.R.O. Deduct $60.00 if you take delivery at the Dealership. IF YOU PURCHASE —WE NEED: STATE COOPERATIVE PURCHASE VENTURE NUMBER PURCHASE ORDER OR LETTER OF PURCHASE We are proud to point out that this pricing includes General Motors standard powertrain warranty of 5 years or 100,000 miles which ever comes first. There is no deductible on this coverage. Thank you for your consideration. David L. Thomas Fleet Sales Manager Enclosure Specializing in State, county and local municipal sales lfdov i I aud RP.(-.P.i\/Pd vfilpq qtnf CUSTOMER A SALES CONSULTANT Buyers Name D.L. # DOB Co-Buyers Name D.L. # DOB Buyers Soc. Sec. # II Co-Buyers Soc. Sec. # Street Address County W. Phone City, State Zip H. Phone Insurance Co. Policy § e-mail address Insurance Agent Name Agents Phone Date of Glass Loss J Agent Address 1:1 First Time Buyer ❑ Commercial Account 'College Grad Customer(s) authorizes dealership to obtain a consumer credit report in connection with the sale/delivery of this vehicle. — Yes No Customer(s) Signature Date Transmission Term of Requested Loan"Lease? Total, Cash Down Purchase Vehicle Stock # Year Make Model Color Mileage Upholstery qrma ion Trade In Inf t* ®r. Vin Year Make— 1 oriel Trim Level Color Body Type Reg Ext Crew Short Box Long Box Plate # Expiration State Appraised Miles Act Over Unk Lien Holder Amt Owed Emissions Purchased: ew Demo N ) Rental Used Thru: Dealer Private Warranty Start: I I Engine Size .9 pment Tranny Manual 4 5 6 Auto 3 4 5 6 4x4 AWD Z71/Off Road Power Features _/SteeroiA ( as ABS(R/A) Air Cond. PDL PW PW DRS SEAT PW PAS SEAT Sun/Moon Root PWR or Man Additional Features: Split Buckets Quad Leather Heated Remote Keyless Alloys Assist Steps Bedliner Sound System: K- 'AM/FM / Cass CD CD Changer/ IMP3 DVD Factory or After Mkt Trailering Pkg Protection Options.`�°-&ery ce Contract Rustproof Sealant Fabric Alarm Transferable/Warranties? Additional OptionslComments Undetected Reconditioning Recent Repairs: Preliminary: GM Cert Gold Silver Bronze Wholesale / Re-cycle Z 0 Z LU 0 LU Ln cc Ci 30/1 ,000 7- 90/4,000 ❑ As Is! Estimated Arrival 1],Stock K-89 , -1,-90 M-91 N-92 P-93 R-94 Locate Future [ - Transit 5 -95 T_96 V-97 Y'V98 X-99 Y-00 1-01 2-02 3-03 4-04 OS 6 -00 'Tires/Covers Exhaust/Muffler Body/Panels Engine Paint/Finish Transmission Windshield/Top Steering Upholstery Radio/Electrical/Horn Brakes Power Options/Cruise Emissions Detail/Fluids/inspect Air Condition Low/High Miles Local Market Adj, Undetected Reconditioning S7 ``'lT1J1S APPRAISAL IS VALID FOR SEVEN AAVS; 'Equipment/Mileage Adjustment $ Estimate ReconditioN e I i et V Curren Appraisal By?' #2 Z 0 Z LU 0 LU Ln cc Ci 30/1 ,000 7- 90/4,000 ❑ As Is! Estimated Arrival 1],Stock K-89 , -1,-90 M-91 N-92 P-93 R-94 Locate Future [ - Transit 5 -95 T_96 V-97 Y'V98 X-99 Y-00 1-01 2-02 3-03 4-04 OS 6 -00 ASPEN 9150 Pillsbury Avenue South - Bloomington MN 55420 Direct # 952- 656 -729 Fax 952 -656 -7158 Cell# 612- 719 -4414 QUOTATION Thursday, February 15, 2007 Ed Nadeau Cih Of Maplewood 1902 East County RD B Maplewood, MN. 55109 Aspen Equipment is pleased to submit the following quotation for you consideration. One (1) New Flatbed and related equipment including the following 4.0 Scott Model 143 -256 Magnum HD Aluminum Flatbed including $ 3,068.00 91.5" bed width / 96" width with outside stake pockets and rub rail 1 5/8" x 3 3/4" stake pockets 4" x 3" aluminum I beam cross members 4" aluminum long sills 7" outer rail Extruded aluminum dry freight floor 4.36 42" x 96" tapered bulkhead, full window, no obstruction from back window $ 683.00 Top of bulkhead to have ladder stops to the outside and inside, leaving a 12" space toward the inside (strobe light mount), 6" tall with tie down rings. The bulk head to have two (2) grab handles installed on the taper's. Aluminum structural tubing side rails, 26" tall, full length, both sides $ 1,462.00 Hinged to drop down giving un- obstructed loading from the sides Horizontal tubing shall be used for full width ladder access to the flatbed with grip tape applied to the top side (when dropped). 8.0 Tommygate Model 91- 1050 -EA37 Lift gate $ 3,257.00 1000 Lbs. capacity 85" x 37" platform with 5" taper Extruded aluminum platform 9.19 Pull plate, rigid mount $ 425.98 9.34 2" pintle / ball combo, installed 20" top of ball $ 84.73 6 prong towing socket, center pin controls brake Rear mud flaps I.C.0 Bumper, lighting and fuel fill. Complete installation on customer supplied Chev 3500, 60" CA All aluminum components are not painted Selling Price $ 8,980.71 6.5% MN State Sales Tax $ 583.75 Your Total Investment $ 9,564.46 All chassis modifications including, but not limited to alterations or relocation of components related to fuel tanks, air tanks, brakes, exhaust systems, battery boxes, protrusions above and below the frame rails, shortening or lengthening frame rails and the like will be the responsibility of the customer. This will include chassis' purchased by Aspen, by the Customer and/or by a third party (i.e. leasing company)." State of Minnesota Contract # 437073 FOB Bloomington, MN Thank you for the opportunity to work with you on your equipment need. If we can be of further assistance in any way, please feel free to call on us. Sincerely Yours Mark Lundeen Territory Manager ASPEN 9150 Pillsbury Avenue South - Bloomington MN 55420 Direct # 952- 656 -729 Fax 952 -656 -7158 Ge1i# 612- 719 -4414 QUOTATION Monday, February 19, 2007 Ed Nadeau City Of Maplewood 1902 East County RD B Maplewood, MN. 55109 Aspen Equipment is pleased to submit the following quotation for you consideration. One (1) New Henderson Model Mark III Dump Body Including the Following DIMENSIONS: 5.0 Henderson Mark III 304 Stainless Steel Construction Capacity to be 2.3 -3.3 cubic yard struck Inside length of 9 feet. Outside width of 95 inches. Inside width to be 85" Side height of 13 inches, drop down Tailgate height of 19 inches. Headsheet height of 44 inches. SIDES & HEADSHEET Double wall 12 gauge, 304 stainless steel sides with boxed top rail. Debris shedding sloped top rail. Single handle quick release fold down sides with 3/8" x 1 'h" handle located in center of the side, spring loaded with vinyl handle grip Two (2) 3 /4 " release pins running from center handle to front and rear corner posts. 12 gauge, 304 stainless steel tapered head sheet with integral cab shield with pre - punched windows across front of body. 12 gauge, 304 stainless steel 4 ' / 4" x 8" full depth rear corner posts are tied to a 5" structural rear apron. This joint is further reinforced with a 304 stainless steel 3/16" plate. FLOOR: $ 9,290.00 One -piece 3/16" AR400 steel (190,000 psi tensile strength, Brinell hardness of 400). Floor and underside is painted black. 45- degree dirt shedding floor and side panel design. One -piece 5" x #10.0 I -beam long sills. One piece sub frame and module hoist cradle allows 9" mounting height TAILGATE: 12 gauge, 304 stainless steel tailgate sheet, double wall construction. Full perimeter boxing with all horizontal edges sloped outward. Single handle quick release action design Flush mount, offset tailgate hinges with easy release pins. 1 'k /4" lower pin diameter, 1" upper pin diameter. Iz" latch hooks with 3/8" latch plates. Tailgate release hardware with stainless steel bushings and rubber covered handle. HOIST: 5.16 Rugby Model HR520 double acting underbody hoist, or quual REAR HINGE ASSEMBLY: 4" x 3" x ''/4" structural angle. 1 '14 ", 1045 CR steel hinge pins connected through 4" bushings with grease zerks. LIGHT PACKAGE: Complete FMVSS108 lighting package with sealed wiring harness. 5.21 LED Rubber mounted, shock resistant stop / I.C.C. 3 -light cluster, and clearance lights, $ 223.00 includes a one piece sealed wiring harness. Install LED lights in stainless steel boxes on bulkhead follow taper $ 125.00 9.109 Ecco Model 3860A, Amber LED installed in rear corner post, switched from cab $ 320.13 HYDRAULICS: 10.0 Force America Model VT15- 2512 -HP central hysraulies with in cab lever controls for DA $ 3,555.00 hoist and straight snowplow. Valve / tank assembly with drop in filter 10.7 Underhood mounting kit, 6.61- Diesel $ 328.00 10.77 Underhood pump $ 409.00 MISCELLANEOUS Rear mud flaps behind rear wheels 9.17 Rear pull plate with 6 prong socket, safety chain "D" rings and $ 421.95 9.34 2" ball / pintle hook combination. Top of ball 23" $ 84.73 6 prong towing socket, center pin for brakes $ 495.00 18" x 18" x 36" long underbed aluminum toolbox with cabinet doors installed on cyrbside Your Investment $ 25,251.81 6.5 MN State Sales Tax S 991.36 Your Total Investment 16,243.17 State Of Minnesota Contract# 437073 FOB Bloomington, MN Thank you for the opportunity to work with you on your equipment needs. If we can be of further assistance in any way, please feel free to call on us. Sincerely Yours Mark Lundeen Territory Manager Agenda Item 112 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer SUBJECT: Public Works Building Expansion — City Project 03 -19 — Approve Contract Revision for Reduction in Retainage DATE: March 2, 2007 INTRODUCTION The contract with the contractor for the construction of the Public Works Building Expansion is nearly completed. The contract provided for a retainage of 5% of the total amount of the contract. The current retainage is $55,326.82 on the total contract of $2,213,070.00. Approval of the contract change to reduce the retainage to $10,000 is recommended. Background The Public Works Building expansion project was awarded to Jorgenson Construction on June 13, 2005 in the amount of $2,138,260. It is typical of building projects that contract changes be limited to 5% of the construction cost. The overall project budget allotted $100,000 toward these types of expenses. The approved changes were below that amount at $74,810. The final contract amount is $2,213,070.00. The contract provided for a retainage of 2.5% of the work completed and 2.5% of the stored material for a total retainage of 5 %. The contractor is complete with his work and we are awaiting spring weather for a repair of a trench drain within the new structure. A reduction of the retainage to $10,000 should be adequate to insure completion of the remaining work. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the city council approve the contract revision with Jorgenson Construction, Inc. for the Public Works Building Expansion in the amount of $2,138,260.00 and authorize the Public Works Director to reduce the project retainage to $10,000. Agenda Item 113 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Chuck Ahl, Director of Public Works / City Engineer SUBJECT: CarMax /Mogren Addition, City Project 06 -14, Approve CarMax Development Contract DATE: March 1, 2007 INTRODUCTION The development contract for the CarMax development is complete and ready for approval from the City Council. DISCUSSION On December 18, 2006, the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development at the CarMax /Mogren Development. A development contract is necessary to insure that the conditions for approval are met and to secure the payment of the assessments for the improvements related to the development. Attached is the development contract. Included with the contract are the minutes of the Council meeting from December 18, 2006. By attaching the minutes the conditions are secured. This agreement, in combination with the Mogren Development Contract, provides security in the form of a letter of credit in the amount of $2,994,600 to guarantee the conditions. The final language is still being reviewed by attorneys for CarMax. These revisions are anticipated to be minor and will be reviewed with the City Attorney. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the council approve the attached Development Contract with CarMax for the CarMax /Mogren Addition, as approved on December 18, 2006 and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the agreement signifying City Council approval. Minor revisions as approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney are authorized as needed. Attachments: 1. Development Contract 2. Project Location Map CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Ramsey County, Minnesota Development Agreement for Mogren Retail Addition City Project 06 -14 THIS AGREEMENT, made this day of , 2007, between the City of Maplewood, a Minnesota municipal corporation, acting by and through its mayor and city manager, herein called the CITY and CarMax, Inc. herein called the DEVELOPER. IN CONSIDERATION of the following mutual agreements and covenants, the parties hereby agree as follows: In consideration of the CITY accepting Mogren Retail Addition, the DEVELOPER shall provide all internal water systems, storm water management facilities, sanitary sewers and street improvements, including concrete curb and gutter, street lighting, signing, landscaping and other improvements as specified herein, all in conformance with current City standards, more specifically outlined in the Special Conditions, Plans and Specifications attached to this contract. All internal improvements constructed by the DEVELOPER shall be considered private utilities and /or improvements and shall be maintained by the DEVELOPER or his assign. The exception to the private improvements are the improvements to Beam Avenue, the construction of Mogren Drive, the wetland mitigation and the associated sanitary sewer, water main and storm drainage improvements as detailed in the Feasibility Study and Report for Carmax /Morgren Addition, City Project 06 -17, dated November 2006. The DEVELOPER warrants that he is or will be, the owner of the property or a portion of the property proposed for the construction of the Mogren Retail Addition development and maintains all rights and obligations necessary to construct the said improvements and to incur any property obligations. 2. The DEVELOPER agrees to perform or contract with Mogren Development to perform the earthwork /grading and necessary soils corrections required for the construction of Mogren Drive and the associated wetland mitigation. The earthwork /grading shall be as detailed in the Feasibility Study and Report for Carmax /Moggren Addition, City Project 06 -17, dated November 2006. The grading shall be completed to within a 0.2 foot tolerance of the required design grades. The earthwork/grading for the wetland mitigation may need to extend beyond property owned by the DEVELOPER in the right of way along Beam Avenue. Any earthwork /grading within the Beam Avenue right of way shall be subject to CITY and Ramsey County review and approval. Upon the completion of the earthwork/grading, the DEVELOPER shall provide the CITY with an as -built field survey confirming that the earthwork/grading meets the required 0.2 foot tolerance. The DEVELOPER agrees to provide the CITY with a stockpile of sand according to specifications to be supplied by the City Engineer that is available on site. The quantity of sand is estimated to be 30,000 cubic yards. Should the sand material not be acceptable to the City Engineer or a quantity of less than 30,000 cubic yards is provided, then the DEVELOPER agrees to an increase in the assessment equal to the CITY bid price for granular burrow material from within the City Project 06 -17 bid price. 3. The DEVELOPER agrees to sign an assessment waiver prepared by the CITY waiving the right to appeal the proposed assessments for the Mogren Street Improvements, City Project 06 -17, as detailed in the Feasibility Study ON and Report. The total amount of the proposed assessments to the DEVELOPER for these improvements has been estimated at $3,394,600.00. The DEVELOPER share shall be determined in agreement with Mogren Development, Inc. as a cost split for improvements. The total assessment amount is hereby agreed to be reduced by the amount of grading work completed by the DEVELOPER. Current estimates of the grading work to be completed are $400,000. The final estimate of the improvements and the amount of the assessment shall be as determined by the City Engineer but shall not exceed $3,394,600 less the amount of grading work completed by the DEVELOPER. The DEVELOPER shall provide the City Engineer with cost summaries of the grading work. 4. The DEVELOPER, in cooperation with Mogren Development, Inc., agrees to provide the CITY a total cash escrow in the form of a letter of credit for 100% of the amount for the Mogren Drive Improvements, City Project 06 -17, as detailed in the Feasibility Study and Report estimated to be $2,994,600.00. Said letter of credit shall be effective until the CITY conducts an assessment hearing noted in 3. above. Developer shall provide to the CITY the letter of credit or other security on or about March 9, 2007. 5. The DEVELOPER agrees to provide the city a Park Availability Charge (PAC) fee consistent with City Ordinance prior to the issuance of any building permits on the subject properties. DEVELOPER agrees that said PAC fee shall be calculated as 9% of the market value of the purchase price of each parcel. CITY agrees that no PAC fee is collected on property Outlots until said Outlots are re- platted. There shall be no PAC fee charged for parcels of land purchased by the DEVELOPER from the CITY under option agreements. 3 6. The CITY acknowledges that the DEVELOPER is entitled consideration for work provided by the DEVELOPER for Mogren Drive and the wetland mitigation. The CITY shall determine a "Credit" to be applied to the assessments of the DEVELOPER based on work performed by the DEVELOPER to the benefit of Mogren Drive construction and the wetland mitigation. Work performed shall be based on takeoff quantities, mutually agreed upon between the CITY and the DEVELOPER. Financial credit will be determined by calculating the sum of the quantities times the respective unit prices of the DEVELOPER'S low bid contractor. The CITY has preliminarily estimated the credits for the street and street and storm water treatment facility performed by the DEVELOPER, at approximately $4 00,000, based on preliminary information provided by the DEVELOPER. The DEVELOPER agrees that all improvements to be constructed for Mogren Drive and/or the wetland mitigation shall be accomplished according to CITY specifications and approved by the City Engineer. 7. The DEVELOPER agrees to dedicate all necessary right of way for the construction of improvements along Beam Avenue and TH 61 as determined by the City Engineer within project 06 -17. This dedication shall be provided at no cost to the CITY. 8. The DEVELOPER agrees to dedicate, at no cost to the CITY, the necessary drainage and utility easements over the wetland mitigation areas, as detailed in the Carmax /Mogren Feasibility Study and Report, City Project 06 -17. This dedication shall be provided at no cost to the CITY. 9. The DEVELOPER agrees to grant a right -of -entry to the CITY to access private property within Mogren Retail Addition as needed to construct the improvements included as a part of the Carmax/Mogren Addition 19 Improvements, City Project 06 -17, as detailed in the Feasibility Study and Report. The right -of -entry shall be provided at no cost to the CITY. 10. The DEVELOPER agrees to complete landscaping improvements to the wetland mitigation area within the city's drainage and utility easement and in Outlot A. The landscaping shall be in accordance with design concepts established by the CITY and shall be subject to the review and approval of the CITY. The CITY hereby grants the DEVELOPER and his assigns a right of entry to Outlot A from the date of this agreement through December 31, 2009. The DEVELOPER agrees to assume a two -year warranty on all planting within Outlot A. 11. The DEVELOPER agrees to install and maintain all required erosion control practices necessary for private construction and work done by the DEVELOPER on Mogren Drive and the wetland mitigation, including but not limited to silt fence, sediment ponds, floating silt curtain, inlet protection and rock construction entrances. 12. Cash escrows shall be a letter of credit or cash deposit. If the surety is in the form of a letter of credit, the letter of credit must clearly indicate that it is an irrevocable letter of credit (from a financial institution approved by the City Attorney) in the name of the City of Maplewood, payable on demand, to assure compliance with the terms of this development agreement. The letter of credit shall be of a one -year duration and must have a condition indicating automatic renewal with notification to the CITY a minimum of 60 days prior to its expiration. 13. The DEVELOPER shall reimburse any costs incurred by the CITY for engineering, legal, and administrative services, associated with the project. A $168,000 cash escrow has been established by the Mogren Development, Inc. for these services. DEVELOPER shall supply the CITY with an additional cash escrow in the amount of $12,000 to assure completion of all CarMax site improvements. Said cash escrow may be refunded to the DEVELOPER and upon satisfactory completion of all improvements contemplated herein as determined by the City Engineer. 14. The DEVELOPER shall complete the work covered by this contract by the date given in the Special Conditions of this contract. No deviation from the required completion date shall be permitted unless approved in writing by the CITY. After receipt of written notice from the DEVELOPER of the existence of causes over which the DEVELOPER has no control which will delay the completion of the work, the CITY, at its discretion, may extend the completion date and any financial sureties required shall be continued to cover the work during the extension of time. The DEVELOPER and CITY hereby agree that said work shall be completed by June 1, 2008. This date may be extended by mutual agreement of the DEVELOPER and the City Engineer. 15. The DEVELOPER shall furnish all engineering, architectural and administrative services for the private improvements and building projects. 16. The DEVELOPER agrees that the work shall be done and performed in the best and most workmanlike manner; and all materials and labor shall be in strict conformity with respect to the approved Plans and Specifications and improvement standards of the City of Maplewood, and shall be subject to the inspection and approval of the CITY or a duly authorized engineer of the CITY; and in case any material or labor supplied shall be rejected by the CITY or engineer as defective or unsuitable, then such rejected material shall be removed and replaced with approved material to the satisfaction and A approval of the CITY or engineer and at the sole cost and expense of the DEVELOPER. 17. After completion of any private work required by the DEVELOPER within public right -of -way or easements, the City engineer or the City engineer's designated representative and a representative of the DEVELOPER's engineer will make a final inspection of the work. This provision shall apply only to work within public right -of -way or easements. The City engineer will not inspect or warrant any private work conducted by the contractor or contractors hired by the DEVELOPER. 18. It is further agreed, anything to the contrary herein notwithstanding, that the City of Maplewood City Council and its agents or employees shall not be personally liable or responsible in any manner to the DEVELOPER, the DEVELOPER's contractor or subcontractor, material suppliers, laborers or to any other person or persons whomsoever, for any claim demand, damages, actions or causes of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the execution of this agreement or the performance and completion of the work or the improvements provided herein, which the DEVELOPER will save the CITY harmless from all such claims, demands, damages, actions or causes of action or the costs disbursements and expenses of defending the same, specifically including, without intending to limit the categories of said costs, cost and expenses for CITY administrative time and labor, costs of consulting engineering services, and costs of legal services rendered in connection with the defending such claims as may be brought against the CITY. It is further agreed that the DEVELOPER will furnish the City of Maplewood proof of insurance in the amount as required by the approval specifications covering any public liability or property damage by reason of 7 the operation of the DEVELOPER's equipment, laborers, and hazard caused by said improvement. 19. Breach of any terms of this agreement by the DEVELOPER shall be grounds for denial of building or occupancy permits for buildings within Mogren Retail Addition until the DEVELOPER corrects such breach. 20. In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions contained herein and any other application thereof shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby. 21. The terms and conditions of this agreement shall be binding on the parties hereto, their respective successors and assigns and the benefits and burdens shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. 22. Notices. Whenever it shall be required or permitted by this Agreement that notice or demand be given or served by either party to or on the other party, such notice or demand shall be delivered personally or mailed by United States mail to the addresses hereinafter set forth by certified mail. Such notice or demand shall be deemed timely given when delivered personally or when deposited in the mail in accordance with the above. The addresses of the parties hereto for such mail purposes are as follows, until written notice of such address has been given: As to the City: City of Maplewood 1830 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 As to the Landowner: Carmax Joe Jagdmann 12800 Tuckahoe Creek Parkway Richmond, VA 23238 A SIGNATURES FOR CARMAX, INC. , its M TITLE STATE OF MINNESOTA } ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY } la TITLE The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2007, by of the Developer. and Notary Public SIGNATURES CITY OF MAPLEWOOD: Diana Longrie, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA } ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY } The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2007 by Diana Longrie of the City of Maplewood, a municipal corporation. Notary Public SIGNATURES CITY OF MAPLEWOO©: Greg Copeland, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA } ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY } The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2007, by Greg Copeland of the City of Maplewood, a municipal corporation. Notary Public IN SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 1. Project Information: a. Name: Mogren Retail Addition b. Developer: CarMax, Inc. C. Engineer: Landform d. General Contractor: Frattalone e. Financial Guarantees: (1) Type: Cash Escrow (Engineering and Legal Expenses) Amount: $12,000 (2) Type: Letter of Credit or Cash Surety Amount: $2,994,600 (Carmax /Mogren Drive Improvements), in cooperation with Mogren Development, Inc. 2. Scope of work contemplated under the terms of this contract and covered by escrow guarantee are outlined in the conditions of development approval from the December 18, 2006, city council meeting (see attached minutes). 11 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M. Monday, December 18, 2006 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 06 -34 H. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:00 p.m. Carmax /Mogren Addition a. Senior Planner Ekstrand presented the report. b. Brandon Bourdon, Kimley Horn & Associates, addressed council. C. Bruce Mogren, Mogren Development Company, was present for council questions. d. Dave Sellegren, Land Use Attorney representing Carmax, addressed council. e. Joe Jagdmann, Real Estate Manager representing Carmax, addressed council. Chuck Patterson, Architect for the project, answered council questions. g. Dan Hughes, Landscape Engineer, was presented for council questions. Boardmember Shankar presented the Design Review Board report. i. Mayor Longrie opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following persons were heard: ►= j. Mayor Longrie closed the public hearing. Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following resolution approving a conditional use permit for a planned unit development for the CarMax/Mogren Addition Development to include all 18 conditions: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 06 -12 -156 FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, Carmax and Bruce Mogren applied for a conditional use permit for a planned unit development to develop a Carmax used -car dealership on the former Country View Golf Course property; WHEREAS, this permit applies to the northeast corner of Beam Avenue and Highway 61. The legal description is: 12 Lot 1, Carmax /Mogren Addition WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: On December 5, 2006, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve this conditional use permit. 2. The city council reviewed this request on December 18, 2006. The council considered the reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approved the above - described conditional use permit revision because: 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 any activity, process, 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. 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. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 13 1. The development shall follow the plans date - stamped October 20, 2006, except where the city requires changes. 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 end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. This approval permits the development of the Carmax site subject to the conditions of the city council. The future development sites are not approved at this time. The developers of these sites must submit all necessary applications and materials for evaluation of those plans as required by the city ordinance. 5. If the watershed district allows their twin drainage pipes to be relocated above grade as an open channel, the PUD shall also require that all developments within the Carmax /Mogren Addition actively and regularly pick up all litter from their parking lots to keep debris from entering this open channel. 6. The applicants shall comply with the requirements in the Engineering Plan Review dated November 21, 2006, by Erin Laberee and Michael Thompson. 7. The applicants shall also comply with the requirements listed in these plan - review reports as follows: • The Drainage and Wetland Report by DuWayne Konewko dated November 22, 2006. • The wetland and rainwater garden landscaping comments by Ginny Gaynor dated November 22, 2006. • The watershed district comments by Tina Carstens dated November 21, 2006. 8. The outdoor vehicle storage area is allowed. The outward- facing fagade of the screening wall shall be brick to match the building. 9. The pervious paving method proposed within the shoreland boundary area shall meet the requirements of the shoreland ordinance. This shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. 10. Vehicle transports shall not use public right -of -way for loading or unloading. 11. The site plan shall be revised for the city engineer's approval relocating the Highway 61 driveway to the north at County Road D. This driveway shall be W located as far east as possible. This driveway shall remain gated at all times except when needed for vehicle test drives which is its proposed and permitted use. 12. The dealership shall not store any materials or supplies on the outside of the building, except for what they store in the dumpster enclosure. 13. The dealership shall only park vehicles on designated paved surfaces. 14. The applicants shall obtain any required permits from the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District, Ramsey County and the State of Minnesota and meet the requirements of those agencies. 15. The site plan shall be revised to move the driveway on Beam Avenue as far to the east as possible. This revision shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. 16. The city engineer shall get the necessary approvals for wetland mitigation from the watershed district as part of the public improvements needed for this subdivision and development as stated in the report by DuWayne Konewko, Environmental Management Specialist. 17. All buildings, paving, unneeded utilities, etc. within the proposed subdivision shall be demolished and removed from the site by the applicants. 18. The applicants shall provide all development agreements, maintenance agreements and escrows required by the city. These agreements shall be executed and escrows paid before the issuance of building permits. Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes -All Councilmember Hjelle moved to approve the preliminary plat for the CarMax /Mogren Addition, subiect to the following conditions: 1. Signing of the following agreements with the city: • A maintenance agreement, prepared by the city, for the rainwater gardens, ponds and sumps. The project plans shall clearly point out the maintenance access route to each garden, pond and basin. The developer /owner of the property will be responsible for all such maintenance. • A development agreement with the city for the construction of the public road within the development site that will connect Beam Avenue to County Road D. 2. Revising the plat to rename all Outlot B with a lot and block number. 15 3. The applicants shall dedicate any easements that the city may require for drainage and utility purposes. 4. The name of the street shall be subject to the approval of the city's public safety staff and city engineer. 5. The applicants shall pay the city escrow for any documents, easements and agreements that the city engineer may require that may not be ready by the time of plat signing. 6. The applicants shall comply with the requirements in the Engineering Plan Review dated November 21, 2006, by Erin Laberee and Michael Thompson. 7. The applicants shall also comply with the requirements listed in these plan - review reports as follows: • The Drainage and Wetland Report by DuWayne Konewko dated November 22, 2006. • The wetland and rainwater garden landscaping comments by Ginny Gaynor dated November 22, 2006. • The watershed district comments by Tina Carstens dated November 21, 2006. Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes-All Councilmember Rossbach moved to direct the applicant provide a three dimensional cad drawing of the building elevations for submission to the Design Review Board for their approval based upon previous suggestions by the board and city staff. Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes-All Councilmember Hjelle moved to adopt the following resolution ordering improvement after a public hearing for the proposed public improvements for the CarMax/Moaren Addition Imorovements: RESOLUTION 06 -12 -157 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AFTER PUBLIC HEARING WHEREAS, a resolution of the city council adopted the 27th day of November, 2006, fixed a date for a council hearing on the proposed public improvements for the CarMaxlMogren Addition Improvements, City Project 06- 17. AND WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was duly held on December 18, 2006, and the council has heard all persons desiring to be heard on the matter and has fully considered the same; m 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 public improvements to the proposed CarMax /Mogren Addition Improvements, City Project 06 -17. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in this council resolution adopted the 18th day of December 2006. 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 $4,416,000 shall be established. The proposed financing plan is as follows: Developer Assessments $ 3,394,600 (76.9 %) City of Maplewood — MSAS Bond Funds $ 517,550 (11.7 %) Ramsey County $ 292,550 (6.6 MnDOT $ 211,300 (4.8 %) Total $ 4,416,000 Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes -All A Comment from Councilmember Rossbach for the record: Although the Landform letter states otherwise, Councilmember Rossbach clarified that this site does and will generate traffic onto local streets. 9.35 p.m. Mayor Longrie announced a 10 minute recess. 17 Stormwater /Wetland Report By DuWayne Konewko, Maplewood Environmental Management Specialist November 22, 2006 A. Storm Water Management 1) Existing Drainage System and Features The existing drainage system consists of a regional treatment pond at the north end of the site which collects and treats runoff from portions of County Road D. The existing pond has treatment capacity for a portion of the proposed development south of County Road D, including portions of the proposed public road and the private development east of the proposed road. The treated storm water from the regional pond discharges to a two -cell constructed wetland system immediately to the west before entering a section of what is referred to as North County Ditch 18 (or Willow Creek). The drainage system is routed to the road ditch on the north side of Beam Avenue and then crosses Beam and TH 61 before entering Kohlman Lake. The existing wetland system was designed and constructed in conjunction with the Maplewood Mall Area Transportation Improvements (MMATI) to mitigate both public and private wetland impacts throughout the MMATI project area. The created wetland credits are all accounted for and no additional credits are available for future impacts in the CarMax /Mogren Site. The wetland also has a buffer area, including minimum setback distances of 100 feet on the north, east, and south sides, and 50 feet on the west. Another feature of the existing drainage system is the existing twin 48 -inch pipes that connect the wetland complex north of County Road D to the pond and wetland complex south of Beam Avenue. This is an important feature of the site from both a site design and long -term operational standpoint. This system is not hydraulically connected to the drainage system on the immediate CarMax /Mogren site, although both systems ultimately drain to Kohlman Lake. As will be discussed later in the section, there may be an advantage to replacing the existing pipes with ditch section to better meet the site design goals for treatment and wetland mitigation and to reduce long -term operational concerns with the existing pipes. 2) Proposed Storm Water Treatment Systems The proposed treatment system consists of a combination of regional and on -site treatment areas. Both existing and proposed systems will be designed to meet City and RWMWD design standards for pollutant removal efficiencies and for volume control (i.e., infiltration requirements). The majority of the public road portion of the site will be routed to the existing storm water pond system on the north end of the site through a conventional storm sewer system. IN A small portion of the south end of the new public road will be routed to a treatment system in the northwest corner of the intersection of the Beam and the new road. A rain garden or infiltration feature in this area is recommended, although coordination with the adjacent development will determine the ultimate size and location of the treatment area. If an infiltration area is incorporated, the system would include a pre- treatment component such as a sump manhole or mechanical sediment removal device. For the purpose of this feasibility report, we have assumed that a more effective mechanical sediment removal device would be installed for pre - treatment. 3) Proposed Storm Water Routing and System Capacity The proposed storm sewer system for the public road will be routed as illustrated in Exhibit 7. The northern section will route to the existing regional pond to the north and southern section will route to the south toward the Beam Avenue ditch system after treatment. Storm sewer catch basins with concrete curb and gutter are proposed to accommodate the runoff from Beam Avenue Developers of the sites on the west side of the proposed public road will be responsible for meeting City and RWMWD rate and volume controls on their individual sites. The overall routing of these systems will be coordinated by City staff throughout the design and development review stages. 4) Proposed Open Ditch /Wetland Section The proposed north -south swale traversing the CarMax site runs parallel and immediately west of the existing twin 48 -inch pipes connecting the wetland basin north of County Road D to the wetland basin south of Beam Avenue. Based on preliminary analyses, the proposed swale system and wet pond could be combined to achieve a larger storm water detention and overall water quality treatment volume. Furthermore, from a hydraulic standpoint, it is also possible to replace a segment of the twin 48 -inch pipes with an open channel which would collect a portion of the runoff from the CarMax area and from the parcel immediately to the east of CarMax. In this case, the runoff from both of these areas would eventually be routed across Beam Avenue. The CarMax site would route through the larger 60" by 136" elliptical pipe at the Beam Avenue 1 Trunk Highway 61 intersection the southwest. The remainder of the site, including the wetland mitigation system, would route through the existing 58" by 91" concrete elliptical pipe. The City, RWMWD, and the Developer have evaluated this as an option. This option would achieve: 1) reduction in the long -term maintenance issues that will likely be needed in the area of the twin 48 -inch pipes; 2) an opportunity to create more wetland mitigation area on -site; 3) additional water quality benefits; and 4) the potential for additional live storage capacity of the regional routing system. Prior to implementation of this approach, the RWMWD will need to review the detailed design and approve the modifications. The critical issue for this ditch m creation is the need to maintain the current response of the wetland areas north of County D and south of Beam. D. Wetlands Management Wetland areas currently exist on the site, primarily along the north Beam Avenue ditch which will be impacted by the overall site development. A small area of wetland impact will also occur along a section of the North County Ditch 18 system. However, this area has already been mitigated for as part of the MMATI project. As discussed previously, the main wetland feature in the immediate area is the created wetland system just south of County Road D. This section discusses the anticipated impacts and mitigation plan for the impacted wetlands in the CarMax /Mogren site. Because the most feasible location for mitigation is adjacent to the existing created wetland area, the City intends to lead the overall coordination, design and operation efforts for the proposed mitigation site, while the developers will remain financially responsible for their portion of the impacts and mitigation. Having the City lead the process will allow for consistency in the overall design and long -term monitoring and operation of the mitigation area. The following table summarizes the anticipated wetland impacts and mitigation needs. These existing and proposed wetland and buffer areas are illustrated in Exhibits 8 and 9. Table 1. Summary of Wetland Impacts and Mitigation Area Wetland (Acres) Buffer (Acres) Existing Mitigation Area South of County D 1.90 3.60 Existing Wetlands Adjacent to Beam 1.25 *1.60 Total Existing Areas 3.15 5.20 Existing Mitigation Area South of County D 1.90 3.60 Expanded Area South of County D 1.60 4.30 Area Adjacent to Beam 0 0 Existing Buffer Modified to Wetland (Loss) 0 (1.10) Total Proposed Areas 3.50 6.80 Net Increase (Decrease) 0.35 1.30 * A portion of this assumed buffer is currently road surface. As shown in Table 1, the existing wetland and buffer areas include the mitigation area to the north and the areas along Beam delineated in 2006. Based on the preliminary review of the proposed project, the improvement can result in a net increase of up to about 0.35 acres of new wetland and 1.30 acres of new buffer. As part of the wetland permitting process, this estimated 1.30 acres of new buffer would be proposed as the public value credit portion of the wetland impacts. The 20 numbers presented in Table 1 assume that the second cell of the treatment system in the CarMax site will not be considered new wetland. If designed to meet the wetland requirements, this area may result in a further increase the extent of new wetlands throughout the site. 1) Wetland Impacts A combination of the private development, the new public road from Beam to County Road D, and improvements to Beam Avenue, will result in impacts to the entire 1.25 acres (54,424 square -feet) of wetlands located adjacent to Beam Avenue. The areas were delineated and boundaries approved by the RWMWD as described in the July 18, 2006 Wetland Delineation Report (SEH). The existing buffer area estimate of 1.60 acres around the wetland system adjacent to Beam is conservative, as the number represents a 25 -foot buffer around the entire wetland. In reality, the buffer extends into portions of the Beam Avenue right -of -way. The total proposed wetland and buffer areas presented in Table 1, are illustrated in Exhibit 9. Only buffer areas outside of the existing mitigation site easement were included in the new buffer calculations. In addition, existing buffer area used to expand new wetland areas inside the easement, were subtracted from the total buffer area calculations. Additional 2) Wetland Mitigation Plan The primary goal of the mitigation plan is to achieve the entire mitigation requirement on -site, including new wetland, public value credits, and buffer areas. The primary mitigation area is the expansion of the current wetland system in the northern portion of the project site. Additional wetland mitigation will be created along the eastern border of the CarMax site, and mitigation credits may also be obtained in the second cell of the pond - wetland system in the south portion of the CarMax site. Final design will need to conform to the state requirements for wetland mitigation sites, include side -slope limitations and maximum bounce. Planting will be consistent with the existing wetland area to the north. 3) Wetland Buffers The wetland areas along Beam Avenue are classified Manage C which means that 25 foot buffer areas will apply. The maximum buffer area for this area is 69,853 square -feet. The actual existing buffer area is somewhat less than this as portions of the 25 -foot zone extend onto Beam Avenue pavement and the gravel shoulder. The required buffer area for the expanded mitigation site will include creation of up to 1.60 acres (69,853 square -feet) of buffer, with an average buffer of 100 feet and a minimum of 50 feet. The RWMWD also had buffer requirements for the 21 created wetland, although to a lower level than the stated City requirements. The RWMWD requires a 75 -foot average and 37.5 -foot minimum. The required buffer area is intended to minimize future impacts resulting from development encroaching on the wetland areas. While adequate surface area is available to meet the buffer requirements, obtaining a minimum 50 foot buffer along the east side of the proposed wetland area /ditch section may be difficult without further encroachment onto the parcel to the east and beyond the existing easement over the twin 48 -inch pipes. Given that one of the overall goals of this project is to obtain all wetland (and buffer) replacement on -site, we recommend that the design use the 50 -foot minimum as a goal, but that the RWMWD distance of 37.5 feet be considered acceptable if site conditions limit the full 50 -foot distance in all areas. The average buffer around the entire wetland system, as proposed, is approximately 110 -120 feet. 22 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: CarMax / Mogren Addition PROJECT NO: 06 -14 REVIEWED BV: Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer, City of Maplewood Michael Thompson, Civil Engineer I, City of Maplewood SUBMITTAL NO: 2 (First Submittal Comments on June 8, 2006) DATE: November 21, 2006 Bruce Mogren is proposing to develop the old Country View Golf Course property at the northeast corner of Highway 61 and Beam Avenue. The development includes Carmax, a major retail center, a fitness center and office facilities. At this time the only portion of the development under consideration is the Carmax site. Mr. Mogren petitioned the city to prepare plans for a public road that would run north and south through the development and connect Beam Avenue to County Road D. Several wetlands will also be impacted by this development. The city will also lead the wetland mitigation process as part of the public improvements project. Runoff from the Carmax site will be treated in several rainwater gardens, a storm water detention basin and an infiltration basin The developer shall address the following questions and comments. Drainage Two 48 inch pipes owned and maintained by the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) run through the proposed development. The developer is also proposing a swale system downstream of the wetlands created as part of the County Road D project. The swale is located parallel to the twin pipes. The city in conjunction with RWMWD is considering the replacement of a segment of the twin pipes with an open channel. This would be a better design hydraulically and from a water quality standpoint. The developer shall work with the city and RWMWD and consider this option. Comments from SEH also address this issue. 2. Please address the comments from the SEH memorandum to Erin Laberee dated November 2, 2006 (updated November 9, 2006). 3. The engineer shall detail how the rainwater gardens, swale, detention basin are to be prepared and constructed. Due to the poor soils in the area, the engineer shall address how runoff is to be infiltrated in the gardens, whether it be through a rock sump or an under drain system. 4. It shall be noted in the plans that sumps are to be 3 feet deep. Most sumps catch basins have been noted with the exception of catch basin 23. 5. The curb cuts at the southwest corner of the site shall be replaced with catch basins with a 3 foot sump. 23 6. Catch basin #77 should have a minimum 3' depth sump in order to catch sediment and other debris prior to flowing into the rain garden. 7. The intersecting storm pipes 61 -62 and 56 -57 do not provide enough separation. Refer to city plate number 320 for concrete block support if at least 1 -ft of separation is not achieved. Wetlands 1. The applicant shall work closely with the city to accomplish the goal of wetland replacement on the development site to mitigate the proposed development impact of the 54,000 sq -ft wetland along the Beam Avenue ditch. The city will lead this process. Please refer to comments from the city's environmentalist, Duwayne Konewko. Grading 1. The developer's engineer shall provide a phased grading plan to include items such as stockpiling, haul routes, etc. 2. If any retaining walls end up being 4 -feet or taller then a required submittal to the City of Maplewood building department is required. Please show a typical detail of the retaining wall on the plans. 3. All rainwater gardens and infiltration basin shall be excavated to final bottom elevation after major grading is complete. Care must be taken to avoid compaction of bottom area in order to avoid losing the infiltration characteristics of the soil. If rainwater gardens or infiltration basins do not perform as designed, it is the responsibility of the developer's engineer and/or contractor to correct the problem. The city will withhold all escrow monies until such time all storm water BMP's work as proposed. Erosion & Sediment Control Plan 1. Identify erosion and sediment protection on slopes and sediment controls at top and toes of slopes and base of stockpiles. Heavy duty silt fence shall be placed 100 -ft east and west of the Beam Avenue entrance. 2. Identify locations for equipment/material storage, debris stockpiles, vehicle /equipment maintenance, fueling, and washing areas. Address measure to contain area and specify that all materials stored on site shall have proper enclosures and /or coverings. 3. Identify the quantity of materials to be imported or exported from the site (cu -yd). 24 4. Describe measures (e.g ... sediment basin, sediment trap, etc) taken during the rough grading process to intercept and detain sediment laden run -off to allow the sediment to settle and how the settled stormwater will be de- watered and introduced to the public drainage system. 5. Describe measures of onsite dust control (i.e .... water as needed) and also provide a sweeping plan for adjacent streets with the sweeping schedule also incorporated into the storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP). 6. The erosion control notes reference using straw bales under note 12; however the city encourages use of bio logs embedded in the ground to contain sediment. Wood chips scattered at the edge of disturbed areas has also has proven effective in controlling sediment. 7. In Outlot A, the wetland edge shall be shown along with the wetland delineator and date wetland was delineated. A 100 -ft buffer shall clearly be shown on the plans. Silt fence and orange construction fencing shall be placed around the wetland area. 8. The following verbiage shall be added to the plan: "Effective erosion and sediment controls shall be in place prior to any storm events." Failure do such shall result in the deduction of escrow funds (the city requires the developer or contractor to post escrow prior to issuance of the grading permit). The funds will be deducted at the discretion of the city inspector upon notice to the developer or contractor. 9. All emergency overflow swales shall include permanent erosion control blanket such as Enkamat or NAG 350. IES0 f s 1. What is the developer's plan for the existing maintenance garage near the holding ponds? This should be shown and addressed on the demolition plans. Landscape 1. The landscape plan does not include seeding or restoration details for lot 3. Orange fencing must be placed around this area to ensure no disturbance. Please shown the plans as fenced with a "no disturb area" text. 2. The landscape plan is subject to the review and approval of the city's naturalist, Ginny Gaynor. See attached comments from Ginny. Sanitary Sewer 25 On sheet C4.1 all of the CarMax sanitary sewer pipe is shown as 6" diameter, but on sheet C4.2A (close up view) it is shown as 8" from SANMH #2 to the existing sanitary manhole. Please clarify which is correct. 8" sanitary sewer pipe shall be SDR 35. Agency Submittals 1. The applicant must apply for permits through Tina Carstens at Ramsey - Washington Metro Watershed District. Also, the applicant shall coordinate all necessary permits associated with the twin 48" storm water pipes running through the proposed CarMax development site. 2. Submit all potable water related design for the development site to Mike Anderson at Saint Paul Regional Water Services ( SPRWS). Is there any specific reason the water service pipe proposed to service the CarMax building is connecting to the main from the south (435 -ft) instead of the east (240 -ft)? Insulation should be shown at all water service crossings in accordance with SPRWS standards. 3. Coordinate with Dan Soler at Ramsey County for all traffic related permits on Beam Avenue. 4. Mn /DOT approval for the entrance /exit on T.H.61 is required. 5. The developer or project engineer shall obtain a MPCA's construction stormwater permit (SWPPP). 6. Agency submittals are not limited to those listed above. Traffic Traffic comments provided by Jon Horn, Brandon Bourdon, and Chadd Larson from Kimley Horn and Associates. The access onto TH 61 from the proposed CarMax site (Lot 1) shall be gate controlled and shall only be used by those that have clearance to open the gates via AVI tag or other form of control. The details and requirement of the gate control and degree of access allowed will be included in the conditional use permit. The use of this access will be reviewed on a yearly basis by the City of Maplewood. The City will solicit comments from Mn /DOT during this yearly review to determine if any modifications to this access need to be implemented. 2. The right -in /right -out access to the proposed CarMax site (Lot 1) from Beam Avenue shall be located as far to the east as possible. The exact location will be determined based upon the wetland mitigation required, the ultimate 26 configuration of the existing storm sewer pipes owned by the Ramsey - Washington Metro Watershed District, and intersection spacing to the proposed public roadway. 3. The access locations for the warehouse retail site on Lot 2 shall be consolidated to two locations on the proposed public roadway. The southern access shall be located at least 300 feet north of Beam Avenue (measured centerline to centerline). Striping shall be installed on the two accesses to the proposed public road from Lot 2 so that there is one entering lane and two exiting lanes. 4. The access from Lot 3 onto the proposed public roadway shall be aligned with one of the access points to the warehouse retail site on Lot 2. Right of Way /Easements Right of way and easement comments provided by Jon Horn, Brandon Bourdon, and Chadd Larson from Kimley Horn and Associates. 1. The preliminary plat does not show the existing Ramsey - Washington Metro Watershed District easement across Lot 1. 2. Proposed public improvements include the possible removal of the existing watershed pipes and the construction of an open ditch. The developer shall dedicate any additional easement required for the construction of this open ditch. 3. Wetland mitigation is currently being investigated on the project site. The developer shall dedicate any additional easement required for wetland mitigation. 4. The preliminary plat shows the dedication of an approximate 88 foot wide right of way for the new north -south roadway. This right of way width should be revised to an 80 foot width. 5. The alignment of the proposed north -south roadway right of way should be revised at the County Road D intersection. Field survey information confirmed that this intersection location is east of the intersection shown in the development plans. 6. Outlot A should be shown as a drainage and utility easement together with Lot 1 rather than a separate lot as the area is needed to meet the maximum impervious area percentage requirements of the shoreland zoning rules for development. Miscellaneous 1. The developer or project engineer shall submit a copy of the MPCA's construction stormwater permit (SWPPP) to the city before the city will issue a grading permit. 27 2. The owner and project engineer shall satisfy the requirements of all permitting agencies. 3. The developer or developer's engineer shall incorporate a preliminary lighting plan into the plans. 4. The owner shall sign a maintenance agreement, prepared by the city, for all stormwater treatment devices (list devices i.e....sumps, basins, ponds, etc). The city shall prepare this agreement upon plan approval. 5. The developer shall enter into a development agreement with the city. The city will prepare this agreement which will cover items such as cost sharing for public improvements (signal lights, Beam Avenue road improvement, etc.). 6. Approval of the site plan is contingent upon the completion of the necessary public improvements to support the proposed development as identified in the Feasibility Study and Report for the Carmax/Mogren Addition improvements, City Project 06 -17. These public improvements include the new north -south public roadway, sanitary sewer and watermain improvements within the public right -of- way, and improvements along Beam Avenue and at the TH 61 /Beam Avenue intersection. The developer shall provide the City with a letter of credit in the amount of 125% of the estimated assessments identified in the Feasibility Study and Report. 7. The developer shall complete the overall mass grading of the project site including areas within the public right -of -way. Grading within the public right -of- way shall be completed to within a 0.2' tolerance of the design grades. The developer shall perform field surveying to verify that the grading meets the specified tolerance before the City commences the construction of any public improvements within the right -of -way. The mass site grading shall be completed and verified by June 1, 2007. 8. The developer shall enter into a developer's agreement with the city for all public improvements including easements. The agreement will require the developer to post a letter of credit for 125% of the cost of the public improvements for the new public road and a portion of the costs for the Beam Avenue improvements as detailed in the feasibility study. The developer's agreement will also detail requirements for the site grading as mentioned previously. 28 SEH MEMORANDUM TO: Erin Laberee, PE Assistant City Engineer City of Maplewood FROM: Dan Cazanacli, PE Ron Leaf, PE SEH Water Resources DATE: November 2, 2006 (updated November 9, 2006) RE: CARMAX Plan Review — Storm Water / Drainage Submittal SEH No. A- MAPLE0612.00 Background We have reviewed the Storm Water Narrative and Calculation and Drainage Plans for the CARMAX — MOGREN site in Maplewood. Landform, submitted a set of plans, narratives, and HydroCAD model printouts, dated October 18, 2006. The set of plans, titled MOGREN RETAIL AND CARMAX MAPLEWOOD, covers the area south of County Road D and north of Beam Avenue, east of Highway 61. We also participated in meetings with representatives for developer and with the Ramsey- Washington -Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) and Ramsey SWCD staff on November 8, 2006. Landform plans indicate that there two development areas: 1. LOT 1 (west): CARMAX area to be located on the western side of the site, immediately east of Highway 61. 2. LOT 2 (east). Warehouse Retail area to be located further east, east of a proposed Public Road connecting County Road D and Beam Avenue. According to the plans, the area between these two sites will remain undeveloped. We believe the intent here is that Landform intends to refer to the land to the north, currently the pond and wetland system for the County Road D and a portion of the future Warehouse Site. The submittal indicates that the north - central area (OUTLOT A) and south - central area (LOT 3) will not be graded or modified. Although the narratives include runoff values for both sites mentioned above, the HydroCAD model for the proposed conditions appears to reflect the CARMAX area (LOT 1) only. Therefore, our review has focused on the details of the CARMAX site, but has also generally considered the overall storm system in the area. For the CARMAX site, the plans indicate a storm water detention, treatment, and infiltration chain consisting of four rain gardens, a wet pond and an infiltration pond. With the exception of a smaller rain garden, these drainage features are located along a K9 north -south strip, east of the proposed CARMAX parking lot. Three rain gardens collect the runoff from approximately half of the impervious surface and overflow into the wet pond. The remaining impervious surface discharges either to a fourth rain garden and then to the wet pond or directly into the wet pond. The wet pond overflows into the infiltration basin. Based on our meeting at the RWMWD on November 8 ", the second cell of this system may be eligible as wetland credits. The plans also include a channel section to serve as the outlet for the wetland mitigation site to the north and also to serve as a portion of the wetland mitigation area. Review Questions and Comments The following review comments are separated into four categories: treatment system, rate controls, infiltration systems and wetlands. Water Quality Treatment When the CARMAX site (LOT 1) only is considered, the proposed drainage plan appears to provide adequate dead storage volume for storm water quality treatment in terms of total phosphorus (TP) and suspended solids (TSS) to meet the City's standards. Submittal of computations for the removal efficiencies of these systems are needed prior to making a final determination. In general, the cumulative volume of the four rain gardens, wet pond, and "infiltration" basin is fairly large relative to the total impervious CARMAX area surface. Our understanding is that these computations have been completed by the developer's engineer and are available. 2. In general, we recommend that the developer remove as many pipes for the rain gardens system as possible and identify what types of pre - treatment will be included in the design. We anticipate the RWMWD will also have questions /comments along these lines. Flow Rate Control 3. The proposed model indicates that the design provides adequate runoff detention and reduces the peak flow rates for 2, 10, and 100 -year events, below the corresponding existing levels. However, the model assumes free - discharge at the downstream end, an assumption that may not be entirely correct. The model should be updated to consider a downstream water level that corresponds to the 2, 10 and 100 -year design storms. 4. The infiltration basin discharges into the ditch north of Beam Avenue through a culvert 1 overflow system. The ditch on the north side of Beam Avenue flows west. A 27 -inch culvert is proposed along the ditch under the CARMAX driveway at Beam Avenue. A 60 -inch by 136 -inch elliptical culvert located on the northeastern corner of the Beam Avenue - Highway 61 intersection collects the runoff from the ditch. Neither the proposed 27 -inch culvert nor the large elliptical culvert has been included in the HydroCAD model. The inverts of these culverts are also not shown on the plan. 5. In talking with the developer's engineer on November 8 ", we understand that the hydrologic modeling was limited to the sites and not beyond the boundaries of the site. Therefore, we recommend that a combine model of the area be updated to evaluate any potential upstream or downstream impacts. The timing of this model should coincide with the selection of the final site storm water routing — with the 30 major unknown at this time being the determination of creating a ditch section to replace the existing twin 48 -inch pipes operated by RWMWD. Infiltration Systems 6. The proposed drainage plan provides runoff volume reduction through infiltration practices. However, the infiltration volume may not be as high as estimated in the submittal due to the uncertainties associated with the soils and ground water elevation in this area. The bottom of this infiltration basin is near elevation 863.0, which is likely near the normal (ground) water level. Plan Sheet C3.2A shows a normal water level (NWL) of 864.25 for the infiltration basin while the HydroCAD model reflects no such assumption. Therefore, because the bottom of the basin is at or near water table the infiltration rates may not be as high as claimed (i.e. 1 -inch of rainfall contained on site). The HydroCAD model assumes certain infiltration rates for the proposed infiltration basin which, as discussed below may not be entirely correct. Note that the RWMWD new rules will require specific soils information in the areas of each basin to demonstrate the design infiltration rates and will require some form of pre - treatment of runoff prior to discharge into the rain gardens /infiltration areas. As stated above, this infiltration basin may be eligible to be counted towards wetland mitigation credits. 7. Clarification with respect to the function of the infiltration basin and the downstream routing are needed. The proposed design has a good chance of satisfying the flow rate and runoff volume reduction requirements when the CARMAX area only is considered. 8. A detailed review of the infiltration systems show in the Retail Warehouse areas to the east was not completed. However, these same questions will arise at the time a project is proposed on that property. Storm Water Routing — Other Considerations 9. The proposed routing scheme indicates that the runoff from the CARMAX area would be entirely directed into the ditch north of Beam Avenue. According to the plans, the central wetland mitigation area, drains through a proposed north -south swale into the same ditch north of Beam Avenue. Both the infiltration basin and the swale are connected to the Beam Avenue ditch through culverts which would have to cross a sanitary sewer pipe. The plans do not provide the elevation (i.e., inverts) information for these culverts. 10. The proposed north -south swale runs parallel and immediately west of the existing twin 48 -inch pipes connecting the wetland basin north of County Road D to the wetland basin south of Beam Avenue. The proposed Swale system and wet pond could be combined to achieve a larger storm water detention and overall water quality treatment volume. Furthermore, from a hydraulic standpoint and based on our preliminary analysis, it is also possible to replace a segment of the twin 48 -inch pipes with an open channel which would collect of the runoff from the CARMAX area and from the central area that would remain undeveloped. In this case, the runoff from both these areas would be eventually routed across Beam Avenue through the existing 58" by 91" concrete elliptical pipe and not through the larger 60" by 136" elliptical pipe at Beam Avenue 1 Highway 61 intersection. 31 The City, RWMWD and developer should consider this as an option which would achieve: 1) reduction in the long -term maintenance issues that will likely be need in the area of the twin 48 -inch pipes; 2) an opportunity to create more wetland mitigation area on -site; 3) some addition water quality benefits; and 4) the potential for additional live storage capacity of the regional routing system. Wetland Impacts and Mitigation 11. This issue was discussed with RWMWD, Ramsey SWCD, City staff and developer's representatives on November 8 At this time, it appears that the site will impact the roughly 54,000 square feet of wetland present along Beam Avenue. The initial wetland permit application submitted to the RWMWD will be revised to reflect comments provided including: a. The City will be identified as the ownerlpermittee and will lead the wetland mitigation process. The details of financial responsibilities of the City versus developer will be discussed as the project proceeds. b. The project will have the goal of replacing all wetland impacts on -site instead of using the bank described in the initial application. c. The developer's engineer will prepare the accounting of wetland impacts and mitigation areas (including buffer area requirements) and work with the City to develop the permit application materials. The City will lead the design and construction process for wetland mitigation efforts. For any questions please email me at dcazanacli&sehinc.com or call me at 651.490.2112. sacolm\map1eV06120Q1earmaa storm system memo I 1- 2- 06.doc 32 Email comments from Virginia Gaynor November 22, 2006 Here are comments regarding the landscape plan for Carmax. Plant selection. Two of the plants in the plan, Barberry and Miscanthus, are potentially invasive and may spread to natural areas. Both of these are on the city's list of plants to avoid (see attached). Because this site is adjacent to wetland complexes, different plant species should be selected. 2. Native seed mix. Mn /DOT mix 328 is the economy native ditch mix. It is 113 bluegrass for quick establishment, and 213 prairie grasses. Because of the wetlands adjacent it would be preferable to use a mix that is more similar to a native prairie. Better choices for the slopes and upland would be Mn /DOT mixes 340 or 350. 3. Rain gardens along Beam and along Highway 61. These are in very visible gardens that need to be successful. Because 1) these are relatively narrow gardens, and 2) they are surrounded by sod, and 3) it takes so long to establish native seedings, and 4) success is not assured with seeding, these gardens should be planted with plants rather than seed. Plants can be perennials and/or trees and shrubs. If native perennials are selected, plugs can be used to keep cost of materials down. Most planted rain gardens are mulched with shredded hardwood mulch. If mulch is not used, blanket and frequent weeding will be needed. 4. Pond, infiltration basin, and 3 rain gardens east of building and parking lot. a. It is difficult to establish the bottom of a rain garden or infiltration basin with seed since the seed is washed away as water flows into the garden. Thus, the bottom of the rain gardens and infiltration basin should be planted with plugs rather than seed. b. Seeding the slopes and upland areas is fine. c. It can be difficult to establish native vegetation from seed when turf is seeded adjacent. Site managers often end up mowing as if it is turf and the natives don't establish. On the east side of the rain gardens, pond and infiltration basin, there is a strip of seeded turf between two strips of native vegetation. I recommend that the native vegetation extend from the gardens, pond and basin all the way eastward. If the goal is to have a more manicured look around the pond, this might be achieved by featuring a couple of focal areas of turf and planting beds on the west side of the pond. d. Maintaining areas of native seed. On sheet L2.2A, Raingarden note #22 indicates garden areas should be free from weeds and other invasive plant material. This language is fine for areas planted with plugs or containers. It would be helpful to include a note on the landscape plan regarding management of areas seeded with natives to ensure these areas are properly managed the first few years. Areas seeded with native prairie mixes are typically maintained by mowing and spot herbicide treatments. The first growing season (and sometimes the second season), these areas should be mowed 4 " -6" high when plants reach 15" high. 33 5. Parking lot medians. It's great to see some planted medians. But, it would be nice to have even more to provide shade and cooling. If this is not possible, it would be help to have more trees along the parking lot edges. In addition, many of the trees along Seam and Hwy 61 are shown centered between the road and parking lot. It might make sense to put those closer to the parking lot to take advantage of the shade they will provide. Please let me know if you have questions. Ginny 34 Timm & Associates 952-932-9787 -- .LlGIHXj'VS'dV-LO - 1 e30Z'a3SNR.Lc�s `4 ! !1 a ® 5 Agenda Item 114 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Chuck Ahl, Director of Public Works / City Engineer SUBJECT: Mogren Street Improvements, Beam to County Road D, City Project 06 -17, Resolution Approving Plans and Authorizing Receiving Bids DATE: March 2, 2007 INTRODUCTION The City Council has approved a public improvement project as part of the CarMax/Mogren Development. The consulting engineer, Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA), has prepared the final plans and specifications and the project is ready to receive bids from contractors. Approval to receive bids is recommended. Background Bruce Mogren, representing Countryview Golf, is proposing a development on the former Countryview Golf Course site. The development includes the addition of a CarMax Used Car Dealership at the corner of Beam Avenue and Trunk Highway 61. The site includes a major retail store along with a fitness center and office facility. Mr. Mogren petitioned the city on June 12, 2006 to prepare the engineering plans for the public roadway that crosses through the development and deposited $168,000 for the engineering services. The development application was recommended by staff and was presented and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on December 5, 2006. The Public Hearing was held on December 18, 2006 where the Council approved the development and ordered the project to be constructed and plans prepared. The CarMax /Mogren Addition is located north of Beam Avenue, east of Trunk Highway 61, south of the newly aligned County Road D and west of the Bruce Vento Trail. The developer will be working closely with the city to develop a storm water management system that will benefit the environment by improving the quality of water. It is proposed that the major street and utilities through the center of the development be public infrastructure. They are to be constructed as part of a public improvement project. KHA has completed the preliminary report and is recommending improvements of $4,416,000. A majority of the project will be assessed to the benefiting property, although the City ($517,550), Ramsey County ($292,550), and MnDOT ($211,300) have obligations on improvements at County Road D and at Beam/TH 61 that are part of this project. The City's share of the project is proposed to be paid from Municipal State Aid Funds. The development has some impacts on TH 61 -Beam; however major problems exist at this intersection that MnDOT and Ramsey County have requested to be included as part of this project. The developer is contributing 25% funding to that regional transportation project in a cooperative agency — private property owner improvement plan. A not -to- exceed project budget of $168,000 was established for the project development and preliminary engineering required to complete the feasibility study and the project plans and specifications. The funds for 100% cost of the feasibility budget were posted by the developer. The developer share of the project is secured through the Development Contract and a letter of credit in the amount of $2,994,600. The Agenda Item 114 developer has agreed to pursue $400,000 of the improvements through a private contract that is being monitored by the City engineering staff. Funds for the city share will come from an advance in our MSAS Account from MnDOT in the summer 2007. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the council adopt the attached resolution approving the project plans and specifications for the Mogren Street Improvements, City Project 06 -17, and authorizing the receipt of bids with a bid date of April 13, 2007 at 10:00 am. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Project Location Map RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS ADVERTISING FOR BIDS WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the city council on December 18 2006, plans and specifications for Mogren Street Improvements, City Project 06 -17, have been prepared by (or under the direction of) the city engineer, who has presented such plans and specifications to the council for approval, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which are attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby approved and ordered placed on file in the office of the city clerk. 2. The city clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published twice, at least ten days before the date set for bid opening, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be publicly opened and considered by the council at 10:00 a.m. on the 13th day of April, 2007, at the city hall and that no bids shall be considered unless sealed and filed with the clerk and accompanied by a certified check or bid bond, payable to the City of Maplewood, Minnesota for five percent of the amount of such bid. 3. The city clerk and city engineer are hereby authorized and instructed to receive, open, and read aloud bids received at the time and place herein noted, and to tabulate the bids received. The council will consider the bids, and the award of a contract, at the regular city council meeting of April 23rd, 2007. (0 1 9. COTTAGE LANE LN. VADNAIS HEIGHTS 10, COTTAGE LANE LN. 11. COTTAGE LANE LN. III LYDIA` AVE. ` � f I -- ------ co 2 0. 5 \ ✓� 3 BEAM AVE. 1. SUMMIT CT.1 2. COUNTRYVIEJq CIR. 3. DULUTH CJF W Kel 1� (n VILLAGE T�R Z LEGACY t]ji 091 E L2 L I Legacy WOODLYNN AVE, Village 11. i Scul pture P. ST. JOHN'S_ to BLVD, 1 1 V) T-0 OR N " 'Project JI L ocation V) U KohIman Lake w ry KOHLMAN ULAVE. ITJ COUNTY i t`} Kohiman Park P LC TGp C7 1'- Manufactured o V) I Housing —J1 i I I :D! 2 Oil LLJ U) C� 3 LJJ CONbNOR ' Z AVE, N1 AVE. (1 COUNTY ROAD D COUNTY ROAD COUNTY ROAD D CT. 1 I KS ic) D CIR. 61 < SEXTANT AVE. Sun HIGHRIDGE CT, QI i Ridge Park 5. CHAMBERLAIN ST. 6. b < 0 MINGV�Ay T 8. COTTAGE LONE LN. C) H COUNTY ROA D III LYDIA` AVE. ` � f I -- ------ co 2 0. 5 \ ✓� 3 BEAM AVE. 1. SUMMIT CT.1 2. COUNTRYVIEJq CIR. 3. DULUTH CJF W Kel 1� (n VILLAGE T�R Z LEGACY t]ji 091 E L2 L I Legacy WOODLYNN AVE, Village 11. i Scul pture P. ST. JOHN'S_ to BLVD, 1 1 V) T-0 OR N " 'Project JI L ocation V) U KohIman Lake w ry KOHLMAN ULAVE. ITJ COUNTY i t`} Kohiman Park P LC TGp C7 1'- Manufactured o V) I Housing —J1 i I I :D! 2 Oil LLJ U) C� 3 LJJ CONbNOR ' Z AVE, N1 AVE. 1 /JJJ KS ic) SEXTANT AVE. Q `f /V GERVAIS AVE. p�Wy no scale I 0 0 LJJ \ o N �,, P on d < ona ,l X 0 �Jz � 5 North (n Hazelwood Park LLJ LJ C L-2 L E k1 1-H Z Ii X31 -J LLJ < V) Lli DEMONT 11 AVE. m 1 [ BROOKS E. Harvest 0 Park Of Fo ur < a Seasons ur P! rk AVE. _ Park ,SEXTANT I L lL �GRANDVIEW] AVE, Project Location Mogren Street Improvement 06-17 Agenda Item 115 MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, Citizen Services Manager DATE: March 14, 2007 SUBJECT: Church of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary Gambling Permit Resolution i • 7r • I An application has been submitted for temporary gambling on behalf of the Church of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, 1725 Kennard Street. This is for their Men's Club Ham Bingo. The event will be held on March 24, 2007 from 4:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. Funds raised will be used for general operation expenditures. In order for the State of Minnesota to issue a temporary license, approval of the following resolution from the City is required: • i BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, that the temporary premises permit for lawful gambling is approved for the Church of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary (BVM), 1725 Kennard Street, Maplewood, Minnesota. FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council waives any objection to the timeliness of application for said permit as governed by Minnesota Statute §349.213. FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council requests that the Gambling Control Division of the Minnesota Department of Gaming approve said permit application as being in compliance with Minnesota Statute §349.213. NOW, THEREFORE, be it further resolved that this Resolution by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, be forwarded to the Gambling Control Division for their approval. Recommendation Approve the above resolution for temporary gambling. TO: City Council From: Greg Copeland, City Manager Date: March 8, 2007 Re: Roseville School District 623 Council member Rebecca Cave has requested action by the Maplewood City Council to request by City Council Resolution provision of one DVD copy of each Roseville School District 623 Board Meeting for rebroadcast on the City's Cable T.V. Channel 16 to inform residents of Maplewood, especially those living in District 623, of the action of their elected officials to offer public educational services. .Tagdfin we earn Agenda Item 1 -17 March 8, 2007 RESOLUTION Maplewood City Council Resolves that: WHEREAS, citizens of the City of Maplewood residing in School District 623 do not have access to live broadcast of the 623 School Board meetings, and WHEREAS, there is substantial interest in the public policies established by the 623 School Board as relates to educational services offered to children and the community. NOW, THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Maplewood City Council requests copies of all DVDs of 623 School Board meetings be forwarded to the Maplewood City Manager for the broadcast on City's Cable TV Channel 16. Adopted on March 12, 2007 in regular session Mayor's Signature City Clerk Signature 2 L�. • AGENDA REPORT To: City Manager Greg Copeland From: Chief of Police David J. Thomalla Subject: Expenditure of Buffer Zone Protection Grant Money Date: March 7, 2007 Introduction City Council approval is required to expend funds for purchases in excess of $5,000. The Police Department is seeking approval to make two purchases from the 2005 Buffer Zone Protection Grant to purchase upgraded portable radios and Sentinal Radio Alarms. The carryover of these grant funds was approved at the February 26, 2007, City Council meeting. Background The Maplewood Police Department received a grant from the Minnesota Division of Homeland Security as part of the Buffer Zone Protection Plan (BZPP). Acceptance of this grant in the sum of $48,378 was approved by the City Council on February 27, 2006. The grant was very specific as to what the money was to be used for. Needs were identified to purchase upgraded radios capable of encryption for supervisors and to also purchase three radio alarm systems capable of operating on the 800MHz radio system. Purchasing the upgraded radios will reduce the amount the City will owe Ramsey County for the total purchase of radios discussed at the February 12, 2007, City Council meeting. The Police Department has already requested reimbursement for these radios; and the money will be passed through to Ramsey County who is providing the radios on a group- purchase price. The expenditure for the radio alarms will be made to a private vendor. The Police Department had hoped to purchase these alarms from a company that has provided similar equipment in the past; however, they do not yet have equipment compatible with the 800 MHz radio system. Recommendation Approve the expenditure of $28,679 towards the purchase of upgraded 800 MHz radios and $15,865 to purchase three radio alarm systems compatible on the 800 MHz radio system. The grant funds must be expended by March 31, 2007. Action required Submit to the City Council for review and action. Agenda Item K1 MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner SUBJECT: Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Map Amendment — Additional Information Request APPLICANT: City of Maplewood LOCATION: Gladstone Neighborhood (Intersection of Frost Ave. and English St.) DATE: March 5, 2007 for the March 12 City Council Meeting BACKGROUND On February 26, 2007, the city council reviewed the proposed comprehensive land use plan and map amendment for the Gladstone neighborhood. The amendment was being proposed to ensure that future developments in the area met with the guiding principles and densities as specified in the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan, which was approved by the city council in December 2006. During the meeting, Mayor Longrie made a motion to adopt the comprehensive plan amendment as proposed by city staff with two changes as follows: 1) keep the three vacant parcels located south of Gloster Park and north of Ripley Avenue as single family residential; and 2) change the six parcels located north of Summer Avenue, east of the Vento Trail, and west of Clarence Street from Gladstone High Density to Gladstone Medium Density. The motion failed by a vote of 3 to 2 (comprehensive plan amendments require a majority vote). After the motion failed, Councilmember Juenemann requested that staff supply the city council with additional information on how the proposed changes to the comprehensive plan amendment as specified in the motion would affect the overall master plan. In addition to this information, this staff report will clarify errors found in the master plan density allowances, discuss the debate from the March 1 city council retreat over additional language and changes for the master plan, and go into the city council's policies on renewing or reconsidering a motion. DISCUSSION Revisions to Master Plan During the February 26 city council meeting, it was brought to city staff's attention that the development strategies section of the master plan (Chapter 4) had errors in the specified density ranges. The density allowance for the Gladstone area was initially approved by the city council on July 10, 2006, by the adoption of a resolution providing Gladstone redevelopment project direction (Attachment 1). The resolution states that the allowed density shall be a maximum of 650 housing units, which can be achieved on a system of to- be- established density bonuses and project goals (i.e., senior housing, senior accessible housing, underground parking, and green building construction). On December 18, 2006, the city council approved the overall Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. The overall density allowance for the area is specified on page 0 -3 of the master plan and states that one of the key components of the master plan is "integrated land use patterns to include 650 new housing units and 50,000 to 75,000 square feet of new neighborhood retail and office." The approved 650 new housing units was a revision to the November 2005 draft master plan which called for 850 new housing units. During the revision process, however, the development strategies section of the master plan was not changed to reflect the reduced densities for each redevelopment area. The errors are found in the captions underneath the redevelopment area maps of each section (pages 4 -18 through 4 -22). The errors were inadvertently overlooked during the process of making final amendments to the plan for city council action. The corrected density ranges are reflected on the revised December 2006 Master Plan Chapter Pages (Attachment 2). When these density ranges are added up, the overall density does not exceed 650 new housing units, as approved by the city council in July and December 2006. In addition to the density range changes mentioned above, there has been request to include the city council's names and titles on the cover sheet. This change is reflected on the revised December 2006 Table of Content Page (Attachment 3). Since the revisions represent a clarification of the allowed densities and the addition of city council members who were in term during the adoption of the master plan, the revisions are minor in nature and would not require formal city council action. Revisions to Comprehensive Plan Amendment The February 26, 2007, city council motion included two changes to the comprehensive plan amendment including keeping the three vacant parcels located south of Gloster Park and north of Ripley Avenue as single family residential (Attachment 4) and changing the six parcels located north of Summer Avenue, east of the Vento Trail, and west of Clarence Street from Gladstone High Density to Gladstone Medium Density (Attachment 5). The changes would result in the re- allocation of 20 units to other areas as follows: five units in the Maplewood Marine area, five units in the English Street South area, five units in the English Street North area, and five units in the Frost Avenue East area. The changes are reflected on the attached March 2007 Master Plan Chapter Pages (Attachment 6). The existing and proposed master plan densities (existing - December 2006; proposed - as amended in the motion February 2007) are also shown in detail on the attached flow chart (Attachment 7). This flow chart shows the net area for these parcels with the minimum density allowed in the comprehensive plan amendment, the assumed densities based on the master plan, and the resulting densities. It should also be noted that further restrictions to densities will be detailed in the Gladstone zoning district which will outline development bonuses allowed as incentives such as green building design. The changes would require an amendment to the master plan. City Council Retreat Concept Statement During the March 1 city council retreat, the city council members who were present agreed that the master plan should be looked at as a guide to redevelopment in the area, allowing for approximately 650 new housing units. It should be considered a flexible concept plan which should be reevaluated as each redevelopment project comes forward based on the current market and other variables. It was agreed that a separate statement which spells out this concept should be added to the beginning of the master plan. Following is the language proposed by staff: 2 "The Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan is intended as a guide to redevelopment in the area. The plan includes a conceptual redevelopment plan, housing densities, and commercial components which are based on market forces and other redevelopment variables existing at the time of adoption. As a guide, the plan should be considered a flexible concept plan which can be modified based on the changing market forces and redevelopment variables." This language could be added to the blank page found between the table of contents and the project abstract chapter. This change is reflected on the attached March 2007 Project Abstract Chapter Page (Attachment 8). This change would require an amendment to the master plan. Additional Master Plan and Comprehensive Plan Chanaes During the March 1 city council retreat, there was a discussion about additional changes to the Gladstone master plan and comprehensive plan. These changes included leaving all existing single family zoned property located south of Frost Avenue, east of Vento Trail, and west of Clarence Street as single dwelling residential (R -1). Also, changing the properties located east of English Street, south of the unused Summer Avenue right -of -way, and west of the Vento Trail from Gladstone Mixed Use to Gladstone Medium. These changes are reflected in the Comp Plan Map Change 3 (Attachment 9). City staff has not had an opportunity to analyze how these changes would affect the overall concept plan or master plan, but it is clear that with the reduction in the housing units in these areas there would be an increase in housing in other areas. These changes would require an amendment to the master plan and the proposed comprehensive plan. Motions Alan Kantrud, city attorney, has reviewed the requirements for making and adopting motions and has determined that there are two methods of approach for addressing the Gladstone comprehensive plan amendment motion: The city council policies have adopted Roberts Rules of Order in its entirety. Roberts Rules of Order at Chapter 10, Section 38 states if a motion is made and disposed of, and is later allowed to come back before the assembly after being made again by any member in essentially the same connection, the motion is said to be renewed. Therefore, the city council could act on the same Gladstone comprehensive plan motion at the March 12 city council meeting. Reconsideration Roberts Rules of Order at Chapter 9, Section 37 states that a motion to reconsider any action taken by the city council must be made at the meeting where the action took place, or at the next regular meeting of the city council. The reconsideration must be made by a member of the city council who voted with the prevailing side. If the reconsideration motion passes, then the reconsideration of the action will take place at the next regular meeting. Therefore, one of the prevailing sides could make a motion at the March 12 city council meeting to reconsider. If the motion passes, then the city council can formally take action on the motion again on March 26 after appropriate notifications are made. 3 RECOMMENDATION Review the changes to the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan and comprehensive plan amendment and direct staff accordingly. P: \com- dev \gladstone\comp plan and zoning\3 -12 -07 cc meeting Attachments: 1. July 10, 2006, City Council Minutes 2. Revised December 2006 Master Plan Chapter Pages 3. Revised December 2006 Table of Content Page 4. Comp Plan Map Change 1 5. Comp Plan Map Change 2 6. March 2007 Master Plan Chapter Pages 7. Density Flow Chart 8. March 2007 Project Abstract Chapter Page 9. Comp Plan Map Change 3 4 Attachment 1 CONTINUATION OF MEETING MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 5:00 P.M. Wednesday, July 12, 2006 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 06 -18 6. Authority to Apply to the Met Council for a Livable Communities Grant for Gladstone Redevelopment a. City Engineer Ahl presented the report. Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following resolution providing proiect direction and authorization to submit a livable communities grant application to the metropolitan council: RESOLUTION NO. 06 -07 -481 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING PROJECT DIRECTION AND AUTHORIZATION TO SUBMIT A LIVABLE COMMUNITIES GRANT APPLICATION TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WHEREAS, in March 2004, the Maplewood City Council established a top priority to be the redevelopment of the Gladstone area; and, WHEREAS, in December of 2004, the City of Maplewood initiated a redevelopment planning process for the Gladstone area generally defined as the area along Frost Avenue between US Highway 61 and Hazelwood Street N and the area along English Street between Ripley Avenue and the Gateway Trail; and, WHEREAS, the City has an approved Comprehensive Plan that establishes future land use patterns in the Gladstone area consisting of open space, single and double dwelling residential, light manufacturing and business commercial and that addresses public facilities and implementation strategies; and, WHEREAS, the Gladstone area contains a number of older commercial uses and parcels that demonstrate signs of obsolescence, inefficient land use and site layout and other signs of a need for revitalization; and, WHEREAS, the City is aware of a number of properties within the project area that are likely to redevelop in the near future and the desired development patterns are not likely to be consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan; and, WHEREAS, in January 2005, the City Council established a 20- person Task Force of property owners and local residents to provide recommendations to the City Council on various alternatives; and, WHEREAS, the master planning effort has provided a plan that establishes a vision and future land use plan to guide redevelopment efforts on an area wide basis as opposed to reacting to individual redevelopment proposals; and, WHEREAS, the master planning effort has resulted in a concept that explores higher density housing development on redeveloped parcels within the project area and limited neighborhood commercial uses; and, WHEREAS, the development concept is supported by a range of public improvements to area park and open space systems, roadway improvements, streetscape enhancements, burial of overhead utility lines, and storm water management systems; and, WHEREAS, on August 8, 2005, the Maplewood City Council adopted a resolution directing the preparation of an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (GUAR), which is a substitute form of environmental 07 -10 -06 City Council Meeting review that replaces an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) or Environmental Impact Statement {EIS} as provided for in Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410.3600 and is a more appropriate form of environmental review that evaluates cumulative impacts resulting from multiple re- development projects spread over a larger area; and, WHEREAS, over the last two years the City has conducted a number of public meetings to discuss and evaluate various redevelopment concepts as presented by private developers, neighborhood groups and interested landowners, including conducting a Public Hearing on April 18, 2006; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has provided comments and questions on the Draft Master Plan and conducted two Work Sessions to discuss and debate the merits of the overall development plan. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Maplewood, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, hereby provides for the following: 1. Authorize staff to develop a Planning Document based upon a revised Master Planning Document for the Gladstone Redevelopment Initiative at the flowing development levels and public improvement investment: Business Retention Work with Gladstone businesses to encourage them to remain in the neighborhood after redevelopment begins Do so by promoting loans and grants available for business owners. Development on the Savanna Do not allow any building development—only natural development with minimal historic public structures. Improvements to the Savanna should be one of the first public improvements made in the neighborhood Efforts should be made to explore conservation easements or other legal forms to protect this parcel for future generations and until such protections are in place, no sale of Savanna or park land shall occur as part of the Gladstone project. Savanna Improvements Only natural improvements should be allowed. This includes savanna restoration as a natural open space. Flicek Park Improvements Make limited changes to Flicek Park. Any changes to Flicek Park will be enacted by the council based upon recommendations of the parks commission and park - planning staff. Culvert t Bebo Improvements Modify the plan so that it includes other options for a pedestrianlstorm water system in this area including enhanced pedestrian and bicycle safety at the roundabout and trail intersections. The bebo should be considered optional for consideration later and is not specifically included as part of the overall project plan. Density The allowed density shall be a maximum of 650 housing units. This can only be achieved based on a system of to- be- established density bonuses and project goals. The minimum density established shall be based upon the existing land -use and zoning within the area. The density bonuses and project goals shall focus on providing credits to developments which provide increased Senior Housing, Senior Assisted Living Housing, Accessible Senior Housing, Underground Parking and green building construction as the primary target focus points. 07 -10 -06 City Council Meeting :3mcmi a m.rnnaam In general, lower buildings are required when they are closer to the street. They can go higher as the building mass is further set back, up to four stories. Building Setback. Massing and Scale Issues identical to building height criteria — buildings with greater mass should be set further back to be less imposing from street view. Care should be taken to "blend" the scale of the new buildings with the existing. Power Line Burial Support for the burial of power lines at a reduced cost or alternative financing methods. Eminent Domain There is no support for the use of eminent domain to achieve project goals. Level of Public Improvements —Frost Avenue Improvement The likely investment will range to a maximum of $14 million to $15 million in public installed improvements, although efforts shall be explored to have the developers install as much of the infrastructure as practical. The goals shall include reduction or removal from the Master Plan in the amount of center median along Frost Avenue, using trees to create a colonnade along Frost Avenue and making Frost Avenue narrower by use of restriping. Limited use of irrigation systems is encouraged. The Roundabout at Frost Avenue and East Shore Drive should be explored further to see if other alternatives might be more effective. The priority for improvements shall be Savanna upgrades. Phase I of the Gladstone project shall focus improvements on the western end of the project area and shall include improvement to the transportation and drainage components of the project. This shall include exploration of improvements to bus service within the area, the installation of improvements to facilitate the construction of bus shelters, a possible roundabout at Frost Avenue and East Shore Drive, improvements to the TH 61 and Frost intersection, area trail connections and improvements, the existing Frost Avenue bridge and the drainage improvements on the western end of the project, along with possible Savanna improvements. The value of these improvements is hereby authorized up to a maximum of $2.5 million. The City Engineer is hereby directed to prepare a feasibility analysis of a project to this amount. Use of Tax Increment Financing The goals of the project shall be to limit or eliminate the use of Tax Increment Financing. The Phase I — Gladstone project improvements shall be explored with a goal of using zero Tax Increment Financing. The direction shall be to explore alternative financing through grants and development contributions through assessment and project payments. 2. Authorize the staff to prepare and submit a Livable Communities Demonstration Grant Application to the Metropolitan Council prior to the due date of July 17, 2006. 3. Authorize the Public Works Director to assemble an Implementation Team which shall include the City Park and Recreation Director, the City Finance Director, the City Senior Planner, the City Planner, the consultant Master Planner and the consultant Engineer to develop the following reports and plans: A. A Prioritized Public Improvement Plan, including a suggested timing schedule for 07 -10 -06 City Council Meeting implementation based upon a 3 -5 year project build out. B. A Prioritized Development Plan, including a listing of potential development parcels that potentially provided for the first project within the Development Area based upon the TIF District and Public Improvement Plan. C. A Preliminary Planning and Zoning Analysis that provides an evaluation of the land -use and zoning needs to achieve the provisions of the Planning Document. 4. Appropriate $50,000 to the Gladstone Project Fund from future project revenues to pay for the Planning Consultant, Engineering Consultant and Financial Advisory Consultant noted above within the Implementation Team. The Public Works Director is hereby authorized to administer the contracts for said consultants up to the $50,000 maximum. Seconded by Mayor Longrie Ayes -All 07 -10 -06 City Council Meeting Attachment 2 Revised December 2006 Master Plan Pages The following list represents corrections made to the December 2006 version of the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan. These changes were inadvertently overlooked during the process of making final amendments to the plan for City Council action. Changes are limited to Chapter 4 - Master Plan Chapter Page 4-18: Tourist Cabins — Redevelopment on this site should fall in a range of 12-30 units per acre. Page 4-18: Maplewood Marine Area — The density range assumed for this area is medium density 7- 12 units per acre. Page 4-19: The caption uses a range of 35-40 units. Page 4-19: 2 Paragraph — Residential densities at the core area should be 20-30 units per acre. Page 4-20: The caption uses range of 185-205 units Page 4-21: I" Column, 3 Paragraph — Residential densities within the English Street South area should range from 20-30 units per acre. Page 4-21: 2' Column, 2nd Paragraph — Should residential development occur on this site, a density of 20-30 units per acre is suggested by the master plan. Page 4-21: The I" caption uses a range of 55-60 units. The 2nd caption uses a range of 40-45 units. Page 4-22: I" Column, 2 Paragraph — Residential densities adjacent to and North of Frost Avenue should range between 20-30 units per acre with taller structures being oriented on Frost Avenue and the height.... Page 4-22: The caption uses a rage of 110-120 units. 2 i 11 4- COS 4. C3 tf t4) cc Z tjj 0 X Z.; cu o 5 42 �j tz tT tr, t tf 771 Lr- 7L 75 C . o z EEL CA 75 ct a) i 11 LOA I i 7- 0 7- C� tz Ntk C 4 ; - t, , U , It 7� -Z ' z" c C r" n- �5 7- S. C) LO co 4- u i tt tt 0 4- — 0 4-d It fl z5 owl It -j:� 4- tt 4. QI - C,; Q) 0 'cz Q U) Z M Q) 0 W m Q) LO CtY tip RS _Z3 Q) Co 0 Q -Z Lo z _0 Qr 11 I LO Q V) m Q) tko z Q C) C) C3® LIJ U) Z O O t- 0 —M 10 rz M i R 8 - 4- 1 t7 4- 1 It LLJ 4- rt 6T) p- cA 4 , of 71 4- 1 74 Wi rt tL Lu O O t- 0 —M 10 rz M i R 11 �t7 C� ct ct rz ct ,,,(j tp, rl ci 4-1 a 4.1 �f- u r"I C, M 4-1 4-1 rE 4-1 tz ct It 4-1 rl C >1 r 4- Lo — tT t7 O 4-1 ct 3 ct 11 Attachment 3 I p 0 ca 0 cs F7 cc C z 4- ct 4� f ca 0 cs Revised December 2006 Table of Content Page cc C z ct 4� Revised December 2006 Table of Content Page f Revised December 2006 Table of Content Page Attachment 4 18 v 2..{ Gladstone w - - Medium to Single Dwelling 1 FRI SEI E .�L E V � E U- RI PLEY AVE - r � _ ... p3 CC�� RIPLEl' AVE 1789 .. 7 - Comp Plan Map Change 1 Attachment 5 �� :� Vento Trail LLJ 0 z LIJ SUMMER AVE \���� ��� J L Lu n KJ y'Z) Comp Plan Map Change 2 T AE Attachment 6 March 2007 Master Plan Pages The following changes are made to reflect proposed amendments to the December 2006 copy of the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan as recommended in the February 26, 2007, city council motion. These changes would require an actual amendment to the master plan. The proposed changes came about as a result of the comprehensive plan amendment process and public comment. Changes are limited to Chapter 4 - Master Plan Chapter Page 4 -3 New figure 4 -1 and table reflecting a change in the area north of Summer Avenue and west of Clarence Street from a higher density to a medium density land use pattern and the three parcels south of Gloster Park from a medium density to a low density pattern. The change to the area near Clarence and Summer results in the reallocation of 20 units to other areas. The change to the area south of Gloster Park does not affect the unit allocation. These parcels are vacant, were assumed as infill development, and were not factored into the allowable 650 units because it their isolated nature to the south of the Gladstone Redevelopment area. Page 4 -18: Tourist Cabins — Redevelopment on this site should fall in a range of 12-30 units per acre. Page 4 -18: Maplewood Marine Area — The density range assumed for this area is medium density 7- 12 units per acre. Page 4 -19: The caption uses a range of 40 — 45 units. Page 4 -19: 2 nd Paragraph — Residential densities at the core area should be 20 -30 units per acre. Page 4 -20: The caption uses a range of 185 -205 units. Page 4-21: I" Column, 3 Paragraph — Residential densities within the English Street South area should range from 20-30 units per acre. Page 4-21: 2' Column, 2nd Paragraph — Should residential development occur on this site, a density of 20-30 units per acre is suggested by the master plan. Page 4-21: The I" caption uses a range of 60-65 units. The 2 caption uses a range of 45-50 units. Page 4-22: 2nd Column, 2nd Paragraph — Residential densities north of Summer Avenue should range between 7-12 units per acre and consist of attached housing products in a lower 3 story or 2 story configuration. Densities south of Summer Avenue would be the same in the range of 7-12 units per acres to reflect and attached.... Page 4-22: The caption uses a range of 95-105 units. 2 I I BI O 70 m U) Q) b � C c '1 7- 72 Tt o -E LL-J I BI O 70 m i U) Q) o -E -0 0 77, o 4- 0 Q COS 42 77� U) Q) 77� Q) Q) U) 0- ct U E'ri tL m Cl Q) 0 rt c ( U) Q) 71 0- o It � 0 I �j CL .S2 ct L. ct �oz Q m ct 0 Cos Q3 is 0 cn U, > Q) Q) �o V) ZZ i i 11 4- COS 4. C3 tf t4) cc Z tjj 0 X Z.; cu o 5 42 �j tz tT tr, t tf 771 Lr- 7L 75 C . o z EEL CA 75 ct a) i 11 LOA I i 7- 0 7- C� tz Ntk C 4 ; - t, , U , It 7� -Z ' z" c C r" n- �5 7- S. LO C) 4- u i tt tt 0 4- — 0 4-d It fl z5 owl It -j:� 4- tt 4. QI - C,; Q) 0 'cz Q U) Z M Q) 0 W m Q) LO CtY tip RS _Z3 Q) Co 0 Q -Z Lo z _0 Qr 11 I Q V) O Lo 0 W, LO O t- 0 W LO -1 —M 10 rz M i R 4- 1 t7 4- 1 It - 7j :zz LLJ 4- rt of 71 75 t1i c rt ct tL ci ETJ Lu W, LO O t- 0 W LO -1 —M 10 rz M i R 11 -� Z :) N , 7 i; rt ct ' 7 71 4.1 4M ct rl to ^Z- u Gfj rw' 4-1 Li ate. 4-1 u rw 72 LZ 4-1 r ri cri rt 7 4-1 7 5 rt 7 - 1 rt rz rz 4-1 7j 11 Attachment 7 bA K 0 Ln rn Ln L-0 CN 00 nn Go Ln 00 rn L-n rn N L-n Z z N rN r N rN L-0 00 00 00 Lf) 00 0 cli rn Ln Cn lfl N rl� oA 4W N 00 00 00 Ol N rn 61 nn rn C rn rj d i 4W z o A CN C CN 4-j un (A Intl 4.4 O QO z z M rA ft un Cn bA K A (=> 0 � Ln �10 C1 go 1) GQ 01 O cC 2 u Oi Density Flow Chart 0 L-0 CN 00 nn Go Ln 00 rn L-n rn N L-n Z z N rN r N rN oA 4W N 00 00 00 Ol N rn 61 nn rn C rn rj d i 4-j un (A Intl A (=> 0 � Ln �10 C1 go 1) GQ 01 O cC 2 u Oi Density Flow Chart \ / 9 / / / � � / \ / \ / / 7v � � / / / / ƒ 5 Attachment 8 I I March 2007 Project Abstract Page Attachment 9 I , 1870 _ U7 Gladstone Mixed Use z to W Gladstone Medium FRI BlE AVE Vento Trail 'i Gladstone High to Single Dwelling Gladstone Medium to Single Dwelling 7 J� 17 3 h to W U z lu J' IMMER AVE COMP PLAN MAP CHANGE 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk DATE: March 7, 2007 Agenda Item L1 SUBJECT: Intoxicating Liquor License /Change of Owner — Chalet Lounge INTRODUCTION Brian Harney has submitted an application for an intoxicating and Sunday liquor license for the Chalet Lounge located at 1820 Rice Street. Mr. Harney is purchasing the Chalet with two other individuals and also be the manager of the business. BACKGROUND Mr. Harney grew up in Duluth and attended the UM Twin Cities for four years. He currently lives in Brooklyn Park. Mr. Harney has been a teacher at North End Elementary School in St. Paul for the past nine years. Prior to that he worked in numerous restaurants in various capacities. One of Mr. Harney's business references indicated she has known him for eight years and has been co- teaching with him for the past five years. She described him as a go getter, hard worker and trustworthy. As required by City ordinances, the necessary background investigation was completed by the Police Department on Mr. Harney. During the background check the following organizations were contacted for information regarding the applicant: State and Federal criminal history check, State and Federal wants and warrants, State Motor Vehicle and Drivers License files, the Cities of Brooklyn Park, St. Paul, Duluth, Mankato, White Bear Lake, Mendota Heights and Maplewood and the counties of St. Louis, Hennepin, Blue Earth, Dakota and Ramsey. There was nothing found that would prohibit Mr. Harney from holding a liquor license in the City. He has been given a copy of the City Code of Ordinances that apply to being an intoxicating liquor license holder and he has met with Chief Thomalla to discuss measures to eliminate the sale of alcohol to underage persons, general security and retail crime related issues. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the liquor license application. Agenda Item L -2 MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk DATE: March 7, 2007 SUBJECT: Intoxicating Liquor License /Change of Owner- Jake's City Grille INTRODUCCTION Robert Jacob has submitted an application for an intoxicating and Sunday liquor license for Jake's City Grille located at 1745 Beam Avenue (formerly known as Bennigan's). Mr. Jacob is purchasing the business with two of his brothers. He will also be the manager of the business. xe Mr. Jacob has lived in Medina for the last three years. Previously he lived in Plymouth and grew up in North East Minneapolis. Currently Mr. Jacob is the owner of five other restaurants throughout the Twin Cities. Those restaurants are: Jake's Sports Cafe -New Brighton, Jake's Sports Cafe - Plymouth, Nye's Polonaise Room, Jake's City Grille -Eden Prairie, and Jake's City Grille- Eagan. Restaurants have been a family business since 1971 and in 1997 the brothers opened their first restaurant. One of Mr. Jacob's business references indicated that he has known him professionally for about ten years and he is, "a man of his word." Chief Thomalla has met with Mr. Jacob to discuss measures to eliminate the sale of alcoholic beverages to underage persons, general security and retail crime issues, and the Maplewood Liquor Ordinances. In the course of this investigation, state criminal history files were checked along with contacts and warrants in the cities of Plymouth, New Brighton, Eden Prairie, Eagan and Maplewood and the counties of Dakota, Hennepin and Ramsey. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the liquor license application. MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk DATE: March 7, 2007 Agenda Item L -3 SUBJECT: Wine and Strong Beer Liquor License — The Ponds at Battle Creek INTRODUCTION Bradley Behnke has submitted an application for a Wine and Strong Beer License for the Ponds at Battle Creek located at 601 Century Avenue South. In the past the Ponds has only been issued a 3.2 beer license. i • Mr. Behnke grew up in Winona and currently resides in Elk River where he has been a resident for the past nine years. Mr. Behnke has been the owner /manager of BRB Golf Management, LLC, which runs The Ponds at Battle Creek golf course since before it opened in 2003. Prior to running The Ponds, he was the golf department manager at the Galyan's store in Minnetonka. He was the on -site golf pro at the Virginia Golf Course from 1996 -2001. One of Mr. Behnke's business references indicated that he has known him for 10 -15 years and described him as, "a wonderful young man, as good as I've ever worked with." Chief Thomalla has met with Mr. Behnke to discuss measures to eliminate the sale of alcoholic beverages to underage persons, general security and retail crime issues, and the Maplewood Liquor Ordinances. In the course of this investigation, state criminal history files were checked along with contacts and warrants in the cities of Minnetonka, Winona, Elk River, Virginia and Maplewood and the counties of Anoka, Sherburne, St. Louis, Winona and Ramsey. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the liquor license application. Agenda Item L4 MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk ATTN: March 7, 2007 RE: Intoxicating Liquor License Application — Big Bear Liquor INTRODUCTION Khue Thi Dong has completed an application for an off -sale intoxicating liquor license for use in the building located at 2223 White Bear Avenue. This space was formerly used by Excellcom. Ms. Dang grew up in her home country of VietNam and moved to St. Paul in 1987. She moved from St. Paul to Crystal and from there to Robbinsdale where she has resided for the last ten years. She is currently employed by the United States Postal Service where she has worked for the last nine years. Ms. Dang also owns seven properties including her residence, three single- family rental properties and three commercial properties. One of Ms. Dang's business references indicated he has known her for about two years and described her as, "a very good person." Chief Thomalla has met with Ms. Dang to discuss measures to eliminate the sale of alcoholic beverages to underage persons, general security and retail crime issues, and the Maplewood Liquor Ordinances. In the course of this investigation, state criminal history files were checked along with contacts and warrants in the cities of Robbinsdale, St. Paul and Maplewood and the counties of Hennepin and Ramsey. RECOMMENDATION Approval of the intoxicating liquor license as requested. Agenda Item L5 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Request to Hire Consultant /Facilitator —South Maplewood Development Moratorium Study LOCATION: South of Carver Avenue DATE: March 6, 2007 INTRODUCTION As directed by the city council (in adopting the moratorium), city staff has started studying the area south of Carver Avenue. The direction the council gave to staff, as outlined in the moratorium ordinance, (refer to the attachment) comprises several different topics to study that will involve a substantial amount of work. In addition, because of the discussions at the ongoing neighborhood workshops, staff is becoming aware of additional issues that the residents expect the city to review as part of the study. Staff also has heard that some council members and the city manager want to expedite this study to get it done this spring. Staff, therefore, interviewed three consulting firms (facilitators) and asked them to submit proposals and cost estimates to assist the city in doing the study for the area south of Carver Avenue. This study may include recommendations for the zoning map, land uses and maximum densities that the city should allow south of Carver Avenue. BACKGROUND November 13, 2006: The city council passed the development moratorium for the area south of Carver Avenue. See the attached ordinance. January 29, 2007: The city staff held a neighborhood meeting and workshop at the Londin Lane Fire Station to discuss several topics including the development potential and desired land uses and characteristics for this part of Maplewood. Staff invited all property owners south of Linwood Avenue to this meeting. Staff is scheduling a second, follow -up neighborhood meeting for March 13, 2007, at Carver Elementary School. DISCUSSION Benefit The magnitude of this work is substaintial. The benefits of bringing on a consultant to facilitate this study are that: • A consultant would free up staff to do other necessary work such as: 1) continue to work on the Comprehensive Plan rewrite as required by the Metropolitan Council, 2) continue to work on the zoning and land use elements of the Gladstone Master Plan, 3) continue to work on the TIF (tax - increment financing) application by DAKAR Companies and the site /building plan proposal also by DAKAR, 4) and continue to work on current development applications such as the Ramsey County Correctional Facility expansion, the St. Paul's Monastery Redevelopment proposal and the ongoing Carmax /Mogren Addition development reviews. • The timeline for the conclusion of the south Maplewood development study has been sped up to finish the work on this matter this spring or early summer rather than by next November as allowed by the moratorium ordinance. A consultant would be able to expedite the review and free staff up to do the above - mentioned work. Consultant /Facilitator Selection and Cost Staff had meetings with three different planning /engineering firms to introduce them to the study and to gauge their interest in doing the work for the city. These firms include Schoell Madson, SEH (Short Elliott Hendrickson) and Bonestroo. All three firms submitted work proposals and cost estimates to city staff. After interviewing the team members from three different consulting firms, reviewing their work proposals and their cost estimates, city staff and the city manager have found one group that we believe is the best to do the work outlined in the moratorium in a timely manner for a reasonable price for the city. The firm of Schoell Madson, based on their discussions with staff and the city manager and their proposal for this study (see the information starting on page six), is the group the city manager has selected for this project. The 2007 city budget (planning division) has a total of $19,990 earmarked for planning consultant fees. This amount will be enough to cover the estimated costs for doing this study. RECOMMENDATION Authorize city staff to enter into a professional consulting services contract with the firm of Schoell Madson for a total of $7,500 (plus expenses) for completing the work outlined in the South Maplewood Development Moratorium Ordinance and the issues raised at the neighborhood meetings. This hiring is necessary to expedite the completion of this study. The report should include, among other things, recommendations for land uses, zoning designations and the maximum densities for the area south of Carver Avenue. Staff expects the consultant to have the study completed, barring any large unforeseen circumstances, by July 1, 2007. p :miscelllrequest for consultant 03 07 Attachments: 1. South Maplewood Development Moratorium Ordinance 2. Study Work Proposal from Schoell Madson 1A Attachment 1 AN ORDINANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING THE PLANNING PROCESS, FOR PROTECTING THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS OF MAPLEWOOD AND FOR DEVELOPING LAND USE AND ZONING STANDARDS AND LAND USE PLANNING FOR THE AREA SOUTH OF CARVER AVENUE IN MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA The area under consideration in this ordinance (hereinafter referred to as the "South Maplewood Study Area ") includes all the land south of Carver Avenue in Maplewood (refer to the South Maplewood Study Area map for the location) that the city has zoned F (farm residence) and R -1(R) (rural residential). The Maplewood City Council ordains: 1.01 The City of Maplewood is currently conducting a study that includes land use, zoning and planning components for the area south of Carver Avenue. 1.02 The objective of the study is to review existing and planned land uses and zoning designations and the existing natural and constructed features in the south Maplewood study area, including a review of the diversity of housing options within Maplewood because of the zoning. From this information, the city may make changes to the comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance or the land use plan in the area to create better - planned and constructed developments and neighborhoods. 1.03 In addition to the study, the city may need to revise the city's zoning ordinance, zoning map, land use map and comprehensive plan because of the following issues: - Land use - Minimum lot sizes - Public utility availability (including sewer and water and the costs and impact on the area) - Building setbacks - Open space connectivity - Existing city and county public land uses - Parks and trails connections - Mississippi River Critical Area considerations - Mississippi National River and Recreational Area (MNRRA) considerations, including those of neighboring communities - Metropolitan Council Requirements and Land Planning Guide Book (including, but not limited to, the strategies for protecting special resources including solar access, wind energy access, the urban service area and historic preservation). - Pedestrian flow and safety - Parking - Historical features and the objectives listed in the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan - Topography 3 Wetlands, ponding and other water features Storm -water systems and management requirements Housing density - The percentage of R -1(R) acreage to other land use acreage for residential purposes. The percentage of R -1(R) housing potential in relation to other designations for housing opportunities in Maplewood, i.e. single dwelling, 40,000 square foot lots versus 10,000 square foot lots, R -1, R-1 (S), mid - density, high density to provide a comprehensive list of the housing options in Maplewood. The financial impacts of development on the city Street patterns and traffic flows - RamseylWashington Metro Watershed District considerations and requirements MnDOT Highway and Traffic Plans for the area, including traffic and public safety Preservation of housing and life -style options 1.04 There is a need for the city to do these studies so that the city staff and the city council will have current and relevant information before considering or making any changes to the city's comprehensive plan and to the city's zoning ordinance, zoning map and land use map for the area south of Carver Avenue. SECTION 2. DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT STUDY; MORATORIUM 2.01 The city council authorizes the city staff to do this study. City staff shall coordinate this study with the planning commission, the environmental and natural resources commission, the historical preservation commission, other government agencies, property owners, interested citizens, the city council and any other entities that may provide input to the study. 2.02 Upon completion of the study, city staff will present the study and its results to the planning commission for their review and recommendation to the city council. 2.03 A moratorium on development in the south Maplewood Study Area is adopted pending completion of the study and /or the adoption of any amendments to the city's zoning ordinance, zoning map, land use map or comprehensive plan as the city deems necessary because of the study. The city will not approve any new development, subdivision or building permit for a new building, except for those parcels that are two acres in size or smaller and now of record, during the moratorium period. Maplewood may issue building permits for the expansion or remodeling of existing structures, for accessory structures or for one new principal structure on an existing lot of record where the owner does not subdivide the property. SECTION 3. TERM 3.01 The term of ordinance shall be for one year or until the city council adopts amendments to the city's zoning ordinance, zoning map, land use map or comprehensive plan as the city deems necessary because of the study or the city council takes any action that directly affects the study or the ordinance. 9 SECTION 4. VARIANCES 4.01 The city council, at their discretion, may grant variances from this ordinance based upon a determination that a proposed subdivision or development would be compatible with proposed land use and zoning, and that such proposals would keep with the spirit and intent of this ordinance. The procedures to be followed in applying for a variance from this ordinance shall be in accordance with state law on findings for variances and shall include the following: a. The applicant shall file a completed application form, together with required exhibits, to the Community Development Department. b. The application for a variance shall set forth special circumstances or conditions that the applicant alleges to exist and shall demonstrate that the proposed subdivision or development is compatible with existing or proposed land use and zoning. C. The city will submit the application to the planning commission for their review and recommendation to the city council. d. The city council may set, at its discretion, a public hearing before making a final determination on the requested variance. e. The city council may impose such restrictions upon the proposed subdivision or development as may be necessary to meet the purpose and intent of this ordinance. SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE 5.01 This ordinance shall take effect after the city publishes it in the official newspaper. The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on November 13, 2006. Mayor Attest: City Clerk Rl Attachment 2 NEM 0 Proposal for Plainungy Service's Prepared for F Tom Ekstrand 1830 County Red; East Maplewood, INN 55109 I Exploring Opportunities Together X pd np`ap: I Exploring Opportunities Together X 15050 �31d Avehlip , Plymcuft M 5-5411 T 103-(46-1 'I F (63-(46-!^' Torn Ekstrand Senior Planner City of Maplewood 1830 County Road B East NlapleNvood MN, 55109 R e: Planning Services for the South Maplewood Study Area Dear Mr. Ekstrand: With these basic assumptions in mind, Schoeil Madson estimates the costs for these planning services to be $7,500.00. We took for to discussing this in morp, detail upon direction frona, the City Council. We would be happy to refine the scope In any NVaN7 and itemize the cost breakdown of scr provided. If there are any questions, please contact me at 763-746-1631 Si Rose A.'Lorsung Senior Nanner, Schoch Madson N it 11 1! [1 111! 4rm offering • Sc ioell Ad, )n Bachelor of Arts, Augsburg College, EXPFRIENCE 2004 0 Worked with resident groups, architects and developers for potential Coursework in Geography, projects Cartography, and Marketing at St. • Worked with Chamber of Commerce and revised Si Code Thonias University, 2004 Ordinance for City of Maplewood Professional Assoclations 0 Created maps and analysis for city projects 4 Analyzed data and created charts, graphs and quantitative analysis Urban Land Institute 0 Researched, reported, and authored ordinances, resolutions and Professional Experience contracts 0 Interacted and communicated with city officials and business leaders I Year S choelf Madsen 0 Prepared all reports for parks, , planning commission, and city council for the City of Medina 7 Years Total * Calculated zoning, variance, arid plats using LUIS for the City of Maplewood 0 Using GP S to ldctitiN infrastructure and implement server-based system of maintenance 0 Creating Capital Improvement Plans * Creating fmancing options for unique land use projects 0 Land Use Project Management, process to construction * Thematic mapping for land use (ICV60PTIlent, environmental studies and demographic rtsearch 0 Extensive report-writing for parks, plannihig commission. and city council 0 Comprehensive Planning including case studies. downtown nodevelopnicrit, and design standards 0 Negotiation in land use development including property Z1- I identification, acquisition and development process Schoell Mad-son PRA, I ; I'. f GENERALBACKGROUND ffol IMr. Goodrum is the Senior Planner of School] & 'Madson, Inc. His experience covers Commercial Development, Residential Development, Urban planning, and lie- development, COO.Servation Dc-velopment. Rural Planning, Parks and Recreation Planning anti Design, Regional Policies, Strectscapes and many other specialties. Duties performed within these projects include Project and Construction Management, Site Design, Education Governim-rit Liaison, Code and Regulation Interpretation, Coordination with special interest groups and municipalities, Public Presentatio n, Bachelor of Elective Studies (BE$), Report and Summary Writing. 1876, SL Cloud State University, at Cloud, Minnesota VXffRIENCE Planning Internship, City of Shakopee His experiences have provided comprehensive knowledge in planning, and development implementation in the following areas: Professional Affiliations a A phumer for the full-spectrum of residential and commercial American Planning Association development with previous employment in rural, urban and Sensible Land Use Coalition regional units ot'govcrimtent, including consulting services. r-1 0 Preparing comprehensive reports with a detailed arnflysis of the Metropolitan Council Natural proposed project and providing recommendations to assure a Resource Task force quality project, Local Government Unit d-GU) 4 Drafling and administering enviromriental sensitive ordinances Representative for Carver County (wetland, shorciand, floodplain and erosion control) within land and Minnetonka use plans as they relate to specific projects. 0 Cuiding cities through conservation deveiopments; that used Metropolitan Council Representative alternative planning practices to create harmonious to the Lake Minnetonka Area Cooperating Cities n-MAC C) developments within environmentally sensitive sites. a Theiroup ,h knowledge in developing a comprehensive plan that Professional Exp-Arlenee best suites the goals of" the community and the strategies of the 2 Years with 5c horiff Madson (2005) regional plans, * Liaison berwcen the Nlefropolitan Council and the communities 15 Years of City, County and within the seven-county Nictropolhari Area, with specific Regional planning responsibility for the City of Independence and 36 other cities within Hennepin County, sharing regional policies pertaining to Metropolitan Council City of Minnetonka the communities' initiatiN es and -oals. )-1 Carver County # Focal person in gathering infOrt - nation from communities, St. Sonifecius outside government agencies, consultants, affected parties, ' Northwest Consultants neighborhood meetings and other resources to effoctively explain the facts of a project and to provide appropriate masurcs, in resolving issues. 0 Lead in> overseeing projects, front initial contact throqzb final approval, providing guidance throughout the planning process to create a favorable project, ffol Thomas J. G m li;F 12 hornas I Goodrum, cont. IK i" GENERAL BACKGROUND Registered $ail Scientist Wisconsin P88176-112 Certified Welland Deiin ator #1051 call Madson PJ§e JO G I I I Oft GENERALL BACKGROLINI) Schoell Madson Pl§,-1 Mr, Candy has over eight years o' experience %vith CiviUMunicipal Engineering Projects, Environmental-, Planning and GIs Projects. He is very knowledgeable 'In using AutoCAD Map, Arc(AS 9,x and Sketch Up 3D Sof1warc. Mr. Candy also provides IT Support and CAD/Civif 3D/GIS Admi and IT Consulting. Education ]EXPERIENCE Bachelors of Science degree in 0 Carver County Mapping Projects: Created neaps for each city within Geography & GtS; Penn State (VVC) 2007 (120 credits) Carver County (address, Fire, police, utility, etc.) • OIS and Planning Support far projects for the City of Maple Plain, GtS Technician Certificate, City of Independence andTonka Bay. North Hennepin Community College, 2005 (64 credits) 0 GIS City Mapping project for the City of Spring Park, includes addinL attribute data and enhancing t1wit"current base maps for GIS Software Engineering Certifi cate W Concept plarriting and GIs for the Beard Group's Stone's Throw MSS College, 2002 (32 Credits) Project Techskills IT Training # Various GIS Site Nnalysis projects for Ryan Companies A+, N+ and MCP Certification • Big Lake Anitexation. GIs project fbr 833 acres 0 Oneka Shores Sketch up 3D ViSUaliZation -repared for the Beard Computer Aided Drafting Diploma Group (200 6) See the Video at w� click on Herzing College, 2000 stonc's'Throw Video! Professional Associations Carver County GIS UseN Group Hennepin County GIS Users Group AutoCAD Map Certification ArcGfS 9.X Certification Working on GISCI Certification Professional Experience 3 Years with Schoell Madsen (2007) 7 Years Total Schoell Madson Pl§,-1 Agenda Item L6 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer Michael Thompson, Civil Engineer I SUBJECT: Brookview Area Street Improvements, City Project 07 -01, Resolution Accepting Preliminary Report and Calling Public Hearing for March 26, 2007 DATE: February 26, 2007 INTRODUCTION The feasibility study for the Brookview Area Street Improvements is complete and is attached for the city council's review. The study includes information on the proposed improvements, proposed financing and probable assessments. The city council will consider accepting the feasibility study and ordering a public hearing. Background The proposed project area is illustrated on the attached project location map. Street improvement for the Brookview Area Streets was listed on the city's capital improvements project plan for 2008, but is now being considered for 2007. The streets are in very poor condition. Storm sewer is very limited and has contributed to the deterioration of the streets. Staff has received many calls from residents requesting the street project be completed earlier due to the poor condition of the streets. The residents and businesses along all affected streets were contacted via mailings and informed about the City's proposed street reconstruction. Residents with questions regarding the mailing were encouraged to call the Public Works Department. A neighborhood meeting is scheduled for March 8 at Fire Station 4. Budget Impact The total project budget as reported in the feasibility study is $3,198,548. The project budget detailed in the city's Capital Improvement Plan is $2,360,000. Construction costs have significantly increased since the CIP cost estimate made in 2004 was created. A noise berm along Hudson Place has also been added to the project scope which was not originally included in the cost estimate. Following is a comparison and expenses between the current proposal and the Capital Improvement Plan. The last CIP was completed in 2005. Financial Source Feasibility Recommendation Special Assessments $ 830,709 Sanitary Sewer Fund $ 118,000 Driveway Program $ 30,000 City WAC Fund $ 97,400 St. Paul Water $ 0 Environmental Utility Fund $ 400,000 Municipal State Aid Funds - internal $ 500,000 Municipal State Aid Bonds $ 290,064 MnDOT Berm cost -share $ 30,000 City — GO Improvement Bonds $ 902,375 2006 -2010 GIP Estimate $ 830,000 $ 122,000 $ 0 $ 100,000 $ 47,200 $ 410,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 850,800 TOTAL ESTIMATES $3,198,548 $2,360,000 Funding Discussion Agenda Item L6 One of the major differences since the 2004 estimate for this project is that Brookview Drive was designated as a state aid street which allows the City to use gas -tax receipts for a portion of the project cost. The $500,000 allocation from internal MSA Funds is from projects which have been under budget in the past few years and will be closed out in early 2007. The remaining $290,064 will be part of a large bond that the City will need to consider in the summer of 2007 or early in 2008 to receive advanced MSAS funds for the White Bear Avenue and Century Avenue projects. Funds are available as planned from the City's Sanitary Sewer and City WAC Fund. The $400,000 allocation from the Environmental Utility Fund is not available. A bond issue will be necessary to provide for these construction - related expenses for this expenditure. The annual impact on the EUF Fund will be $32,000 for a 15 -year bond. This expense appears within the annual budgeted funds for this enterprise and may not require an increase in rates. There are other expenses proposed for EUF funding in 2007 that will likely require bonding as well. An analysis of this bonding impact on the EUF rates will be presented as part of the budget. It is anticipated that a slight increase (1 -2 %) in the EUF rates, above the inflation adjustment will be necessary to meet the expanded costs for infrastructure replacement. The $902,375 will require the issuance of a general obligation bond in the summer of 2007. Attached is the debt analysis from the Capital Improvement Plan in 2005. This debt analysis was updated in 2006, but was not published when the CIP was not presented for Council adoption. The $902,375 expenditure will require an annual debt service payment of approximately $71,800. The debt service fund appears to have adequate resources to accommodate a one -year acceleration of this amount. The original debt service allocation and the current estimate are similar, so the impact is a single year to accelerate the project. It must be noted that in 2005, the City financial management strategy was to annually increase the levy dedicated toward the debt service fund by $194,000 annually from 2005 to 2010 to increase the allocation toward public infrastructure replacement. The Debt Capacity Analysis shows that the City debt peaked in 2004 and is projected to remain relatively steady through 2010. This is based on the assumptions with the 2006 — 2010 Capital Improvement Plan resulting in a major increase in Capital Improvement spending for infrastructure replacement. Even with this increased spending plan the debt ratio per capita remains relatively steady, while the projected ratio of debt to market value is expected to continue to decline. It is this ratio of debt to market value that Moody's Investment Service uses to determine the City's bond rating, which remains very good at "Aa2" and resulted in the State Auditor to comment on the City's debt as very manageable. The legal debt limit for the city is set at 2.0% of the market value. Current calculations show the City slightly over 1.5% and projections were that this percentage will continue to decrease to an estimated 1.1 % in 2010, which is consistent with the 2001 and 2003 levels, prior to the major expenditures and bonding associated with the Legacy Village development. One final consideration is that construction costs have increased by 33% in the past three years based on this project's estimate. Constructing this project in 2007 versus 2008, using that rate of increase, will save the $300,000 in increased costs over normal inflation. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution accepting the report and calling for a public hearing for 7:00 p.m., Monday, March 26 2007, for the Brookview Area Street Improvement project. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Location Map 3. Executive Summary 4. 2005 Debt Capacity Analysis 5. Feasibility Report RESOLUTION ACCEPTING REPORT AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution of the council adopted January 22nd, 2007, a report has been prepared by the city engineering division with reference to the improvement of Brookview Area Street Improvements, City Project 07 -01, and this report was received by the council on March 12, 2007, 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 1 . The council will consider the street improvement of Brookview Area Streets in accordance with the report and the assessment 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 $3,198,548. 2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 26 day of March, 2007 in the council chambers of city hall at 7:00 p.m., and the clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. Approved this 12 day of March 2007 7 J 1 1 l 1; Tanners I La ke N 12J JAMES DR. ° Lu 68 Q J W J Q J TILE CRE ARK Pa rk J >- J o z J Q B �O�ONP� P w ° ry U PPER AFTON RD. U o IL 4 R ~ 35 120 ry z Street Improvements no scale EXHIBIT 1 Project Streets CITY PROJECT 07 -01 3 - 'T 1:7 i1�/ 1 T1 ►� CITY OF MAPLEWOOD BROOKVIEW AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT 07 -01 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Feasibility Study and Report have been prepared for the Brookview Area Street Improvements, City Project 07- 01. The proposed project involves complete reconstruction of approximately 1.8 miles of residential street and constructing a berm for noise mitigation along the north side of Hudson Place. Proposed drainage improvements consist new storm sewer piping, regional rain gardens and also individual residential rain gardens in order to provide treatment to the impervious areas within the project. Sanitary sewer spot repair would also be made as part of the project, while water upgrades will be conducted by SPRWS prior to city street reconstruction. The water system improvements detailed in the cost estimate are for valve adjustments, water utility holes, insulation, and other costs directly related to city street and utility improvements. The estimated costs for the proposed improvements are detailed below. These costs include allowances for construction cost contingencies and allowances for indirect costs, as detailed in the feasibility cost estimates. Proposed Improvement Estimated Cost Brookview Area Street Improvements: Street Improvements: $ 2,630,436 (82 %) Drainage Improvements: $ 475,154 (15 %) Sanitary Sewer Improvements: $ 68,197 (2 %) Water System Improvements: $ 24,761 (1 %) Total estimated project costs: $ 3,198,548 (100 %) It is proposed that the improvements be financed through a combination of special assessments to benefiting properties and Maplewood funds. Estimated funding amounts from each of the financing sources are as follows: Financing Source Amount Street assessments: $ 784,432 (24.5 %) Storm assessments: $ 77,777 (2.4 %) Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund: $ 118,000 (3.7 %) Driveway Replacement Program: $ 30,000 (1 %) WAG Fund: $ 97,400 (3 %) MSA Bonds: $ 790,064 (24.7 %) Environmental Utility Fund: $ 400,000 (12.5 %) Berm Landscaping Mn /DOT: $ 30,000 (1 %) City general tax levy: $ 870,875 (27.2 %) Total: $ 3,198,548 (100 %) The following is a proposed schedule for the project should the city council vote to proceed: Receive feasibility study and order public hearing 03/12/07 Public hearing 03/26/07 Authorize preparation of plans and specs 03/26/07 Approve plans and specs /authorize advertisement for bids 05/14/07 Bid date 06/15/07 Assessment hearing 06/25/07 Accept bids /award contract 06/25/07 Begin construction 07/02/07 Complete construction 10/31/07 Assessments certified to Ramsey County 10/08/07 Based on the analysis completed as part of this report, the proposed Brookview Area Street Improvement project is feasible, necessary and cost effective, and would be a benefit to the City of Maplewood. The anal yst's of Ma debt capacity included arevje�vofdata for the pact five years on debt ratios and on ratinos. Also, the anal'VSiS included a projection of future debt transactions, population changes, tax base 2 and debt ratios, T" c I 'I i amount o"'dcbt anticipated to issued 200 's S41 �9WOW of ti l- bonds PI anlle d to be is s u ed he t%vstet ". and 1 -010 'wi I I be for publ is works i nlp rovem e tits. De bt t r -an sact o ris and outstand: n Q de bt fo r 00 5 - 2 0 10 are sho vn on the ne: xt two pa c s, 2-1 DEBT TR ANSACTI ONS PAST F I F E YEARS AND N FIVE YEARS New L ess Debt Lit Debt Refunding t Debt Year Issued id Outstanding u rsran i 2001 B alance Fonvar�l 79,99 7. 9 7 29,997,29 7C 1 00 7, _ 70 j )2 5.1 X0,0 11 ,850 1 O) 34,487297 34,497.29 "i 88 56,7 7 7 t. 1 t E1 55,587.797' 17,56000) .,02)7. 20 M 77.900 (4.215.000) 0) 1.950. 197 (2,56 tM 59390,1 9 701" 6�94&600 5.77 5 .000 6',671.797 (2,560. 1,111,79' 71 1 . � r5 0 n Cl 1. 70,7 7 (2.560 � ...... - 110.? * 2 77,t0 €C{7 747.77 # £ '20 10 9 I CURRENT NPROJECTED ;- Population pro - 1'ectioris fi.)r the next five years vvere made ]it order to proJect the debt per capita, (Debt per capita, is calculated by dividing the outstanding debt by the I)OI)LIlation.) "I'llese p•o are explained at dic and of' Section I under the licading General 1111111ity Deve lopment I n fi 'I lie tol lowi ti table is a com g fir lation ot'lli preced c i rig 4 ' - pr(�Jecfions� The data in the abos table is displayed in the graph on the next page. c 2-4 PROJECTED DEBT PER CAPITA Debt Outstanding Debt Per Capita W ithout W it W i tbout i hi Ncv� N' a Nv ForoJected New New Year Debt Dobt flop u latiout Debt Debt 2006 47.701297 - 3 7.0 1 �279 1.592 2007 4' ).067.297 61.111 797 X7,7 8 0 1,140 1.618 2008 17w 9-57_297 5 9.110,297 3%8 020 998 1 � Not 77. 6'7.`? 9 7 62342.297 .38,116 8-56 1. 6 76 201 (1 1 -6.787.297 643 3 9.2 1 2 701 1,68 The data in the abos table is displayed in the graph on the next page. c 2-4 1800 1600 1400 12£10 1000 Soo 600 400 200 0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 PL W - CURRENT ....... MAPLEWOOD-PROJECTED 2- I'lie ratio oft.lebt to tax base was also analvzed. Fhis ratio is calculated by dividina the debt outstanding bN the estimated full market % atuc of'Nlaplewood's to base. The estimated ful in arket va I tie o I't lie City's tax base was preject I 20 - 00 10 base d it pon the ass unt pt i o 11 that it would increase annually by 12,31% xvhich is the same rate Its, it has increased over the past ten years. The 1 table is a compilation of the preceding p ro C7 jeclions- I'lictlata in the abo% c table is araphicalb, displaved on the next page, 2-6 ....................... PROJECTED DEBT TO MARKETVALUE Debt Outstanding Dehil'o:Vlarket Value kVithout kV i th Projected NVIth(nit NV i I II Nvvv New Tax [lase New N`ov Year Debt Debt N-larket Value Debt Debt 200 43.067.297 6 1.111 �797 4316350M() I JM 1.4% 2008 1 7 71 7,2 9 5 9 11 .0,297 4.848 .667.000 0. 8 % - 2009 3 2.62- 2 - ' 1 7 6234-1-207 5A46633.000 06(N) L1% 2010 26 7 8 7. 2 9 7 6 4 3 9 3. _2 9 7 6.11 8.34.4.000 0, 4 1, 19! 7 , I'lictlata in the abo% c table is araphicalb, displaved on the next page, 2-6 ....................... 3 . 0 2,5% Z0% 1.5% 0.5% 0.0% 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 MAPLEWOOD-CURRENT MAPLEWOOD-PROJECTED 2-7 A nothc r i in port ttt I'at: for related to the C ity's debt papa it is tile S tit te I egal debt I i tit i t. 'I"leis limit is 2. 0 of the assessor's market value ofthe City's tax base. Bond issues covered by this limit are those that are financed by property taxes unless at least . fthe annual debt service costs are financed by special assessments Or to ulcrements, maple"k has three debt issues that are SUb to the debt limit in 2006 -2011 The difference between the statutory debt limit and the bonds outstanditnt that are covered hv the debt limit is relerred to as tile legal debt margin. ["he table belo-w shoxvs %- libeal debt marein for the years_ 2006-2010. It indicates that the City is currentiv and kvirl be Under the legal debt limit for the entire period. Projection of Loge i Debt Margin December 31 Fda vak;e -of Waxa!Ae croDedy Statutony debt imm 2 0%, of market vwUe Amount of deb 4 ble W debt hr €C FWe Safety Bonds 202H3A Open Space Refundmno Bonds N Refundmi; Bonds 200 AA' �M � ,ai debt aPokable *0 debt lim! 0e 3. debt rnargm Q 'Amourd o; net or esu ow 2006 2007 2008 2209 2010 53842.473.00-0 54.31&3519,00 34.84&667.000 3544033,000 3 6A1&344eG2 1 6.849460 86.327.0 QO 96,97134'. 108.932.660 122366A 2,98UQ() 2,850.000 2,710.000 3 0 2.605A00 2.315.0 , 00 1 2.020,000 1 .715. 000 1 A00A-00 71,264 8 . 162.000 92,241340 104.657,663 1 1 1 8.361. a a0% M a CAPITAL IMPROVEM ENT PLAN FINANCING STRATEGY The five -v ear total fort e 1r ects in the C. 1, P, i s S 64,7 '39,6 70 F'u nd inn sources bv vear for the {'.1s are a s followsl i 2-9 ALLOCATION OF COSTS BY YEAR FUNDING SOURCE TOTAL 2006 2007 2008 2 ---- 2 AMBULANCE SERVICE FUND $1 14,000 $0 $0 $0 $114,000 su BONDS-G.O. IMPROVEMENT 51o,916.650 2,656,400 1,775,800 1,47a,550 1,802,500 3,412A6X! BONDS-M.S.A. $9.553.400 415,000 2,137,000 1,255Z00 3,563,000 2.182.600 XONDS-SP. ASSESSMENT 514,064.000 1945,500 2,283 1,323,000 3,091.500 3 BONDS-TAX INCREMENT $3. 000 2,540.000 750.000 0 500,000 C LP FUND $418.650 138,000 182.300 78 20,000 0 ELECTRIC FRANCHISE FEE $2175,000 7 225,000 0 0 1,450,000 0 ENVIRONMENTAL UTILITY FUND $3,290.500 353,500 512,000 645.000 830,000 950.000 FIRE TRUCK REPLACEMENT FUND 5 280,000 � 372,700 0 395,700 FLEET MANAGEMENT FUND $1 ;712,420 110,000 306.000 157,740 658,670 560.010 LITTLE CANADA $137.500 0 137,500 0 0 0 MnDOT S&GO0,000 250,000 a 5,450,000 100,000 200a011 NORTH ST. PAUL $608.4010 0 a 175.000 395.000 35, 400 OPEN SPACE LAND ACQUIS!TIN $230,100 0 5 200,000 PARK DEVELOPMENT FUND 2 x00,000 450,000 550,000 700000 tooaaoc 0 R,k16EY COUNTY $3.556.010 150,000 20,000 2,360.000 256,000 600=0 REDEVELOPMENT FUND _$600.000 0 1 50.00- 152,000 150.000 w SEWER FUND $2633,300 580000 583,700 424002 560,60 437,000 ST, PAUL WAG FUND $425.553 30,000 120.000 75,000 100 100.000 T. PAUL INATER $726.500 163,600 193,700 90.000 155,600 123,6001 STREET AID FUND so a 0 0 0 0 VADNAIS HEIIGHTS $1 50,000 0 150,000 0 0 0 TOTALS 564,889.720 312,786,000 310,031 514714.340 3 $13,310,711 2-9 Several projects and major purchases in the C - I . P. will be financed by the Ambulance Service Fund. Sewer Fund and I legit M anagement Ti und . F inane ial rCSO Urce s have been and xvill be acc n in ul ated 1 n these funds for the specified projects. InIna, .� cr-q �Pro �crtv T�axcs inned Levies Per CIP 5IB $3,016 $3,294,800 $3,603,400 $3951.200 $4,365,200 168,000 0 42,000 42,000 42,000 42,000 104000 0 0 235,000 3 OOG 493,000 250,000 0 150,000 5€ 000 20,000 0 1,100,000 0 320,000 320,000 230,000 230,000 2,M5,000 0 400,000 650,000 955,000 0 612,000 a 153,000 153,000 153,000 i53MO $23,470,400 $3,016,800 $4,359,800 55,083A00 $5327,200 $5283,200 2-10 IN The Firs T' ruck R ent on en t F u n d "a s e ma N is tied in 19 9 9. 1he tax 1 e vy 1 h r t h, i s fit rid was fit 5. 0 01) € - 0 5, Beg inning with t xes p a y abic i n 200 7 , A w H I req u Ne an annual tax Ic %� o fS 2.3 0,0011 U) S 3 NINO to rep! ace tire. trucks after t1hey are 20 � cars Ad. The park l)CVCh)P[-11olt Fund is anticipated to he u,ecl it) fivance $2.70SON of" park development projects during 2 006 - 201 O I'lie arriount is based upon a projection o f park availabi I ity charge reven ues at 1 5 3 0 per unit t i m e s the number o f ne v lio us i it g units used to r th C oni in ti City De v a' I o pi it en t De partment po 1 ) ut at to 11 c9itnates in Section 1. property tax levies totaling $2,005,000 will So be riceded to firiance the park development projects. The AdevelopriterA Fund accounts for cash assets that are tier redevelopment including a housing rehabilitation and replaco program that is designed to Minute scattered bligived housing. provide neck housing. and proAde funds Rv rehabilitation and repair. The tax levy for this fund - ,vas $0 in 2005, Beginning Nvith taxes payable in 2006. A "A requite an annual tax levy ofS 1 53 000 to finance the housing program and other redevelopment. OveralL the projects included �whhin die 2006-2010 CIT. can be financed without depleting the City's financial resources. Each year when a ne" CIT, is prepared, the financing plaits will be reviewed and refined as nacessar 2q! FEASIBILITY REPORT BROOKVIEW AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 07 -01 BROOKVIEW COURT, BROOKVIEw DRIVE, CRESTVIEW DRIVE, FERNDALE STREET, HUDSON PLACE, MCCLELLAND STREET, O'DAY STREET, STERLING STREET I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Signature: Erin Laberee, P.E. Date: License No. 43464 City of Maplewood Department of Public Works 1902 East County Road B Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 CONTENTS CERTIFICATION............................................................................................ ............................... i TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................. ............................... ii INTRODUCTION............................................................................................ ..............................1 History.................................................................................................. ..............................1 Resident Correspondence .................................................................. ............................... 2 STREETS....................................................................................................... ..............................2 General............................................................................................... ............................... 2 ExistingConditions .............................................................................. ..............................3 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ...................................................................... ..............................3 Street.................................................................................................. ............................... 3 Stormwater Management .................................................................... ..............................5 Watermain ........................................................................................... ............................... 6 SanitarySewer ..................................................................................... ..............................6 NoiseMitigation ................................................................................... ..............................7 MISCELLANEOUS PRIVATE UTILITIES ...................................................... ............................... 7 EROSIONCONTROL ..................................................................................... ..............................7 TRAFFICCONTROL ..................................................................................... ............................... 7 PROJECTCOST ........................................................................................... ............................... 8 COSTRECOVERY ......................................................................................... ..............................9 PROJECTSCHEDULE .................................................................................. .............................10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................. .............................11 EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Project Streets Map Exhibit 2: Existing and Proposed Street Section Exhibit 3: Proposed Drainage Improvements Exhibit 4: Cost Estimate Exhibit 5: Proposed Assessment Roll (Preliminary) Exhibit 6: Street Assessment Map Exhibit 7: Storm Assessment Map ii FEASIBILITY REPORT BROOKVIEW AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 07 -01 BROOKVIEW COURT, BROOKVIEW DRIVE, CRESTVIEW DRIVE, FERNDALE STREET, HUDSON PLACE, MCCLELLAND STREET, O'DAY STREET, STERLING STREET INTRODUCTION History The above referenced streets are referred to in this report as the Brookview Area Streets. As shown on Exhibit 1, the project area is generally bounded by Interstate 94 to the north, Battle Creek to the south, Century Avenue to the east, and McKnight Road to the west. The Brookview Area neighborhood as defined in this study is comprised of the Brower Park plat which was recorded in 1946 and includes all properties between Sterling Street and Century Avenue, with the exception of those properties that are part of the Homewright Addition platted in 1969. The Homewright Addition plat consists of properties fronting Brookview Court and those properties fronting the east side of O'Day Street. The most recent development within this project area was platted as Battle Creek Court in 1975, and consists of those properties fronting Brookview Drive (west of Sterling Street) and two properties fronting the west side of Sterling Street. Just to the west of the Battle Creek Court plat, Heckeroth Addition and Heckeroth Addition No.2 were platted in 1957 and 1963, respectively, and are located along Crestview Drive. Lastly, located within the project area is Christ Methodist Church, located at the southwest corner of Hudson Place and Sterling Street. This 5.47 acre parcel was not part of any of the above mentioned plats. Most of the streets in this neighborhood evolved over time as utilities such as watermain, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer were installed. Once utility construction was complete the streets were graded and rolled smooth and a thin layer of bituminous was most likely placed on the streets over a thin layer of aggregate base which now make up the existing street section. The projects streets have a length of approximately 1.79 miles. The average weighted PCI rating for these streets is 36 out of 104 with failures including but not limited to transverse and edge cracking, medium to high severity patching, alligator and block cracking, and potholes. Storm sewer was installed along Brookview Drive as part of City Project 73 -14 and 78- 20. The properties benefited by these improvements were assessed and thus would not be assessed as part of the current proposed storm sewer improvements. Exhibit 7 shows those properties that would be assessed for storm sewer, and all those properties not highlighted were assessed as part of one of the past storm sewer projects. The only streets with concrete curb and gutter are Brookview Court and Brookview Drive (west of Sterling). Crestview Drive has bituminous curb, while Hudson Place, Brookview Drive (east of Sterling), and McClelland Street have partial bituminous curbing. Those streets with no curbing include: Ferndale Street, O'Day, and Sterling Street. The existing storm sewer is inadequate and does not extend far enough into the neighborhood to successfully manage the storm water. The three pipe runs transporting drainage from Brookview Drive to Battle Creek are corroded corrugated metal pipe that is in disrepair and in need of replacement. Also, currently the storm water is not treated prior to out falling into Battle Creek. There are many areas of standing water in the streets due to flat grades and lacking of curb and gutter section. A pronounced crown is lacking in many street section due to the patching, potholes, and overlays over the years. Resident Correspondence The feasibility report for this project was ordered at the January 22 2007 city council meeting. Subsequently a letter was mailed out to residents on January 26 ", 2007 to provide information on the council's action and that preliminary engineering, such as soil borings and a topography survey would begin within the neighborhood. The residents were notified that city staff would be preparing a mailer with a survey and some general information about street reconstruction. A neighborhood meeting with residents has been scheduled for March 1 St at 7:00 p.m. at Fire Station 4, located at 2601 Londin Lane. This meeting will cover proposed improvements, noise mitigation, assessment information, and resident driven issues and concerns. STREETS General The existing streets in this neighborhood present an ongoing maintenance problem for the City of Maplewood Maintenance Department. Of the infrastructure elements the City maintains (sanitary sewer, storm sewer and streets), the bulk of the maintenance activities consist of patching the roadway and filling potholes. Some of the streets included in this project are local streets and serve only local neighborhood traffic but Hudson Place (ramp to Sterling), Sterling Street, and Brookview Drive (east of Sterling) connect McKnight Road and Century Avenue. Sterling Street and Brookview Drive (east of Sterling) are classified as Municipal State Aid Streets (MSAS), while Hudson Place is not because it is located within Mn /DOT 1 -94 right -of -way. Garbage trucks and school buses are generally the heaviest vehicles that use the project streets. 2 Existing Conditions Presently, the conditions of the streets within the scope of this project range from a PCI rating of 41 (Hudson Place) as the highest to 24 (Sterling Street) as the lowest, with the average being 36. It is the city's goal to have streets at a 74 rating. Potholes and patches are abundant on most of the streets. Longitudinal and lateral cracks are also apparent on a majority of the streets. Inadequate crown allows water to pond and traverse the street section, further deteriorating the roadway. The freeze and thaw cycles that happen every spring, combined with the old age and poor design of the streets, are responsible for the declining roadway conditions. Also, the poor soils beneath the road section were most likely never excavated and replaced with suitable sub -grade materials. The soils throughout this neighborhood have low R- values, which translates to an inadequate overall road structural section. The existing street widths vary from street to street. A summary of the existing street widths are provided in the next section. To determine the existing pavement thickness and subgrade soil type, approximately 16 soil borings will be taken within the project area. Fourteen of the soil borings will be taken within the street sections in order to determine existing pavement and base thickness and also determine the nature of the native subgrade materials. The streets within the proposed project area have deteriorated past the point where reactionary maintenance is no longer effective. Crack sealing, seal coating and overlaying are no longer cost effective solutions to maintain these streets. The overlay has been a quick fix to improve the street condition. Now the overlay is beginning to deteriorate because of inadequate base and sub -base conditions. To be cost effective it is recommended that these streets be reconstructed as part of this improvement project. PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS Most of the streets in this area will be reclaimed where pavement thickness and subgrade soils are adequate for this process. Reclaiming the streets is a material recycling process where the existing pavement surface, aggregate base and sandy subgrade soils are pulverized and mixed to form a new aggregate base material. This new homogeneous material is salvaged and reused. This process, where applicable, reflects a financial savings to the project since less material must be hauled from and to the site. Street The proposed street design will use a B618 barrier curb and gutter on the streets. Exhibit 2 shows the existing and proposed street section for these streets. This type of curb will be used throughout the project in conjunction with conventional storm sewer. Concrete curb will provide delineation between the street and the boulevard. There are a number of long -term advantages to constructing concrete curb and gutter. The roadway edges are strengthened and reinforced by the concrete curb. Horizontal alignment and vertical elevations for the street are fixed during paving. Future pavement management operations are simplified, less expensive and less disruptive by having a concrete curb constructed with this project. For the most part, street widths will remain relatively unchanged. Average existing street widths and proposed street widths for each of the streets within the project area are tabulated below. Street Average Existing Street Width (feet) Proposed Width (feet) Brookview Court 31.5 30 Brookview Drive (West of Sterling) 32.6 30 Brookview Drive (East of Sterling) 30.8 30 Crestview Drive 28.7 28 Ferndale Street 31 30 Hudson PI (Ramp - O'Day) 27.5 28 Hudson PI (McClelland - Ferndale) 24.8 26 McClelland Street 31.5 30 O'Day Street 30.9 30 Sterling Street 24.3 26 1 Municipal State Aid Street The proposed street section will generally consist of 8- inches of aggregate base topped with a tack coat and 3.5- inches of bituminous pavement. In areas of poor subgrade materials, identified in the geotechnical report, the subgrade will be excavated to a 2- foot depth and replaced with a select granular material. Since the geotechnical report has not yet been officially been completed, the assumption was made that 50% of the streets contain poor subgrade and will have to be excavated and replaced with the select granular material. Once the official report is completed, the streets will be designed according to existing site conditions. The listed MSA Streets above will be built to a higher standard which generally consists of 12- inches of aggregate base topped with a tack coat and 4- inches of bituminous pavement. Also Hudson Place, from the ramp to Sterling Street, will be built to this higher standard as it is a portion of the connector route between McKnight Road and Century Avenue. Hudson Street however is not available for State Aid funding being that it is within Mn/DOT 1 -94 right -of -way. 0 Based on the city's current street design standards, streets narrower than 32 feet would be subject to parking restrictions. However, these narrower street widths have existed for years without parking restrictions. Thus it is not recommended that parking restrictions be applied to the project streets. Since Sterling Street is heavily used and is classified as a MSA Street, it is recommended that the minimum street width be 26 -feet. The City has a Driveway Replacement Program available to all residents which allows property owners to use the city's selected street reconstruction contractor to replace existing substandard driveways. This program will be coordinated by city staff similar to past reconstruction projects. Stormwater Management The current drainage system consists of several storm sewer segments that discharge to Battle Creek. Three segments discharge to the south of Brookview Drive between Century Avenue and O'Day Street, one discharges from Brookview to the west of Sterling into a 72 -inch line from the 3M Company property and one system discharges to Battle Creek from the south end of Crestview. The Brookview system west of Sterling is in good condition and will remain in place with some minor improvements to manhole castings and rings and most of the downstream section of the Crestview system will also remain. The system in Brookview east of O'Day is generally in poor condition and will be abandoned or removed and replaced as part of the project. The proposed improved system in this segment of Brookview will consist of installation of new catch basins and pipe sections between Century Avenue and O'Day Street and combining the drainage to a single outlet to Battle Creek. The proposed outlet location would be near the existing drainage pipe system south of O'Day Street. Easement acquisition may be required for the new pipe alignment. This is also the preferred location for one of the two larger rainwater gardens. In this location, the rainwater garden would be off -line from the main Brookview drainage system and treat runoff from the north from O'Day and a small portion of Brookview to the west of O'Day. The preferred rainwater garden area along Brookview may also need easement acquisition. The Crestview system will be replaced at the south end in the street with the installation of new catch basins and pipe sections which will be tied into the drop manhole located between the cul -de -sac and Battle Creek. At the low point of Hudson Place west of Crestview, the proposed system will consist of two catch basins and an outlet to the south. If space is available this may be an area for an additional small infiltration basin. Erosion protection will be needed at the outlet in this area to protect the slope to the south. In all sections where storm sewer will be replaced or new system installed, sump manholes will be installed at selected locations. Sump manholes or other pre - treatment methods will also be used directly upstream of the proposed large rainwater gardens (discussed in the following paragraphs). Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as infiltration basins and/or rainwater gardens are proposed to improve the water quality treatment levels in the area. These BMPs will be designed to meet Ramsey - Washington -Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) requirements and City treatment goals. In the design of these systems, the City will anticipate, to the extent possible, future requirements that may be created as part of state and federal regulatory programs. The current drainage system provides little to no treatment, so any treatment created as part of this project will result in an improved quality of the runoff waters to Battle Creek. The City's plan is to install at least two larger rainwater gardens at select locations as well as offering the option of individual rain water gardens to residents to help provide additional treatment for their properties. The RWMWD requires volume reduction BMPs for the new impervious areas created by the project and for the impervious surface in any areas where significant disturbance of the road sub -grade will occur. The areas where volume reduction requirements apply to this project result in a total area of approximately 0. 15 to 0.20 acres. Based on staff's preliminary assessment of the treatment requirements, installation of two larger rainwater gardens or infiltration areas (one south of Hudson Road west of Sterling and one south of Brookview east of O'Day) will exceed the requirements of the RWMWD. While not directly related to this project, it is worth noting that the City created infiltration treatment capacity within Afton Heights Park in 2006. In preliminary discussions with RWMWD staff, and based on their watershed Plan, there are no other significant treatment or drainage issues that must be completed in this area. Permanent energy dissipation and erosion protection measures will be provided at the new outfall from the east Brookview storm system. Watermain At this time Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) does not plan on any watermain replacements along the project streets. But, as a matter of maintenance, SPRWS is proposing to replace 11 fire hydrants and install 8 gate valves and replace any substandard main valves, services, etc., where necessary. This work would be done by the water utility personnel prior to the street construction, and at no cost to the city. Maplewood will only be responsible for water system expenses that are directly the result of the street construction. Sanitary Sewer No major improvements are proposed for the existing sanitary sewer system. However, city sewer maintenance records have been reviewed and city staff has identified five spot repairs on the 8 -inch sanitary sewer main that would be set for improvements. Also, during the design phase questionnaires will be sent out to residents to determine if there are any potential sanitary sewer main and service problems within the right -of -way I and under the proposed street. Any damaged sanitary sewer main and services under the roadway will be repaired prior to the street reconstruction. This work would be performed as part of the overall project with repairs being paid by the sewer utility fund. Noise Mitigation In response to concerns from residents on Hudson Place and Crestview Drive the city council passed a resolution on July 25 2005 authorizing city staff to proceed with noise mitigation efforts along the north side of Hudson Place from the existing sound wall to Crestview Drive. Currently Mn/DOT has a berm with a height of approximately 6 -feet in a portion of the mitigation location. The city is proposing to heighten this berm by adding fill to make the total height at least 12 -feet to 15 -feet. The berm would be landscaped after final grading activities. Two of the soil borings were taken within the proposed noise berm mitigation area in order to provide the necessary information for the earthen berm design MISCELLANEOUS PRIVATE UTILITIES Private utility companies have been notified of the proposed improvement by city staff through a February 8 2007 mailing. Utility coordination is of high priority and meetings will be held with all utility holders in the project area after the design process begins in order to identify utility conflicts and plan for utility relocation or upgrades if needed. It is important to note the existence of the Magellan pipeline, which runs in the north /south direction on the west side of Sterling Street. Care shall be taken if any excavation occurs near the pipe and Magellan officials will be notified of all proposed construction work in the area. EROSION CONTROL Erosion and sediment control methods will be implemented throughout the project. Silt fence, straw wattles, erosion control blanket, and other erosion protection methods will be utilized where direct runoff might occur. Inlet protection will be used to protect both the existing and new catch basins during construction. Street sweeping will occur, as needed, on all paved street surfaces throughout the project, including intersecting streets. Watering of exposed soils and aggregate material would be done as a dust - control measure. TRAFFIC CONTROL Traffic from outside the neighborhood should not be greatly impacted by construction except for those vehicles using the neighborhood streets to get between McKnight Road and Century Avenue. A construction project of this magnitude will result in some 7 inconvenience and disruption to the neighborhood and its residents. Signage will be installed noting that streets are for local traffic only. Emergency access for vehicles will be available 24 -hours a day throughout the project. During short periods of time, however, some segments of the project may not be passable while certain work is being executed. In these instances, access would be available from another direction. Streets would always be reopened at the end of the day. An alternate route for the fire trucks will be determined for short periods of time when access may be blocked due to construction. Residents with concrete curb work, or concrete driveway apron replacements, will not be able to use their driveways during the week the concrete is curing. During that time, Maplewood police will be notified of the arrangement in order to add patrols while residents are required to park on the streets. The traffic control for the project will be in conjunction with Mn/DOT standards as some of the project streets are defined as municipal state aid streets. PROJECT COST The estimated project cost is outlined below. Estimated Project Costs: $3,198,548. The estimated costs for the proposed project are outlined below. The estimated costs include 10% contingencies and 31.5% overhead, which include engineering, administrative, legal, and fiscal expenses. Exhibit 4 provides a more detailed construction and project cost estimate. Estimated Proiect Cost Summary Street Improvements: Drainage Improvements: Sanitary Sewer Improvements: Water System Improvements: $2,630,436 (82 %) $475,154 (15 %) $68,197 (2 %) $24,761 (1%) Total estimate project costs: $3,198,548 (100 %) 8 COST RECOVERY Based on the City of Maplewood's Pavement Management Policy, a portion of the project cost is assessed on an equal "unit" basis. The "unit" would be based on an average residential lot, as has been used in the past. There are 131 assessable parcels within the project area. Exhibit 5 details the preliminary assessment roll. Exhibit 6 and 7 show the properties proposed to be assessed for street and storm, respectively. There are five commercial lots that will be assessed based on front footage. As stated earlier, the only streets with concrete curb and gutter are Brookview Court and Brookview Drive (west of Sterling). It may be possible, if the final design allows, to salvage existing concrete curb and gutter. In this case, those properties will be charged a partial street reconstruction assessment. As part of the cost recovery, the city will apply for Mn /DOT funds for landscaping improvements to the proposed earthen noise berm. It should be noted that there is no funding from Saint Paul Regional Water Services because their work is limited and would be completed, by SPRWS, prior to city street reconstruction. As earlier mentioned Sterling Street and Brookview Drive (east of Sterling) are defined as MSA streets and as such have allocated funding through municipal state aid bonds. Sterling Street and Brookview Drive have been allocated $168,393 and $621,671, respectively. No funding is available for Hudson Place being that it is within Mn /DOT I- 94 right -of -way. The city's 1999 pavement management policy identifies certain improvement options with established assessment rates for each of those options. The 2007 assessment rates were set by the city council and the following assessment rates would apply. Residential Rates: • $4,960 /unit for full street reconstruction (adding or replacing curb & gutter). $3,700 /unit for partial street reconstruction (utilizing existing curb & gutter). • $820 /unit for drainage improvements. Commercial or Multi- Family Rates: • $99.20 /Front Ft. for full street reconstruction (adding or replacing curb & gutter). • $74.00 /Front Ft. for partial street reconstruction (utilizing existing curb & gutter). $16.40 /Front Ft. for drainage improvements. Estimated Project Cost Recovery: Street assessments: $ 752,932 (23.5 %) Storm assessments: $ 77,777 (2.4 %) Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund: $ 118,000 (3.7 %) Driveway Replacement Program: $ 30,000 (1 %) 9 WAC Fund: $ 97,400 (3 %) MSA Bonds: $ 790,064 (24.7 %) Environment Utility Fund: $ 400,000 (12.5 %) Berm Landscaping Mn /DOT: $ 30,000 (1 %) City general tax levy: $ 902,375 (28.2%) Total $ 3,198,548 (100 %) PROJECT SCHEDULE The following schedule may be implemented, should it be determined to proceed with the project: Receive feasibility study and order public hearing Public hearing Authorize preparation of plans and specs Approve plans and specs /authorize advertisement for bids Bid date Assessment hearing Accept bids /award contract Begin construction Complete construction Assessments certified to Ramsey County 03/12/07 03/26/07 03/26/07 05/14/07 06/15/07 06/25/07 06/25/07 07/02/07 10/31/07 10/08/07 10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS From the results of the feasibility study and investigations, it can be concluded that: 1. The project is feasible as it relates to general engineering principles, practices and construction procedures as it has been presented in this report. 2. The project is necessary for economic and safety reasons and is cost effective when all the related costs are considered — environmental, private and public. 3. The proposed improvement is necessary to maintain the city's infrastructure. 4. The total cost estimate for the project is $3,198,548. 5. The total share proposed to be assessed to the benefited properties is $830,709. 6. The total share proposed from N1SA bonds is $790,064. 7. The total city share of these costs is proposed to be $902,375. 8. Sewer and the environmental utility fund will contribute $518,000 to the project. In consideration of the above conclusions, it is recommended that: 1. If the city council deems the project feasible, a public hearing should be held as soon as possible. 2. The proposed improvements should be constructed as outlined in this report. 3. The cost of the improvements will be recovered through assessments to the benefited and through city contributions. 11 Tanners La ke a� 12 OUDSON Q� PL. Cn �— > V ( 94 z 0 RR \ � E 0 DR "5 U) Ld n M C ree p MAYER LN. JAMES DR. 9: Lu @) ;t < I C? I < C/) TILE \ ECK Afton 0 –J > Heigh K Park ts — 1 ry < ft, ?-� J , 0 w 0 If 0 < :2 UPPER AFTON RD. u� I I 0 � ry Street Improvements no scale EXHIBIT 1 Project Streets CITY PROJECT 07-01 01 lambe Q F6 "M I : WN, MA V Will & 19 Sol, 4: 4 a 1 0 1 1 w : W TLA : I A I: I ilk k 16 9 Existing Street Section R/W EXAMPLE OF STANDING WATER ON STREET CROWN V _ARIES CROWN VARIES VARYING THICKNESS OF BITUMINOUS & BASE EXISTING SUBGRADE Proposed Street Section R/W 30 -33' R/W -_- 2.5%-- 3. B -618 C & G �Ak. 1 - 1/2" TYPE 41A WEARING COURSE (2" FOR MSA STREETS) BITUMINOUS TACK COAT 2" TYPE 31 BASE COURSE MIXTURE 8" CLASS 6 AGGREGATE BASE (12" FOR MSA STREETS) 24" SELECT GRANULAR (AREAS OF POOR SUBGRADE ONLY) EOTEXTILE FILTER FABRIC TYPE V (AREAS OF POOR SUBGRADE ONLY) no scale EXHIBIT 2 Existin and Proposed St S PR OJECT CITY "07-0 *'ROOKVIEW AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS i a o C1 0 POSSIBLE ON Ln ��j ❑ V ❑ ❑ 0 F-1 Cj �❑ d❑ IN E o C� REPLACE EXISTING do B A L R E INSTALL STORM Wj CATCH BASINS o °o o °o °❑ o 0 o d b o u o �o a❑ c° o ❑❑ o oa �o ❑❑ o❑ ❑ 4 DR� El ❑ p EZ� 4oa❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑a ❑ 0 0❑ ❑ °❑ ❑o ❑❑ ❑❑ o _ ❑ °� ❑ ❑ ° ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ o ❑ �° ❑ Elo� ❑ ❑ ['❑ ❑ ❑ ❑N❑ ❑ as ❑ ❑ ❑°o❑ 0 E� ❑o a c� ❑❑ �P ❑ 6o ❑❑ o❑ o 0 UPPER AETON R0. no scale e e v Existing Storm EXHIBIT 3 �E-----F Proposed Storm z > Z 0 d z tu 01 I lu uj z z 0 0 « 0 0 uj < EXHIBIT 5 Brookview Area Street Improvements Preliminary Assessment Information City Project 07 -01 PARCEL ID TAXPAYER STREET NUMBER STREET RESIDENTIAL UNITS FRONT COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE STORM ASSESSMENT' STREET ASSESSMENT TOTAL ASSESSMENT 12822120023 REGINALD E BRONSON 186 BROOKVIEW CT 1 S820.00 S3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822120032 RICHARD L HAYS 187 BROOKVIEW CT 1 N/A $3,700.00 $3,700.00 12822120024 LAVERNE S NUTESON 192 BROOKVIEW CT 1 S820.00 S3,70000 54,520.00 12822120031 ROBERT W MACK 193 BROOKVIEW CT 1 $820.00 $3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822120025 THOMAS D ALTRICHTER 200 BROOKVIEW CT 1 S820.00 S3,70000 54,520.00 12822120030 THOMAS D AUSTIN 201 BROOKVIEW CT 1 N/A $3,700.00 $3,700.00 12822120026 MICHAEL E ZSCHOKKE 210 BROOKVIEW CT 1 S820.00 S3,70000 54,520.00 12822120029 BLANCA R GONZALEZ 211 BROOKVIEW CT 1 N/A $3,700.00 $3,700.00 12822120027 CHARLES H BERG TRUSTEE 216 BROOKVIEW CT 1 S820.00 S3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822120028 CARL G ADAMSON 221 BROOKVIEW CT 1 N/A $3,700.00 $3,700.00 12822110011 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 0 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,96600 54,966.00 12822210010 JACQUE A NELSON 2431 BROOKVIEW DR 1 $820.00 $3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822210009 JOSEPH T RECCHIO 2439 BROOKVIEW DR 1 S820.00 S3,70000 54,520.00 12822210011 CHARLES J DIEDERICH 2442 BROOKVIEW DR 1 $820.00 $3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822210008 JON C ELIZONDO 2447 BROOKVIEW DR 1 S820.00 S3,700.00 54,520.00 12822210012 RONALD H KUBINSKI 2450 BROOKVIEW DR 1 $820.00 $3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822210007 AM V NGUYEN 2455 BROOKVIEW DR 1 S820.00 S3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822210013 ELIZABETH J WALKER 2458 BROOKVIEW DR 1 $820.00 $3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822210014 FLOY L ASHLEY 2466 BROOKVIEW DR 1 S820.00 S3,700.00 54,520.00 12822210006 PAO HER 2473 BROOKVIEW DR 1 $820.00 $3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822210015 DONALD L BROSKY 2474 BROOKVIEW DR 1 S820.00 S3,70000 54,520.00 12822210016 JAMES F PERMAN 2480 BROOKVIEW DR 1 $820.00 $3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822210005 PERRY L ENGLE 2481 BROOKVIEW DR 1 S820.00 S3,700.00 54,520.00 12822210017 TIMOTHY V MILLER 2488 BROOKVIEW DR 1 $820.00 $3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822210004 WAEL H ABDELKADER 2489 BROOKVIEW DR 1 S820.00 S3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822210018 SHARON L UTGAARD 2496 BROOKVIEW DR 1 $820.00 $3,700.00 $4,520.00 12822120052 JAMES A BLOEMENDAL 2510 BROOKVIEW DR 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 12822120053 ROBERT R ARNOLD 2516 BROOKVIEW DR 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822120045 HOUA VANG 2519 BROOKVIEW DR 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 12822120054 PATRICK J SCOLES 2524 BROOKVIEW DR 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822120055 LILA H MILLAR 2530 BROOKVIEW DR 1 S820.00 S4,960.00 55,780.00 12822120056 MERLE C BAH 2554 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120057 PETER F MANDOUX 2566 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120022 NIKKI ERPELDING 2571 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120058 BETH A HURLER ULRICH 2574 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,96000 54,960.00 12822120021 TEKLEMICHAEL A SOQUAR 2579 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120059 GARY M WASMUNDT 2580 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,96000 54,960.00 12822120060 METTA BELISLE TRUSTEE 2594 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120006 SENG LEE 2597 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,960.00 54,960.00 12822120061 GOODRICH E SMITH 2604 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120007 BRIAN FISCHER 2605 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120008 JOSEPH M GROPPOLI 2613 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120062 CHARLES A NELSON 2614 BROOKVIEW DR 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 12822110034 MURIEL H ROWE 2620 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110007 MICHAEL T JONES 2627 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,96000 54,960.00 12822110033 DALE EDWARD MONTBRIAND 2630 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110008 GARY C EDGETT 2633 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,960.00 54,960.00 12822110032 SHELLEY D CARLSON 2636 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110009 ROBIN D PLAN 2641 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110031 ROBERT D LOFGREN 2646 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110010 JEFFREY T BOSTON 2647 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,960.00 54,960.00 12822110030 GERALD A MOLLER 2650 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110029 MICHAEL R HUDON 2656 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,96000 54,960.00 12822110012 JOSEPH A KORBA 2659 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110028 CHRISTOPHER D JENSEN 2666 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,960.00 54,960.00 12822110013 JOYCE J KORBA 2667 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110035 DAKOTA COMMUNITIES INC 2675 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110027 WILLIAM E PICKETT 2676 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110036 ALMOND F HENTHORNE 2685 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A S4,960.00 54,960.00 12822110026 RAYMOND A JOHANEK 2686 BROOKVIEW DR 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110025 THOMAS J PENNING 2690 BROOKVIEW DR 1 - N/A S4,96000 54,960.00 12822110037 RINKEL FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERS 2695 BROOKVIEW DR - 215.00 N/A $21,328.00 $21,328.00 12822110024 STEVEN A TUFENK 2700 BROOKVIEW DR 1 - N/A S4,960.00 54,960.00 12822110023 ERIK A SRIGLEY 2706 BROOKVIEW DR 1 - N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110022 COMMERS CLOVER II LLP 2714 BROOKVIEW DR - 130.00 S2,132.00 $12,896.00 $15.028.00 12822110018 RINKEL FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERS 0 CENTURY AVE N 240.00 $3,936.00 $23,808.00 $27,744.00 12822110021 DONALD ROEMER 135 CENTURY AVE N 112.68 S1,84T95 $11,177.86 $13,025.81 12822210028 RONALD N SCHLANGEN 130 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 - $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210029 JAMES GUNDERSON 131 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 12822210030 BRAD A WHITE 137 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210043 FRANCIS D STURZL 140 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 12822210031 CRESTVIEW PROPERTIES LLC 147 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210042 GEOFF T TILSEN 148 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 S820.00 S4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210026 GENE T KULZER 152 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210032 SEAN C ANDERSON 155 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 12822210033 JILLIAN CROLL 165 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 1 of 2 EXHIBIT 5 CONTINUED Brookview Area Street Improvements Preliminary Assessment Information City Project 07 -01 PARCEL ID TAXPAYER STREET NUMBER STREET RESIDENTIAL UNITS FRONT COMMERCIAL FOOTAGE STORM ASSESSMENT' STREET ASSESSMENT TOTAL ASSESSMENT 12822210025 CHARLES FERRISE 170 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210034 JOHN B BLUMER 175 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 S820.00 S4,960 00 55,780.00 12822210041 PATRICK B VANG 187 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210024 DONALD E DISSELKAMP TRUSTEE 188 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 S820.00 S4,960 00 55,780.00 12822210040 CEDRIC E FOX 199 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210023 ROBERT OLIVEIRA 200 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 12822210022 JOHN M RASMUSSEN TRUSTEE 212 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210037 STEPHEN BERGK 215 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 S820.00 S4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210038 GERALD F GRANT 221 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210021 ALVIN C BIERBAUM 222 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 S820.00 S4,960 00 55,780.00 12822210020 FRED B MCCORMICK 230 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210039 APOSTOLIC BIBLE INSTITUTE 235 CRESTVIEW DR N 1 S820.00 S4,960 00 55,780.00 12822120009 DANIEL J GRZYWINSKI 177 FERNDALE ST N 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110006 CYNTHIA A PEARSON 180 FERNDALE ST N 1 N/A S4,960.00 54,960.00 12822120010 JEROME I HUNGER 187 FERNDALE ST N 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120011 PAUL V HAIDER 193 FERNDALE ST N 1 N/A S4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110005 LISA MARIE HAWKINSON 198 FERNDALE ST N 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120012 CLYDE W WILLIAMS 199 FERNDALE ST N 1 N/A S4,960.00 54,960.00 12822120013 KENNETH I WOLFE 203 FERNDALE ST N 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110004 ROBERT JAMES GROE 204 FERNDALE ST N 1 N/A S4,96000 54,960.00 12822110003 LORENA MAITREJEAN 210 FERNDALE ST N 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120063 JAMES M KACZMARCZIK 211 FERNDALE ST N 1 N/A S4,960.00 54,960.00 12822110002 WALTER L MCLAURIN 214 FERNDALE ST N 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822110001 GREGORY M WHITTIER 218 FERNDALE ST N 1 - N/A S4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822210001 CHRIST METHODIST CHURCH 2500 HUDSON PL - 909.84 $14,92138 $90,256.13 $105,177.50 12822120038 SANDRA MEDINA 2510 HUDSON PL 1 - S820.00 S4,960 00 55,780.00 12822120001 KIRK J NELSON 2600 HUDSON PL 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822120005 E TODD VOLKMEIER 176 MCCLELLAND ST 1 N/A S4,96000 54,960.00 12822120004 LUCAS R HONERBRINK 184 MCCLELLAND ST 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120020 KEITH S WEBER 195 MCCLELLAND ST 1 N/A S4,96000 54,960.00 12822120003 HUMBERTO C GONZALEZ 196 MCCLELLAND ST 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120019 GREGORY P ODONNELL 201 MCCLELLAND ST 1 N/A S4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120002 CHERYL TVEIT 204 MCCLELLAND ST 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822120018 ERVIN L KNUTSON 209 MCCLELLAND ST 1 N/A S4,96000 54,960.00 12822120017 GREGORY G MEHSIKOMER 219 MCCLELLAND ST 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120016 BEVERLY K LOKEN 221 MCCLELLAND ST 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 12822120046 JOAN L GRIEMANN 185 ODAY ST N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822120033 ROBERT W MILLAR 188 ODAY ST N 1 S820.00 S4,960.00 55,780.00 12822120034 RONALD D PRICE 196 ODAY ST N 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120047 JULENE MARIE SPINOSA 201 ODAY ST N 1 S820.00 S4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822120035 LUE MOUA 204 ODAY ST N 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120048 RICHARD A JOHNSON 207 ODAY ST N 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 12822120036 LEROY B OLSEN 212 ODAY ST N 1 N/A $4,960.00 $4,960.00 12822120049 JEFFREY A SCHOW 213 ODAY ST N 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 12822120050 RAYMOND J WESTPHALL 219 ODAY ST N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822120037 JUSTIN J MCCLELLAN 220 ODAY ST N 1 N/A S4,960.00 54,960.00 12822120051 STEPHEN R HARBERTS 225 ODAY ST N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210003 CHARLES D ROWE 179 STERLING ST N 1 S820.00 S4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822120044 PAUL D WEBER 180 STERLING ST N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822210002 DAVID M ZAIMAN 189 STERLING ST N 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 12822120043 DONALD J HELMINICK 190 STERLING ST N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822120042 JOHNNY JONES 200 STERLING ST N 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 12822120041 DANA M LIENKE 208 STERLING ST N 1 $820.00 $4,960.00 $5,780.00 12822120040 ROLAND G KNYPHAUSEN 210 STERLING ST N 1 S820.00 S4,96000 55,780.00 128221200391 YANG KONG 1 222 STERLING STN 1 S820.00 S4,960.00 55,780.00 RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL STORM UNITS FRONT ASSESSMENT FOOTAGE TOTALS= 126 1607.52 $77,777.33 2007 ASSESSMENT RATES: STREET ASSESSMENT TOTAL ASSESSMENT 5752,931.98 5830,709.31 TOTAL = $830,709.31 RESIDENTIAL STORM SEWER = $820.00/UNIT RESIDENTIAL FULL STREET RECONSTRUCTION = $4,960.00JUNIT RESIDENTIAL PARTIAL STREET RECONSTRUCTION = $3 COMMERCIAL STORM SEWER = $16.40/FRONT FOOT COMMERCIAL FULL STREET RECONSTRUCTION = $99.20/FRONT FOOT COMMERCIAL PARTIAL STREET RECONSTRUCTION = $74.001FRONT FOOT NOTES: ' PROPERTIES LABELED "N/A" WERE PREVIOUSLY ASSESSED FOR STORM SEWER UNDER CITY PROJECT 73 -14 OR 78 -20 OR BOTH. 2 of 2 • EXHIBIT 7 Storm Assessments Agenda Item L7 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer SUBJECT: Interstate 94 Corridor Alliance — Approve Resolution of Support For State Funding DATE: March 2, 2007 INTRODUCTION A Joint Task Force, led by Ramsey County and Washington County, is proposing to study the needed improvements to Interstate 94 from St. Paul to Hudson, Wisconsin. The Coalition is being formed by State Senator Kathy Saltzman, District 56. Senator Saltzman has introduced Senate File 658 which requests state funding for a study of the needs of Interstate 94. The bill is supported by Representative Nora Slawick and Senator Chuck Wiger. The Coalition is currently being formed and the Council will eventually be requested to appoint a representative. Currently the Technical Advisory Committee of staff is preparing preliminary information. The Maplewood staff member is City Engineer, Chuck Ahl. Senator Saltzman is requesting that Maplewood consider the attached resolution requesting state funding for the necessary transportation studies to determine the corridor needs. A copy of the press release from Senator Saltzman is attached. RECOMMENDATION It is requested that the city council adopt the attached resolution supporting funding for the study of Transportation Needs for the Interstate 94 Corridor and direct that the City Manager have the resolution sent to Representative Slawik, Senator Saltzman, Senator Wiger, the Commissioner of Transportation, Senator Murphy (chair of the Senate Transportation Committee), Representative Lieder (chair of the House Transportation Committee ), Ramsey County Commissioner Victoria Reinhardt, and Representative Leon Lillie. Attachment 1. Resolution 2. SF 658 Press Release Agenda Item L8 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer Michael Thompson, Civil Engineer I SUBJECT: Pond Overlook Public Improvements (2161 County Rd D) City Project 07 -08, Resolution Ordering Preparation of Feasibility Study DATE: March 2, 2007 INTRODUCTION /SUMMARY Doug Andrus is considering development of the property at 2161 County Road D. Please see the attached location map and preliminary site layout. The city council will consider initiating the project by approving the attached resolution ordering the preparation of the feasibility study. Background Doug Andrus has approached the city regarding development of 2161 County Road D. Currently there is a single family home on the site, and the developer would be proposing five 2 -unit townhomes. On March 1, 2007 the city planning and engineering departments met with Mr. Andrus and received a petition letter from him petitioning the city to conduct a feasibility study for extending public utilities and a public road into the proposed development site. Mr. Andrus has paid $5,000.00 for city staff to complete the study. The developer will be making a formal submittal to the city for the proposed townhome development in the near future. This project would be fully funded by the developer. Staff will initiate the feasibility upon Council approval and will begin the feasibility process. Once the feasibility study is finalized, city staff would bring the study to the Council for approval and call for a public hearing. Budget A project budget of $5,000.00, posted by Mr. Andrus, would be established for the preliminary engineering required for completing the feasibility study. If extra staff time is spent during the feasibility process, the owner will be required to post additional funds. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the city council approve the attached resolution ordering the preparation of the feasibility study for the proposed Pond Overlook Public Improvements (2161 County Road D), City Project 07 -08. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Location Map 3. Preliminary Site Layout 4. Petition Letter RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF A FEASIBILITY STUDY WHEREAS, it is proposed to make improvements to Pond Overlook Public Improvements (2161 County Road D), City Project 07 -08, and to assess the benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: That the proposed improvement be referred to the city engineer for study and that he is instructed to report to the council with all convenient speed advising the council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is necessary, cost effective and feasible and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement, and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended. 694 0 r Tom .0 --- - - - - -, KAUI I I I I i I Playcrest Park LOCATION MAF 2161 4 N i OVERLOOK GRAPHIC SCALE 61 BURRING& LOT DETAEL(typ.) rtn.trr r roe, w r I SITE PLAN PRELIMINARY LAYOUT N 2- S-0 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------=---------------- $ L \nUtl\ CAD \06pnoJ \06588\06588- concepttlwg 2/5/2007 12 PM CST March 1, 2007 2440 Charles Street N,, Suite 210 North St. Paul, IVIN 55109 651-777-0111 Fax 651-777-0999 andrusbuilt,com I am petitioning the City of Maplewood to begin a feasibility study for the extension of utilities and road into the property at 2161 County Road D. Doug Andrus Andrus Homes RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR FUNDING OF THE 1 -94 CORRIDOR TRANSPORTATION FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS WHEREAS, the Interstate 94 (1 -94) Corridor is the principal east/west route for traffic thru Ramsey Washington, and St. Croix Counties connecting St. Paul to the eastern metropolitan area, and; WHEREAS, the 1 -94 Corridor is experiencing robust employment and population growth, and; WHEREAS, the 1 -94 Corridor is experiencing increasing levels of congestion, reducing mobility in the corridor, and; WHEREAS, there are no planned highway improvements to the 1 -94 Corridor in the Metropolitan Council's 2030 Transportation Policy Plan, and; WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has identified 1 -94 as a high priority Interregional Corridor and is supportive of planning for mobility improvements in the Corridor, and; WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood recognizes the need to plan for mobility improvements in the 1 -94 Corridor, and; WHEREAS, this planning should take a multi - modal, highways and transit, approach to maintaining Corridor mobility, and; WHEREAS, maintaining mobility is necessary for the continued prosperity and economic vitality of residents, businesses, and commuters throughout the Eastern Metropolitan area, and; WHEREAS, the first step in planning for a multi -modal 1 -94 Corridor is to complete a Transportation Feasibility Analysis which includes analyzing highway and transit improvements. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Maplewood hereby supports the multi -modal evaluation of the 1 -94 Corridor and a request of $1 million in State funds for the completion of the 1 -94 Transportation Feasibility Analysis. Minnesota Senate NEWS RELEASE Senator Kathy Saltzman (SD 56) 306 State Capitol, 75 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd, St. Paul, N/fN 55155 Phone: (651) 296-4166 — Email: sen.kathy.saltzman Gsenate.mn February 15, 2006 Senator Kathy Saltzman seeks investments in 1-94 corridor State Senator Kathy Saltzman (DFL-Woodbury) announced the formation of a new East Metro transportation coalition to advocate for greater investments in East Metro transportation and transit improvements along the 1-94 Corridor. Last week, Saltzman introduced SY 658, which calls for a transportation feasibility analysis of the Corridor and is the first step in developing a plan for improvements along 1-94 between downtown St. Paul and the Wisconsin border. The bill calls for predesign, environmental studies and analysis of alternatives, including busways and rail transit. An initial meeting of East Metro city and county officials to discuss transportation improvements along 1-94 was organized by Saltzman shortly after she took office in January. Following that group's initial positive reaction, the group was expanded to include officials from St. Paul and Ramsey County, as well. "The Metropolitan Council's 2030 Transit Policy currently does not include any transit or corridor improvements in our district, and after talking with a number of people it became clear there is a need to be proactive," Saltzman said. Saltzman said there is a great deal of excitement about this project and its potential to reduce congestion as well as stimulate economic growth and development in the East Metro region. She also announced that a joint meeting of the Minnesota Senate and House Transit Committees will be held on Wednesday, March 7, from 7-9 p.m. at Central Park in Woodbury. Saltzman will co-host the meeting with Representatives Marsha Swails (DFL-Woodbury) and Julie Bunn (DFL-Lake Elmo). Interested citizens are encouraged to attend. "The hearing will be a great opportunity for legislators to learn about the transit and transportation needs of the East Metro area and to hear the concerns and suggestions of area residents," Saltzman said. For further information about the East Metro transportation alliance, contact: Senator Kathy Saltzman, at (651) 296-4166 Washington County Commissioner Bill Kriesel, at (651) 430-6000 Woodbury Mayor Bill Hargis, at (651) 714-3500 Lake Elmo Mayor Dean Johnston, at (651) 777-5510 RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF A FEASIBILITY STUDY WHEREAS, it is proposed to make improvements to Pond Overlook Public Improvements (2161 County Road D), City Project 07 -08, and to assess the benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: That the proposed improvement be referred to the city engineer for study and that he is instructed to report to the council with all convenient speed advising the council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is necessary, cost effective and feasible and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement, and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended. AMMMEM-M IIIIIMIII�11�1 .s 4,d � ■1�1 -- _--- __ - - - -, KAU, i i I MEMEEPP - m - m ij Piaycrest Park C OUNTY ROAD i 4 N INS GIVERLOOK GRAPHIC SCALE — -'-- --� - ATE �WAY No. 594 BMDING& LOT DETAEL(tgp.) 1 S ITE PL PRELIMINARY LAYOUT r 1 _ 0 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------=---------------- SL\ 1111 CAII ti06proJ \Ob588\06588- concept11rg 2/5/2007 IM3-55 PM CST March 1, 2007 City • Maplewood '1902 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 2440 Charles Street N., Suite 210 North St. Paul, IVIN 55109 651-777-0111 Fax 651-777-0999 andrusbuilt,com I am petitioning the City of Maplewood to begin a feasibility study for the extension of utilities and road into the property at 2161 County Road D. n. Doug Andrus Andrus Homes DA:id Agenda Item L9 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: County Road D East Improvements- (TH 61 to Southlawn), City Project 02 -07, Resolution for Modification of the Existing Construction Contract (Change Orders 32 -39) DATE: March 1, 2007 INTRODUCTION Field changes have been implemented to complete the construction of the County Road D East Improvement project. Council approval of the attached resolution directing the modification of the existing construction contract, Change Order Nos. 32 -39, is required. Background On June 28, 2004, the city council awarded the construction contract for the utility and roadway construction to Shafer Contracting, Inc. in the amount of $2,364,326.51. Change Orders 32 through 39 are listed on the attached change order forms and are summarized as follows: • Change Order 32 ($253.63) The contractor encountered and removed styrofoam over the twin 48 inch pipes. • Change Order 33 ($14,839.70) Storm sewer revisions were necessary next to the wetland surcharge area to connect to a new drainage facility installed at County Road D and T.H. 61 • Change Order 34 ($10,734.65) The contractor was required to remove shredded tires for approximately 500 feet to provide for a clay cover between the tires and roadbed. • Change Order 35 ($5,040.70) Unexpected debris and rubble were encountered. The contractor excavated and removed this material. • Change Order 36 ($4,995.00) Thirteen concrete approach noses were required to be installed along with rock logs to control erosion. Neither item was included in the bid quantities. • Change Order 37 ($1,723.50) Trail closed signs were required at the Bruce Vento Trail during construction. • Change Order 38 ($57,502.95) Approximatley 10,000 cy of granular material was not available as planned from the surcharge earthwork and the contractor was required to truck in granular material. This change order covers the cost of the material and the haul time to bring it to the project. • Change Order 39 ($31,252.30) Originally the project was supposed to be complete on July 25, 2005. Due to delays and circumstances beyond the contractor's control, substantial completion was not obtained until the end of the 2006 construction season. This change order covers wage increases for the extended construction contract. Budget Impact The total amount of Change Orders 32 through 39 would increase the construction contract by $126,342.43. The revised contract amount would be $3,047,300.57. IVISA funds would finance $85,947.54 of the additional costs and the remaining $40,394.89 would be covered by city funds. Budget revisions were approved by the City Council on February 26 2007 to cover the additional cost for Change Orders Agenda Item L9 32 -39. The construction costs for this project were estimated in December 2005 to be $4,913,549. Final construction costs are $4,845,912. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution directing the modification of the existing construction contract, Change Order Nos. 32 through 39, for the County Road D East Improvements (T.H. 61 to Southlawn), City Project 02 -07. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Change Order Nos. 32 -39 3. Location Map RESOLUTION DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PROJECT 02 -07, CHANGE ORDER Nos. 32 through 39 WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made Improvement Project 02 -07, County Road D East Improvements (TH 61 to Southlawn), and has let a construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported that it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designated as Improvement Project 02 -07, Change Order Nos. 32 through 39, as an increase to said contract by an amount of $126,342.43, such that the new contract amount is now and hereby established as $3,047,300.57. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that the mayor and city manager are hereby authorized to sign on behalf of the City of Maplewood to signify and show that the existing contract is hereby modified through said Change Order Nos. 32 through 39 as a contract increase in the amount of $126,342.43. The revised contract amount is $3,047,300.57. UI RS Cozr� City C opy Contractor Copy CHANGE ORDER NO, 32 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Nalne: County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138- 121 -03 / 138 - 112 -05 Project No. 02 -07 Date: 9/29/06 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: The City of Maplewood directed Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. to remove and dispose of ten cubic yards of styrofoam material. This material was installed by the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District in association with the twin 48" storm sewer pipes that cross County Road D through the wetlands and the surcharge area. This change order accounts for all costs associated with the disposal including hauling and transfer fees. The work was performed in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work as specified in the contract documents. A prime contractor mark -up does not apply to this extra work. The value of this change order is $ 253,63. Contract Status Cost (Corrected Amount) Original Contract $2,364,326.51 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No. 1 - 31 $ 556,631.63 Approved Revised Contract: $2,920,958.14 Change this Change Order: $ 253.63 Possible Revised Contract: $2,921,211.77 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by Contractor Title Approval M lF.. y"'A 100% Local Funding Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #32, Page 1 of I Z O a O a U) Z LL O IL W F O W Z Z Z D O U a W O LL } J LL O Q 2 U C d tII � a � 0 O m rz° LL 0 O r U U L w lu Z S 0 Z U) Uw V5 E m a ° a� E 0 0 1 D fl a 3 N S g a p 0 3 0a O O w 00 a-i z e .Q Q Q O o � O F N L r r � � a M Q O r Z zcc LL f d O`0E � =�0 0 cD LL a m E E M 0 m O () C �tS O c m a l3 D n 9 yl N -r Q3 G U 4 � N C y � U n E C D — a G� IIJ N N Lo C N i6 E C � m 0 L � c Q._��fl o O Q `0 Z 0 T -2 O Q } N � I � 69 Efl E:�4A ffi 69 (fl LLJ t,-: O I uj . . . . ° . . . . . . . . . . . . . S F� O I ! 0 W z O Q � I 0 0 Z o o w w W a) J a Q O z v ~ LL O °a O OO W c Q. ~ ss p _c O W r ¢ z z �aw Ec a p Z 0 m� c O c J D z a. - I- W D atn a 0 t o v¢ o O Z ° o ° o 0 o 7 fG co Q ss e» us to ss to LU � N 0 Q o ff E u N n Q }} - If 11 O C z J �N ON ci> O O I U¢ a) z z D I w a 0 O a z O � w in v t7 J Q X J a J 'L F W a, wd F n0�c� a� O U QZ env a m v to Q�J4 U) > T Z h f p h h V N t V 0 N 3-- N Q k Efi ffl e9 H3 69 fA f`) Cl) (O } Q 4. 69 ss n ° ° 0 O 2 E w Z F ' i w 0 > U I { 0m E f mQ Lli - w i o z 0 a o as w w o ar ° ao i ~`°Dm z Ev�aU)U- m - UL 1 a m E E M 0 m O () C �tS O c m a l3 D n 9 yl N -r Q3 G U 4 � N C y � U n E C D — a G� IIJ N N Lo C N i6 E C � m 0 L � c Q._��fl o O Q `0 Z URS Copy CHANGE ORDER NO. 33 city Copy DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS Contractor Copy CI1 Y OF MAPL,EWOOD, R AMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA -4 copy Project Name: County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S,A.P. 138- 121 -03 / 138 -112 -05 Project No. 02 -07 Date: 11/20/06 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: Revisions to the original storm sewer design include the movement, addition and alteration of storm sewer structures as well as realignment of associated storm sewer piping at the lowpoint of the roadway, adjacent to the wetland surcharge area. Storm sewer piping was also adjusted along the north side of County Road D to connect with new drainage facilities installed under a different project at County Road D and T.H. 61. This change order accounts for all costs associated with materials, installation of four (4) HDPE storm sewer structures, one (1) flared end section, 15" HDPE corrugated pipe, and 24" HDPE corrugated pipe. The work was performed in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work as specified in the contract documents. A prime contractor mark -up does not apply to this extra work. The value of this change order is $ 14,839.70. Contract Status Cost (Corrected Amount) Original Contract $2,364,326.51 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No. 1 - 31 $ 556,631.63 Approved Revised Contract: $2,920,958.14 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 32 $ 253.63 Change this Change Order: $ 14,839.70 Possible Revised Contract: $2,936,051.47 Approval Approval Mayor Agreed to by Contractor By Its Approval Engineer P': Title UWAT Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #33, Page 1 of 2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 33 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Naive: County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138 - 121 -03 / S.A.P. 138- 112 -05 Project No.: 02 -07 Date: 11/20/06 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. Amount of Change Order No. 33 $ 14,839.70 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY The storm sewer system revisions specified on this change order are eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: Category S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Storm Sewer 100% S,A.P. 138 - 121 -03 1.00 $ 14,839.70 Amount of Change Order No. 33 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 14,839.70 C.O. #33, Page 2 of 2 Z O Q F- CC F 0 Z () Q O LL W � Q O U F 0 w U- O J ?a 0 O N LL W O Z CC 2Q LL O F N Q W J CJ} c 0 U 0 3 O � ro z > ° T U U O � a ct s O Q w m w z =0z (n U W 0 O U G fl m Q � E � 6 os � a 3 m S a > a +� L 3 T � C � 0 0 � Cn U w� 30 S Q d w O O N O r r1 n Q Q t17 Q Z F- � O � T O L c6 O_ � r — Q O Q p r O Z dl co iL oas m Z W � a j— U uj LL m N 1— 0 3 M Z O CI ro U LO V C U O m 0 U a a � m m L Q d � � C O � 25 O W N N C C O O iil C 9 U � C m (r} O In o -rod V Q CJ O O E C o U m Q o Z (n F- ° (n ( 4 ti r C5 ID m 0 cyi m m m Q 4n V} 4fs 69 N r O m O O m O J W (V Ci o t� d' � Q muO --m:n O T cc: n U (/j o�naao CL Sri <o Sri co ci S J W O CL O U z Q Q O � r z J z O O cc U o em u a U NFU Q o a`i O 1¢F Z a LL F O O ED o F faF a O W o.' W Q m w 2 o O W �o� 1-- o W �5 o o- E' O. H U a LL 0 o c Q 2 C z m 0 a j aQ °° cv W Cl) CL W 0 O N O O N N O m O CD O N O) N O (O I to N k\ C} N a N N z N c] (0 d m N LO ID (D m LO O d M O f- t M t 0 d' n m •- tt) O O N N O m Q (D Ee fA US U'3 ffl Efl 69 64 £f3 69 U4 V} V? 000 N w N N 0 M10 ', N m m d' A m ft7 O O] m O .- Q < m J w m w w m w N a J wa��(7'a Q m U m U m U m U m w o ro Q 6 o ro o m E U s O J N Q Ua aU U? U z w z 0 ��� O 'i v i ti U f� U m'� t� U Q W . O p 2 i t i w w w U m 0 tL } F W F- Z (%J (tJ SR (IJ iL tL d - O m J Y 9 ¢ U) z a U O a 0 0 t1] V O (n O U w W X J a 0 CL CL C I-F�a O w - f� U z O a Or rNro�mm N (� cn �m »US r U ¢ n o n z¢m(air° ice° F Z m 0 c0 0 0 N O (O . +12 N r E� N N r i O O m f� f.! � LD [� N N t N N (O O) m m to N (D O O tz 1� 0 Oi QY N m N m N -M d) N m m 7 N O N N 7 N O g m v Q b3 (s3 (�3 ffl Nj Ery EFj (�'i Efl Efl U3 £{} ff3 ce H', tf3 ff3 U`3 64 4f3 fA Q N CO m *- m m N CO N .- M m m � (O n N 2 th V' N N d O N Cl) (D N N N h d N N a O N Cl) (O N N N O It - N O r OS } m 64 69 Ut U9 Ey (A 'J3 s4 U4 (fl U3 69 ft? ¢3 EA Eta U4 o0 0000 :n000�no N N b O o f*) oua M V d N o m � O S S m L N O tL W J Q r Q w CC t d m N O w W N 0 W w O N(D Z O N U S m w N U c G S m a LL N C7 Q Q F— m m N __ m m N T > __ m CO W Q C 0 ° cO Q C O M Q �' (`� t6 N 0 0 ro ro m JJLL N O O f0 m W W� O Z J w J 0 'r O Q o Q m �.., d. m N r cr w N opw m z U d U) U- J CJ} c 0 U 0 3 O � ro z > ° T U U O � a ct s O Q w m w z =0z (n U W 0 O U G fl m Q � E � 6 os � a 3 m S a > a +� L 3 T � C � 0 0 � Cn U w� 30 S Q d w O O N O r r1 n Q Q t17 Q Z F- � O � T O L c6 O_ � r — Q O Q p r O Z dl co iL oas m Z W � a j— U uj LL m N 1— 0 3 M Z O CI ro U LO V C U O m 0 U a a � m m L Q d � � C O � 25 O W N N C C O O iil C 9 U � C m (r} O In o -rod V Q CJ O O E C o U m Q o Z (n URS0Gpy cis Oopy Contractor Copy `sr Wi g, Copy CHANGE ORDER NO. 34 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138- 121 -03 /138-112-05 Project No. 02 -07 Date: 11/20/06 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions: During earthwork operations for the County Road D roadway, Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. encountered shredded tires associated with the wetland surcharge (approximate Stations 55 +00 to 60 +00). Shafer was directed to excavate and remove enough rubber material to allow a suitable clay cover (four feet) between the shredded tires and the roadway base. Shafer performed the work in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work as specified in the contract documents. A prime contractor mark -up does not apply to this extra work. The value of this change order is $ 10,734.65. Contract Status Cost (Corrected Amount) Original Contract $2,364.326.51 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No. 1 - 31 $ 556,631.63 Approved Revised Contract: $2,920,958.14 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 12, $ 15,093.33 Change this Change Order: $ 10,734.65 Possible Revised Contract: $2,946,786.12 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by Contractor By Its Z Title Approval Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #34, Page 1 of 2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 34 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138 - 121 -03 / S.A.P. 138 - 112 -05 Project No.: 02 -07 Date: 11/20/06 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. Amount of Change Order No. 34 $ 10,734.65 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY Earthwork for this project is eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: Category S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Roadway 100% S.A.P. 138-121-03 1.00 $ 10,734.65 Amount of Change Order No. 34 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 10,734.65 C.O. #34, Page 2 of 2 z O H Q H cr O a U) z a F- LL O H a W 0 Q h O O w z z W U cc O LL } J Q 0 LL O } Cc Q F " <r 0 0 oo0 0 N (D to N Un m CJ N O o N a of v u1 co tti (o z 4of a) 0 co LL: vo o c mom; oM <t (d o m v v v a v m v O r m m N 7 7 n m M O O Q V3 b4 FA b4 (fl ffj U} {f}v? Efl Efl ff} EA 64 £'} zR 4fJ fA N O C N m N m W N-- O J w Q mromr N rro a o m vl Notes �r o O s m 69 ffi tfi V3 (A 69 fA fA E+', it} (fl S G? Uj o o o u� 10 1n Q N c') - O S J W m0 U z a a 3 a o o u� a I Z° N o o � 0 O o o N p c o Z Q N Om E c,j cli N W d co L D M o � 10x1 t O T o F m a . c m a a) °' `m m N cn . ° c c f o m o f a fl m E a o m WO Y tV N U U (D O J LL O y C 0 m O m 5 0 m O O ° O (qm Q Q m m m mz E Oz o U f- «a rj E E o o O LL, W ¢ Q U a3 63 s s m o o 0 Y W ¢ U o Q tE U 0 Y O m F o z O O ¢ i E o p n o a 0 a C -.j z Z m J J O U ¢ °N° cc W u)LLW C7 F 0 ono O O O O o O cq N a(R N (D m 93 0 O 0 O z (D tfi to Et} LL} [0 � N tD tD (D O r M M W o m () o a m O o in Q E 0 y w O J c v c o 4 0 > U ~ 2 F_�a o =s m O z J ��z J o¢ > F- z p c� tJS (1 LL U tU N h z Q� ) 0 }w o mZ W o U al U cc cL Y N N L y C F J U z p a`r G N C o '� m co O W U w W J F C) tL 1) {= X J J tl 0 }} OU U ~ r 2 F ¢ 1x1 1n m Q tL U ¢ q n U F0z N h n Z co co a f f� oam r O m m m U7 lU lam N O 1�mmm�coLOrl-tnr- N .- .- .- m d' N t� r r m (o to ttt o LO m m m O r o t0 r- <t m;o m cc m N Z (fl 4 i' LO N O O '.0 q L7 tfj tfj tf) �' f*3 �' V' d' O (D (D (D 7 O .- (D O 16 1� S m m m d' O O of I' fn CO m N N .- (4 C) � It) 7 m C'3 C *� Cl) � m N�� ( 0 N M Q H} ff} 63 d3 En Ef? EPr ff; £9 :>`} f9 Ef3 ffi b4 N3 £4 (fi £9 6 �fl fii 6 69 69 fA W N 17 U'I d' m M m N m v'} r N o (O U7 O 1n N M N m m M m O co u1 N c'3 fn C�} O O N i� O W I- N N N N N O O (7 ('') N d' N €� d' N N d' d' N N d' 0 N C1= O (O I M (D (O m m (� N d' n N 1 d' N M N (n } Q (fi 69 } Ff-1 EA <9 ffl N} ffl ffl 69 16 ul "I 64 69 69 U, (f 411 fA 11 "1 "1 EA £fl O O O O 1f7 1D O O u7 O :1) lU . O 111 � Lo m 17 1n in m 11) 1f/ z13 m Q ttj (D co d' Cl) m (h clI N M M m M r O r N D 0 S m Lo [L O 0 [L v s o F O m m N LL S W J O< N CC Q W O 1t') O Q W s LL < S Lr) Q O C O O N O O m W ♦- t c> a: as mE -I-Nms O N tll rnssss� O N ,y F m0 I N N O ccss� ai ( D O N E `) S cr p N O M J (D Nm USJO Nm S N m SG: N j < mks ` co mm a m2 Q U :5 Ulm Um0 y' [ -j 0 a 0 c D o 0 0 0 0 0 o p o 0 0 uj m O d a r O 0 O O 0 U •- C} O .- .- .-- r 0 r r r O `- :-' •- ` m S O O L_ m M. C N m M O N . O ff} N N N N tD O @ o N N U O O L 9 6 ii Z w � Q X Q O N O p f� s as v N O F' W U ca >> 'C 'C U p ttl LL m >> 'c 'c O m U t�3 m S n J U ,p N cd m J .p .O N 2 J J _O t6 c o U .O m M m J 9 N ctl J J U m Q 9 (6 r3 J J .o rii J O m S C U 0 J O ¢ j Q J <[ W m co O F m m p_ O F° N r W o 2 o n 0 0 0 ca mD Z J O Q D Q fl J C Ot C 0 U N O � a s o O m U c Q z Y r O U W U m Q � o � U} 0 a Q LU S Z Lu (o 0 O E o E E � 0 LU m � 0 3 v a �n a c s 3 T � U t7} U 00 CE cc a. , CS O O N g O E ill W O Qz 0 O 0 a N O (il LL p s et O O M r � O z LL C6 LL ¢� mm r O flas cn m tl ' r- 0 u cn LL m m L U E c ai v 0 d N 0 9 L I- C O U p N L Q d s a c o O N U � N � ca (n E l3J N s ' - 0 a c Q c m C O !n U U7 9 U E J O o E f�i1 ¢ o c c p U Y O N Q `o z U) U R S Cop City Copy Contr olor Copy CHANGE ORDER NO. 35 4 t Copy DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138 -121 -03 / 138 - 112 -05 Project No. 02 -07 Date: 11/20/06 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. uncovered significant quantities of debris and rubble in an area crossing the proposed roadway, east of T.H. 61. Shafer was directed to excavate and remove the unwanted material in accordance with MnIDOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work as specified in the contract documents. This change order covers all costs associated with excavation and removal of this extra debris and does not duplicate rubble removal paid for under contract unit prices. This extra work is not eligible for a prime contractor mark -up. The value of this change order is $ 5,040.70. Contract Status Cost (Corrected Amount) Original Contract $2,364,326.51 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No. 1 - 31 $ 556,631.63 Approved Revised Contract: $2,920,958.14 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 32, 33, 34 $ 25,827.98 Change this Change Order: $ 5,040.70 Possible Revised Contract: $2,951,826.82 Approval Approval Mayor Engineer Agreed to by Contractor By Its Approval Title Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #35, Page 1 of 2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 35 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138 - 121 -03 / S.A.P. 138 - 112 -05 Project No.: 02 -07 Date: 11/20/06 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. Amount of Change Order No. 35 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY $ 5,040.70 Rubble and debris removal for this project is eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: Category County Road D Roadway S.A.P. Differentiation 100% S.A.P. 138 - 121 -03 Fraction Amount 1.00 $ 5,040.70 Amount of Change Order No. 35 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 5,040.70 C.O. ##35, Page 2 of 2 z O F- CC O a z F- F- LL O F- a w 0 Q h O W w Z z w U It O LL r J O LL O } Q D U) 2 V a} 0 Cl m h L , � O LC 3 O m U � F a Z Y r O U LL U D � {n O Q u' LL w al �Fz - O z o U LJ a ci �i E a) a E = E t- ° O fl 3 m S o _> � 0 � 3 c � U w CC 2 d LL tP O N to N N O Z q� Q Cn f- O c�oN ? N � r � C b _ a t v a r d � f 0 O O Q E rllzw m d �Qw U (o LL v v a D 3 3 `o If O ail O U � N � d d -6 9 C O U C � tJ •` - O L T O O - c Q N i C o t a� � N O fl o ) � Z o O F O) C O v* O N Un U .� t� n � N U7 Q V N U) &4 E5 w (y V} fa V} 64 64 cq b3 fA bA N O O N N O J O O o , O m FO Q LL 3 �s U) ss D to Uj w G b N S J w OF cc D O Q U N UO X tfy 0 0 G X 0 p J O Q O d. O Q I c c 2 Q 0 C.4 n N O O O n- O _7 0 w r N EE EE Q W G7 N m E E 6} E ¢ o a N o` F- O O U a m o ¢ .o p F- z p w o.Lw Z Yl Y OF J �oF w L u Z �cc o rN �� OF ° b ( 0 0 o c z Z dz ay w U J dw0Qr O O J o a c\i 0 U' z D O w Q w Q a F ¢ h F- It 11 0Q O 0 0 J F LL ¢U(,3j �n N F - N 0 U w z O U J ¢ w O W ¢ CL s co z a 1- ¢ m o U) 0 w z J xJ E V a d U y a Q HI Q O F -gin- U) 0 w -� O Q O wmjr o to vi o G N � U)dm Z C O N N dt O LO m N m W 't 0 0 N 0 0 tt) to 0 0 vn Ln O �W Lq m - N O t0 114 O1 tD N m u: <t m m m O � a N r N C (O CO N O N 69 E3 fP. ff3 V} 64 d? ffi 69 V; {t} H} 64 6'} fF} b4 S9 if3 V3 69 #fl y F N O O M CO O O LO N m m N N O C O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Up N Q S } r t i t") O O 7 O m d �} (i} fg ffl Efl Efl Y- ii} Efl 69 6S hg w 64 Efl fP U 'D I o L o oIn in �n En �n in o our Ir r CV O � N O S ID W w O Q [c o a F 0 Q 0 Q a O Q 0 Q O S N F N z d N S {_ C, Q N N N N N CL CO Q w Q y �-� OLL QO m `m 'g -a: a`t �ncc )U tll O d N N O N N d N O S y O cm o 0 0 m m y c 1) 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 m m w G3 X o m I - s - O r w t - 1. �QG � O , > > m > > y > > > > F [-O LL 0] . . 00 m m 000000 w,� O W d F F- Q m r iD 0 - O N F w J m O O co O F m z m J 0 d� LL J V a} 0 Cl m h L , � O LC 3 O m U � F a Z Y r O U LL U D � {n O Q u' LL w al �Fz - O z o U LJ a ci �i E a) a E = E t- ° O fl 3 m S o _> � 0 � 3 c � U w CC 2 d LL tP O N to N N O Z q� Q Cn f- O c�oN ? N � r � C b _ a t v a r d � f 0 O O Q E rllzw m d �Qw U (o LL v v a D 3 3 `o If O ail O U � N � d d -6 9 C O U C � tJ •` - O L T O O - c Q N i C o t a� � N O fl o ) � Z o O U'i amity < qq,, ; g Goni ao v Copy A(0 Copy CHANGE ORDER NO. 36 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138 - 121 -03 /138-112-05 Project No. 02 -07 Date: 12/15/06 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions; Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. installed thirteen (13) concrete approach noses as specified in the construction plans for this project. Bid documents for this project did not include contract bid items by which to pay for the noses, either per each structure, or per the depth of concrete indicated on Mn/DOT Standard Plate 7113A. The Mn/DOT Estimating Office approved a price of $ 315.00 for each approach nose. (13 each x $315.00 =$ 4,095.00). And, to control erosion, Shafer installed ninety (90) lineal feet of rock logs on the project, at the direction of the Ramsey - Washington Metro Watershed District. The Mn/DOT Estimating Office accepted Shafer's lineal foot price submission of $10.0011-17 for this extra work item. (90 LF x $ 10.00 / LF = $ 900.00). Both work items are included in this change order. The value of this change order is $ 4,995.00. Contract Status Cost (Corrected Amount) Original Contract: $ 2,364,326.51 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1 - 31 $ 556,631.63 Approved Revised Contract: $ 2,920,958.14 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 32 -35 $ 30,868.68 Change this Change Order: $ 4,995.00 Possible Revised Contract: $ 2,956,821.82 Approval C.O. #36, Page 1 of 2 Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by Contractor B Its Title Approval Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #36, Page 1 of 2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 36 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138- 121 -03 / S.A.P. 138 - 112 -05 Project No.: 02 -07 Date: 12/15/06 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. Amount of Change Order No. 36 $ 4,995.00 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY Concrete Approach Noses, installed on this project in accordance with Mn /DOT Standard Plate No. 7113A, are eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: Category S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Roadway 100% S.A.P. 138 - 121 -03 0.846 $ 3,465.00 Hazelwood Street Roadway 100% S.A.P. 138 - 112 -05 0.154 $ 630.00 Erosion control devices for this project participate in state aid funding as follows: CategorX S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Roadway 100% S.A.P. 138 - 121 -03 1.00 $ 900.00 Amount of Change Order No. 36 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 4,995.00 C.Q. #36, Page 2 of 2 Contractor Capy CHANGE ORDER NO. 37 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138- 121 -03 / 138 -112 -05 Project No. 02 -07 Date: 12/15/06 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions: The Saint Paul Park and Recreation Board requested the placement of three (3) barricade - mounted, "Trail Closed" signs, on two segments of the Bruce Vento Regional Trail. Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. was directed to place one barricade w /sign on the trail south of Beam Avenue. The other two barricades w /signs were placed on the trail north of County Road D, one north of Hazelwood Street and the other south of Buerkle Road. The barricades and signs were installed on November 29, 2005 and removed on August 3, 2006. The value of this change order is $ 1,723.50. Contract Status Cost (Corrected Amount) Original Contract: $ 2,364,326.51 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1 - 31 $ 556,631.63 Approved Revised Contract: $ 2,920,958.14 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 32 -36 $ 35,863.68 Change this Change Order: $ 1,723.50 Possible Revised Contract: $ 2,958,545.32 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by Contractor By Its Title Approval 100% Focal Funding Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #37, Page 1 of 2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 37 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 138- 121 -03 / S.A.P. 138 - 112 -05 Project No.: 02 -07 Date: 12/15/06 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. Amount of Change Order No. 37 $ 1,723.50 This change order represents payment in full for three barricade- mounted "Trail Closed" signs placed on the Bruce Vento Regional Trail between November 29, 2005 and August 3, 2006. The devices are paid for using a Mn/DOT predetermined rate. After ninety (90) days of placement, rates are reduced to forty percent (40 %) of the ninety -day daily rate. MnDOT No. Qty 2563.613 3 2563.617 3 Description Type III Barricade — 8' Standard Sign Trail Closed 30" x 48" Daily Rate Extension Extension Per Unit All Units 90 Days $ 2.75 $ 8.25 $ 742.50 $ 1.00 $ 3.00 $ 270.00 Subtotal (90 Days) $1,012.50 MnDOT No. _ Qty Description 2563.613 3 Type III Barricade — 8' 2563.617 3 Standard Sign Trail Closed 30" x 48" Daily Rate Extension Extension Per Unit All Units 158 Days $ 1.10 $ 3.30 $ 521.40 $ 0.40 $ 1.20 $ 189.60 Subtotal (158 Days) $ 711.00 TOTAL (248 Days) $1,723.50 C.O. #37, Page 2 of 2 City Copy ']ultra &tog' C - Date: 1/22/07 Project Name: County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138-121-03 / 138-112-05 Project No. 02 -07 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions: According to the original contract quantities related to project surcharge earthwork, Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. expected to realize 15,393 cubic yards (EV) of excess salvaged granular material. Actual surcharge settlement and subsequent material placement decreased the expected excess to 4,842 cubic yards (EV). This change order compensates Shafer for the value of the unavailable excess select granular material at a rate of $ 4.45 per cubic yard, the haul time cost difference between County Road D and the source of Shafer's replacement material, plus the agreed upon rate of $ 1.00 per cubic yard for the unavailable common excavation quantity. (((15,393 — 4,842) x $4.45) + ((15,393 — 4,842) x $1.00) = $ 57,502.95). The value of this extra work is $ 57,54235, Contract Status Original Contract Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No. I - 31 Approved Revised Contract: Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 32 — 37 Change this Change Order: Possible Revised Contract: Approval Cost (Corrected Amount) $2,364,326.51 $ 556,631.63 $2,920,958.14 $ 37,587.18 $ 57,502.95 $3,016,048.27 Approval Agreed to by Contractor By Its Approval ' CHANGE ORDER NO. 38 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Mayor Engineer Title Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #38, Page 1 of 2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 38 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name. County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138 - 121 -03 / S.A.P. 138 - 112 -05 Project No.: 02 -07 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. Date: 1/22/07 Amount of Change Order No. 38 $ 57,502.95 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY Seventy -five percent of the contract quantity unavailable material (Mn/DOT Specification 1903) less the actual amount of unavailable material, covered by this change order, are eligible to participate in state aid funding at the Mn1DOT Estimating approved rate of $ 3.50 per cubic yard. The eligibility falls within the following participation category: Category County Road D Roadway S.A.P. Differentiation 100% S.A.P. 138- 121 -03 Fraction Amount 1.00 $ 23,460.50 ((15,393 CY (EV) x 0.75 (Mn/DOT 1903)) — 4,842 CY (EV)) x $ 3.50 /CY = $ 23,460.50 Amount of Change Order No. 38 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 23,460.50 C.O. #38, Page 2 of 2 City cap CHANGE ORDER NO. 39 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138 - 121 -03 / 138 -112 -05 Project No. 02 -07 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. Date: 1/22/07 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: According to the terms of this project's Contract Agreement, entered into on June 28, 2004, between Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. and the City of Maplewood, work on all phases of the project was to have been completed on or before June 25, 2005. Due to delays and circumstances beyond the control of Shafer Contracting, substantial completion was not accomplished until the end of the 2006 construction season. This change order accounts for wage and benefit increases Shafer paid their employees from June 26, 2005 through December 2006. The value of this extra work is $ 31,252.30. Contract Status Original Contract Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No. 1 - 31 Approved Revised Contract: Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 32 — 38 Change this Change Order: Possible Revised Contract: Approval Cost (Corrected Amount) $2,364,326.51 $ 556,631.63 $2,920,958.14 $ 95,090.13 $ 31,252.30 $3,047,300.57 Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by Contractor By Its Title Approval Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #39, Page 1 of 3 CHANGE ORDER NO. 39 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name. County Road D / Hazelwood Street Improvements S.A.P. 138 - 121 -03 / S.A.P. 138 - 112 -05 Project No.: 02 -07 Date: 1/22/07 Contractor: Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. Amount of Change Order No. 39 $ 31,252.30 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY Wage and benefit increases for this project are eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows (based on project pro rata): Cateffory S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Roadway 100% S.A.P. 138 -121 -03 0.65 $ 20,314.00 Hazelwood Street Roadway 100% S.A.P. 138 - 112 -05 0.09 $ 2,812.71 County Road D Storm Sewer 75% S.A.P. 138 - 121 -03 0.09 $ 2,812.71 25% S.A.P. 138 - 112 -05 0.03 $ 937.57 Total State Aid Eligibility $ 26,876.99 Amount of Change Order No. 39 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 26,87699 C.O. #39, Page 2 of 3 CHANGE ORDER DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC O CITY OF „ !! 94 ! ! Laborer 101 Operator G2 G4 G5 Teamster G1 G3 6/24 -12/24 2005 4/9/06 - 4/29/06 $20.80 $688.88 4/30/06 - 6/24/06 $109.48 URS Reg. Wage OT Wage Total Wage Benefits $654.75 $400.50 $1,055.25 $1,935.67 $118.30 $94.95 $213.25 $1,225.80 $235.20 $184.80 $420.00 $2,419.20 $5.10 $2.40 $7.50 $45.22 G3 4/9/06 - 4/29/06 $640.75 $3,690.22 $364.20 $295.05 $659.25 $3,786.08 $188.80 $124.50 $313.30 $1,834.65 $972.55 $5,620.73 Mason 406 7/10 -11/12 2005 Wages 2005 Benefits $69.30 $71.92 $141.22 $183.92 $2,809.77 x $11,430.54 Ii: Reg. Wage Laborer 101 1/22/06 - 4/29/06 $215.75 4/30/06 - 11/18/06 $1,693.60 Operator G2 4/9/06 - 4/29/06 $20.80 $688.88 4/30/06 - 6/24/06 $109.48 G4 4/3/06 - 4/29/06 $28.30 $12.75 4/30/06 - 11/4/06 $378.00 G5 4/23/06 - 4/29/06 $1.60 $14.55 4/30/06 - 9/16/06 $98.10 G6 4/23/06 - 4/29/06 $3.20 Teamster G1 4/9/06 - 4/23/06 $37.70 $45.22 6/11 /06 - 6/17/06 $24.00 G3 4/9/06 - 4/29/06 $80.00 5/7/06 - 9/9/06 $100.88 Mason 406 4/23/06 - 4/30/06 $24.64 $5.65 5/1/06 - 8/12/06 $382.70 0.62 $4,551.83 OT Wage Total Wage Benefits $90.75 $306.50 $580.13 $688.88 $2,382.48 $2,745.40 $2,688.98 $3,325.53 $12.75 $33.55 $197.77 $64.31 $173.79 $231.00 $14.55 $42.85 $256.50 $247.05 $625.05 $1,326.60 $0.30 $1.90 $12.15 $45.22 $143.32 $313.50 $1.80 $5.00 $48.40 $1,025.46 $2,385.92 $16.80 $54.50 $330.08 $5.65 $29.65 $86.95 $39.60 $119.60 $718.20 $28.82 $129.70 $376.00 $333.45 $1,511.23 $16.82 $41.46 $56.26 $143.19 $525.89 $514.30 $567.35 $570.56 2006 Wages $4,615.24 x 0.62 _ $7,476.69 2006 Benefits $7,793.24 2005 and 2006 Wage Difference (including 62% Markup) $12,028.52 2005 and 2006 Benefit Difference $19,223.78 TOTAL $31,252.30 G.O. #39, Page 3 of 3 �r r k , -CW N'ry RoAp R EALIGNME NT SFGMtNT I D D a r Agenda Item L10 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, City Manager FROM: Chuck Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: County Road D Realignment (West) Improvements (TH 61 to Walter Street), City Project 02 -08, Resolution for Modification of the Existing Construction Contract, Change Order Nos. 29-40 (T.A. Schifsky Contract), 4 -5 (Palda Contract), 10 -11 (Imperial Contract) DATE: February 28, 2007 INTRODUCTION The city council will consider approving the attached resolution directing the modification of the existing construction contract, Change Order Nos. 29 -40 (T.A. Schifsky Contract), 4 -5 (Palda Contract), 10 -11 (Imperial Contract). Background In April 2004, the City Council awarded a contract to Imperial Developers for the construction of the Venburg /Guldens frontage road. In September 2004, the City Council approved the award of a construction contract for this project to Palda & Sons, Inc. The project included construction of utilities and roadway for the entire County Road D West improvement. Unfortunately, the County Road D West project did not begin as anticipated due to problems coordinating the various area improvements. Palda & Sons, Inc. requested an increase in the bid in excess of $300,000 to have the delays extended into 2005. Negotiations with the contractor resulted in the elimination of the street construction portion of the contract. The eliminated roadway construction was then rebid in the spring of 2006 and a construction contract for the roadway was awarded to T. A. Schifsky & Sons in the amount of $668,162.93, resulting in a $40,000 cost savings to the city. T.A. Schifsky: Change Orders 29-40 During construction there are often many unforeseen changes and conditions that require revisions to the original plan. A brief summary of the necessary changes is listed below. Details of each change order are also attached. Project delays due to construction coordination with adjacent developments resulted in extra work such as erosion control, repairs to the temporary road and cost escalations due to the project delay. Change orders 31, 34, 36 and 37 total $22,036.67. During construction all efforts were made by the city's contractor to install and maintain erosion control to prevent sediment from entering downstream water bodies. Adjacent construction on new developments and several intense rainfall events caused erosion and sediment to enter the LaMettry pond. It was necessary to remove sediment, reshape the pond and reseed to restore the pond. Change orders 33 and 35 total $26,946.49 for this work. Adjacent residential and commercial properties were disturbed during the construction of County Road D. Improvements and repairs to these properties became necessary for restoration. Change orders 29, 36 Agenda Item L10 and 38 account for this work and total $21,315.02. Several items were not included in the original bid and change orders were formulated to cover the additional items. Change Order 30 for $1,237.50 was necessary for additional landscaping required at Venburg Tire and LaMettry Auto Body. Change Order 32 for $925.69 was needed for bituminous curb along the north side of County Road D to control runoff and prevent erosion. The contractor also earned a bituminous incentive for meeting density goals for the project. Change Order 40 for $6,370.15 covers this cost. Palda and Sons: Change Orders 10 -11 Additional work outside of the original contract was performed by Palda and Sons to the LaMettry Pond outlet. Trash guards were added and revisions to the outlet control structure were required to increase the dead storage of the pond. These change orders total $3,682.32. Imperial Developers: Change Orders 4 -5 Change Order 4 is needed for the televising of the 42" HDPE storm sewer pipe to check for deficiencies. Televising storm sewer was not included in the original bid. Change Order 5 reduces the contract amount. These change orders reduce the contract by $39,558.09. Budget Impact Change orders 29 -40 for T.A. Schifsky would increase the construction contract by $78,831.52 from $999,155.38 to $1,077,986.90. State Aid has approved funding for $45,530.21 of these additional costs. The city is responsible for $30,300.98 and Vadnais Heights is responsible for $45,530.21. City funding is provided through the assessments to the developer. Change Orders 10 -11 for Palda and Sons increase the contract from $753,748.20 to $757,430.52. Mn/Dot has approved funding for $3,367.32. The remaining $315.00 is the responsibility of the city. The Imperial Developers contract is reduced from $428,287.00.34 to $388,729.25. These change orders fall within the revised budget approved by the City Council on February 26, 2007. The construction cost for this project through 3 contracts was estimated in December 2005 to be $1,933,776. The final cost of the construction was $2,153,295. The added work was due to the addition of pond work at the LaMettry Auto Body site that was added to the project after December 2005. This pond work was necessary to meet water quality improvements for Kohlman Lake. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution directing the modification of the existing construction contract, Change Order Nos. 24 -40 (T.A. Schifsky Contract), Change Order Nos. 10- 11 (Palda and Sons) and Change Order Nos. 4 -5 (Imperial Developers) for the County Road D West Improvements (TH 61 to Walter Street), City Project 02 -08. Attachments: 1. Resolutions (3) 2. Change Order No. 29 -40, 4 -5, and 10 -11 3. Location Map RESOLUTION DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PROJECT 02 -08, CHANGE ORDER Nos. 29 -40 (T.A. Schifsky Contract) WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made Improvement Project 02 -08, County Road D Realignment (West) Improvements (TH 61 to Walter Street), and has let a construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported that it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designated as Improvement Project 02 -08, Change Order Nos. 29 -40, (T.A. Schifsky Contract), as an increase to said contract by an amount of $78,831.52, such that the new contract amount is now and hereby established as $1,077,986.90. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that the mayor and city manager are hereby authorized to sign on behalf of the City of Maplewood to signify and show that the existing contract is hereby modified through said Change Order Nos. 29 -40 as a contract increase in the amount of $78,831.52. The revised contract amount is $1,077,986.90. RESOLUTION DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PROJECT 02 -08, CHANGE ORDER Nos. 4 -5 (Imperial Developers Contract) WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made Improvement Project 02 -08, County Road D Realignment (West) Improvements (TH 61 to Walter Street), and has let a construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported that it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designated as Improvement Project 02 -08, Change Order Nos. 4 -5, (Imperial Developers Contract), as a reduction to said contract by an amount of $39,558.09, such that the new contract amount is now and hereby established as $388,729.25. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that the mayor and city manager are hereby authorized to sign on behalf of the City of Maplewood to signify and show that the existing contract is hereby modified through said Change Order Nos. 4 -5 as a contract increase in the amount of $39,588.09. The revised contract amount is $388,729.25. RESOLUTION DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PROJECT 02 -08, CHANGE ORDER Nos. 10 -11 (Palda and Sons Contract) WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made Improvement Project 02 -08, County Road D Realignment (West) Improvements (TH 61 to Walter Street), and has let a construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported that it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designated as Improvement Project 02 -08, Change Order Nos. 10 -11, (Palda and Sons Contract), as an increase to said contract by an amount of $3,682.32, such that the new contract amount is now and hereby established as $757,430.52. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that the mayor and city manager are hereby authorized to sign on behalf of the City of Maplewood to signify and show that the existing contract is hereby modified through said Change Order Nos. 10 -11 as a contract increase in the amount of $3,682.32. The revised contract amount is $757,430.52. URS Cc' City Copy CHANGE ORDER NO. 29 Contractor % s py DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62- 619 -026 / 138- 020 -30 Project No. City Project 02 -08 Date: 12/1/06 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. corrected poor soil conditions associated with City Project 02 -08 (04 -04), Grading, Utilities and Paving for Venburg /Guldens. In 2004, clay soils underlying the southern portion of Gulden's parking lot were removed and replaced with materials capable of bearing loads and resisting deterioration. Final asphalt was not placed on the parking lot until 2006 when the adjacent public roadway improvements were completed. The City of Maplewood agreed to pay the following improvements: Description Unit Quantit Unit Price Extension Aggregate Base, Class V Ton 541.0 $ 12.26 S 6.632.66 Controlled Fill CY 1,030.0 $ 3.00 $ 3,090.00 Wear Course— Asphalt Cost Escalation LS 1.0 $ 2,456.00 $ 1456.00 TOTAL $12,178.66 Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,16193 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Change this Change Order: $ 12,178.66 Possible Revised Contract: $1,011,334.04 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by Contractor 1 B U Its P �ta_-j Title Approval 100% Local Funding Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #29, Page 1 of 1 CHANCE ORDER NO. 30 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, ME INESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62- 619 -026 / 138 -020 -30 Project No. City Project 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. URS Copy City Copy Date: 12/12/06 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions: The Mn/DOT Office of Estimating approved prices shown, as submitted by C. Mogren, Inc., for the following plant stock and material installed at the request of the City of Maplewood: Mn/DOT No. Description Qty Price Extension 2571.501 Coniferous Tree 8' Ht. B & B (Austrian Pine) 1 EA $ 325.00 $ 325.00 2571.502 Deciduous Tree 2 -1/2" Cal. B & B (Flowering Crab) 2 EA $ 225.00 $ 450.00 2575511 Hardwood Mulch, Type 6 14 CY $ 25.00 $ 350.00 Subtotal $ 1,125.00 The prime contractor is allowed a ten percent mark -up. The value of this change order is $ 1,237.50. Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,162.93 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 29 $ 12,178.66 Change this Change Order: $ 1,237.50 Possible Revised Contract: $1,012,571.54 Approval Approval Mayor Engineer Agreed tom Contrac By Its Title Approval 100% Local Fundbig Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #30, Page 1 of 1 CHANGE ORDER NO. 31 DEPARTMENT OF PTJTLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 / 138 - 020 -30 Project No. City Project 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. URA cay o� Copy COPY Co py Date: 12/18/06 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: The City of Maplewood directed T.A. Schifsky and Sons, Inc. to repair pavement settlements that occurred on County Road D where the temporary roadway was placed. The repairs were necessary to maintain safe traffic flow along the roadway. The pavement settlements were caused by late season 2004 construction work, poor subsurface soils and periods of heavy rains during and after the work. All repair work was performed in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work as specified in the contract documents. The value of this change order is $ 2,400.50. Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,162.93 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 29 & 30 $ 13,416.66 Change this Change Order: $ 2,400.50 Possible Revised Contract: $ 1,014,972.04 Approval Approval Agreed tc By c Engineer Its Title G Approval Mayor Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #31, Page 1 of 3 CHANGE ORDER NO. 31 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62- 619 -0261 S.A.P. 138- 020 -30 Project No.: 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Date: 12/18106 Amount of Change Order No. 31 $ 2,400.50 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY Because the settlement repairs took place on County Road D, the work is eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: Category County Road D Roadway S.A.P. Differentiation 100% S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 Fraction Amount 1.00 $ 2,400.50 Amount of Change Order No. 31 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 2,400.50 C.O. #31, Page 2 of 3 z O F- Q f- O Q. z Q cr LL O F IL w 0 Q f— N W z z_ 2i LL O w Q CO Y itl u d t— O 2 0 LL fl iu t7 m o m z o0 m a Q O it d W W rIz U) 0 W a �; ° _ O I- W U ?4 C E >v � O 3 � O E � a a - Z ! o rr z c C? Liil co W CL CC d Li Lo o O `i} N z� C T Q � � a O L O O �?oN t m � u O m � Z a W o ° Q oo Z W D it L € a o nLL II C i5 t} O N R£ N to s3 U II m c 0 a� 'a L f- O C � U C � O C) io o. U N N n a - U N C e7 G - - O N U C L N N G W L n C G O 0 CL m c ° m N n U N _ Q m 5 m 'o Qw Q L C C o .� U s a o z to c � N o Om tom W o O N rn O O N N 6 Cl) to ff3 � Cf} Hi 6^ Uj o o L? sn u, U7 0 o o 2 J Q ~O w U H a a C 3 D z ¢ o z z a O 2 ° o S o O ¢ O W N N� t£ w m U d u Q m u d W C b O Q� u F- F 0 o o z 0 o o ct?f - o � o co a o of O w C ltl Q Z-- Q ° z Q 2 �n ` O O 4 n II a p I7 U) f-n. 0 o cQ z Z CC) D J 0 F 0 Irl w CO d. w Q N O 0 Z co tti ro ct> tD Q 64 fR tFi ft} to m H m Q W m a o W C U) Q Q F o Q ¢ >- jr N Z J �O o 0 U- 0 Q CV Ud rd' Z� z X 0 ~ z a Y o Q 6 U w w U)i z O U c~i� 0 LLI XJ � fL a > d a0itt U Q <t n a It n U R v a a D u) »aoo��ow ° 'ZQrin U) - � L7 O LO N 6 N N C� m co 0 7 7 N 11 L) (D z ui a v v Cl) o o ui r th m ca co D a N r m m LO Q <t L m m LO m m ,- N Q I sg t-�r ss 119 ss e9 s» t» s r ss 60 co En W I UN5 co cc, M 6 m (D N Q t4 N N N N N N N N O r m } 60 cl? 69- ffi U3 O o L� UO If) n L O n o W tf: L7 tSJ r tV r tj m N D O W w u} (n °ofd 05 N Q N If J UJ ` N J Cn W S J Q m YQmu�Ydmt�m o N N N W W J Q O O N O O O N N J m ❑] W Q Q X �� o Q I LL p .U4 N .> N N F LL W O J J o a W J a J w o Q 0 Q m N N r D O O W Q �' to F- O ao 0D �2 Z a !n 2. U) LL J II C i5 t} O N R£ N to s3 U II m c 0 a� 'a L f- O C � U C � O C) io o. U N N n a - U N C e7 G - - O N U C L N N G W L n C G O 0 CL m c ° m N n U N _ Q m 5 m 'o Qw Q L C C o .� U s a o z to CHANGE ORDER. NO. 32 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 / 138 - 020 -30 Project No. City Project 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. UR I ,� , o r y L Qontraetor Copy Coo" Date: 12/19/06 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: The City of Maplewood directed T.A. Schifsky and Sons, Inc. to place approximately three hundred (300) lineal feet of bituminous curb (Stations 25 +50 to 28 +40) along the north side of County Road D. The curb was necessary to control roadway surface runoff and side slope erosion. The original plan pavement width on the north side of the road was not adequate for placement of bituminous curb. This change order covers only the necessary pavement widening work (approximately 18 ") for placement of bituminous curb. The work was performed in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work as specified in the contract documents. The value of this change order is $ 925.69. Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,162.93 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No,: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 29, 30 & 31 $ 15,816.66 Change this Change Order: $ 925.69 Possible Revised Contract: $ 1,015,897.73 Approval Approval Agreed Con � . B � � Mayor Engineer Its r� Title Approval Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #32, Page 1 of 3 CHANGE ORDER NO. 32 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 / S.A.P. 138- 020 -30 Project No.: 02 -08 Date: 12/19/06 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Amount of Change Order No. 32 $ 925.69 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY Asphalt widening on County Road D is eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: Category S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Roadway 100% S.A.P. 62- 619 -026 1.00 $ 925.69 Amount of Change Order No. 32 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 925.69 C.O. #32, Page 2 of 3 Z O Q N O Z � D Z O CC U F- Q U w O U N 0 a o w LL � J Q Q 0 (1) LL w O Z_ 2E Q U- 0 D W N Q N T Y L U C 6 cc ° O v C) rr � F- o Cl) z a w C) 0 � o � U} cc � m O ¢ w w w z co O Lu 0 = 0 a= o d N E y � O C fl d - 6 a S {[ T c U Lu U w T If a_ W Ci7 O N a N 0 Z m Q Cn kF O CQ 4 O co N O 3 No 9 o � s � co C, 0 a C�0 z o LL N 00 � O O 0 Ec rn� d L Q 0 U m a D v m U `o C O rJ C a a ti N N II U C C � N � C _ O N � C L � co ,C w � co 0 J C L U m N � t/E� G R L U N o¢ >o C) 'm U U Y N Q n p z 1 ]II T a Ef; Y b3 I O oc�r .- J* W O N M Q w (f; H3 {fir Uj O O O Cc N N N T J O O z 'G U ¢ O z ° z J a O c ' o i 0 n m m to ul F co m U r ¢ Q co w a o o Q C U ¢ © 00 z 0 m 0z o U Lu N 2 O �0a °' n ai h te a. a 0 0 c Q z 0 a »a0 ioa 0 cc (n a_ w 0¢ r N h O � � co N to A z o �D r LO m N O N N M R Q 63 � ss ttr m w � m Q w 2 � o Q :�iQ7 a_ z J O LL = O <UUO u7 N Z " z x ro W IL U) z Y L O a O O U z O U P tu ¢ OU a, Q < Q C N ; O ¢ O C,0 � r�U Q� F- F� a 0 u3e w a w U ° z ¢ca ° c G ° 7 @ m ( ( N r `� ° c LO� O Z :*� 0 to In to CO v V �n m cn N o u� u� cr v v cv r a b4 64 ff3 (fl Efl '�} EA 69 69 E9 fA to Efl 69 W O 6t m m w N t0 ¢ W LO c1> N N N (V N N N N r OJ O } 00000 0 O O U N N N N N N N (Q O J W to Q N N Lu Z O N W j O Q > O ) F m w � O Y a 0 0 o m Co o QQ w 0 0 0 o f f_ LL E p J z .Y in 6S c6 J J rtf J W W J J w 0 v o a IL Fa- N P w O `° W m m L m-3 m z a,aU)L - m a D v m U `o C O rJ C a a ti N N II U C C � N � C _ O N � C L � co ,C w � co 0 J C L U m N � t/E� G R L U N o¢ >o C) 'm U U Y N Q CHANGE ORDER NO. 33 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITE' OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSE I COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62- 619 -026 / 138 - 020 -30 Project No. City Project 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. UW3 t; "' Y' W C ontract or Copy 1 copy Date: 1/5/06 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: At the request of the City of Maplewood, T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. commissioned their subcontractor, Lino Lakes Landscaping, Inc. to perform final turf restoration work around LaMettry Pond. Lino's work was limited to seed and fertilizer distribution and the placement of erosion control blanket. This change order represents complete compensation for the placement of seed and blanket and was performed in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification ( 1901) Extra and Force Account Work as specified in the contract documents. The value of this change order is $ 7,763.69. Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,162.93 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 29, 30, 31 & 32 $ 16,742.35 Change this Change Order: $ 7,763.69 Possible Revised Contract: $ 1,023,661.42 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Alzreed-to--b�v Contractor n By l Cie. , Its Title Approval Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #33, Page 1 of 3 CHANGE ORDER NO. 33 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62-619-026 / S.A.P. 138-020-30 Project No.: 02-08 Date: 1/5/07 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Amount of Change Order No. 33 $ 7,763.69 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMNIARY Turf restoration associated with the LaMettry Pond is eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: Category S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Storm Sewer 75% S.A.P. 62-619-026 0.75 5,822.77 County Road D Storm Sewer 25% S.A.P. 138-020-30 0.25 $ 1,940.92 Amount of Change Order No. 33 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 7,763.69 C� C.O. #33, Page 2 of 3 Z O 1- Q O �- LL Z U) :3 z O � Q U O O F- Ir a O W LL F- Q O N LL W O z >- Z Q LL 02 O LU F N Q N N C Y O Q a O 0 3 O ar o a 2t t- o m z a 0 LL m O o CE < w Q w w z x0 . 0 LzIJ ar� 0 o t- a O C) a � O O Qp E ID II -6 a � o T O C o U {} tLl F LU LU � Q tt LL d O N 0z N it Q Q Q Lli � O L m m � O c6 N n co O Sc d Z m L C) ° _ ° _ a 5 o LF Ot Q 0 u;:L 6 m 2 U E a 0 0 Q e� O O U 0 ib C O � � m Y a a a � c v O U N w r N N C C O O C U m ���ro Lo t+l Q N d u m E c �oE�� E L c Qr C O 0 N U u N O <t `o z co o °I ah # ; m o om m z r o s ua � � � _ _ LO Q � fA (f� ( O O° t� s w Q 0 - Efi ff3 &3 ;fi 69 Uj o o a o [[ CO 9 m m J Q U O z � Q 3 Q o O J O M o z Q Q O 60 ¢ O 0 n m° 0 2 II ¢ o ¢ F °o o� y C O O Z O 'a c Gl o ~ o W O C W J Q `o J ap ~ n 0 DQ z z w w a¢ N d C F om•- ZrcYi� d ai cv � N O t0 co r lt) d m N Q} cn a tip 0} Q o f r o � Fw- Q w J n ¢ J Q O Q w U Q O Z J Q n m F. r \\ O ~O IL o ° Z O ? LO N O Q Z F- z O(Z!; 0 QW O Icn Z 0 Q L o w 0 in W J J � a y F a I Q < f - I (0 W J O w 0 w v U ? v ° v 0 `ruF -'d' 0 tee» - U Q r v n Q o> IL (A ° N N N z N 0O r r N =n N a m m s O Q < r N } Ef} +f} to 64 it; SS 0 cc m 0 0 m m 0 s ° o m D O S m ff J H z N w tt7 w E O Z F m w o °° a CO mf N 33 fil c X Q F- c O W o zap 0 o J W m om ¢ rQ 4 LLI (D O w m LL 'r'3 07 m, m Z O m N C Y O Q a O 0 3 O ar o a 2t t- o m z a 0 LL m O o CE < w Q w w z x0 . 0 LzIJ ar� 0 o t- a O C) a � O O Qp E ID II -6 a � o T O C o U {} tLl F LU LU � Q tt LL d O N 0z N it Q Q Q Lli � O L m m � O c6 N n co O Sc d Z m L C) ° _ ° _ a 5 o LF Ot Q 0 u;:L 6 m 2 U E a 0 0 Q e� O O U 0 ib C O � � m Y a a a � c v O U N w r N N C C O O C U m ���ro Lo t+l Q N d u m E c �oE�� E L c Qr C O 0 N U u N O <t `o z co CHANCE ORDER. NO. 34 gala Copy DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS rempC CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62- 619 -026 / 138- 020 -30 Project No. City Project 02 -08 Date: 1/8/07 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following Provisions: As part of LaMettry Pond sediment removal work, Rams y-Washington Metro Watershed District required the City of Maplewood to install and maintain a stone filter dike in the pond's outlet channel to help protect downstream waters from sedimentation. The stone filter dike was located on the south side of Beam Avenue adjacent to LaMettry Pond outlet piping. Larson Contracting, a subcontractor of T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc., performed this extra work in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work as specified by the contract documents. A prime contractor mark -up of ten percent is allowed and included in this change order. The value of this change order is $ 1,747.72 Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,162.93 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 29 -33 $ 24,506.04 Change this Change Order: $ 1,747.72 Possible Revised Contract: $ 1,425,40914 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by_Contractol /) By Its Title Approval I Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #34, Page 1 of 4 CHANGE ORDER NO. 34 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 / S.A.P. 138 - 020 -30 Project No.: 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Date: 1/8/07 Amount of Change Order No. 34 $ 1,747.72 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY The placement, reconstruction and removal of the Beam Avenue rock filter dike is eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: Category S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Storm Sewer 75% S.A.P. 62- 619 -026 0.75 $ 1,310.79 County Road D Storm Sewer 25% S.A.P. 138- 020 -30 0.25 $ 436.93 Amount of Change Order No. 34 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 1,747.72 C.O. #34, Page 2 of 4 Z O a F CC O �- a Z In Z) z O cc U F Q IL W O U N 0 a U- w U- � J a Q H C2 In U- W O Z x - a LL O D UJ F- W a Cl) U O U Q � 6 CL a O 0 y Z _T O m o CC � m O Q W W z i0z U) 0 w � 3 0 1- O t3 E > 0 2 O a C) N 0 � L � S o w i- 0 00 w w d w co 0 a 0 Q Q � O F ° a o o LL r` N m = s a i✓ to Q O � � � o _ O o w 05 d Ci O U u> LL I 0 t � . Q o `o u c m O c ro 0 C� - o a m � r a a 7C) CO7 G C N - O i U Q> N c N N W Y N N C C O i O c L6 u Q m 7 N � E C O E 2 T O ti3 Q > C O o m U O N Q o z co I- N !: � 17 Q L ER V: E V3 69 ff3 VS 6 Q N W co I- r Q v r- v W F- to sg Efl 69 uj O O Q O w I-- fl: U z O Q o �� a z tr O Y ° _ z Q o W U U i > C O c.O 0 U 0 O _ - ° W t O Cc o LL o z X �.__ m m 0 ° U O W c uj ° w U H U.1 Q ¢ Ea a 0 z f- a Q o c Q z W D J Q O-1 o\ O CL m W W 0 <. C7 Z 6 0 r r N o O N Q f:: 6S bS Vf co w r F Q tr F g o a w m Q O z J jr 6 F LL U Ow d z O J u7 N Q O C) <w h O c ° t7} J F w s a z0 F Q Y o o ¢ - -IC a O a z F co U.1 Q <QTQ rnw 0 F w LU Oz u) O ¢ U 1� Q O U Q o O c -5 c o J< ° z r o v z o 0 o Lo o m r co O co Q W Q m m un u7 2 N v } Q D - sg 0 co 0 2 co O I :E I I I I I w cl 9 2 — o o W m w } 0 N o Q < w d Q O m `o X Q F IE it w a Q ° w `� 0 � J W O r O 0.. O O m N Q co f F' O m cc O a co z m O to o_ D cc w LL J I 0 t � . Q o `o u c m O c ro 0 C� - o a m � r a a 7C) CO7 G C N - O i U Q> N c N N W Y N N C C O i O c L6 u Q m 7 N � E C O E 2 T O ti3 Q > C O o m U O N Q o z co z O Q F O Z z 0 cc C) LL W O U F 0 a 0 w U- � J_ O N LL w O Z jr ga LL O W W Q 0 U c O It J s U Q � o 0 O t � o z T O lt. m O � o m tC � �0 U � Q €13 � Z S 0 z Un U to o= o� �a U r vi v v > 3 0 0 E g � a c a� rc � O `c 0 2 0 w U 00 LL LL LL LL 0 0 0 01 Z E d � �Q ui o Z t O 0 0 � N L 0 t v s a tin d ° ' Z cfl LL a {} QO LU if s . O 0 co LL m 0 � c O b G v � a a a U C C N O N 2 U) N ` o N E N U) .� w m C O 4 n — E a 9 C) � 2 N m E C o E Q} Q L O C C o a < a Z n c m Cl) m o a O m � co ce Q d ifl 3 EA {tJ 64 b9 Vj tq ct# m r Q F �.0 ff ss cts � s� ss � O O EC V S Q ~ � S w U 4 F z ¢ 00 Z Y -o m J O m m 2 z O ¢ O a 0 i E C O U O LL m E _> O C J N w w E o Q L L tl L O a L1J Y N > n C : m J Q. O F- m O c m U (y F O O O Z U Qtr a a Z0 O C w J Z U co F cs vO J o p F F. U n }- ¢ z ¢ a O t- a 0 F a a p 2 J� a C 0 a P Z ¢ p w 0) m w U¢ N 1 L� F- Z O Q w Q Z ~ Q ti 0 J ¢ w m U Q 0 z k O J a � O d ¢ o 11 it 0 Q 0 LL O E O QUaCiUZ in �v F N F- z o ¢ U y w IL 4 Y o ¢ J 0 Z 0 ¢ r O U~ m 0 c� z J X J a O w M ¢ ul U) 0 n U Q O � I-- j tw- o sv sit w o > O t F m 0 m p ro O 0 D O 1 r N N Q 54 f 3 EJj Efl 64 EF3 In w d � Er3 � O C O S W QS LL H ° o � F N 0 N ° U W W C7 G Q Q U) M � W O �d0 �m J O Q o U Q F- LL J m LL t J L O W z O t > Q ~ o N a m- 0 ~ a ¢O Occ D a m 0 � c O b G v � a a a U C C N O N 2 U) N ` o N E N U) .� w m C O 4 n — E a 9 C) � 2 N m E C o E Q} Q L O C C o a < a Z n City ("Cloy CHANGE ORDER NO. 35 1>mIT&ctor Copy DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Al �P,� _0 CC y CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62-619-026 / 138-020-30 Project No. City Project 02-08 Date: 1/31/07 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: LaMettry's Collision allowed the City of Maplewood use of their driveway property during the excavation and restoration of LaMettry Pond. The driveway was used to access the pond and as a haul road for removal of excavation materials and delivery of restoration materials. In return for the use of the property, the City agreed to rebuild the driveway to equivalent or better condition than before trucking began. T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc., performed this extra work in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work as specified by the contract documents. The value of this change order is $ 19,182.80 Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,16293 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 29-34 $ 26,253.76 Change this Change Order: $ 19,182.80 Possible Revised Contract: $ 1,044,591.94 Approval Approval Agreed t by Con) By Its Approval Mayor Engineer Title Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #35, Page I of 4 CHANGE ORDER NO. 35 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 / S.A.P. 138 - 020 -30 Project No.: 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Date: 1/31/07 Amount of Change Order No. 35 $ 19,182.80 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY The repair and reconstruction of LaMettry's driveway is eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: Category S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Storm Sewer 75% S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 0.75 $ 14,387.10 County Road D Storm Sewer 25% S.A.P. 138- 020 -30 0.25 $ 4,795.70 Amount of Change Order No. 35 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 19,182.80 C.O. #35, Page 2 of 4 Z O 4 OZ LL cn D z Ir U F- Q O U F- M a O w "- � J Q Q F.. 0 O LL N O W Z Q 2 < LL O w U) Q Y L C) I 0 S � � ry n ¢ 5� � C a Z - Q CJ W m' Q � O (S 0 J o w ¢ w W W F z = G Z cn () ul o = o t- a_ p t7 r E o � Q ° E p a� rs � a Li" S T � c U W t- C1 LIJ ff � w w O O N 0 cD Z N � G U) �r 0 0 > N O CL C7 O O � � N r _ m �c cm0 d 0 Z fl LL 2 'C5 0 0 w , Z W CJf d L ? O p Cn LL g S R Y) E i 7 i C O Z rll O C L t} O U C �p O G � O ro U v a N N N N C U - ro � G O C L Qj i m .� W - C > O O Q C 9 (9 U N s v ' m E c E L C U 5 m o Q =� O O Y iD N ¢ O z Cn ct O 0 O 0 - ®� } o m - -- 0 m o N �• Z c 6) O !J r A to n O 0 0 uj N G O CD O O 0 if) N r h a �r0oo Noo �t N C) tno 0 - o0 00 Lit F cli to N N 0 0 Cl) O M Cl) N N d 10 ON o 1 V) 10 010 ¢ W - b9 69 69 V) 64 69 69 EA 69 fF3 ffl Cn O O , to S? , O O N N N Cv N CD c9 03 V S w O F Q Q U 0 N o E `0 m U � `- m E `o cc z O Oo�� m o'er 0 o � CD ° oa -o �� 0 d m H N c6 Cn N N N {T N m F N ro Qy F U O fl W N N ❑J N J 'O 4) N J N p X w U O a •'7 X Q O C U Y� Q a N C ril ¢ CL W W J .ro W W-j U O >� S N W .c3 cj CL O O Q F O� as�� oY W -� 2 �2 J Qu. °o Z Lo CO � c� LL 0o �o C? 0 CY 0 c ro Q a� c Q 15 Ty F z w o :c w J d F' C} (5 Cl) C�CRJm U) O -t ot J oZl- U N o w N f f m r m Q w F ¢ E m a t FT d a. z n p m 0 5 c a z m J ° Q O D 0j 00 Joo O w cn n. w U Q +- N F- {7 O D 0 O 0 N O m Z V m m t 7 co d c S 0 m m T m m :5 N N ¢ 69 09 ft O O � m � r � cc 69 69 E Q ° r v cc O d Q W m M U O Q W 0 c d O mD1 O II It 0 O 2i °- Z ui c�vr N W ar 0 ¢UGtrz r z U O Z m Q W Er fL d Y O F C0 z0 O U CS to O U 0) w ¢¢ o x t- J w a 0 p r w a J Q ¢ W J o tL t` U Q U WO Jrm�1w O06969fj v U rn m o tntnU) 1()000 P O O m +- O cON r w r0) cD O 00 N t9 t7 ov i� <t i� 0 to r N �t mca D c� D o O Z co (n N f O .- m c) N O {7 Cl) (V N (D N m f` N OJ 0 N N ¢ E9 64 f9 69 69 69 � U C9 (9 fn 69 F9 FA 69 fA Eq F9 69 69 Eq E9 H3 69 Eta FA N3 b4 69 (fl W N r tov0 m O N m cD to O N room N N In O no m o� N m 00�o O to q O m ov V) tP N r Q 0 <O CD N Cl) f� ff O r r to 07 Cl) CD Ct4 f` CD N M ( O 0 N fJ O r (r N N N N N N N N t� N N N N N N N N N N N ( N N } ¢ [L 69 64 6° 69 69 69 �} 69 64 c9 69 69 V3 49 E9 E9 69 69 Cfl U7 69 69 b9 69 69 U, O Q O O tD tCJ Lq tD U? N O O O O t0 O t0 'o O O to O u1 v7 LO W 7 M r r N N N N N N N N CD N N m r 0 Cl) D O w J Q m w S> ° W m Q V S: w w cr m [[ ¢ w F a m� o S� m o ma mOW o o p ti) w w or O N CL o m ° W N cD �Y O W �r 2 °t`C N Y N W Y r r0 m {L W Y r0 0¢ C7 �- N N Y W N N O S m 11 C\J F m W <j N V N W m N CL W +- 7 N `~ `m N N o CJ o N c a o= ... {!$ m y} o c W m o �� m a ¢m�0p� cN°om � ¢� 0 ¢mo�� ¢ m Ld ¢ x¢ m 5"a O O `m L G m ° v O Y °s.n.> 0 0 0 roL N > N O �.?.? N N 0 a� 0 '�O 0 m.n 0 � 0 0 `) 0 ¢ rr r w W W C m J d ro J P {J) ro m J J a C) Y -1 Co ro [L 2 o ro W J O ro J ro o m J J m J O CJ lo EL J ro J {Z �. 117 J 0 G r ro J >¢ o J ¢ W m O Cl) r N r m © 000w �s rt Q co Z m W m m m 4 1 1 p F {n d (n W J Y L C) I 0 S � � ry n ¢ 5� � C a Z - Q CJ W m' Q � O (S 0 J o w ¢ w W W F z = G Z cn () ul o = o t- a_ p t7 r E o � Q ° E p a� rs � a Li" S T � c U W t- C1 LIJ ff � w w O O N 0 cD Z N � G U) �r 0 0 > N O CL C7 O O � � N r _ m �c cm0 d 0 Z fl LL 2 'C5 0 0 w , Z W CJf d L ? O p Cn LL g S R Y) E i 7 i C O Z rll O C L t} O U C �p O G � O ro U v a N N N N C U - ro � G O C L Qj i m .� W - C > O O Q C 9 (9 U N s v ' m E c E L C U 5 m o Q =� O O Y iD N ¢ O z Cn Z O F Q F- 0 O Z a = z O � U F- Q L- W O O F 0 U- w w � J F- Q O LL O Z > Z Q U- 0 FW- U) Q U) U L ) Q � O 5 3 O � t- o Z _> 0 O W O o [n S � 7 O C- Q W W to 0 W o = o i- C p U � vi > o O O E E 0 a 2 b � fL S a O 0 Lll t CE Q. W co O N O co Z N C C Q - Ct} Q t o z m O > o N tL N 0 T N t c {B � O m Q O O tc a z W Q LL C} U7 ti O p 0 6 s0 M 2) a O C} 0 Q m m D m 0 7 O 0 a ro U a a L 2 d a U C C - O p�j U i L � N N W L N 0 Y �c c c 0 E - E c m 0 u� m � 2 d 4J E c o 5 m 'o m Q L o o .� U U Y N O N Q O Z n m m y 0 O t N N m l9 Q U} i•� E73 69 b4 VJ att matflo u N I? W ri Cl) o Q O N N M w H U3 ffl n O O CC U) m m N S Q O Q O U � a o E Z J Q Z (c) O O p a O F N cc) o J rr} U p fl- (D uJ Rl -W Ul F Jx W 7 W J rt CL a J Q W o Z O p Z O cW J o F pulu a Z Jm{7 cn Za Z �r 0 rm ¢ ~O �� a Win. 2 a � a. p H a m Q o c 0 Q z CY W () W W 0 a r N F F C'S m O m O r D r 0 0 O O ]ICN r N (- P') m t` t` ,- n Q ffi H3 £9 V} ,r°� LLI Q w s4�b <02 ro o a F W N _ U a O Z J a m Q m ¢ } 111 �i F O F F- m m O J 10 N 4 F_ LL @J CG co _ 0 () 0 <ul o Y m U O J J LL a U) F- 2 Z p z a p F 1- O z ¢Qt to c°a r O U OU co U xJ ¢ _j Q a r vt ? L= NNO ¢ co 'o ¢ w n 0 J o LU D ° w &� v 0 » ss v U F- a u° ¢�Jam> Q co 0) a- z ° (n r oo�mo ou�v o 0 o my o m v F- co r c� m o m r (o m m r o co co vi or 10 (n a (n Z 177 J V O N ('�3 O N N (o t0 O N G) �' (V h (O h (6 N M O Cl) m O N N O N N O N N ' N r O R Q ff; b9 ffi b4 fA EA 69 EH {y} b`} b9 �3 64 V3 E/3 64 tfi ff} 69 VT W Lo N co O N m t N m o N L7 Qcoui d0i Ln m gwlil (0 V 0 'T U7 N Ic) co ffl f/3 69 V3 Efl 6 �F Ei3 I'l Ef3 H} EA 00 000000 0000(no o CO N m r w r co r m r N N M N O W LU H zz 6 J O m ° oCT O F a J20 co U W Z LL Q F Y Y N N W 0 0 >> rn m o o F - 2 1- CL O > W O Q LL g d' N J CO C O 0 21 0 0 0 0 m W 2 o E E°°" 0 0 N N J J N N :J ¢ F LL m L E O J `o `0 ' o a m a' 2 F Z y a LL L J J O W D n C C W J O J w O r J 0 Q¢ NF mvIrr F �r rmr rN O W W F- Co C7 m LL m Co Z m O J j ul C CO LL U L ) Q � O 5 3 O � t- o Z _> 0 O W O o [n S � 7 O C- Q W W to 0 W o = o i- C p U � vi > o O O E E 0 a 2 b � fL S a O 0 Lll t CE Q. W co O N O co Z N C C Q - Ct} Q t o z m O > o N tL N 0 T N t c {B � O m Q O O tc a z W Q LL C} U7 ti O p 0 6 s0 M 2) a O C} 0 Q m m D m 0 7 O 0 a ro U a a L 2 d a U C C - O p�j U i L � N N W L N 0 Y �c c c 0 E - E c m 0 u� m � 2 d 4J E c o 5 m 'o m Q L o o .� U U Y N O N Q O Z n CHANCE ORDER NO. 36 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 / 138- 020 -30 Project No. City Project 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Date: 1/31/07 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions: The City of Maplewood directed T.A. Schifsky and Sons, Inc. to repair the existing gravel shouldering (Station 22 +00 to Station 25 +00) along the north side of County Road D. Maplewood also directed Schifsky to recondition the existing riprap lined drainage basin (Station 26 +50) on the south side of County Road D. These repairs were necessary to help prevent shoulder, side slope and ditch erosion. This change order also includes gate valve adjustments that were not in the original scope of the project. All repair work was performed in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work as specified in the contract documents. The value of this change order is $ 3,184.68. Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,162.93 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 29 -35 $ 45,436.56 Change this Change Order: $ 3,184.68 Possible Revised Contract: $ 1,047,776.62 Approval Approval Agreed to b r By _G Engineer Its Title Approval Mayor Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #36, Page I of 3 y � Date: 1/31/07 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions: The City of Maplewood directed T.A. Schifsky and Sons, Inc. to repair the existing gravel shouldering (Station 22 +00 to Station 25 +00) along the north side of County Road D. Maplewood also directed Schifsky to recondition the existing riprap lined drainage basin (Station 26 +50) on the south side of County Road D. These repairs were necessary to help prevent shoulder, side slope and ditch erosion. This change order also includes gate valve adjustments that were not in the original scope of the project. All repair work was performed in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work as specified in the contract documents. The value of this change order is $ 3,184.68. Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,162.93 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 29 -35 $ 45,436.56 Change this Change Order: $ 3,184.68 Possible Revised Contract: $ 1,047,776.62 Approval Approval Agreed to b r By _G Engineer Its Title Approval Mayor Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #36, Page I of 3 CHANGE ORDER NO. 36 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 / S.A.P. 138- 020 -30 Project No.: 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Amount of Change Order No. 36 Date: 1/31/07 $ 3,184.68 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY The shoulder rehabilitation on County Road D is not eligible to participate in state aid funding under this project because it is outside the project limits. Riprap removal and replacement at the storm sewer structure is eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: Category S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Storm Sewer 75% S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 0.75 25% S.A.P. 138 - 020 -30 0.25 Gate valve adjustments are not eligible to participate in state aid funding. $ 138.26 $ 46.09 $ 184.35 Amount of Change Order No. 36 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 184.35 C.O. #36, Page 2 of 3 z O E- a w o z D Z O < U F Q LL Uj O U N Ir ' o w LL � J a Q 0 O O LL J) O Z >- Z Q LL LL 2 2 O w Cl) a a s U} r a U � F O Z >, W U C, m O � o m :n co O w ¢ W W LLI LU Z r- S Q Z u) t} w m co q � 0 F- a- 0 0 F- 0 a C) F � Q a a � 2 a o 0 w 0 lll � CEcc LL LL tQ O 0 N Z r tl a 2 � Q � F O O X p O cli N T co f a t c m a � O z � � O O w Z W ct a- CL ?O CC O(6 LL O N co O Z `m 0 1, rn U O J OG C O C> o o. m m m � a a � U L � C O il N U L L N C ,. t7 L 'o o O m E C) Oi 9 C) lP C JS y U t0 rn m•- ro 2 m ¢ m -E C . O 0 U U C � O N Q Q Z (n F o t t T IUT7T l l O q I t z m ° o m n 1 I ¢ o oco w o l- r n3 d F Cl) ¢ N W C/) L o L I ) L o W m m ro 2 J F O w U O z _ C U Q Q O ¢ Z J Q a ' O cr F S F U O ° m m w r cc x U 0 < < a ¢ W IL a ❑ C C 0 a LL F O O O Z O a) —mgt th CE1 OZ C o ~ O W Cn O) O r N Q O Z Q Q a 0 O 2- n a p f m a a 00 a c Q Z Z m- o 0 1-- Q O CC w (n d w 0 Q N D U' Lo N U 3 Z r m. -Nd O � v cc N J N N it Q cc m 0 J Q ~ w co U Q 2' n. Z ho �0Q O U a LO U 2 4 z 00 N O U� G" Q w O o m iL z00 Q m O � .c 4w0 O0 J E ¢ao J a >cn w a Q QN O w 0 0 Ft-LO— w D W !- Z m J LU J f- 0 Ls3 EH w a ¢ nu 1 if - z to °) N f F r- co N N mr- to (D NSA h N v {'7 ono t N 0 (O 0 m V n N z Z co r >` ai co ai co of yr d= d v co 0 y r m LO v t ao � 69 c» ss fs &� tf3 � E» bs Q�l GI) vj v} w ¢ o tD N o v (O N o v to tii w CV m e < N (V N N N N m Cl) } L ft3 EA Ef3 Vj ER LID m U) o a Cl) of tO LO w (o a o f0 b m o o ,- O J L W CC O d d Z N N W a W o W (� SW r0 r0 r0 SW p ¢ j M { t=L w Q= 0 = 0 3 0 O J m n-n ¢ �'_ ¢ ter¢ ¢ m ¢ ea ar a� G `m � Q h 0 0 O O 0 6 0 0 ¢ F LL O J m J J ro ro J J J J b J J W J w O J W b W J Q Q N F¢-- m N O d J m O W 0 W F C7 ¢ W 0 ca O ::) Z ¢ n n a s U} r a U � F O Z >, W U C, m O � o m :n co O w ¢ W W LLI LU Z r- S Q Z u) t} w m co q � 0 F- a- 0 0 F- 0 a C) F � Q a a � 2 a o 0 w 0 lll � CEcc LL LL tQ O 0 N Z r tl a 2 � Q � F O O X p O cli N T co f a t c m a � O z � � O O w Z W ct a- CL ?O CC O(6 LL O N co O Z `m 0 1, rn U O J OG C O C> o o. m m m � a a � U L � C O il N U L L N C ,. t7 L 'o o O m E C) Oi 9 C) lP C JS y U t0 rn m•- ro 2 m ¢ m -E C . O 0 U U C � O N Q Q Z (n CHANGE ORDER NO. 37 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 / 138 - 020 -30 Project No. City Project 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. �a RS, ,, ci Cy cop' nlrolor Copy Date: 2/7/07 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: This contract included a bid item for furnishing and installing split rail wooden fence. The fence protects pedestrians using the bituminous trail paved under this contract from a drainage pond constructed by a private developer in 2005. Since construction of the trail was delayed until 2006 due to adjacent development activities, it was agreed the fence work would be performed in accordance with Mn/DOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work. The value of this change Order is $ 8,870.45. Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,162.93 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 29 -36 $ 48,621.24 Change this Change Order: $ 8 Possible Revised Contract: $ 1,056,647.07 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by Contractor By Its Title Approval 100% Local Funding Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #37, Page I of 2 L Q F o 2 0 o LL F o N z U o C3 o � m N O U � ¢ w 0- w Z F- - zUz U) U w H Z O U ° T Q 13 F- w °- O U b -- O w v r E Q ° 0 U- y O L a < r = > Q Sc C N C W F U 00 FL LLL O N m o� z E J � y Qn ui o ar O � E 2 co U �— (D M O d m O Z mLL a ° p ooh n a_ ¢ O C� to tL v O L U Q C � O o m U a a y y y n Cl U) - o y U C L a) i U! C E C w y� a} C C O o g N E d E Q N 4 E c _ E � `o E c .-0 a, < C U a U o a c `o z rn 6 O 6� r �2 C O eP f- C z o C SJI L O c o 0 0 r ¢ y} s3 vs s>:r es o a?� w o a r n o K} 64 O J ri o c n N = N N J <1 °O F O fl LU O Q r o z� z J a O O aC IL = U O I- a) Cc X� a UQ o ft a o z 0 a Cc y x Q w O o o O o OwL' a F- cnn N Q ° Z Q Z ` O r w a wrma f' Z p co Q o o a m ' IL > 1 ¢ w z U U,0Q 000 ° °0° cl Z Qj 0 0 0 0 0 ° O o 4 O N O V 61 N V N i r r 7 r (O !D N M Q fA b4 ff} £Pf � ffl 0 Lo o 0 o-11 w co 0 s4�»� N N p Q c c V �" `n it 3t * ~ Q (� m } IC }- L 0?@ j Lo z o Om ` �h w 0 z w'o a 0 m U n X zm Y ° o a w G_jU5 z� O y r!1 as o d O a U r U H U 3 o W J < 0 LL (� X J .J CL � a) " � � r o o 0 0 Q ¢¢ 'o¢ O w t J O wO o O Lo wp � C> M U a Qz -j f c Ov>eaLU °t Q m ! r rn U1 LL Z N (D N t4 O N (o l o co r W N n +- N m C; o M z W �(A ttc��o d' ('�'J V [O N co N to m N O (c r N N r N N r O m 0 N M Q b4 N3 64 EA hf3 4H ER di 69 Efl {f} ffi ER {A £f} �? 64 w q m m N 0 m N o O N O m (n Lo to r mr u3 (o r u> c Q �{ N (+j N co N r N O (n C) N r O N Cl) (h f� N N O m CV r r r Q � 61) ° 0 000 000 oo(o o u U t 7 c0 m c4 W m z 0 (r w m CO to to m m o ca a o ° o ° o N� N y N y y N y y N y y (n w w r Q w r iL O ~D u cn U) m y UED m n Q U) �¢ �o a �ot�7LE a ¢Hw 4) na�w Q0 7Q -jm w m r ' m Q V O d) G t1 C w o cc LL a Q m Ou- -j OtL �O w w� O w° < N m O m r a ¢W J O oU0 tL co ca a 0 0 co _j D 2 ¢ co a- (n it J v O L U Q C � O o m U a a y y y n Cl U) - o y U C L a) i U! C E C w y� a} C C O o g N E d E Q N 4 E c _ E � `o E c .-0 a, < C U a U o a c `o z rn CHANGE ORDER NO. 38 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 / 138- 020 -30 Project No. City Project 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. URS Copy City Copy Contractor Copy Date: 2/7/07 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: This change order compensates T.A. Schifsky's subcontractor, Lino Lakes Landscaping, Inc., for extra grading efforts performed outside the limits and conditions of the contract. The work was necessary to correct incomplete grading and restoration work by private utilities and other outside contractors working along the project roadway. Almost all of the work was performed to eliminate or minimize disturbances caused by roadway construction adjacent to private residential or commercial properties. The work was performed in accorcance with Mn/DOT Specification (1904) Extra and Force Account Work as specified in the contract documents. The value of this change order is $ 5,951.68. Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,162.93 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 29 -37 $ 57,491.69 Change this Change Order: $ 5,951.68 Possible Revised Contract: $ 1,062,598.75 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to b Contractor By Its _ Title Approval 100% Local Funding Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #38, Page I of 3 Z Q E- 0 a z Q F LL O F- IL w 0 a F N w z z z D O U a w U O LL r Q v U- 0 r Q D (n ME Y J O C T (f7 S 0) d O � O Q � C) LL Z 0 Ora c� pry N 0 U Q w Cc w Z W Z (J u o � 0 afl N C Q° _ m 0 0 o o Om CE = T Q U w } LIJ T � LL IL O 0 G} ID � O Q 0 cli � F O O � N ao w O E T M ' r r 0 M O � o m0 Z in a 0 Q 0 0 w �Zw �Q0 U u7 U- g CS a m 6 Z a 0 m O O i C O (� - O d O N N d d U NNC C � G ro O U L r U ro c w U) y C O O E C c 8 m C IIS fq U � yr ¢ Q L O C C O o� o Y N Q `a z cn 0 T . - ` Q 69 (f#di 64 G 3 (f3 dfit (o ff W d N t 7 o 'D Q W co N CO 64 D 64 Uj 99 Q O S N O N Q ~ W U !L O z � Q 3 o ZO c z Q O o rn o U m O W O IL €L O O F Z r F O a O Z 2 cno d J a O 6 1 }_ U w Q 0 W F Oz 117 a �,•,�� E¢ F- 3 = a a. co a 2 0 w U) LW U Q CS Z 0 w Q Q o F U � � w Q c ¢> u u °o s F a F O :5 LL O F J o o (n N � fl ((4 V F O ( U a O Y Q IL U) 2 z O F 1- O U °' z co D F U W O } N a u7 ¢ U Z F- F — ¢ LU U - O U ~ w �! c I;i uj a ll o co U) � - z Q ff ° ( [D O N O r 0 -T u7 (t7 O N O f- O G` O it In N 7 (n co O (� O O m M Z lf} tD CO CO CV a] (O (D C\l r—co m¢ v co n 0 m t(3 v_ m oc Q {f} 64 64 64 6'3 Q"3 U3 ( a fp, 69 63 b4 69 65 cq fi3 (f3 69 F- r N f Lo N N L N r N N N r N N r O } 69 64 69 69 (i3 b9 64 64 65 64 64 £4 co O O C4 t4 O O d' 7 O O (*} co 0 0 q V 0 0 f'7 C*i O Ul O m D O o Ir N Cc N ff N ,- U W � p[L 0 u, o� 0 u� oQ 0 v1 0 ti v7 0 2 N m O w O� ow O W otC o m co W n to N (D N O N (D F N tff w (9 0 N N T N c0 z N . N c0 r N cp C7 Q O y 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° 0 0 ° Co LL m O ro 0 O m o O m O O m 0 w m X U a A a s m a 6 °a Q F I C E J s co 3 0 (n J .Y 0 's o U) J '� o to J W J LL O J w m" w O F Q F *- O¢ N F W N O F cc O W < U) z O -1 {t co LL (n LL J g CS a m 6 Z a 0 m O O i C O (� - O d O N N d d U NNC C � G ro O U L r U ro c w U) y C O O E C c 8 m C IIS fq U � yr ¢ Q L O C C O o� o Y N Q `a z cn z O Q F- 0 F O Z �D a° �a O LL U F- CC ' o w LL F- Q O LL w LL W o z >- Z Q LL O W Q N s 9 J O U} .0 U i O O O 3� C m � o z > O ct O � o C£ � m U F Q W z = O z m m cD a= O F �fl () F c} N > > p !z � C p ❑ - - a � o m £L S Y o 0 o ` c n 6 U iil LIJ LIJ 00 Cr CE L1 LL O O N O cv z r Q� � F m 0 jy0N 1+ qy W r m o cl a rn 0 N�❑ a 5bE tr Q Q (J uj LL a z U O c s c� r" O O o ` C} o a � m m � � C s0 O L ` NEB "- O 9 E a� c o rn c c r n v u� L6 w d b N Q E c o g E L � .� o > c L c U o a°)i F m� { m m N r O TI N N N bli U) 69 cc W . CD Q 0 G Q F r N fi m co (�) 61) Uj Ln a 2 ri co LE r Q w � 0 � U z O Q U 3 Q� O O m o z F m O O a U O W F- U o 2 a W m b o ❑ LL a z o O o o O U p F 0 z c W J F- U)0 0 � U ss c� F ui Q Z z Q Q �� Q O n� 30 2 n. n. 0 U) o n o c a Z z ¢ W D O O 1 p p (n d w U Q ,- N F- a z O Q ss sn w Q 0 J Q U Q LL 1 O w z F o o U U¢ (} Q F_ O ❑ a z a ; O W z 0 Y Q F, O ° z co O U U) ,' J Q X -1 <FQ J ii iL U C U) w0 n0 ¢r0 W ¢� O az �m�FW- o w o a m Q D colt J Q r z Q m A 0 r_ n F i m O O c�v to m� V o z r c0 m m (b G) m r` w in m r O o m N 2E Q 69 Eq E/3 £4 Si fA iA 6 EH 69 b4 H} 69 lf} LU F < r h r d'ai N r �m N r poi N r Nm } d Efl Efl Efl 69 frr 69 #fr 0 0 :a 0 0 o u o 0 0 a2 c2 D O ff cc it w O O o Cc C �w F o N o N a [V m N� o ° N m N m w w 7 O F_- C0 m 0 m o r L m (} O 0 O r c 0 o w m w o A o dd � Q H `n X F Q m s' n❑ —' n❑ s' n❑ w� O w z0>� F- CO r r a� N F cc 2i Q O O � O 2 Q a z U O c s c� r" O O o ` C} o a � m m � � C s0 O L ` NEB "- O 9 E a� c o rn c c r n v u� L6 w d b N Q E c o g E L � .� o > c L c U o a°)i CHANGE ORDER NO. 39 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62- 619 -026 / 138- 020 -30 Project No. City Project 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. �a, � Ci ty �F C" ;�i Date: 2/7/07 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. requested price increases for some bid items due to a 2006 completion date. Contract bid items affected by this price escalation request are as follows: Item Description 2005 2006 Unit Price 2006 Cost No. Unit Price Unit Price Increase Quantity Increase 17-A Topsoil Borrow (CV) $ 12.90 $ 16.90 $ 4.00 322 CY $ 1,288.00 20 -A Aggregate Base, Class 6 $ 9.00 $ 14.00 $ 5.00 1,168 TON $ 5,840.00 33 -A Adjust Frame c& Ring Casting $ 195.00 $ 285.00 $ 90.00 21 EA $ 1,890M Approval 2006 Cost Escalation $ 9,018.00 The cost escalation accounts for 2006 labor wage increases. A State Aid Funding Summary is attached. Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,162.93 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 29 -38 $ 63,443.37 Change this Change Order: $ 9,018.00 Possible Revised Contract: $ 1,071,616,75 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by Contractor By AL Its Title Approval Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #39, Page 1 of 2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 39 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 / S.A.P. 138 - 020 -30 Project No.: 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Date: 2/7/07 Amount of Change Order No. 39 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY $ 9,018.00 254 cubic yards of Topsoil Borrow were used within the right -of -way limits of County Road D and are eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: (254 cy x $ 4.00 /cy = $1,016.00) Category S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Roadway 100% S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 1.00 $ 1,016.00 1,157 tons of Aggregate Base, Class 6, were used as base for the 2" Bituminous Walk and are eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: (1,157 ton x $ 5.00 /ton = $ 5,785.00) Category County Road D Roadway S.A.P. Differentiation 100% S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 Fraction Amount 1.00 $ 5,785.00 Twelve (12) casting adjustments are eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: (12 each x $ 90.00 /casting = $ 1,080.00) Category S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Storm Sewer 75% S.A.P. 62- 619 -026 0.75 $ 810.00 25% S.A.P. 138- 020 -30 0.25 $ 270.00 $ 1,080.00 Amount o f Change Order No. 39 Eligible, for State Aid Participating Funds $ ' 7,881.00 C.O. #39, Page 2 of 2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 40 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 / 138- 020 -30 Project No. City Project 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. URS Copy City Copy f Date: 2/26/07 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. is entitled to a bituminous density incentive payment according to Mn/DOT Specification (2350) Plant Mixed Asphalt Pavement Quality ControUQuality Assurance (Type LV, MV, HV) The incentive payment was calculated (sheets attached) and shall be paid on a Lump sum basis in accordance with the prices listed below. Paving Date Asphalt Type Tans Represented Incentive Payment 08109/05 LV 716.34 $ 734.94 08110/05 My 228.28 $ 317.30 08113105 MV 697.76 S 484.93 08129/05 LV 962.08 $ 1,316.10 09112/05 My 348.58 S 484.51 09/21105 MV 748.35 $ 1,040.18 06116106 MV 1,134.84 $ 1,577.39 06126106 My 298.43 $ 414.80 A state aid funding summary is attached. Incentive Payment Due S 6,370.15 Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 668,162.93 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No.: 1-28 $ 330,992.45 Approved Revised Contract: $ 999,155.38 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 29 -39 $ 72,461.37 Change this Change Order: $ 6,370.15 Possible Revised Contract: $ 1,077,986.90 Approval Approval Agreed By E Engineer Its Title Approval Mayor Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #40, Page 1 of 2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 40 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62- 619 -026 / S.A.P. 138- 020 -30 Project No.: 02 -08 Contractor: T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Date: 2/26/07 Amount of Change Order No. 40 $ 6 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY This bituminous density incentive payment is eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: Category S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Roadway 100% S.A.P. 62 -619 -026 1.00 $ 6,370.15 Amount of Change Order No. 40 Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds $ 6,370.15 C.O. #40, Page 2 of 2 iyop CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 Contractor CORY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: Venburg / Guldens Grading, Utilities and Paving Project No. City Project 02 -08 (04 -04) Date: 12/11/06 Contractor: Imperial Developers, Inc. In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions: Imperial Developers, Inc. installed 42" HDPE storm sewer pipe as accepted by Schedule E — Bid Alternate 1 and as shown on the construction plans for this project. Contract specifications require mandrelling of all HDPE pipe following installation and prior to final acceptance. Because mandrell availability for large diameter HDPE pipes is limited, The City of Maplewood agreed to pay Imperial to televise the pipes in lieu of mandrelling. The Mn/DOT Estimating Office approved the lineal foot pricing submitted by the contractor for the work. This change order includes a ten percent allowance for the prime contractor. (986 LF x $ 0.98 /LF = $ 966.28). The value of this change order is $ 1,062.91 Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 369,942.84 Net Change of Prior Approved Contract Amendments $ 54,823.50 (Bid Alternate 1 — HDPE Pipe): Approved Original Contract Amount: $ 424,766.34 Net Change of Prior Approved $ 3,521.00 Change Order No. I — 3 : Approved Revised Contract: $ 428,287,34 Change this Change Order: $ 1,062.91 Possible Revised Contract: $ 429,350.25 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by Contractor By 1L Ii ( L Its V Title C.O. #4, Page 1 of 1 U City C Co ntractor Copy CHANGE ORDER. NO. 5 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: Venburg 1 Guldens Grading, Utilities and Paving Project No. City Project 02 -08 (04 -04) Contractor: Imperial Developers, Inc. Date: 12114106 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: Several contract bid items were not used during the prosecution of work for this contract. This change order addresses the removal of these bid items from the contract and revises the contract amount. Page 2 of 2 of this change order provides an itemization of the contract deletions. This change order reduces the original contract amount by $ 40,621.00. Contract Status Cost Original Contract: $ 369,942.84 Net Change of Prior Approved Contract Amendments $ 54,823.50 (Schedule E - Bid Alternate 1 — HDPE Pipe): Approved Original Contract Amount: $ 424,766.34 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No. I — 3 : $ 3,521.00 Approved Revised Contract: $ 428,287.34 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No. 4 : $ 1,062.91 Change this Change Order: $ (40,621.00) Possible Revised Contract: $ 388,729.25 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by Contractor By - Its � Title C.O. #5, Page I of 2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 5 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: Venburg / Guldens Grading, Utilities and Paving Project No. City Project 02 -08 (04 -04) Contractor: Imperial Developers, Inc. Date: 12114/06 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: The following contract bid items were not used during the prosecution of work for this contract. C.O. #5 Page 2 of 2 Unit Contract Contract Item No. Mn/DOT No. Description Unit Price Quantity Amount A- 8 2105.509 Remove Concrete Apron EA $ 50.00 1.00 $ 50.00 A -10 2104.513 Sawcut Bit. Pavement (Full Depth) LF $ 2.00 556.00 $ 1,112.00 A -11 2104.523 Salvage Lighting Unit EA $250.00 3.00 $ 750.00 A -12 2104.523 Salvage Sign EA $ 50.00 5.00 $ 150.00 A -18 2340.508 Type 41A `Near Course Mix TON $ 41.30 255.00 $10,531.50 A -19 2357.502 Bituminous Material for Tack Coat GAL $ 125 255.00 $ 318.75 A -21 2531.507 8" Concrete Driveway Pavement SY $ 4725 125.00 $ 5,906.25 A -22 2554.602 Barricades Type III (Temporary) EA $236.00 6.00 $ 1,416.00 A -23 2554.602 F & I Sign Panel (No Parking 2'x2') EA $100.00 6.00 $ 600.00 A -25 2564.531 Install Sign EA $ 68.00 7.00 $ 476.00 A -26 2573.502 F & I Biorolls EA $377.00 4.00 $ 1,508.00 D- 2 2503.511 15" RC Pipe Sewer Design 3006 Cl V LF $ 25.00 475.00 $11,875.00 D- 4 2503.511 21" RC Pipe Sewer Design 3006 Cl II LF $ 30.00 54.00 $ 1,620.00 D- 6 2503.602 Connect to Existing Storm Sewer EA $600.00 1.00 $ 600.00 D- 7 2503.602 Construct Bulkhead EA $350.00 4.00 $ 1,400.00 D -14 2506.521 Furnish Casting EA $287.00 4.00 $ 1,148.00 D -15 2511.501 Random Riprap Cl III CY $ 65.00 1630 $ 1,059.50 TOTAL $40,621.00 This change order reduces the original contract amount by $ 40,621.00. C.O. #5 Page 2 of 2 [URS CAY Wvotory G>T- Copy CHANGE ORDER NO. 10 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62- 619 -025 / 138 -020 -29 Project No. 02 -08 Contractor: Palda & Sons, Inc. Date: 12/12/06 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the work as altered by the following provisions: Short, Elliott, Hendrickson, Inc., the City of Maplewood's storm water management consultant, determined an increase in the dead water storage capacity of LaMettry Pond was necessary. This required modifications to the pond's outlet control structure. The orifice opening in the existing outlet control structure was raised one foot to attain the increase in storage capacity. This change order accounts for all costs associated with the work and payment was determined according to Mn/DOT Specification (1904), Extra and Force Account Work as specified in the contract documents. The value of this work is $ 2,192.12. Contract Status Cost Original Contract $1,333,032.71 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No. 1 — 9 $ (579,284.51) Approved Revised Contract: $ 753,748.20 Change this Change Order: $ 2,192.12 Possible Revised Contract: $ 755,940.32 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by Contracto B Its Title Approval Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) CO ##10, Page 1 of 2 CHANCE ORDER NO. 10 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -025 / 138- 020 -29 Project No.: 02 -08 Contractor: Palda & Sons, Inc. Date: 12 /12/06 Amount of Change Order No. 10 $ 2,192.12 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY Storm sewer improvements associated with the LaMettry Pond are eligible to participate in state aid funding as follows: Category S.A.P. Differentiation Fraction Amount County Road D Storm Sewer 75% S.A.P. 62- 619 -025 0.75 $ 1,644.09 25% S.A.P. 138- 020 -29 0.25 $ 548.03 C.O. No. 10, Amount Eligible for State Aid Participating Funds 2,192.12 C.O. #10, Page 2 of 2 z O F Q f• LL O F- CL z (/) D z O Q U f- Q O U F ¢ a O W LL F- Q O L LL O z > z Q a < U- 0 LU !- co Q co 0 L C l} � cY, p r3 S S S S a a z - ' o am z 2 O Qw S W Oz co mZ; O T O � � O w v Q O � U a � c � C) U 00 IL LL m O N o Z N O � d f N 00 O N 0 0 c y r o O � 5 o 0 z t?LL a p o F Z w rn a LQO 0 u} u • LMI O U � m m a a U U C � N vv C _ _ U � � U G L i N � � N N yC w = E m o o rn C U N U n N � C U u o m Q o Z co o j o O O J I z - ! - - 10 0 I a bg � 69 V3 69 <fi Vi G4 Lij O O E a a T J S m � 69 co uj 0 2 m S '- J a I 0 0 W o Z a c 3 O ir J ZO = z a O cc F- O ::3 F- U U W u 0 d 00 Q cr O J O z 0 U O z N J ° F 0z {Wj c E- Lu F W Q W z t- a r ¢ a F- O �5 3 �° j a a p H a a U o c Q z Q :D -i 00 J \ p tL W U LL W 0 C\j {7 O O O Z O 00 O O O n 0 O r a Lfl �fl £fl iPr EH Ef3 f/3 w a W 0 0 O J J U W w Q a 69 !d a o a ir r ,, o iv cc O a OF tL U -1 Q @G @) U z N z O U r C> a W O o z w ¢ n. z 0 ti a Y u o w N co O F U; w J X Q J a N U g Q Q U Z W Q10 Q Q CL I� Ul w U 00 F JcB � }' vOoo U lu U a��a Co D O ? T N N m ON F r m a 7 N O O� 0 cO O 4) O d' O D N a 69 69 69 V3 69 69 69 � W a N � V 0 N r 6 W uomcv a CL 69 {A c9 Ga � 0 0 co 0 0 o D Q S N ui N O N O � T f z o w m w C� W a O a LL a Q a N O N O Li J m LL r r `m w � p a X T z a L- 5 N O o a F- r LL LL O w ,J a o J J CE: W J O Z J O .° W W m C7 m m LL a m U) z LL J J O J} O. (o • LMI O U � m m a a U U C � N vv C _ _ U � � U G L i N � � N N yC w = E m o o rn C U N U n N � C U u o m Q o Z co CHANGE ORDER NO. 11 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Project Name: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62 -619 -025 / 138- 020 -29 Project No. 02 -08 Contractor: Palda & Sons, Inc. city C OVY C ntraact r opy y y . Date: 12/13/06 In accordance with the terms of this Contract, you are hereby authorized and instructed to perform the Work as altered by the following provisions: Bid items removed from the contract through Change Order No. 1 were used as work items and are to be paid for under this change order. The attached sheets define the removed bid items used and associated state aid participation. In addition, two flared end section trash guards incorporated into the project were not included in the original bid. This change order includes payment for these guards. The value of this change order is $ 1,490.20. Contract Status Cost Original Contract $1,333,032.71 Net Change of Prior Approved Change Order No. 11 = 9 $ (579,284.51) Approved Revised Contract $ 753,748.20 Net Change of Prior Pending Change Order No.: 10 $ 2,192.12 Change this Change Order: $ 1,490.20 Possible Revised Contract: $ 757,430.52 Approval Mayor Approval Engineer Agreed to by Contractor By �- Its Title Approval Assistant State Aid Engineer (For Funding Approval Only) C.O. #11, Page 1 of 2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 11 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CI T Y OF MAPLE WOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY MEI�NESOTA Project Dame: County Road D Improvements S.A.P. 62- 619 - 0251 138- 020 -29 Project No.: 02 -08 Contractor: Palda & Sons, Inc. Date: 12/13/06 Participation Status Amount of Change Order No. 11 1,490.20 Saw Bit. Pavement 99.00 County Road D Roadway 100% 62- 619 -025 $ 297.00 2501.602 REMOVED CONTRACT BID ITEMS USED County Road D Storm Sewer 75% 62 -619 -025 MnDOT No. Item No. Descri tp ion Unit Qty Unit Price Extension 2104513 13 -A Sawing Bituminous Pavement (Full Depth) LF 204.00 $ 100 $ 612.00 1.00 ITEMS EXCLUSIVE OF CONTRACT BID USED $ 461.06 MnDOT No. Descript Unit Qty UnitPrice Extension 2501.602 Trash Guard for 15" Pipe Apron EA I $ 263.46 $ 263.46 2501.602 Trash Guard for 24" Pipe Apron EA I $ 614.74 $ 614.74 TOTAL $ 1,490.20 STATE AID PARTICIPATION SUMMARY Item No. MnDOT No. Description Q t , Participation Status Participating Amount 13 -A 2104.513 Saw Bit. Pavement 99.00 County Road D Roadway 100% 62- 619 -025 $ 297.00 2501.602 15" Trash Guard 1.00 County Road D Storm Sewer 75% 62 -619 -025 $ 197.60 County Road D Storm Sewer 25% 138 - 020 -29 $ 65.86 2501.602 24" Trash Guard 1.00 County Road D Storm Sewer 75% 62- 619 -025 $ 461.06 County Road D Storm Sewer 25% 138- 020 -29 $ 153.68 State Aid Participation - Total Amount $ 1,175.20 STATE AID FUNDING DIFFERENTIATION County Road D Roadway County Road D Storm Sewer County Road D Storm Sewer Funding Total 100% 62 -619 -025 75% 62- 619 -025 25% 138- 020 -29 $ 297.00 $ 658.66 $ 219.54 $ 1 The amount of Change Order No. 11 eligible for state aid participating funds is $ 1,175.20. C.O. #11, Page 2 of 2 �r r k , -CW N'ry RoAp R EALIGNME NT SFGMtNT I D D a r Agenda Item L11 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Kenwood Area Street Reconstruction, City Project 05 -16, Resolution for Modification of the Existing Construction Contact , Change Order No. 12 DATE: March 1, 2007 INTRODUCTION During construction there are often unforeseen changes from the original plans and specifications. The city council will consider approving the attached resolution directing the modification of the existing construction contract and revising the project financing plan. DISCUSSION Changer Order 12 is in the amount of $617,849.84. During the project, design staff estimated that 25% of the streets in the project area would need soils corrections. During construction nearly 75% of the roadbeds needed subgrade correction work. This work was necessary to properly construct the road. The additional soil work provided a structurally sound base for the pavement section. If the additional costs had not been incurred the pavement would deteriorate prematurely and maintenance would be required earlier. Soil corrections account for approximately $325,000 of the additional costs. A portion of the remaining costs are for additional work required to the water main by Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS). This accounts for another $155,000 of added costs, the majority of which SPRWS is responsible for. Many residents participated in the private driveway program and caused an overrun of driveway related items by $60,000. All of the additional private driveway work has been paid for by residents who received new driveways. Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District also incurred $10,000 of additional costs for the wetland creation done as part of the city's project. Extra sanitary sewer mainline repairs were necessary along with sanitary service improvements. These additions were required to protect the roadway from future disturbance and maintain the existing sanitary sewer system. Several storm sewer revisions were also necessary due to conflicting utilities. Budget Impact Revisions to the project budget were approved by council on February 26 2006 to finance change order 12. No additional revisions are required. It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution directing the modification of the existing construction contract for the Kenwood Area Neighborhood Street Improvements, City Project 05- 16, Change Order 12. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Change Order 12 3. Project Location Map RESOLUTION DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PROJECT 05 -16, CHANGE ORDER NO. 12 WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made Improvement Project 05 -16, Kenwood Area Neighborhood Improvements, and has let a construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and WHEREAS, it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designated as Improvement Project 05 -16, Change Order No. 12. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that the mayor and city clerk are hereby authorized and directed to modify the existing contract by executing said Change Order No. 12 in the amount of $617,849.84. The revised contract amount is $5,233,543.63 CHANGE ORDER DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA Project Name: Kenwood Area Neighborhood Improvements Change Order No.: 12 Project No.: 05 -16 Date:2(22107 Contractor: Forest Lake Contracting The following changes shall be made in the contract documents: (Work not covered under contract or bid item totals increased from original estimate) Description Item Unit Quantity Price Total 2101.507 GRUBBING EA. 12 $60.00 $720.00 2104.505 REMOVE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY S.Y. 85 $5.00 $425.00 PAVEMENT 2104.603 ABANDON STORM SEWER PIPE L.F. 691 $10.00 $6,910.00 2105.507 SUBGRADE EXCAVATION, CY (EV) G.Y. 4,084 $10.00 $40,840.00 (SEE EARTHWORK SUMMARIES) SELECT GRANULAR BORROW, CY 2105.522 (CV) (SEE EARTHWORK C.Y. 616 $14.00 $8,624.00 SUMMARIES) 2123.610 STREET SWEEPER WITH PICKUP HOUR 90 $115.00 $10,350.00 BROOM 2211.501 AGGREGATE BASE CLASS 6 FOR TON 918 $21.00 $19,278.00 DRIVEWAYS, TRAILS AND WALKS 2232.603 MILL BITUMINOUS SURFACE, 1.5" L.F. 323 $4.00 $1,292.00 DEPTH @ MINIMUM 18" WIDE 2331.604 BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S.Y. 28,192 $1.00 $28,192.00 RECLAMATION TYPE 41 BIT. MIX. FOR 2340.521 TRAILS/DRIVEWAYS (41WEB50055L) S.Y. 1,184 $9.00 $10,656.00 (PG 64 -22) 2451.503 GRANULAR BACKFILL (CV) C.Y. 1,274 $4.00 $5,096.00 AGGREGATE FOUNDATION (INCL. 2451.609 1.5" CLEAR ROCK & TYPE V GEO. TON 512.94 $27.00 $13,849.38 WRAP) 4" PERF. CORR. PE DRAINAGE 2502.541 TUBING WJ TYPE I GEO. SOCK & L.F. 874 $7.00 $6,118.00 3149.2J (F.F.A.) 2503.511 24" CORRUGATED SMOOTH WALL L.F. 4 $30.00 $120.00 HDPE PIPE SEWER 2503.603 PIPE BEDDING FOR HDPE STORM L.F. 9,002 $10.00 $90,020.00 SEWER PIPE 2503.603 PIPE BEDDING FOR PVC SANITARY L.F. 490 $6.00 $2,940.00 SEWER PIPE 2504.602 WATER UTILITY HOLE (EXCAVATE & EA. 29 $1,100.00 $31,900.00 BACKFILL) WATER UTILITY MAIN 2504.602 OFFSET/REPLACEMENT TRENCH EA. 9.50 $2,000.DO $19,000.00 (EXCAVATE & BACKFILL) 2504.603 WATER UTILITY MAIN TRENCH L.F. 1,811 $24.00 $43,464.00 (EXCAVATE & BACKFILL) 2504.603 PIPE BEDDING FOR WATER MAIN L.F. 4,278 $6.00 $25,668.00 PIPE 2506.502 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE EA. 1 $800.00 $800.00 STRUCTURE, DESIGN 27" 2521.501 4" CONCRETE WALK S.F. 705 $6.00 $4,230.00 2531.501 CONCRETE C &G, DESIGN B612, L.F. -1,456 $8.20 - $11,939.20 8618, B624, RIBBON OR TRANSITION 2531.507 6" CONCRETE DRIVEWAY S.Y. 109 $40.00 $4,360.00 PAVEMENT, RESIDENTIAL 2535.501 BITUMINOUS CURB L.F. 201 $4.00 $804.00 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET, 2575.523 CATEGORY 0 (TYPE WOOD FIBER S.Y. 645 $1.58 $1,019.10 OS,RD) NET FREE 2575.525 EROSION STABILIZATION MAT, S.Y. 5,180 $5.90 $30,562.00 CLASS 1 2575.604 SODDING, TYPE LAWN (INCLUDING S.Y. 14,974 $2.00 $29,948.00 270RT SEED @ 30 LB/AC) NORTH AREAAGGREGATE BASE 2211.501 CLASS 6 FOR STREETS - TYPICAL TON 80 $11.00 $880.DO SECTION AREA SUB -TOTAL $426,126.28 NON BID ITEM EXTRA WORK Description Item Unit Quantity Price Total FABRIC - BASE BID AREA S.Y. -6,245 $2.50 - $15,612.50 FABRIC -NORTH BID AREA S.Y. 571 $2.50 $1,427.50 CL 6 USED FOR SUBGRADE EXCAVATION AREAS - BASE BID TON 8,198 $11.00 $90,178.00 AREA CL 6 USED FOR SUBGRADE TON 3,512 $11.00 $38,632.00 EXCAVATION AREAS - NORTH AREA ROCK (STABILIZATION) TON 440 $22.50 $9,900.00 NORTH AREA SUB -GRADE C.Y. 1,860 $12.DO $22,320.00 EXCAVATION NORTH AREA STORM SEWER PIPE L.F. 1,170 $10.00 $11,700.00 BEDDING NORTH AREA SANITARY PIPE L.F. 73 $6.00 $438.04 BEDDING NORTH AREA WATER MAIN PIPE L.F. 643 $6.00 $3,858.00 BEDDING SUB -TOTAL $162,841.00 MISC.NON BID ITEMIWORK ORDERS SUMMARY FORCE ROSELAWN BOULEVARD GRADING 1 $993.00 $99390 FORCE 15" RCP FES 1 $675.00 $675.00 FORCE WO 2847 1 $587.98 $587.98 FORCE WO 3161 Radial Grate Swap 1 $499.84 $499.84 FORCE WO 3078 1 $731.42 $731.42 FORCE Landscaping Eldridge Boulevard 1 $2,025.00 $2,025.00 FORCE WO 2849 1 $636.50 $636.50 FORCE Drain Grate Error 1 $44730 $447.30 FORCE WO 3077 1 $1,581.48 $1,581.48 FORCE WO 2184 1 $57639 $576.39 FORCE WO 3569 1 $1,903.56 $1,903.56 FORCE Driveway Prep with Class 5left in place 1 $2,869.00 $2,869.00 FORCE SPRWS Invoice 1 $508.86 $508.86 FORCE WO 3153 KELLER POND - SOUTH CHANNEL FROM WETLAND 1 $595.68 $595.68 FORCE Assist Tree Mover on Eldridge Avenue 1 $327.00 $327.00 FORCE Belmont/Burke Ex. Curb Removal 1 $1,213.55 $1,213.55 FORCE Belmont/Burke Curb Placement 1 $3,600.00 $3,600.00 FORCE Belmont/Burke Curb -extra common and cl. 6 placement 1 $9,111.00 $9,111.00 SUB -TOTAL $28,88156 Original contract amount: $4,236,756.46 Net change of Prior Change Order 1 -11: $378,937.33 Previous revised contract $4,615 Change Order 12 $617,849.84 Revised Contract $5,233,543.63 Approved Mayor Recommended Engineer Agreed to by Contractor by Its Title I I \I V w VIKING DR. n w 0 1 ry Li < ui 0 3: LAURIE CT. < n ui BURKI u� 7u 'qv--AVE. ELDRIDGE cn Oehrline BELMONT La ke cn AVE. SKILLMAN AV. 0 2 cr_ < (Y ry CK, M C/) M z Edgerton Park >- W < w Li III ry n " n -1 0 ROSELAWN AV. -i I BELLWOOD n 0 SUMMER 0 0 CT. i, i - 3: 1 D ry ui. Lu A < Y TRAIL RIP LEY AV- GATE ® PROPOSED STREET IMPROVEMENT BURKE CT Maplecrest Park AVE. IF 4� N KEN 'OOD LN. 0 �D Keller La ke 61 11-1 Exhibit 1: Project Location Kenwood Area Street Improvements City Project 05-16 Agenda Item L12 TO: City Council From: Greg Copeland, City Manager Date: March 8, 2007 Re: Resolution to Premier Bank to List City Manager, Finance and Administration Manager, City Clerk and the Finance Administrative Assistant on Safe Deposit Box Accounts A resolution to appoint the City Manager, Finance and Administration Manager, City Clerk and Finance Administrative Assistant as the authorized signatures on the City of Maplewood's Safe Deposit Boxes at Premier Bank is needed due to changes in City staff. Recommendation: Approve attached resolution authorizing access to the Safe Deposit boxes. .Ta we ean Agenda Item L12 RESOLUTION FOR SAFE DEPOSIT BOXES Be it resolved, by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, that until written notice to the contrary is given by this Corporation to the Safe Deposit Department of the Premier Bank access to Safe Deposit Boxes (herein called safes) standing in the name of the corporation in the vaults of above bank shall be had by the following: Greg Copeland, City Manager Robert Mittet, Finance and Administrative Manager Karen Guilfbile, City Clerk Deb Schmidt, Administrative Assistant Any one (1) of whom shall have full authority to enter said safes and to make deposits therein or remove any part of all of the contents thereof, to execute leases thereof in the name of this Corporation, to amend or cancel said leases, to exchange or surrender the safes, and in all other respects to represent this Corporation. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 1, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed Clerk of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City of Maplewood, held on March 12, 2007 with the original on file in my office, and the same is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the same relates to access to City safe deposit boxes at Premier Bank. Witness my hand as Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this 13 day of March, 2007. City Clerk City of Maplewood, Minnesota Agenda Item L13 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner SUBJECT: Planning Commission Rules of Procedure DATE: February 28, 2007 INTRODUCTION The city council should review the planning commission's rules of procedure. Section L of the rules says that the planning commission is to review the rules at their first meeting each year. BACKGROUND The planning commission first approved the rules of procedure on February 21, 1983. The commission has reviewed and changed their rules several times since then. On January 3, 2005, the planning commission reviewed the rules and made a change to them about appointments to the commission (based on the latest city council policies). On January 24, 2005, the city council adopted the latest rules of procedure for the planning commission. On January 16, 2007, the planning commission considered and adopted revised rules of procedure. On February 20, 2007, the planning commission, at the request of the city manager, again reviewed their rules of procedure. After much discussion and consideration, the planning commission recommended that the City Council make the necessary changes in the city ordinance about the planning commission. The Planning Commission will review any ordinance changes and then make changes to the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure so the wording is inconsistent with the new or revised city ordinance. (See the planning commission meeting minutes starting on page nine.) DISCUSSION The city manager reviewed the planning commission's rules of procedure after their meeting of January 16, 2007. He suggested several changes to the rules that he wanted the planning commission to consider before staff sends them to the city council for approval. He suggested these changes to reflect the current practice in the city. As such, staff brought the rules back to the commission on February 20, 2007, with additional proposed changes. The parts of the rules the city manager suggested changing include: Section A2 — Meeting Schedule. The current rules state the planning commission will meet on the first and third Mondays of the month. The city manager, however, decided that the planning commission should meet on the first and third Tuesdays of the month. This change was to allow all Mondays to be available for council meetings and to ensure that the city could broadcast all city meetings on cable. As such, there is a conflict between the current planning commission rules and the schedule set by the city manager. For reference, I have attached Sections 2 -246 through 2 -255 of the city code. These code sections provide for the establishment and duties of the planning commission. Section 2- 251(a) of the city code says, "The planning commission shall elect its own officers, establish meeting times and adopt its own rules of procedure to be reviewed and approved by the city council." Section D1 — Election of Officers. The current rules state, "A chairperson and a vice chairperson shall be elected at the second meeting of each calendar year and will serve until their successors have been elected." The city manager suggested that it would be better for the commission to hold the election of officers later in the year after the council makes the appointments and reappointments to the planning commission. This change would allow the entire body of the commission to vote on the election of officers. However, Section 2 -249 of the city code states, "The planning commission shall elect a chairperson and vice - chairperson at the second planning commission meeting in January each year." Section J — Appointments. The city manager suggested a change to Section J of the rules to simplify the language of the rules. I have included the proposed change in the attached rules. In addition, city staff is proposing changes to Section F (about the community development director) to reflect the current organization of the city and the current code section numbers. The question now before the city council is do they want to change the city code about the planning commission or do they want the planning commission to adopt rules of procedure that are inconsistent with the existing city code? L* N il - * IIL0 On January 16, 2007, the planning commission adopted the attached rules of procedure. RECOMMENDATION Provide city staff and the planning commission with direction about the following: A. A possible change to the city code for the planning commission (Sections 2 -246 through 2 -255 of the city code). B. The timing for the approval of the planning commission's rules of procedure. This could include none, some or all of the noted changes to the rules. p: \commdvpt \pc \perules.2007 Attachments: 1. PC Rules of Procedure 2. Sections 2 -246 — 2 -255 of the City Code 2 RULES OF PROCEDURE Attachment 1 Approved by the Planning Commission on February 21, 1983 Revision on February 17, 1999 Revision adopted on January 3, 2005 Last Revision proposed on January 16, 2007 We, the members of the Planning Commission of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, created pursuant to Chapter 2 2-5-, as amended, of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances, do hereby accept the following Rules of Procedure, subject to the provisions of said ordinances, which are hereby made a part of these rules: A. MEETINGS 1. All meetings shall be held in City Hall unless otherwise directed by the chairperson, in which case at least 24 hours notice will be given to all members. 2. Regular meetings shall be held at 7 p.m. on the first and third Mondays of each month. If a regular meeting falls on a legal holiday, such meeting shall be rescheduled as a special meeting, if needed. 3. Special meetings shall be held upon call by the chairperson, or in their absence, by the vice chairperson, or by any other member with the concurrence of five other members of the Commission. At least 48 hours notice shall be given to all members for special meetings. B. QUORUM 1. A simple majority of the current membership of the Commission shall constitute a quorum. 2. Any member having a conflict of interest shall declare the same before discussion of the item in which he or she has a conflict. Any member who abstains from voting on a question because of possible conflict of interest shall not be considered a member of the Commission for determining a quorum for the consideration of that issue. 3. Approval of any motion shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of the members present. C. DUTIES OF CHAIRPERSON In addition to the duties prescribed in Section 2 -249 2E-24 of the Code of Ordinances, the chairperson shall appoint such standing committees and temporary committees as are required, and such committees will be charged with the duties, examinations, investigations, and inquiries about the subjects assigned by the chairperson. No standing or temporary committee shall have the power to commit the Commission to the endorsement of any plan or program without its submission to the full Commission. D. ELECTION OF OFFICERS 1. A chairperson and vice chairperson shall be elected at the second meeting of each calendar year and will serve until their successors have been elected. 2. In the absence of the chairperson, the vice chairperson shall perform all duties required of the chairperson. When both the chairperson and the vice chairperson are absent, the attending members shall elect a chairperson pro tem. 3. If the chairperson resigns from or is otherwise no longer on the planning commission, the vice chairperson shall become the acting chairperson until the planning commission can hold an election for new officers. If the vice chairperson resigns or is otherwise no longer on the planning commission, the planning commission will elect a new vice chairperson at the next possible planning commission meeting. E. REPRESENTATION AT COUNCIL MEETINGS A representative from the Commission shall appear at each Council meeting, where a planning item is on the agenda, to present the Commission's recommendation and to answer questions from the City Council regarding the decision. The Commission shall adopt a rotating schedule of its members at the first meeting of each year to attend these meetings. F. PLANNING DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVE nDneCAIT In addition to carrying out the duties prescribed in Section 2 -254 25-25 of the Code of Ordinances, the city planning staff d+rsste shall: 1. Prepare the agenda and minutes for each meeting of the Commission. 2. Act as technical advisor to the Commission. 3. Present written alternatives and make recommendations on matters referred to the Commission. 4. Maintain a record of all agenda items from application to final action by the City Council. G. AGENDA 1. Copies of the agenda, together with pertinent planning office reports and copies of the minutes of the previous meeting, shall be distributed so that the members of the Commission shall have a copy at least three days prior to the meeting concerned. 2. The agenda shall consist of the following order of business: a. Call to Order b. Roll Call c. Approval of Minutes 12 d. Approval of Agenda e. Public Hearings f. Unfinished Business g. New Business h. Visitor Presentations I. Commission Presentations j. Staff Presentations k. Adjournment 3. No item that is not on the agenda shall be considered by the Commission. H. Except as herein provided, Robert's Rules of Order, Revised and Robert's Parliamentary Law shall be accepted as the authority on parliamentary practice. 1. Amendments to the comprehensive plan shall require that the Planning Commission follow the same procedure for hearings and notices as required by State law for zoning ordinances. J. APPOINTMENTS The city council shall make all appointments to the planning commission. by f o ll ew in„ +ho K. AMENDMENT 1. Any of these rules may be temporarily suspended by the vote of two - thirds majority of the members present. 2. These Rules of Procedure may be amended at any regular meeting of the Commission by a majority vote of the entire membership and submitted to the City Council for approval. L. These "Rules of Procedure" shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at the first meeting of each year. p: \commdvpt\pc \perules.2007 Attacfarent 2 2-246 NIAPLEWOOD CODE DI 4. PLANNING COMNIISSIQN* See. 2.246 Established, The city council establishes for the city a planning commission as an advisory board to the city council, as provided in Minn. State. 462,351-462.264. (Code 1982, § 25-t7) See. 2-247, Advisory body; exceptions- See. 2-248. Composition; appointment; qualifications; terms. (a) The planning corn nission shall have nine members appointed by the city council. The members shall be residents of the city and may not hold an elected city pubLic office. When possible, the council shall select commission members to represent the various areas of the city and to help meet the needs of the residents. See. 2-249. Dhairperson and vice-chairperson. CD2 6 0 ADMINISTRXrION 2-252 CD2; 17 7 § 2-252 MAPLEWOOD CODE (8) Review and make recommondationq to the city council on development applications, such as rezonings, conditional use permits, variances, vacations, preliminary plats and hoarse occupation licenses. 19) Accept juch other and further duties as may, from time to time, be directed by the city council, inalm conducting hearings. (Code 1982, � 2i All members of the planning commission shall serve without compensation, However, approved expenses of the planning commission shall be paid from available city funds. {'Code 1982, § 25-24) (4' Keep the dockets and minutes of the commission s proceedings, 05) Keep all required records and files, i61 Maintain the files and indexes of the commission. (Code 1982, § 25-25) See. 2-255. Duties of city engineer, city attorney, city inspectors and other city employees. W The city engineor and the city attorney shall be available to the planning commission, The city engineer and attorney shall have the right to sit in with the commission at all C, meetim�s, but shall not be entitled to vote as members of the commiss-.on, t� (b) All city inspectors and other regnlar Pmplovees or personnel of the city shall cooperate with the planninx commission and make themselves available and attend meetings when requested to do so, (Code 1982, § 25-26) Sees. 2-256-2-280. Reserved. C'D2:18 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2007 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 11. ROLL CALL Vice - Chairperson Tushar Desai Present Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Present Commissioner Michael Grover Absent Commissioner Harland Hess Present Commissioner Gary Pearson Present Commissioner Dale Trippler Absent Commissioner Joseph Walton Present Commissioner Jeremy Yarwood Absent Staff Present: Ken Roberts Planner Michael Thompson Staff Engineer present until 7:30 p.m. Lisa Kroll Recording Secretary VI. NEW BUSINESS d. Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Mr. Roberts said Section L of the Rules of Procedure says that the commission is to review the rules at their first meeting each year. Since the Planning Commission meeting January 16, 2007, the city manager reviewed the commission's Rules of Procedure. He suggested several changes to the rules before staff sends them to the City Council for approval. As such, staff is bringing the rules back to the commission with additional proposed changes. The parts of the rules the city manager suggested changing include: The Meeting Schedule, Election of Officers, and Appointments. Mr. Roberts said regarding the statement "The Planning Commission shall elect a chairperson and vice - chairperson at the second planning commission meeting in January each year." The existing language makes it difficult to do if the openings on the planning commission haven't been filled yet by the second meeting. Chairperson Fischer said it might be difficult if somebody was elected chairperson or vice - chairperson and the person didn't get reappointed. That would cause the planning commission to have another election. Mr. Roberts said the ideal situation would be if the City Council did the reappointments in December then the planning commission could have everyone in place by the second meeting in January. 9 Planning Commission -2- Minutes of 02 -20 -07 Commissioner Desai said if the City Council has not found new planning commission members by December to replace terms that were up or any resignations that had been received any time of the year could be a bad time. He said he feels the planning commissioners that are here during the first two meetings of the year should be the ones to vote for chairperson and vice - chairperson to keep the process moving. Mr. Roberts said even if the commission had a full planning commission by then, how would the new people know who to vote for unless they had been following the planning commission meetings and know who they would like as chairperson and vice - chairperson. Chairperson Fischer asked if there had been any discussion among the city council for the future procedures that the city council would consider filling or making reappointments in December rather than waiting until the middle of January? ►�it�.Z•7•�i�iiTai�i�:Tt:1 Chairperson Fischer asked if there was anything in the December workload for the city council that would make it prohibitive to go through the process at that point in time? Mr. Roberts said the biggest thing is the adoption of the budget which the city council usually does the first meeting of December. The ideal situation would be for the appointments to be done before the end of December or the first meeting in January. However, situations come up and there is really no good way to predict things, especially in city government. Chairperson Fischer said Commissioner Trippler brought it up before that the Rules of Procedure state the planning commission set their own meeting night but now the City Council has set the meeting nights, should the ordinance be changed by the City Council before we do the changes to the Rules of Procedure so we are in sync because if the ordinance is going in a different direction then the planning commission is stuck in the middle. Mr. Roberts said that is why staff included the Maplewood Code with the Planning Commission Rules and Procedures because it states in Sec. 2 -249 the Planning Commission shall elect a chairperson and a vice - chairperson at the second Planning Commission meeting in January each year. As the Planning Commission rules are written you are in agreement with the city code as it stands. Chairperson Fischer questioned whether the commission should change the Planning Commission Rules of Procedures if the ordinance hasn't changed yet? Commissioner Desai said he thinks the City Council should change the ordinance first. Mr. Roberts said the question is who should initiate the change to the ordinance, city staff, the City Council, or the city manager? Chairperson Fischer said if the Planning Commission decided to leave the things that are dictated by the ordinance in place then the changes the Planning Commission would change tonight would be on page 4, item F. Planning Department and item J. Appointments. im Planning Commission -3- Minutes of 02 -20 -07 Commissioner Desai questioned item J. Appointments and the text that is stricken that says by f9II9WiR9 +ho G UrFeAt Ghat app9iRtR49 t PGIinae Mr. Roberts said he wasn't sure about that. For long time commissioners like Gary Pearson and Lorraine Fischer, the Planning Commission used to hold their own interviews when openings occurred and the commission would vote and rank the applicants and pass that along to the City Council who would then make the final decision. In more recent times the city has just had enough applicants for openings and the City Council has done the interviews for the boards and commissions. Each City Council sets their own rules regarding how they want to do things. That language that is proposed to be stricken in the Rules of Procedure is not really necessary because the same City Council makes the appointments. Whether they are following the city policy doesn't really matter because the City Council makes the appointments. Commissioner Pearson said when he applied to be on the commission years ago the interviews were all handled by the City Council and then it changed to the interviews being done by the commission and the final decision was made by the City Council. Now the process has gone back to the way it was years ago when he applied. Commissioner Desai said he agrees that the City Council is going to make the decision regarding who gets appointed to the Planning Commission but he would still expect there be an established protocol that the City Council follows. And that is what he interprets with the City Council Appointment Policy because it's not a helter- skelter process where the city manager, the Mayor or the City Council does whatever they feel like doing. Commissioner Desai said they follow a set of protocols to make things happen and those protocols should be defined in existence so that anybody who wishes to see the procedures should be able to see it and understand the process. If that protocol doesn't exist, then he would recommend that the City Council create that, pass it, amend it and go forward from there. Mr. Roberts said you may want to make that as a separate motion. Commissioner Pearson said there were a number of times when the Planning Commission would interview an applicant and that person would obviously have the background that could be better applied to a group like the CDRB or some other group. That may be one reason the City Council wants to look at all the applicants by bringing everyone into the same application process. Commissioner Pearson asked what the timeline is to get the ordinance changed by the City Council? Would that be a long drawn out process? Mr. Roberts said the City Council would need to have two readings of it and staff has not seen this on the agenda yet. It may not be on the radar screen yet so staff has no way of knowing what the timeline is at this time. Commissioner Desai asked if this request to have the city ordinance changed by the City Council needed to be done first before the Planning Commission changes the Rules of Procedure? Mr. Roberts said if you want to make that recommendation you could. 11 Planning Commission -4- Minutes of 02 -20 -07 Chairperson Fischer asked if the City Council wants the Planning Commission to change the Rules of Procedure to reflect the current practice even though it is contrary to the ordinance or would they change the ordinance so the Planning Commission can bring the Rules of Procedure in accordance with the ordinance? Mr. Roberts said if the planning commission wants to take no action on this until the Planning Commission gets feedback from the City Council you can. If the Planning Commission wants to send the changes the commission wants to make to the city council and separate motions with other ideas you can do that too. Commissioner Hess said he agrees with Commissioner Desai's comments. It makes more sense to have the City Council review these procedures and get something down that the Planning Commission reviews before the Planning Commission makes a decision. He said he had an interesting conversation with a Lake Elmo City Councilmember. Commissioner Hess told him he served on the Maplewood Planning Commission and that his term was up for re- election. Commissioner Hess said the Lake Elmo City Councilmember said their Planning Commission members rotate through each year so the people serve until they decide to resign or someone else approaches the city looking for an opening. There are no definite term limits. In some ways that process would help the commission because we are short commission members and this is an unpaid position and that way you would still get people that want to serve. The only potential problem is that it precludes continuous movement of people through the system in a way that the current system allows for. Chairperson Fischer said when a persons' term comes up they often assess their life and if it is getting too busy and they decide not to renew their term an opening would occur. That would still allow new applicants to interview for an opening. Mr. Roberts said the commission is structured with three groups, each with three year terms so in theory there should be continuity if people stay on as volunteers. However, when someone resigns from the commission that changes the process. With previous city councils, if a commissioner wanted to serve another term the city council generally accepted that, but the current practice has been that everyone needs to reapply and new applications come in and the City Council interviews everybody. If someone in the community wants to apply they have the chance to serve and current members can re- interview to try and renew their terms. Commissioner Desai moved to recommend the City Council make the necessary changes in the city ordinance about the planning commission. The Planning Commission will review any ordinance changes and then make changes to the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure so the wording is in consistent with the new or revised city ordinance. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes — Desai, Fischer, Hess, Pearson, Walton This item will go to the City Council on March 12, 2007. 12