Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2006 05-08 City Council Packet
6:00 p.m. CouncillManager Workshop AGENDA MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M. Monday, May 8, 2006 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 06 -13 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 Nearing 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 commentslquestions 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. April 18, 2006 Special Meeting 2. April 24, 2006 Council /Manager Workshop 3. April 24, 2006 City Council Meeting F. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS G. APPOINTMENTS /PRESENTATIONS Building Safety Week - 2006 H. CONSENT AGENDA 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. 1. Approval of Claims 2. Approve Sewer Use /Connection Agreement with the City of Woodbury -North of Highwood Avenue 3. Approve Waterfest Appropriations for 2006 4. Approve Purchases for Kenwood Area Street Improvement Project, City Project 05 -16 5. Approve Contract for Services for City Hall Campus Plan — Phase 11 6. Temporary Gambling License and 3.2% Beer Permit at Ramsey County Fair 7. Maplewood Community Center Request for Proposal for Food Catering Services 8. Joint Powers Agreement - Tanners Beach -City of Oakdale 9. Joint Powers Agreement - Bellaire Beach -White Bear Lake Township PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 7:00 p.m. Code Amendment— Noise Control Ordinance (First Reading) 2. 7:15 p.m. Code Amendment — Accessory Structures and Garages (First Reading) 3. 7:30 p.m. Objection Hearing: Kenwood Area Street Improvements, C.P. 05 -16: Resolution for Adoption of Revised Assessment Roll J. AWARD OF BIDS K. UNFINISHED BUSINESS L. NEW BUSINESS 1. Easement Vacation (2249 Kenwood Court) 2. TH 61 Improvements (Beam to 1 -694) — City Project 03 -07 — Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1 3. Roselawn Traffic Issues (35E to Rice) — City Project 05 -25 — Approve Contract for Traffic Monitoring 4. Agenda Order of Business 5. Intoxicating Liquor Off -Sale License Code Revision M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 1. Preparation of 2007 Budget -Phase 2 2. Report on Emergency Operations Center, EOC, Staff Training 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. 13 A A E. MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M. Tuesday, April 18, 2006 Maplewood Community Center (Theatre Room) 2100 White Bear Avenue Meeting No. 06 -11 CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the City Council was held in the Theatre Room, at th 7:00 P.M. by Mayor Longrie. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Diana Longrie, Mayor Rebecca Cave Councilmember Erik Hjelle, Councilmember Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Will Rossbach, Councilmember nt Present Present APPROVAL OF AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Gladstone Redevelopment Initiative Bradley Scheib, project consultant, Hoisi Master Plan recommendations and ans" Agenda Item E1 , and was called to order at Koegler Group Inc., presented the Gladstone ouncil questions. N 1111f Amy 5mtn, aaaress not given Pat Vaughan, 1856 Phalen Place, Maplewood Ron Cockriel, 948 Century Avenue, Maplewood David Donch, 1792 Duluth Street, Maplewood David Bartol, 1249 Frisbee Avenue, Maplewood Tom Mathisen, 1848 Clarence Street, Maplewood Ed Lundblad, 1824 English, Maplewood Dale TriPpler, 1201 Junction Avenue, Maplewood Bill VonKreuzhof, 1752 Ide Street, Maplewood Kevin Schmidt, 1800 Phalen Place, Maplewood Julie Hawkinson, 1900 Ide Street, Maplewood Georgia Chen- Gladstone Task Force Tim McKane, 1491 Ripley, Maplewood Geoff Strickland, 1940 Atlantic Place, Maplewood Sandra Dicke, 1742 Frank Street, Maplewood Tim Quinn, 1900 Ide Street, Maplewood Special City Council Meeting 04 -18 -06 9:50 p.m. Task Force Recommendations Wayne Sachi, Gladstone Task Force Joan Paulson, address not given Dale Trippler, Maplewood Planning Commission Michael Grover, Maplewood Planning Commission Peter Fisher, Maplewood Parks and Recreation Commission Repor Al Singer, 49 O'Day Street, Maplewood Linda Olson, Maplewood Community Design Review Board Joe O'Brien, Maplewood Housing and Redevelopment Authority George Rossbach, Maplewood Historical Preservation Commission Linda Bryan 1752 Gulden Place, Maplewood F. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS G. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS Mayor Longrie adjourned at 11 Special City Council Meeting 04 -18 -06 ADJOURNMENT Agenda Item E2 MINUTES CITY COUNCIUMANAGER WORKSHOP Monday, April 24, 2006 Council Chambers, City Hall 6:00 p.m. A. CALL TO ORDER B. ROLL CALL Diana Longrie, Mayor Rebecca Cave, Councilmember Erik Hjelle, Councilmember Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Will Rossbach, Councilmember Others present Interim City Manager Copeland Finance Director Faust Parks and Recreation Director Anderson Public Works Director AN REAL Director Guilfoile City Attorney Kelly C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA to aobrove the Seconded by Councilmember Cave D. NEW BUSINESS . M Police Chi Fire Chief IT a as submitted. Ayes-All er i nomaia Lukin source Director Le r Fowlds 1. Gladstone Tax Increment Financing (T.I.F.) Paul Steinman, and Terri Heaton from Springsted Public Sector Advisors, gave a presentation on the Concepts and Mechanics of Tax Increment Financing. E. FUTURE TOPICS F. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Longrie adjourned at 6:55 p.m. MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:02 P.M. Monday, April 24, 2006 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 06 -12 A. CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the City Council was held in the Council Chambers, at City 7 :02 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 D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Longrie moved to approve the agenda as amended. L4. NEST Appointment M7. NEST M8. RushLine M9. ARP M10. City Manager Position M11. Volunteer Appreciation M12. Council Social Supper Seconded by Councilmember Cave'' Ayes -All Agenda Item E3 and was called to order at E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Minutes from the April 10, 2006, Council /Manager Workshop Councilmember Cave moved to approve the minutes from the April 10, 2006 Council Manager Workshop as :presented. Seconded by Mayor Longrie Ayes-All 2. Minutes from the April 10, 2006, City Council Meeting Councilmember Cave moved to approve the minutes from the April 10, 2006 City Council Meeting as presented. Seconded by Mayor Longrie Ayes-All April 24, 2006 City Council Meeting 1 F. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS 1. Diane Delgiorno, 655 E. Belmont Lane, asked city staff to choose a safe, environmentally non - evasive measure at Oehrline Lake during the Kenwood Avenue improvements instead of drawing down the lake by 4 feet. City Engineer Ahl concurred with Ms. Delgiorno that the scheduled work should be delayed at the lake. 2. William Kayser, 6408 81S Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, read a one page notice into the record regarding a property (2516 Linwood) that he claims is owned by his mother Evelyn Kayser Wallace. 3. Jeanette Hulet, 2021 Kenwood Drive West, shared her perceptions during the council appointment of Interim City Manager Copeland. 4. Kristy Fischer, 2443 Standridge Avenue, requested clarity on the vision of the City and what is being done to improve the communication between council and staff. Ms. Fischer also asked Mayor Longrie to explain a comment she felt was unwelcoming at the April 10 City Council Meeting. Mayor Longrie reiterated that everyone is welcome to speak at meetings and invited everyone to attend the Mayor's Forum. 5. Ron Rygwalski, 2086 Edgerton Avenue, commented on city storm sewer system maintenance and concerns he has with charges, to residents for this maintenance. 6. Cortland Blomstrand, 1990 E. Kenwood Drive, a Maplewood resident of 57 years, shared a bit of history about the 3M property with council. G. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS 1. Police Department a. Police Chief Thorr Officer William Syr Award. Officer Sypnieski on the 1000 block additional occupan N a Presentation Ila presented the Maplewood Police Department Life Saving a male occupant of a burning home during a March 24 fire , e. He then reentered the burning house to check for Officer Tommy Kong was presented a Maplewood Police Department Letter of Commendation. Officer Kong assisted Officer Sypniewski in securing the male occupant of the home and also reentered the burning house to search for additional occupants. Community Development Block Grant Mayor Longrie announced that Denise Beigbeder, Ramsey County, was present and available to answer questions regarding the Community Development Block Grant Agreement. H. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Longrie moved to approve consent agenda items 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 9. Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -All April 24, 2006 City Council Meeting 2 Mayor Longrie moved to approve consent agenda item 3. Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes- All Mayor Longrie moved to approve consent agenda items 6. Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes- All 2. Conditional Use Permit Review — Woodhill (Dahl Avenue, south of Linwood Avenue) Approved to review the CUP for Woodhill again in six months. This review will be to ensure the developer has continued to keep the site in proper order, to review the status of the project and to review all the conditions of approval. April 24, 2006 City Council Meeting 3 3. Ramsey County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Agreement Approved the joint cooperation agreement with Ramsey County for CDBG money. 4. Amendment to Assessment Agreement — Legacy Village Approved the Special Assessment Agreement Amendment for Legacy Village. 5. Authorization to Purchase Insurance Agent Services Approved the purchase of insurance agent services from Arthur cost of $8,500.00 for the renewal of the city's property and liabil with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. 6. Joint Powers Agreement between the City of the Operation of Mahtomedi Beach Approved the agreement between the City of Maplewc lifeguard services and administrative aquatic services: 7. Approve Purchase of 2006 -2007 Winter Road Salt Authorized the purchase of de -icing salt up to $45,000 8. Approve Purchase of Bituminous Materials Authorized the street superintendent to purchase the neCE maximum of $35,000 as needed to perform street mainten 9. Temporary Gambling — St. Paul /Minneapolis Bulldog Club Adopted the foll'{ Minneapolis Bul the City Ilagher and Company at a trance coverage that is City of Mah edi Beach. i to provide sary bituminous materials up to a nce. roving the temporary gambling resolution for the St. Paul - at the Best Western Maplewood Inn, 1780 County Road D: N 06 -04 -446 BE IT HEREBY RE premises permit for lawfu County Read D, Maplewc LVED,° by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, that the temporary mbling (raffle) is approved for the Best Western Maplewood Inn, 1780 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. 10. Live Burn Training ROG Adopted the submitted Recommended Operating Guidelines (ROG) for live burn training. April 24, 2006 City Council Meeting 4 1. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 7:00 p.m. Conditional Use Permit Review or Revocation — Mapletree Group Home (2831 Southlawn Drive) a. Planner Roberts presented the report. b. Mayor Longrie opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following persons were heard: Jon Brandt, Owner of Mapletree Group Home Stacey Walsh, 1876 Dieter Street, Maplewood (submitted a''petition to the City Clerk) Deborah Mielke, 2796 Southlawn, Maplewood Nicole Zuk, 2799 Southlawn, Maplewood Mick Manders, 2804 Southlawn, Maplewood Stacey Walsh, 1876 Dieter Street, Maplewood Ben Jackson, 2796 Southlawn, Maplewood C. Mayor Longrie closed the public hearing. Councilmember Rossbach language on condition 5. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes- COL Rossbach uenemann and r Longrie, Councilmembers Cave and Motion failed. Mayor Longrie CUP is NOT rE Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes -All A five minutes recess was to 10:02 p.m. Kenwood � Resolution a. City Engineer Ahl presence to nbiect their assessment. 1 Improvements, Project 05 -16 - Assessment Hearing and ion of Assessment Roll the report and informed property owners of their rights if they chose b. Mayor Longrie opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following persons were heard: James Pomroy, 200 Kenwood Drive East, Maplewood Sue Mason, 2173 Payne Avenue, Maplewood Tom Baxster, 2222 Payne Avenue, Maplewood John Carlson, 2216 Payne Avenue, Maplewood Mary Opsahl, 2182 Payne Avenue, Maplewood Dolores Peterson, 1990 Kenwood Drive East, Maplewood Cort Blomstrand, 1990 Kenwood Drive East, Maplewood Dave Schilling, 1955 Greenbrier, Maplewood Jeff Serine, 1951 East Kenwood Drive, Maplewood April 24, 2006 City Council Meeting 5 Mayor Longrie closed the public hearing. Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the following resolution for the adoption of the assessment roll for the Kenwood Area Street Improvement Proiect, It Project 05 -16, less all objections (to be reviewed and recommendations made to the Council on Mav 8. 2006: RESOLUTION 06 -04 -447 ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on March 27 2006, calling for a Public Hearing, the assessment roll for the Kenwood Area Street Improvements, City Project 05- 16, was presented in a Public Hearing format, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and WHEREAS, the following property owners have to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 421 1. Susan and Oakley Surine, 1995 Kenwoo, 2. Shirley Skelton, 2075 Greenbrier Avenue 3. Arlene Vian, 675 Roselawn Avenue. 4. Ronald Rygwalski, 2086 Edgerton Street 5. Joseph Cote, 1942 Lee Street 6. Kim Dean, 108 Kenwood Drive East 7. James and Joanne Roehl, 785 Kenwood 8. Shirley Nelson, 2242 Payne Avenue 9. Shirley Blomstrand, 1990 Kenwood DrivE NOW, THEREFORE, �d objections to tf ummarized as fol Drive Lane ssments according OLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 1. That the City Engineer and City Clerk are hereby instructed to review the objections received, as noted above, along with any and all objections filed at the Assessment Hearing, and report to the City Council at the regular meeting on May 8 2006, as to their recommendations for adjustments. The City Engineer and City Clerk are hereby instructed to delay all assessments proposed for Viking, Searle and Payne Streets and shall be included in the final recommendations of the City Engineer on May 8, 2006. 2. The assessment roll for the Kenwood Area Street Improvements as amended, without those property owners' assessments that have filed objections, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby adopted. Said assessment roll shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 3. Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 15 years, the first installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2007 and shall bear interest at the rate of 5.9 percent per annum for the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2006. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. April 24, 2006 City Council Meeting 4. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, but no later than November 1, 2006, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of the payment, to the city clerk, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and they may, at any time after November 1, 2006, pay to the county auditor the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. 5. The city engineer and city clerk shall forthwith after November 1, 2406, but no later than November 15, 2006, transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over the same manner as other municipal taxes. Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Councilmember Rossba Seconded by Mayor Longrie J. AWARD OF BIDS Kenwood Area Street Improvements, Project 05 -16 - Resolution for Award of Bid a. City Engineer Ahl presented the Councilmember Rossbach moved to ad E SOLUTION FOR AWARD OF BIDS 06 -04 -048 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, that the bid of Forest Lake Contracting in the amount of $4,236,756.46 is the lowest responsible bid for the construction of Kenwood Area Street Improvement, City Project 05 -16, and the mayor and clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with said bidder for and on behalf of the city. The finance director is hereby authorized to make the financial transfers necessary to implement the revised financing plan for the project. A project budget of $5,200,000 shall be established. The proposed financing plan is as follows: Assessments: Ramsey Wash Watershed District: Sanitary Sewer Utility Fund: SPRWS Obligation: WAC Fund Environmental Utility Fund Investment Interest: City general tax levy: Total Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -All $ 1,422,700 (27 %) $ 90,600 (2 %) $ 460,000 (9 %) $339,900 (6 %) $ 80,000 (2 %) $ 303,500 (6 %) $ 60,000 (1 %) $ 2,443,300 (47 %) $ 5,200,000 (100 %) April 24, 2006 City Council Meeting K. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None L. NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution Appointing Responsible Authority a. Interim City Manager Copeland presented the report. Mayor Longrie moved to adopt the following resolution appointing City Clerk Karen Guilfoile as the Responsible Authority for the city: RESOLUTION 06-04-049 Appointment of Responsible Authority WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 13.02, Subdivision 16, as amended, requires that the City of Maplewood appoint an employee as the Responsible Authority to administer the requirements for collection, storage, use and dissemination of data on individuals, within the City and, WHEREAS, the Maplewood City Council shares concern expressed by the legislature on the responsible use of all City data and wishes to satisfy this concern by immediately appointing an administratively qualified Responsible Authority as required under the statute. BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of Maplewood appoints City Clerk Karen Guilfoile as the Responsible Authority for the purposes of meeting all requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, as amended, and with rules as lawfully promulgated by the Commissioner of Administration as published in the State Register on August 31, 1981. Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle Ayes-All 2. By-Law Change Fire Fighters Relief Association a. Fire Department Representative Ed Fitzgerald presented the report. Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the proposed by-law change to Article III, Section 3.12 and delete reference to Oakdale firefighters and adopt by-law changes to Article IX, Section 9.2a to $1,100.00 for 2006 per active fire fighter and $1,200.00 for 2007 per active fire fighter. Seconded by Mayor Longrie Ayes-All 3. Intoxicating Liquor License — Jacse Lee, Best Western Maplewood Inn a. Interim Manager Copeland presented the report. b. Jacse Lee, 778 Viking Drive East, was present for council questions. Councilmember Cave moved to approve the intoxicating liquor license for Jacse Lee to be used at the Best Western Maplewood Inn, 1780 County Road D. Seconded by Mayor Longrie Ayes-All 4. Northeast Suburban Transit (NEST) Appointment April 24, 2006 City Council Meeting 8 a. Councilmember Rossbach presented the report. Councilmember Rossbach moved to appoint Mayor Longrie as the second representative on the NEST Commission. Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes -All M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS 1. Maplewood Community Center Update Mayor Longrie relayed suggestions from residents to add a seasonal membership option and a limited monthly visit membership option (both at a decreased rate) at the Community Center. Item stricken. 3. Council Portraits Mr. Grupa, a Maplewood resident and photographer, offered to take council photos at no charge, requesting recognition only. All councilmembers were in agreement to new photos for the website and will contact Mr. Grupa for arrangements to have individual photos. 4. Tourist Cabin Site Councilmember Rossbach met with Interim Manager Copeland and confirmed city staff is ascertaining some ability to assist residents in negotiating their lease options. 5. Environme Councilmember Juenemann asked residents to make an effort to clean -up their neighborhoods and yards in recognition of Earth Day. April 29 is Maplewood Spring Clean up day at Aldrich Arena 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. The Maplewood Nature Centers is holding a Free Arbor Day Event on Saturday April 29 from 10:00 to noon to celebrate the value of trees. Further details for both events are available on the city website. Sky Warn Chief Lukin stated they had an excellent turnout for the Sky Warn program with 32 people in attendance. 7. NEST Commissi Councilmember Rossbach provided a brief report from the April 11 meeting noting that the city's annual contribution to NEST did not increase for 2006. 8. Rush Line Corridor Councilmember Rossbach reported on April 12 Rush Line Corridor meeting with the main topic relating to a revised joint powers agreement to include St. Louis County (Duluth). The next meeting will be held July 21s 1 p.m. in Duluth which will include a train ride for all in attendance (capacity of approximately 300). April 24, 2006 City Council Meeting 9 Councilmember Rossbach shared a letter from Milo Thompson thanking the city for the use of the Community Center to assist AARP members in the completion of tax forms. Council publicly thanked Mr. Thompson and all of the volunteers for this valuable service he and many volunteers provide and is utilized by many citizens each year. 10. City Manager Position Mayor Longrie and Councilmembers will bring their calendars to the Council Retreat on October 28, 2006, to set a date to hold a workshop on the process for hiring a New City Manager. 11. Volunteer Appreciation Week Councilmember Juenemann announced that the last week in April is Volunteer Appreciation Week and acknowledged and thanked all of the city volunteers for their time and expertise. Ms. Juenemann also acknowledged Administrative Assistants day and thanked all the Administrative Assistants and support staff for all of their continuous hard work. 12. The Council Social Supper Mayor Longrie shared the success of the first council all attendees would, unanimously, 'like to do it again." N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS supper. "The turnout was great and 1. Council Retreat Interim City Manager Copeland remind Retreat on April 28 and felt confident 1 communication open to keep everyone dents they are invited to attend the Council or Dr. Schulz will keep the lines of is toaether toward the future. O. ADJOURNMENT Longrie April 24, 2006 City Council Meeting 10 Agenda Item G1 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: David Fisher, Building Official SUBJECT: Building Safety Week 2006 DATE: May 8, 2006 INTRODUCTION Building Safety Week will be celebrated across the nation and around the world during the week of May 7 — 13, 2006. Building Safety Week raises public awareness of building safety by promoting the use, enforcement and understanding of building safety and fire prevention codes. These are all to help protect lives and property. "Building a Safer World Together" is the theme of Building Safety Discussion Week of 2006. Inspectors, plan reviewers and other code enforcement officials in the city work to ensure the structures you and your families live, work and play in are safe. The Maplewood inspection staff are active members of the International Code Council, an association that develops building safety and fire prevention codes that are used in more than 15,000 jurisdictions across the nation. Building Safety Week, first observed in 1980, is sponsored by the International Code Council Foundation, an organization dedicated to changing the devastating effects of natural disasters and other building tragedies at home and around the world. Our department is using Building Safety Week to educate the community. It is an opportunity to increase public awareness of the role building safety and fire prevention officials, local and state building departments and federal agencies play on the front line of defense to protect lives and property. They are the "silent defenders" who are seldom seen but work daily to ensure safety in the built environment. RECOMMENDATION The City of Maplewood should demonstrate our commitment to building safety and fire prevention in our community by adopting the attached official proclamation designating May 7- 13, 2006, as Building Safety Week. Attachment: Building Safety Week 7 -13 Proclamation PROCLAMATION MUILDING SAFETY WEEK 2006 MAY 7-13 Whereas, through our continuing attention to building safety, we enjoy the comfort and peace of mind of structures that are safe and sound; and, Adopted this 8 m Day of May 2006. Diana Longrie, Mayor Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk AGENDA NO. H -1 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council FROM: Finance Director RE: APPROVAL OF CLAIMS DATE: May 8, 2006 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: $ 145,838.51 Checks 9 69751 thru 4 69792 dated 04/25/06 $ 5,660,478.63 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 04/14/06 thru 04/20/06 $ 1,082,254.59 Checks 4 69793 thru 9 69843 dated 4/21/06 thru 5/02/06 $ 338,432.02 $ 7,227,003.75 PAYROLL $ 565,723.20 $ 2,284.75 $ 568,007.95 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 4/21/06 thru 4/27/06 Total Accounts Payable Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 04/21/06 Payroll Deduction check 9 104902 thru 104903 dated 04/21/06 Total Payroll $ 7,795,011.70 GRAND TOTAL Attached is a detailed listing of these claims. Please call me at 651- 249 -2902 if you have any questions on the attached listing. This will allow me to check the supporting documentation on file if necessary. ds attachments S: \CTY_CLRK\Agenda Lists and Reports 2006\Agenda Reports\05- 08-06 \H1 Approval of Claims.xis vchlist 04/2112006 11:30:14 AM Check Register CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Check Date Vendor Description /Account Amount 69751 4/25/2006 02113 FURSMAN, RICHARD REIMBURSE FOR TUITION 1,824.00 LTD INSURANCE 210.00 69752 4/25/2006 00178 BERGGREN, GORDON NAME SIGN 25.00 69753 4/25/2006 01811 BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC MERCH FOR RESALE 189.00 MERCH FOR RESALE 252.00 MERCH FOR RESALE 63.00 69754 4/25/2006 03647 COURTERPORT CORPORATION REPAIR EQUIPMENT 390.00 69755 4/25/2006 03619 DRAIN KING INC PROJ 05 -16 TELEVISE SEWER 148.00 PROJ 05 -16 TELEVISE SEWER 173.00 PROJ 05 -16 TELEVISE SEWER 321.25 PROJ 05 -16 TELEVISE SEWER 247.00 PROJ 05 -16 TELEVISE SEWER 247.00 PROJ 05 -16 TELEVISE SEWER 247.00 PROJ 05 -16 TELEVISE SEWER 247.00 PROJ 05 -16 TELEVISE SEWER 247.00 69756 4/25/2006 01372 DYNAMEX DELIVERS NOW DELIVER CAFR TO SPRINGSTED 48.41 69757 4/25/2006 03648 EDGERTON COMMUNITY DRAMA CLUB CHARITABLE GAMBLING AWARD 900.00 69758 4/25/2006 03576 EUREKA RECYCLING RECYCLING - MAR 16,545.78 69759 4/25/2006 00532 FRANK MADDEN & ASSOCIATES LABOR RELATIONS SERVICES 553.00 69760 4/25/2006 00585 GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL NET BILLABLE TICKETS - MAR 336.40 69761 4/25/2006 03597 HOFMEISTER, MARY JO REIMB FOR MILEAGE 3/17 - 3/31 13.58 69762 4/25/2006 03330 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC PROJ 04 -21 GLADSTONE REDEV 2,200.98 69763 4/25/2006 00483 IDEACOM MID - AMERICA REPAIR VOICE MAIL SYSTEM 273.00 69764 4/25/2006 00755 JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC TURN OUT GEAR 13,799.47 69765 4/25/2006 02196 JORGENSON CONST INC PROJ 03 -19 PW BLDG ADDITION 72,825.68 69766 4/25/2006 00945 MASYS CORP STRATUS SOFTWARE 738.68 69767 4/25/2006 03651 MAYER OPTICAL SHOP EYE GLASS LENSES FOR SCBA 84.66 69768 4/25/2006 00959 MCLAUGHLIN, BILLY MCC THEATER PROG REV 4/7 & 4/8 7,150.52 69769 4/25/2006 03649 MEISSNER, BRENT REIMB FOR SAFETY SHOES 79.99 69770 4/25/2006 00986 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MONTHLY SAC - MAR 6,138.00 69771 4/25/2006 01126 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE PERA LIFE INSURANCE - APR 380.00 69772 4/25/2006 01175 NORTH ST PAUL, CITY OF MONTHLY UTILITIES 2,923.08 69773 4/25/2006 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF JOHN WYKOFF - CUP 676.00 69774 4/25/2006 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF PROG MISSIONARY - DBL 540.00 69775 4/25/2006 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF J CLENDENEN- PR #03 -36 370.36 69776 4/25/2006 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF MN COALITION - EVENT 150.00 69777 4/25/2006 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF DIANA CARLSON - 95.85 69778 4/25/2006 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF DOROTHY EK - MEMBERSHIP 58.00 69779 4/25/2006 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF BARBARA FARRELL - MCC 8.00 69780 4/25/2006 01254 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY MERCH FOR RESALE 270.60 MERCH FOR RESALE 449.60 69781 4/25/2006 01360 REINHART FOODSERVICE MERCH FOR RESALE 183.66 MERCH FOR RESALE 172.78 MERCH FOR RESALE 158.29 69782 4125/2006 02001 ROSEVILLE, CITY OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT 625.00 69783 4125/2006 03398 SHAMROCK GROUP MERCH FOR RESALE 171.00 69784 4/25/2006 01497 SPRINGSTED UPDATE LEGACY VILLAGE 1,835.00 69785 4/25/2006 00198 ST PAUL REGIONAL WATER SRVS WATER UTILITY 723.19 69786 4/25/2006 01504 ST PAUL, CITY OF MONTHLY WIRELESS REPORTING - 3,798.00 69787 4/25/2006 03650 STRETCH- DEMARS INC TRAINING REGISTRATION 100.00 69788 4/25/2006 02853 SVENDSEN, JOANNE REIMB FOR MILEAGE 1/5 - 4/17 6.23 69789 4/25/2006 01568 SWANSON, LYLE REIMB FOR MILEAGE 2/15 - 4/14 34.27 69790 4/25/2006 01615 THERMO -DYNE, INC. REPAIR DEHUMIDIFICATION 2,190.74 69790 4/25/2006 01615 THERMO -DYNE, INC. REPAIR DEHUMIDIFICATION 2,418.10 69791 4/25/2006 01734 WALSH, WILLIAM P. COMMERCIAL PLUMBING 882.36 69792 4/25/2006 01190 XCEL ENERGY SEMINAR 4/26 100.00 42 Checks in this report Total checks : 145,838.51 2 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Disbursements via Debits to Checking account Transmitted Settlement Date Date Payee 04/13/06 04/10/06 04/13/06 04/14/06 04/17/06 04/18/06 04/13/06 04/18/06 04/14/06 04/19/06 04/20/06 04/20/06 04/14/06 04/14/06 04/14/06 04/17/06 04/18/06 04/19/06 04/19/06 04/19/06 04/19/06 04/20/06 04/20/06 04/20/06 MN State Treasurer MN Dept of Revenue MN Dept of Natural Resources MN State Treasurer MN State Treasurer MN State Treasurer MN Dept of Revenue Pitney Bowes US Bank VISA One Card* MN State Treasurer Dain Rauscher Citigroup TOTAL Description Drivers License /Deputy Registrar MN Care Tax DNR electronic licenses Drivers License /Deputy Registrar Drivers License /Deputy Registrar Drivers License /Deputy Registrar Sales Tax Postage Purchasing card items Drivers License /Deputy Registrar Investment purchase Investment purchase *Detailed listing of VISA purchases is attached. Amount 12,868.19 4,061.67 1,195.00 9,033.25 20, 576.87 14,587.63 9,586.00 2,985.00 55, 011.07 12,446.64 2,070,138.58 3,447,988.73 b,bbU,41b.b6 Cl VISATransactions 4 -1 -06 to 4 -14 -06 Trans Date Posting Date Merchant Name Trans Amount Name 20060413 20060414 ZZOUNDS.COM $415.74 BRUCE K ANDERSON 20060403 20060405 STREICHERS INC $488.84 SCOTT ANDREWS 20060404 20060406 CIRCUIT CITY SS #3137 $26.61 SCOTT ANDREWS 20060401 20060403 WAL -MART #2087 ($17.62) MANDY ANZALDI 20060401 20060403 WAL MART $18.23 MANDY ANZALDI 20060404 20060405 CUB FOODS, INC. $7.07 MANDY ANZALDI 20060413 20060414 WALGREEN 00073882 $10.66 MANDY ANZALDI 20060404 20060406 SHRED -IT 01 OF 01 $173.16 JOHN BANICK 20060405 20060407 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED $1,355.40 JOHN BANICK 20060405 20060407 GRAFIX SHOPPE $720.00 JOHN BANICK 20060410 20060411 CHIEFS TOWING $271.89 JOHN BANICK 20060411 20060413 WOLF CAMERA #1530 $5.10 JOHN BANICK 20060330 20060403 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE $8.22 JIM BEHAN 20060331 20060403 WALLY'S UPHOLS80110026 $1,161.52 JIM BEHAN 20060405 20060407 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE $23.05 JIM BEHAN 20060407 20060410 PRECOR $704.50 JIM BEHAN 20060408 20060410 CYBEX - 01 $35.14 JIM BEHAN 20060411 20060412 TRI -DIM FILTER CORP $14.49 JIM BEHAN 20060411 20060412 VERIZON WRLS 12KW $45.35 JIM BEHAN 20060411 20060412 NAPA AUTO PARTS # 28438 $39.33 JIM BEHAN 20060412 20060413 MUSKA LIGHTING CENTER $860.20 JIM BEHAN 20060412 20060414 AQUA LOGIC INC $759.44 JIM BEHAN 20060331 20060403 GOODYEAR AUTO SRV CT 6920 $44.00 JOSEPH BERGERON 20060402 20060403 WALGREEN 00016873 $31.93 JOSEPH BERGERON 20060411 20060412 ADOPT A WATERSHED $229.00 OAKLEY BIESANZ 20060403 20060405 OFFICE MAX 00002204 $212.96 RON BOURQUIN 20060404 20060405 USPS 2663650015 $288.45 ROGER BREHEIM 20060404 20060406 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $23.33 ROGER BREHEIM 20060410 20060411 MENARDS 3059 ($76.59) ROGER BREHEIM 20060410 20060411 MENARDS 3059 $289.49 ROGER BREHEIM 20060410 20060411 MENARDS 3059 $114.74 ROGER BREHEIM 20060412 20060413 MENARDS 3059 $18.53 ROGER BREHEIM 20060404 20060405 FEDEX KINKO'S #0617 $53.25 HEIDI CAREY 20060405 20060407 OFFICE MAX 00002204 $20.10 HEIDI CAREY 20060407 20060410 DGI *DYNAMIC GRAPHICS $79.00 HEIDI CAREY 20060410 20060411 FEDEX KINKO'S #0617 $59.64 HEIDI CAREY 20060410 20060411 INNOVATIVE COLOR PRINTING $351.45 HEIDI CAREY 20060411 20060413 OFFICE MAX 00002204 $13.40 HEIDI CAREY 20060405 20060406 G & K SERVICES 006 $577.85 LINDA CROSSON 20060405 20060406 WMS *WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY $844.70 LINDA CROSSON 20060405 20060406 WMS *WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY $870.69 LINDA CROSSON 20060406 20060410 BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLD $36.72 LINDA CROSSON 20060405 20060406 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS $15.98 ROBERTA DARST 20060331 20060403 MERIT CHEVROLET CO. $16.74 DAVE EDSON 20060411 20060413 HOULE FARM GARDEN & PET $50.70 DAVE EDSON 20060320 20060406 OVERHEAD DOOR OF NORTH $480.95 LARRY FARR 20060331 20060403 CINTAS FIRST AID #431 $54.69 LARRY FARR 20060404 20060405 INTEREUM INC $26.20 LARRY FARR 20060404 20060406 METRO MECHANICAL 01 OF 01 $338.50 LARRY FARR 20060405 20060406 G & K SERVICES 006 $201.77 LARRY FARR 20060407 20060410 CONTINENTAL RESEARCH $211.08 LARRY FARR 20060407 20060410 ELECTRO WATCHMAN INC $265.91 LARRY FARR 20060407 20060410 SERVICEMASTER PROF SVC $979.80 LARRY FARR 20060410 20060411 PETSMART 00004614 ($26.61) LARRY FARR 4 VISATransactions 4 -1 -06 to 4 -14 -06 Trans Date Posting Date Merchant Name Trans Amount Name 20060410 20060412 COMMERCIAL KITCHEN SVCS $5.89 LARRY FARR 20060410 20060412 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $188.10 LARRY FARR 20060409 20060410 VERIZON WRLS 12KW $76.90 DANIEL F FAUST 20060404 20060405 CSN STORES.COM $89.99 SHANN FINWALL 20060330 20060403 DEEP ROCK WATER $104.57 DAVID FISHER 20060330 20060403 HOMETECH SOLUTIONS W01 $27.24 MYCHAL FOWLDS 20060330 20060403 RADIO SHACK 00161455 $32.46 MYCHAL FOWLDS 20060331 20060403 METRO SALES INC $1,020.27 MYCHAL FOWLDS 20060403 20060404 CABLING SERVICES CORPORA $814.90 MYCHAL FOWLDS 20060403 20060404 CABLING SERVICES CORPORA $4,193.44 MYCHAL FOWLDS 20060401 20060403 DR *WWW.SHAREIT.INFO $29.95 NICK FRANZEN 20060404 20060405 HP DIRECT- PUBLICSECTOR $2,884.36 NICK FRANZEN 20060406 20060410 CIRCUIT CITY SS #3137 $115.00 NICK FRANZEN 20060407 20060407 HP DIRECT- PUBLICSECTOR $206.61 NICK FRANZEN 20060407 20060410 CIRCUIT CITY SS #3137 $58.55 NICK FRANZEN 20060408 20060410 DR *TARGUS US ONLINE S $104.52 NICK FRANZEN 20060411 20060413 HP PARTS SUPPORT $422.82 NICK FRANZEN 20060412 20060414 HP PARTS SUPPORT $510.14 NICK FRANZEN 20060405 20060410 PRAIRIE MOON NURSERY, INC $161.32 VIRGINIA GAYNOR 20060411 20060413 THE HOME DEPOT 2810 $90.72 VIRGINIA GAYNOR 20060331 20060403 PRICE CHOPPER INC00 OF 00 $1,748.52 MIKE GRAF 20060407 20060410 AKA *ADOLF KIEFER ASSOC $414.53 MIKE GRAF 20060411 20060412 DAYDOTS $17.09 MIKE GRAF 20060406 20060410 DEGE GARDEN CENTER $15.92 JANET M GREW HAYMAN 20060403 20060405 PANERA BREAD #3459 $164.67 KAREN E GUILFOILE 20060410 20060411 PROPERTYKEY.COM, INC. $50.00 KAREN E GUILFOILE 20060331 20060403 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS $90.12 LORI HANSOM 20060406 20060407 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS $54.91 LORI HANSOM 20060410 20060411 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS $199.26 LORI HANSOM 20060331 20060403 HOCKENBERGS $9.84 PATRICK HEFFERNAN 20060331 20060403 MENARDS 3059 $5.48 PATRICK HEFFERNAN 20060401 20060403 MENARDS 3059 $21.25 PATRICK HEFFERNAN 20060403 20060404 TARGET 00011858 $18.09 PATRICK HEFFERNAN 20060405 20060406 MENARDS 3059 $26.12 PATRICK HEFFERNAN 20060408 20060410 MENARDS 3059 $11.68 PATRICK HEFFERNAN 20060403 20060405 ICI- DULUX- PAINTS #0092 $1,260.11 GARY HINNENKAMP 20060407 20060410 OFFICE MAX 00002204 $15.82 RON HORWATH 20060331 20060403 BLUE RIBBON BAIT & TACKL $6.18 ANN E HUTCHINSON 20060401 20060403 DE LAGE LANDEN OP01 OF 01 $206.61 ANN E HUTCHINSON 20060405 20060406 G & K SERVICES 006 $60.28 ANN E HUTCHINSON 20060406 20060410 KNOWLANS #2 $16.41 ANN E HUTCHINSON 20060411 20060412 SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS $35.33 ANN E HUTCHINSON 20060413 20060414 IRON AGE CORP $159.95 DON JONES 20060413 20060414 BATTERIES PLUS $276.05 FLINT KAKIS 20060413 20060414 FITNESS WHOLESALE INC $109.05 MARY B KOEHNEN 20060331 20060403 VERIZON WRLS 12KW $84.43 DUWAYNE KONEWKO 20060403 20060404 SUBWAY #15786 $12.68 DAVID KVAM 20060405 20060407 KEYS ROBERT STREET CAFE $12.85 DAVID KVAM 20060406 20060407 SUBWAY #15786 $17.59 DAVID KVAM 20060413 20060414 GAL *GALLS INC $65.94 DAVID KVAM 20060331 20060403 U OF M CCE ON LINE ($40.00) ERIN M LABEREE 20060404 20060405 FEDEX KINKO'S #0617 $685.86 ERIN M LABEREE 20060411 20060411 SPRINTPCS AUTOPYMT RC1 $54.16 ERIN M LABEREE 20060331 20060403 HYATT HOTELS NEWPORTER $1,642.75 SHERYL L LE VISATransactions 4 -1 -06 to 4 -14 -06 Trans Date Posting Date Merchant Name Trans Amount Name 20060403 20060404 VERIZON WRLS 12KW $45.35 SHERYL L LE 20060405 20060406 FEDEX SHP 03/31/06 AB# $88.31 SHERYL L LE 20060327 20060403 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $548.88 MICHAEL LIDBERG 20060331 20060406 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $117.85 MICHAEL LIDBERG 20060408 20060410 FRATTALLONE'S ACE HDWE $7.96 MICHAEL LIDBERG 20060330 20060403 MILLS FLEET FARM #27 $205.91 DENNIS LINDORFF 20060331 20060403 MENARDS 3059 $31.52 DENNIS LINDORFF 20060407 20060410 NORTHERN TOOL EQUIP -MN $274.73 DENNIS LINDORFF 20060407 20060410 NORTHERN TOOL EQUIP -MN $12.09 DENNIS LINDORFF 20060330 20060403 FURY DODGE CHRYSLER $55.23 STEVE LUKIN 20060401 20060403 AIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL INT $962.31 STEVE LUKIN 20060405 20060406 WMS *WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY $268.11 STEVE LUKIN 20060407 20060410 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT $928.87 STEVE LUKIN 20060411 20060412 SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS $882.50 STEVE LUKIN 20060403 20060405 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE $257.26 MARK MARUSKA 20060404 20060405 MAUTZ #3525 $24.50 MARK MARUSKA 20060405 20060406 G & K SERVICES 006 $277.39 MARK MARUSKA 20060405 20060406 METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY INC $739.91 MARK MARUSKA 20060406 20060410 VIKING ELECTRIC -ST. PAUL $148.97 MARK MARUSKA 20060406 20060410 VIKING ELECTRIC -ST. PAUL $595.84 MARK MARUSKA 20060412 20060413 METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY INC $239.36 MARK MARUSKA 20060331 20060403 CINTAS FIRST AID #431 $86.23 BRYAN NAGEL 20060406 20060407 SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS $477.25 BRYAN NAGEL 20060413 20060414 CERTIFIED LABORATORIES $1,451.37 BRYAN NAGEL 20060413 20060414 SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS $448.73 BRYAN NAGEL 20060410 20060411 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS $214.59 JEAN NELSON 20060331 20060403 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS $73.06 AMY NIVEN 20060404 20060405 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS $193.80 AMY NIVEN 20060405 20060406 G & K SERVICES 006 $364.50 AMY NIVEN 20060405 20060406 G & K SERVICES 006 $213.00 AMY NIVEN 20060405 20060406 G & K SERVICES 006 $87.05 AMY NIVEN 20060413 20060414 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS $80.87 KATHLEEN PECK HALL 20060330 20060403 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE $36.00 PHILIP F POWELL 20060403 20060405 BDS TACTICAL INC $73.26 PHILIP F POWELL 20060410 20060411 BOTACH TACTICAL $43.71 PHILIP F POWELL 20060411 20060413 THE SUPPLY SERGEANT $22.50 PHILIP F POWELL 20060406 20060410 LEEANN CHIN INC #17 $29.63 ROBERT PRECHTEL 20060412 20060413 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC $529.00 ROBERT PRECHTEL 20060331 20060403 GE CAPITAL $331.22 WILLIAM J PRIEFER 20060402 20060403 SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS $232.76 WILLIAM J PRIEFER 20060411 20060413 CENTURY COMMUNITY TECHNIC $327.00 WILLIAM J PRIEFER 20060401 20060403 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS #19 $22.28 STEVEN PRIEM 20060403 20060404 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $91.93 STEVEN PRIEM 20060403 20060404 ZIEGLER INC CREDIT DEPT $63.29 STEVEN PRIEM 20060403 20060405 POLAR CHEVROLET {$483.55} STEVEN PRIEM 20060403 20060405 RAPID WIRELESS BURNSVILLE $46.22 STEVEN PRIEM 20060403 20060405 TOUSLEY FORD 127200021 $392.31 STEVEN PRIEM 20060403 20060405 EAT INC $180.92 STEVEN PRIEM 20060403 20060405 POLAR CHEVROLET $483.55 STEVEN PRIEM 20060404 20060405 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS #19 $187.88 STEVEN PRIEM 20060404 20060405 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $124.07 STEVEN PRIEM 20060404 20060407 AMERICAN FASTENER & SUPPL ($5.51) STEVEN PRIEM 20060404 20060407 AMERICAN FASTENER & SUPPL $48.90 STEVEN PRIEM 20060405 20060406 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $68.03 STEVEN PRIEM VISATransactions 4 -1 -06 to 4 -14 -06 Trans Date Posting Date Merchant Name Trans Amount Name 20060405 20060406 PAM OIL INC $260.69 STEVEN PRIEM 20060406 20060407 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $87.39 STEVEN PRIEM 20060406 20060410 BAUER BULT TRE33200023 $378.55 STEVEN PRIEM 20060406 20060410 FASTENAL CO MO TO $54.52 STEVEN PRIEM 20060406 20060410 NORTHERN FACTORY SALES $135.63 STEVEN PRIEM 20060406 20060410 ROSEDALE AUTOMOTIVE $58.04 STEVEN PRIEM 20060407 20060410 BAUER BULT TRE33200023 $90.37 STEVEN PRIEM 20060407 20060413 TRI STATE BOBCAT INC $498.76 STEVEN PRIEM 20060410 20060412 MERIT CHEVROLET CO. $106.16 STEVEN PRIEM 20060411 20060413 WALSER BUICK PONTIAC GMC $146.18 STEVEN PRIEM 20060412 20060413 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC $31.57 STEVEN PRIEM 20060413 20060414 ANDERSON SHOE STORE $99.99 STEVEN PRIEM 20060413 20060414 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $92.27 STEVEN PRIEM 20060413 20060414 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $15.40 STEVEN PRIEM 20060413 20060414 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $73.83 STEVEN PRIEM 20060413 20060414 NORTHERN TOOL EQUIPMNT $163.97 STEVEN PRIEM 20060412 20060414 MN OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH $288.50 TERRIE RAMEAUX 20060413 20060414 NOVACARE REHBIHEALT $180.00 TERRIE RAMEAUX 20060331 20060403 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $31.80 MICHAEL REILLY 20060405 20060410 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $894.82 MICHAEL REILLY 20060406 20060410 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $20.77 MICHAEL REILLY 20060410 20060411 HILLYARD INC MINNEAPOLIS $104.17 MICHAEL REILLY 20060330 20060403 GRAND LODGE & WATER PARK $100.00 AUDRA ROBBINS 20060406 20060407 TARGET 00011858 $5.33 AUDRA ROBBINS 20060411 20060412 TARGET 00011858 $28.57 AUDRA ROBBINS 20060403 20060405 MILLS FLEET FARM #27 $138.25 JAMES SCHINDELDECKER 20060404 20060405 ST PAUL STAMP WORKS INC $81.80 DEB SCHMIDT 20060405 20060406 STAPLES SCC #467 $41.39 DEB SCHMIDT 20060407 20060410 CURTIS 1000 $129.35 DEB SCHMIDT 20060413 20060414 STAPLES SCC #467 $47.23 DEB SCHMIDT 20060406 20060407 CLOVER SUPER FOODS $141.14 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT 20060406 20060410 TICKETS.COM 00 OF 00 $627.99 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT 20060410 20060412 PC NAME TAG $146.31 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT 20060411 20060413 ARAMARK REF SVS #6013- $297.27 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT 20060412 20060414 RADIO SHACK 00161133 $40.19 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT 20060412 20060414 RADIO SHACK 00161455 $30.00 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT 20060330 20060403 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC $65.95 MICHAEL SHORTREED 20060407 20060410 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC $36.74 MICHAEL SHORTREED 20060407 20060410 T- MOBILE $43.85 ANDREA SINDT 20060408 20060410 SPRINT *WIRELESS SVCS $430.86 ANDREA SINDT 20060402 20060403 TARGET 00006940 $21.04 PAULINE STAPLES 20060403 20060405 ASPEN MILLS 8005717343 $524.57 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 20060403 20060405 ASPEN MILLS 8005717343 $192.00 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 20060403 20060405 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE $283.77 LYLE SWANSON 20060404 20060406 TWIN CITY HARDWARE HALE $28.71 LYLE SWANSON 20060406 20060407 NEEDELS SUPPLY INC $82.88 LYLE SWANSON 20060407 20060410 STATE SUPPLY COMPANY $22.23 LYLE SWANSON 20060411 20060413 ENGRAPHICS, INC $36.74 LYLE SWANSON 20060411 20060413 FOREST PRODUCTS SUPPLY $15.98 LYLE SWANSON 20060402 20060403 FSH COMMUNICATION01 OF 01 $58.58 JUDY TETZLAFF 20060408 20060410 QWESTCOMM *TN612 $140.58 JUDY TETZLAFF 20060408 20060410 QWESTCOMM *TN612 $70.29 JUDY TETZLAFF 20060408 20060410 QWESTCOMM *TN612 $398.34 JUDY TETZLAFF 20060408 20060410 QWESTCOMM *TN612 $70.29 JUDY TETZLAFF 7 VISATransactions 4 -1 -06 to 4 -14 -06 Trans Date Posting Date Merchant Name Trans Amount Name 20060408 20060410 QWESTCOMM *TN612 $99.68 JUDY TETZLAFF 20060408 20060410 QWESTCOMM *TN612 $70.29 JUDY TETZLAFF 20060408 20060410 QWESTCOMM *TN612 $99.68 JUDY TETZLAFF 20060408 20060410 QWESTCOMM *TN612 $99.68 JUDY TETZLAFF 20060408 20060410 QWESTCOMM *TN612 $99.68 JUDY TETZLAFF 20060408 20060410 QWESTCOMM *TN612 $375.28 JUDY TETZLAFF 20060331 20060403 HEJNY RENTAL $8.66 TODD TEVLIN 20060412 20060414 OFFICE MAX 00002204 $30.87 JUDY WEGWERTH 20060407 20060410 FREDPRYOR /CAREERTRACK $195.00 SUSAN ZWIEG $55,011.07 vchlist Check Register 0412812006 9:03:33 AM CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Check Date Vendor Description /Account Amount 69793 69794 69795 69796 69797 69798 69799 69800 69801 69802 69803 69804 69805 69806 69807 69808 69809 69810 69811 69812 69813 69814 69815 69816 69817 69818 69819 69820 69821 69822 69823 69824 69825 69826 69827 69828 69829 69830 69831 69832 69833 69834 4/21/2006 VOID 412412006 01083 MDR A 412612006 02274 SPRINT 412712006 02033 MN TWINS 5/2/2006 02113 FURSMAN, RICHARD 51212006 03375 ASHBY, MARK 5/2/2006 00174 BELDE, STAN 51212006 03153 BLUE RHINO STUDIO INC 5/2/2006 02914 BLUECROSS BLUESHIELD OF MN 5/212006 03109 CLIA LABORATORY PROGRAM 5/2/2006 02929 CNAGLAC 51212006 02071 FISHER, DAVID 5/2/2006 03365 FRANZEN, NICK 512/2006 00589 GRAF, DAVE 5/2/2006 00668 HIEBERT, STEVEN 51212006 03597 HOFMEISTER, MARY JO 5/212006 00483 IDEACOM MID - AMERICA 5/2/2006 03654 KELLY, JIM 5/2/2006 00856 LE, SHERRIE L 5/2/2006 02966 LU, JOHNNIE 51212006 03637 MAINTENANCE EXPERTS INC 5/2/2006 00935 MAPLEWOOD FIRE FIGHTERS RELIEF 512/2006 00936 MAPLEWOOD HISTORICAL SOCIETY 5/2/2006 03612 MAS MODERN MARKETING 51212006 01819 MCLEOD USA 5/212006 00975 MERIT CHEVROLET CO 512/2006 02872 METLIFE SBC 5/2/2006 00985 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 51212006 01085 MN LIFE INSURANCE 5/212006 01095 MODERN FENCE & CONST INC 5/212006 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR 5/2/2006 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR 51212006 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR 5/2/2006 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR 512/2006 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR 5/2/2006 01340 REGIONS HOSPITAL 512/2006 03172 RYAN CONTRACTING COMPANY 5/2/2006 01397 RYAN PLUMBING & HEATING CO. 51212006 01418 SAM'S CLUB DIRECT 5/2/2006 03278 SKRYPEK'S DAIRY QUEEN 512/2006 01497 SPRINGSTED 5/2/2006 00198 ST PAUL REGIONAL WATER SRVS 0 0.00 TITLE CLERK TRAINING - 4 40.00 CELL PHONE 2/7 - 4/6 413.66 DARE TWINS GAME TICKETS 1,078.00 REIMB FOR TUITION 2,805.00 PARKING LOT RENT - MAY 1,000.00 K -9 MAINTENANCE - MAY 35.00 TAXIDERMY LABELS & DEER SIGN 2,000.00 MONTHLY PREMIUM 140,237.50 CERTIFICATE FEE 150.00 LONG TERM CARE INS 789.28 REIMB FOR MILEAGE 111 - 4120 213.16 REIMB INTERNET /CELL 229.02 KARATE INSTRUCTOR 414 - 4125 102.25 K -9 MAINTENANCE - MAY 35.00 REIMB FOR MILEAGE 414 - 4120 12.50 PROJ 03 -19 DIGITAL PHONES - 536.76 PROJ 03 -19 DIGITAL PHONES 536.76 PROJ 03 -19 DIGITAL PHONES 1,477.88 SOCCER PROGRAM INSTRUCTOR 360.00 REIMB FOR MEALS 3128 - 3/29 52.00 REIMB FOR MEAL & UNIFORM 76.71 SEAL CERAMIC TILE FLOORS 3,272.74 ANNUAL CITY CONTRIBUTION 86,000.00 CHARITABLE GAMBLING AWARD 9,500.00 PROGRAM SUPPLIES 50115 LOCAL PHONE SRV 3116 - 4115 2,097.34 TRANSMISSION FOR TRUCK #541 2,727.47 TRANSMISSION CORE RETURN - 745.50 MONTHLY DENTAL PREMIUM 9,297.46 WASTEWATER - MAY 199,21184 MONTHLY PREMIUM 4,154.80 REPAIR CHAIN LINK FENCE 725.00 REF CARRIE KISSLING - AMB 137.80 LEO STI RENS - SPEAKER 63.89 REF R ORTHMEYER -AMB 02014917 50.80 REF BARBARA FARRELL - GYM 35.00 REF TUESDAY MORNING - FALSE 25.00 PHARMACY SUPPLIES 319.93 ACLS TRAINING 125.00 ACLS TRAINING 125.00 ACLS TRAINING 250.00 PHARMACY SUPPLIES 1,103.60 PROJ 03 -26 LEGACY PRKWY THRU 76,279.08 RP2 TEST 345.00 BIRTHDAY PROGRAM CAKES 25.74 GYM SUPPLIES 167.08 BIRTHDAY PROGRAM CAKES 38.61 MERCH FOR RESALE 124.87 PROGRAM SUPPLIES 167.89 MERCH FOR RESALE 125,01 MERCH FOR RESALE 77.60 BIRTHDAY PROGRAM CAKES 42.77 GYM SUPPLIES 197.84 BIRTHDAY PROGRAM CAKES 179.75 2006 BOND ISSUE FEES 32,199.42 WATER UTILITY 75.92 0 vchlist 0412812006 9:03:33 AM Check Register CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Check Date Vendor 69835 5/212006 01683 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 69836 5/2/2006 00529 UNION SECURITY INSURANCE CO 69837 5/2/2006 02165 URS CORPORATION 69838 5/2/2006 02464 US BANK 69839 5/2/2006 01734 WALSH, WILLIAM P. 69840 5/2/2006 01750 WATSON CO INC, THE 69841 51212006 02410 WELLS FARGO LEASING INC 69842 5/2/2006 01190 XCEL ENERGY 69843 5/212006 01798 YOCUM OIL CO. 51 Checks in this report Description /Account Amount BULLETPROOF VEST 68150 BULLETPROOF VEST 682.50 STD PLAN 4043120 -0 -1 MAY 1,800.94 MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM 3,12101 PROJ 02 -07 ENGINEERING FEES 299,598.29 PROD 02 -07 & 02 -08 ENGINEERING 156,794.25 PAYING AGENT FEES 450.00 PAYING AGENT FEES 450.00 PAYING AGENT FEES 431.25 PAYING AGENT FEES 43125 PAYING AGENT FEES 215.63 COMMERCIAL PLUMBING INSP 89.44 MERCH FOR RESALE 19029 COPIER LEASE 419 TO 519 1,467.57 ODL ST LIGHT MAINT 41.40 ELECTRIC UTILITY 12,367.22 GAS UTILITY 7,082.51 UNLEADED 89 OCTANE BLUE 16,22168 Total checks : 1,082,254.59 im CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Disbursements via Debits to Checking account Transmitted Settlement Date Date Payee 04/20/06 04/21/06 04/13/06 04/20/06 04/21/06 04/21/06 04/21/06 04/21/06 04/24/06 04/21/06 04/21/06 04/21/06 04/25/06 04/26/06 04/24/06 04/21/06 04/21/06 04/21/06 04/21/06 04/24/06 04/24/06 04/24/06 04/24/06 04/25/06 04/25/06 04/25/06 04/25/06 04/26/06 04/27/06 04/27/06 MN State Treasurer ICMA (Vantagepointe) MN Dept of Revenue MN Dept of Natural Resources MN State Treasurer U.S. Treasurer P.E.R.A. Orchard Trust MN State Treasurer MN State Treasurer MidAmerica - ING Labor Unions MN State Treasurer MN State Treasurer ARC Administration TOTAL Description Drivers License /Deputy Registrar Deferred Compensation Fuel Tax DNR electronic licenses Drivers License /Deputy Registrar Federal Payroll Tax P. E.R.A. Deferred Compensation Drivers License /Deputy Registrar State Payroll Tax HRA Flex plan Union Dues Drivers License /Deputy Registrar Drivers License /Deputy Registrar DCRP & Flex plan payments Amount 13, 501.28 7,210.55 476.40 1,411.50 12, 509.43 122,521.35 61, 550.28 25,934.62 28,965.06 22, 595.52 3,123.98 3,287.34 16,013.75 13,475.54 5,855.42 I� CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD 12 CHECK 9 CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 04121106 CAVE, REBECCA 397.80 dd 04/21/06 HJELLE, ERIK 397.80 dd 04/21/06 JUENEMANN, KATHLEEN 397.80 dd 04/21/06 ROSSBACH, WILLIAM 397.80 dd 04/21/06 COLEMAN, MELINDA 4,218.88 dd 04/21/06 DARST, ROBERTA 1,880.86 dd 04/21/06 FURSMAN, RICHARD 16,982.19 dd 04/21/06 FARR, LARRY 1,821.04 dd 04/21/06 SWANSON, LYLE 1,711.57 dd 04/21106 LE, JENNIFER 153.00 dd 04/21/06 LE, SHERYL 4,121.65 dd 04/21/06 RAMEAUX, THERESE 2,448.11 dd 04/21/06 FAUST, DANIEL 4,292.22 dd 04/21/06 SCHMIDT, DEBORAH 1,570.96 dd 04/21/06 ANDERSON, CAROLS 1,238.69 dd 04/21/06 BAUMAN, GAYLE 3,537.43 dd 04/21/06 JACKSON, MARY 1,873.35 dd 04/21/06 KELSEY, CONNIE 842.17 dd 04/21/06 TETZLAFF, JUDY 1,873.35 dd 04/21/06 FRY, PATRICIA 1,738.95 dd 04/21/06 GUILFOILE, KAREN 2,969.70 dd 04/21/06 MORSON, JOHN 638.40 dd 04/21/06 SPANGLER, EDNA 793.77 dd 04/21/06 JAGOE, CAROL 1,679.66 dd 04 /21/06 JOHNSON, BONNIE 1,090.56 dd 04/21/06 MECHELKE, SHERRIE 1,036.89 dd 04/21/06 MOY, PAMELA 798.19 dd 04/21/06 OLSON, SANDRA 1,456.40 dd 04/21/06 OSTER, ANDREA 1,812.75 dd 04/21/06 WEAVER, KRISTINE 1,839.76 dd 04/21/06 BANICK, JOHN 4,017.82 dd 04/21/06 CORCORAN, THERESA 1,693.35 dd 04/21106 POWELL, PHILIP 2,394.54 dd 04/21/06 RICHIE, CAROLE 1,688.28 dd 04/21/06 THOMALLA, DAVID 4,429.00 dd 04/21/06 ABEL, CLINT 2,422.18 dd 04/21/06 ALDRIDGE, MARK 2,963.32 dd 04/21/06 ANDREWS, SCOTT 3,395.50 dd 04/21/06 BAKKE, LONN 2,560.09 dd 04/21/06 BELDE, STANLEY 2,794.57 dd 04/21/06 BIERDEMAN, BRIAN 2,417.26 dd 04/21106 BOHL, JOHN 3,408.75 dd 04/21/06 BUSACK, DANIEL 2,543.58 12 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD 13 CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 04121106 COFFEY, KEVIN 2,331.55 dd 04/21/06 CROTTY, KERRY 2,864.38 dd 04/21/06 DOBLAR, RICHARD 3,040.49 dd 04/21/06 GABRIEL, ANTHONY 1,988.74 dd 04/21/06 HEINZ, STEPHEN 2,770.78 dd 04/21/06 HIEBERT, STEVEN 2,760.82 dd 04/21/06 JOHNSON, KEVIN 3,395.50 dd 04/21106 KALKA, THOMAS 654.68 dd 04/21/06 KARIS, FLINT 3,115.07 dd 04/21106 KONG, TOMMY 2,709.13 dd 04/21/06 KROLL, BRETT 2,425.86 dd 04/21/06 KVAM, DAVID 3,523.42 dd 04/21/06 LANGNER, TODD 1,645.93 dd 04/21/06 LU, JOHNNIE 2,400.11 dd 04/21/06 MARINO, JASON 2,554.62 dd 04/21/06 MARTIN, DANIEL 678.37 dd 04/21/06 MARTIN, JERROLD 2,514.38 dd 04/21/06 MCCARTY, GLEN 2,910.09 dd 04/21/06 METRY, ALESIA 2,400.11 dd 04/21/06 NYE, MICHAEL 1,891.61 dd 04/21/06 OLSON, JULIE 2,698.09 dd 04/21/06 RABBETT, KEVIN 3,587.70 dd 04/21/06 RHUDE, MATTHEW 1,937.33 dd 04/21/06 STEFFEN, SCOTT 3,258.72 dd 04/21/06 STEINER, JOSEPH 2,088.43 dd 04/21/06 SYPNIEWSKI, WILLIAM 1,874.47 dd 04/21/06 SZCZEPANSKI, THOMAS 2,560.59 dd 04/21/06 IRAN, JOSEPH 2,331.55 dd 04/21/06 WENZEL, JAY 2,510.47 dd 04/21/06 XIONG, KAO 2,477.36 dd 04/21/06 BARTZ, PAUL 2,701.48 dd 04/21/06 BERGERON, JOSEPH 3,212.05 dd 04/21106 DUGAS, MICHAEL 2,734.19 dd 04/21/06 ERICKSON, VIRGINIA 2,773.80 dd 04/21/06 FLOR, TIMOTHY 3,923.89 dd 04/21/06 FRASER, JOHN 2,745.14 dd 04/21/06 LANGNER, SCOTT 2,217.28 dd 04/21/06 PALMA, STEVEN 2,782.73 dd 04/21/06 THEISEN, PAUL 2,573.27 dd 04/21/06 THIENES, PAUL 2,628.65 dd 04/21/06 BECK, PATRICK 1,322.48 dd 04/21106 BECK, YANCEY 723.38 dd 04/21/06 BECKER, SHANE 1,982.26 13 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD 14 CHECK 9 CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 04121106 DAWSON, RICHARD 2,324.30 dd 04/21/06 DUELLMAN, KIRK 2,191.33 dd 04/21/06 EVERSON, PAUL 2,070.31 dd 04/21/06 FITZGERALD, EDWARD 1,038.74 dd 04/21/06 GARZA, BRANDON 836.14 dd 04/21/06 GJERTSON, MARK 324.62 dd 04/21/06 HALWEG, JODI 1,864.53 dd 04/21/06 HEFFERNAN, PATRICK 2,289.38 dd 04/21/06 HEMQUIST, MICHAEL 600.68 dd 04/21106 HJELLE, ERIK 1,054.16 dd 04/21/06 JOHNSON, DOUGLAS 2,298.64 dd 04/21/06 KNAPP, BRETT 1,567.42 dd 04/21/06 LAW, ROBERT 443.50 dd 04/21/06 MYERS, TODD 1,864.53 dd 04/21/06 NOVAK, JEROME 2,375.63 dd 04/21/06 NOWICKI, PAUL 1,505.68 dd 04/21/06 OPHEIM, JOHN 1,927.20 dd 04/21/06 PARSONS, KURT 2,008.66 dd 04/21/06 PETERSON, MARK 958.68 dd 04/21/06 PETERSON, ROBERT 2,384.32 dd 04/21/06 PILLAR, MICHAEL 205.76 dd 04/21/06 PRECHTEL, ROBERT 2,186.41 dd 04/21/06 REYNOSO, ANGEL 907.30 dd 04/21/06 RIEMENSCHNEIDER, RONALD 991.02 dd 04/21/06 SCHOLEN, CHRISTOPHER 875.28 dd 04/21/06 STANWAY, ROBERT 488.08 dd 04/21/06 SVENDSEN, RONALD 2,411.27 dd 04/21/06 WATERS, JOSEPH 2,553.72 dd 04/21/06 WHELEHAN, ROBERT 1,359.38 dd 04/21/06 GERVAIS -JR, CLARENCE 2,868.34 dd 04/21/06 BAUER, MICHELLE 1,722.75 dd 04/21/06 FLAUGHER, JAYME 1,931.75 dd 04/21106 HERMANSON, CHAD 1,673.63 dd 04/21/06 HUBIN, KENNARD 1,737.35 dd 04/21/06 KNAPP, BRETT 1,603.76 dd 04/21/06 LINN, BRYAN 2,512.98 dd 04/21/06 PACOLT, MARSHA 2,529.68 dd 04/21/06 RABINE, JANET 1,917.35 dd 04/21/06 STAHNKE, JULIE 1,931.75 dd 04/21/06 LUKIN, STEVEN 4,016.18 dd 04/21/06 SVENDSEN, RUSTIN 3,219.37 dd 04/21106 ZWIEG, SUSAN 1,829.93 dd 04/21/06 DOLLERSCHELL, ROBERT 293.39 14 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD 15 CHECK 9 CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 04121106 AHL, R. CHARLES 4,500.69 dd 04/21/06 BREHEIM, ROGER 1,900.28 dd 04/21/06 GROHS, JUDITH 1,820.29 dd 04/21/06 KONEWKO, DUWAYNE 3,059.51 dd 04/21/06 NIVEN, AMY 1,293.70 dd 04/21/06 PRIEFER, WILLIAM 2,601.29 dd 04/21/06 BRINK, TROY 2,028.79 dd 04/21/06 BRUNELL, DAVID 1,817.07 dd 04/21/06 DEBILZAN, THOMAS 2,262.75 dd 04/21106 EDGE, DOUGLAS 2,848.15 dd 04/21/06 FREBERG, RONALD 568.86 dd 04/21/06 JONES, DONALD 3,043.42 dd 04/21/06 MEYER, GERALD 2,188.20 dd 04/21/06 NAGEL, BRYAN 2,368.18 dd 04/21/06 OSWALD, ERICK 2,080.46 dd 04/21/06 RUNNING, ROBERT 1,807.75 dd 04/21/06 TEVLIN, TODD 2,110.45 dd 04/21/06 DUCHARME, JOHN 2,414.86 dd 04/21/06 ENGSTROM, ANDREW 1,694.15 dd 04/21/06 ISAKSON, CHAD 103.95 dd 04/21/06 JACOBSON, SCOTT 1,910.45 dd 04/21/06 JAROSCH, JONATHAN 2,315.35 dd 04/21/06 KNUTSON, LOIS 1,347.75 dd 04/21/06 KUMMER, STEVEN 2,739.26 dd 04/21/06 LABEREE, ERIN 2,882.35 dd 04/21/06 LINDBLOM, RANDAL 2,414.86 dd 04/21/06 PECK, DENNIS 2,421.80 dd 04/21/06 PRIEBE, WILLIAM 3,482.05 dd 04/21/06 THOMPSON, MICHAEL 2,519.95 dd 04/21/06 ANDERSON, BRUCE 4,184.27 dd 04/21/06 CAREY, HEIDI 2,138.16 dd 04/21/06 HALL, KATHLEEN 1,820.28 dd 04/21106 MARUSKA, MARK 2,754.63 dd 04/21/06 NAUGHTON, JOHN 1,770.15 dd 04/21/06 SCHINDELDECKER, JAMES 1,895.66 dd 04/21/06 BIESANZ, OAKLEY 1,52620 dd 04/21/06 DEAVER, CHARLES 525.41 dd 04/21/06 HAYMAN, JANET 1,228.98 dd 04/21/06 HUTCHINSON, ANN 2,330.27 dd 04/21/06 NELSON, JEAN 1,059.99 dd 04/21/06 FOERG, ELIZABETH 296.00 dd 04/21106 GAYNOR, VIRGINIA 2,060.55 dd 04/21/06 EKSTRAND, THOMAS 3,134.50 15 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD i[� CHECK 9 CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 04121106 KROLL, LISA 1,254.20 dd 04/21106 LIVINGSTON, JOYCE 1,007.81 dd 04121/06 SINDT, ANDREA 1,695.75 dd 04121/06 THOMPSON, DEBRA 670.94 dd 04/21!06 YOUNG, TAMELA 1,602.75 dd 04/21/06 FINWALL, SHANN 2,274.41 dd 04/21/06 ROBERTS, KENNETH 2,668.91 dd 04/21/06 CARVER, NICHOLAS 2,853.51 dd 04/21/06 FISHER, DAVID 3,374.28 dd 04/21106 RICE, MICHAEL 2,012.55 dd 04/21/06 SWAN, DAVID 2,110.95 dd 04121/06 SWETT, PAUL 1,544.55 dd 04/21/06 WELLENS, MOLLY 1,161.93 dd 04/21/06 BJORK, ALICIA 43.88 dd 04/21/06 FINN, GREGORY 2,280.01 dd 04/21/06 GALLANT, CHARLENE 233.75 dd 04/21/06 KELLY, LISA 1,027.26 dd 04/21/06 OHLHAUSER, MEGHAN 435.38 dd 04121/06 ROBBINS, AUDRA 2,179.48 dd 04/21/06 SHERRILL, CAITLIN 95.00 dd 04/21/06 STAPLES, PAULINE 3,028.20 dd 04/21/06 TAUBMAN, DOUGLAS 2,854.34 dd 04/21/06 UNDERHILL, KRISTEN 190.32 dd 04/21/06 GERMAIN, DAVID 1,902.59 dd 04/21/06 NORDQUIST, RICHARD 1,893.35 dd 04/21/06 SCHULTZ, SCOTT 2,124.33 dd 04/21/06 ANZALDI, MANDY 1,308.60 dd 04121/06 COLEMAN, PHILIP 155.00 dd 04/21/06 COLLINS, ASHLEY 128.00 dd 04/21/06 CRAWFORD - JR, RAYMOND 252.00 dd 04/21/06 CROSSON, LINDA 3,047.13 dd 04/21/06 DREWES, DEENA 44.40 dd 04/21106 EVANS, CHRISTINE 795.52 dd 04/21/06 GRAF, MICHAEL 2,001.16 dd 04121/06 HER, CHONG 335.60 dd 04/21/06 HOFMEISTER, MARY 707.80 dd 04/21/06 PELOQUIN, PENNYE 527.80 dd 04/21/06 SCHMIDT, RUSSELL 2,094.61 dd 04/21/06 SCHULZE, BRIAN 726.81 dd 04/21/06 ANDREA, JOHANNA 77.50 dd 04/21/06 BRENEMAN, NEIL 480.55 dd 04/21106 BRUSOE, CRISTINA 109.88 dd 04/21/06 BUCKLEY, BRITTANY 8625 i[� CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD if CHECK 9 CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 04121/06 DUNN, RYAN 742.53 dd 04/21/06 EVANS, KRISTIN 165.60 dd 04/21/06 FONTAINE, KIM 850.52 dd 04/21/06 GREDVIG, ANDERS 351.33 dd 04/21/06 HASSENSTAB, DENISE 42.60 dd 04/21/06 HAWBAKER, EVAN 54.45 dd 04/21/06 HORWATH, RONALD 2,159.70 dd 04/21/06 KOEHNEN, AMY 100.20 dd 04/21/06 KOEHNEN, MARY 1,560.00 dd 04/21/06 KRONHOLM, KATHRYN 470.89 dd 04/21/06 MATHEWS, LEAH 57.00 dd 04/21/06 OVERBY, ANNA 40.00 dd 04/21/06 PROESCH, ANDY 67526 dd 04/21/06 SCHULTZ, MATTHEW 52.00 dd 04/21/06 SKALD, SHANNON 74.25 dd 04/21/06 SMITH, ANN 295.50 dd 04/21/06 TRUE, CAROLINE 102.15 dd 04/21/06 TUPY, HEIDE 169.60 dd 04/21/06 TUPY, MARCUS 325.50 dd 04/21/06 WERNER, REBECCA 96,86 dd 04/21/06 WHITE, NICOLE 368.11 dd 04/21/06 WOLFGRAM, MARY 84.50 dd 04/21/06 GROPPOLI, LINDA 335.00 dd 04/21/06 HOLMGREN, STEPHANIE 99.75 dd 04/21/06 ANDERSON, MATT 79.80 dd 04/21/06 BEHAN, JAMES 1,769.23 dd 04/21/06 LONETTI, JAMES 1,077.42 dd 04/21/06 PATTERSON, ALBERT 1,116.60 dd 04/21/06 PRINS, KELLY 1,181.78 dd 04/21/06 REILLY, MICHAEL 1,674.15 dd 04/21/06 SCHOENECKER, LEIGH 113.05 dd 04/21/06 AICHELE, CRAIG 1,940.55 dd 04/21/06 PRIEM, STEVEN 2,158.65 dd 04/21/06 WOEHRLE, MATTHEW 1,624.84 dd 04/21/06 BERGO, CHAD 2,355.83 dd 04/21/06 FOWLDS, MYCHAL 2,561.82 dd 04/21/06 FRANZEN, NICHOLAS 2,128.02 wf 104752 04/21/06 LONGRIE, DIANA 452.00 wf 104753 04/21/06 JAHN, DAVID 1,683.59 wf 104754 04/21/06 MORIN, TROY 144.50 wf 104755 04/21/06 THOMAS, MOLLY 348.00 wf 104756 04/21/06 MATHEYS, ALANA 2,059.19 wf 104757 04/21/06 HANSEN, LORI 1,813.35 if CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD iE:3 CHECK 9 CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT wf 104758 04121106 GENNOW, PAMELA 627.25 wf 104759 04/21/06 PALANK, MARY 1,703.66 wf 104760 04/21/06 SVENDSEN, JOANNE 1,855.39 wf 104761 04/21/06 SHORTREED, MICHAEL 3,268.81 wf 104762 04/21/06 WELCHLIN, CABOT 2,692.93 wf 104763 04/21/06 ACOSTA, MARK 940.16 wf 104764 04/21/06 AMBORN, JASON 880.72 wf 104765 04/21/06 ANDERSON, BRIAN 1,472.14 wf 104766 04/21/06 BAHL, DAVID 1,140.14 wf 104767 04/21106 BAUMAN, ANDREW 634.38 wf 104768 04/21/06 BOURQUIN, RON 2,093.84 wf 104769 04/21/06 BUCHE, JOETTE 2,156.62 wf 104770 04/21/06 CAPISTRANT, JOHN 1,068.46 wf 104771 04/21/06 CARLSON, CAMERON 213.15 wf 104772 04/21/06 CAVE, GEORGE 586.66 wf 104773 04/21/06 CORK, JEFFRY 337.23 wf 104774 04/21/06 CROMETT, MARK 1,241.02 wf 104775 04/21/06 DIETZ, EDWARD 1,356.24 wf 104776 04/21/06 DITTEL, MICHAEL 1,255.88 wf 104777 04/21/06 DUELLMAN, AMY 64924 wf 104778 04/21/06 EVANS, JASON 635.40 wf 104779 04/21/06 FASULO, WALTER 408.02 wf 104780 04/21/06 GERARD, JAMIE 1,228.46 wf 104781 04/21/06 GREGERSON, GLEN 325.68 wf 104782 04/21/06 HAGEN, MICHAEL 590.91 wf 104783 04/21/06 HAKSETH, NATHAN 628.10 wf 104784 04/21/06 HALE, JOSEPH 958.16 wf 104785 04/21/06 HERLUND, RICK 1,675.10 wf 104786 04/21/06 HUTCHINSON, JAMES 1,332.80 wf 104787 04/21/06 IMM, TRACY 62895 wf 104788 04/21/06 KALKA, THOMAS 2,028.72 wf 104789 04/21/06 KANE, ROBERT 3,021.86 wf 104790 04/21/06 KARNOWSKI, SANDRA 1,974.92 wf 104791 04/21/06 KOEHN, CORY 187.74 wf 104792 04/21/06 KONDER, RONALD 1,362.70 wf 104793 04/21/06 KORTUS, WILLIAM 819.54 wf 104794 04/21/06 LIDBERG, MICHAEL 1,115.86 wf 104795 04/21/06 LOCHEN, MICHAEL 1,577.40 WT 104796 04/21/06 MAHONEY, KENNETH 499.56 WT 104797 04/21/06 MALLORY, GORDON 1,925.62 wf 104798 04/21/06 MCGOVERN, JOHN 1,373.90 wf 104799 04/21106 MELANDER, JON 1,357.60 wf 104800 04/21/06 MELLEN, RICHARD 1,292.76 iE:3 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD IF CHECK 9 CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT wf 104801 04121/06 MILLER, NICHOLAS 1,195.92 wf 104802 04/21106 MUTZENBERGER, JODY 482.58 wf 104803 04121/06 NALIPINSKI, STEPHEN 1,211.30 wf 104804 04/21/06 NOLAN, PAUL 1,390.50 wf 104805 04/21/06 PODOBINSKI, LAURENCE 730.83 wf 104806 04/21/06 RAINEY, JAMES 795.69 wf 104807 04/21/06 RAVENWALD, CORINNE 1,297.32 wf 104808 04/21/06 RICE, DANIEL 999.60 wf 104809 04/21/06 RIDER, JEFFREY 1,245.04 wf 104810 04/21/06 ROBERTSON, STEVEN 670.94 wf 104811 04/21/06 ROMANIK, JAMES 937.02 wf 104812 04/21/06 SCHADT, JEFFREY 730.38 wf 104813 04/21/06 SCHULTZ, JEROME 677.85 wf 104814 04/21/06 SCHWARTZ, SHAWN 490.05 wf 104815 04/21/06 SELBY, JOSEPH 351.08 wf 104816 04/21/06 SINGER, SCOTT 470.08 wf 104817 04/21/06 SKOK, STEPHEN 1,107.28 wf 104818 04/21/06 SOLHEID, DALE 651.54 wf 104819 04/21/06 STELLA, JAMES 967.20 wf 104820 04/21/06 STENE, MARK 654.68 wf 104821 04/21/06 THOMPSON, JAMES 355.23 wf 104822 04/21/06 WASHENBERGER, CHARLES 425.50 wf 104823 04/21/06 WHITE, JOEL 889.26 wf 104824 04/21/06 MEISSNER, BRENT 189.00 wf 104825 04/21/06 EDSON, DAVID 1,932.28 wf 104826 04/21/06 HELEY, ROLAND 1,932.28 wf 104827 04/21/06 HINNENKAMP, GARY 1,904.15 wf 104828 04/21/06 LINDORFF, DENNIS 1,897.97 wf 104829 04/21/06 NOVAK, MICHAEL 1,857.35 wf 104830 04/21/06 GERNES, CAROLE 382.81 WT 104831 04/21/06 HAMRE, MILES 157.50 WT 104832 04/21/06 BERGER, STEPHANIE 318.76 wf 104833 04/21/06 ERICKSON, AMY 49.50 wf 104834 04/21/06 KOHLMAN, JENNIFER 124.00 wf 104835 04/21/06 ROBBINS, EMERALD 124.00 wf 104836 04/21/06 SHOBERG, KAKI 57.75 wf 104837 04/21/06 HAAG, MARK 1,880.44 wf 104838 04/21/06 NADEAU, EDWARD 3,061.98 wf 104839 04/21/06 GLASS, JEAN 1,868.83 wf 104840 04/21/06 HER, PHENG 103.60 wf 104841 04/21/06 NAGEL, BROOKE 267.58 wf 104842 04/21/06 SIMPSON, JOSEPH 105.00 wf 104843 04/21/06 TOLBERT, FRANCINE 263.50 IF CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD ic7 CHECK 9 CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT wf 104844 04121106 VELASQUEZ, ANGELA 90.00 wf 104845 04/21106 ANDERSON, CALEB 28.50 wf 104846 04121/06 ANDERSON, JOSHUA 124.70 wf 104847 04/21/06 ANDERSON, JUSTIN 124.70 wf 104848 04/21/06 ARNEVIK, ERICA 87.50 wf 104849 04/21/06 BRENEMAN, SEAN 16126 WT 104850 04/21/06 CLARK, PAMELA 232.05 WT 104851 04/21/06 COSTA, JOSEPH 326.95 wf 104852 04/21/06 DEMPSEY, BETH 147.00 wf 104853 04/21106 ESTRADA, KIEL 156.00 wf 104854 04/21/06 FENGER, JUSTIN 137.75 wf 104855 04/21/06 GRANT, MELISSA 344.01 wf 104856 04/21/06 GRUENHAGEN, LINDA 528.15 wf 104857 04/21/06 HAGSTROM, EMILY 262.85 wf 104858 04/21/06 IRISH, PETER 87.75 wf 104859 04/21/06 LEMAY, KATHERINE 316.02 wf 104860 04/21/06 LUTZ, CHRISTINA 63.00 wf 104861 04/21/06 MELLEN, CHRISTOPHER 67.50 wf 104862 04/21/06 NWANOKWALE, MORDY 94.25 wf 104863 04/21/06 PEHOSKI, JOEL 108.55 wf 104864 04/21/06 PETERSON, ANNA 143.60 wf 104865 04/21/06 RICHTER, NANCY 296.75 wf 104866 04/21/06 ROSTRON, ROBERT 201.00 wf 104867 04/21/06 RYDEEN, ARIEL 177.13 wf 104868 04/21/06 SCHMIDT, EMILY 148.84 wf 104869 04/21/06 SCHMIDT, JOHN 85.50 wf 104870 04/21/06 SCHOENECKER, SAMANTHA 40.80 wf 104871 04/21/06 SCHR.AMM, BRITTANY 138.20 wf 104872 04/21/06 SCHREINER, MICHELLE 283.88 wf 104873 04/21/06 SMITLEY, SHARON 352.10 wf 104874 04/21/06 STAHNKE, AMY 104.71 wf 104875 04/21/06 WARNER, CAROLYN 276.65 wf 104876 04/21106 WEDES, CAROL 70.05 wf 104877 04/21/06 WENZEL, SHANNON 47.44 wf 104878 04/21/06 WILLIAMS, KRISTINE 108.88 wf 104879 04/21/06 WOODMAN, ALICE 216.80 wf 104880 04/21/06 ZALK, IDA 65.32 wf 104881 04/21/06 BOSLEY, CAROL 336.18 WT 104882 04/21/06 BREITBACH, GARY 567.00 WT 104883 04/21/06 LEWIS, AMY 188.70 wf 104884 04/21/06 ODDEN, JESSICA 139.66 wf 104885 04/21106 OIE, REBECCA 67.03 wf 104886 04/21/06 PARAYNO, GUAI 224.45 ic7 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD 21 CHECK 9 CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT wf 104887 04121106 SATTLER, CASSANDRA 39.98 wf 104888 04/21106 SATTLER, MELINDA 34.50 wf 104889 04121/06 STODGHILL, AMANDA 16.88 wf 104890 04/21/06 VAN HALE, PAULA 161.85 wf 104891 04/21/06 WADE, MARY -LEE 127.50 wf 104892 04/21/06 ZAGER, LINNEA 55.35 WT 104893 04/21/06 BERLIN, SARAH 272.65 WT 104894 04/21/06 BIRKHOLZ, TYLER 158.75 wf 104895 04/21/06 DOUGLASS, TOM 1,318.67 wf 104896 04/21106 GADOW, ANNA 53.98 wf 104897 04/21/06 SCHULZE, KEVIN 184.15 wf 104898 04/21/06 THEESFELD, CALEB 55.60 wf 104899 04/21/06 YANG, KAY 91.70 wf 104900 04/21/06 VANG, TIM 51.80 wf 104901 04/21/06 VUE, LOR PAO 119.70 565,723.20 21 Agenda Item H2 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer Bill Priefer, Public Works Operations Analyst SUBJECT: Sewer Use /Connection Agreement with the City of Woodbury- North of Highwood Avenue DATE: April 24, 2006 INTRODUCTION Maplewood Sewer District 51(W), the New Century Development, was connected to the City of Woodbury's sanitary sewer system in 2000. However, a formal written agreement addressing the connection, the sewage treatment costs and the repair and maintenance costs was never done by either city. To rectify this oversight, a formal sewer use /connection agreement was drafted and was sent to council for consideration and approval at the February 27, 2006, Maplewood city council meeting. However, the agreement with the City of Woodbury was tabled at the February 27, 2006, meeting pending renegotiation of terms that were not deemed favorable to the City of Maplewood. DISCUSSION The language in question held the City of Maplewood solely responsible for all maintenance, repairs and claims for damages or injuries caused to any person or property or from any cause relating to the properties or persons served by the Maplewood sanitary sewer system. The "hold harmless" clause also appeared to be one -sided in favor of the City of Woodbury. According to Maplewood City Council directive, more favorable terms were negotiated with the City of Woodbury so that, in essence, the City of Maplewood and the City of Woodbury will be responsible for the maintenance and repair of their respective sanitary sewer systems (refer to Section 1, Terms, paragraph 3 of the attached revised agreement). It was also mutually agreed that the cost of any major maintenance, repair or replacement of the common sanitary sewer lines will be shared proportionately by the cities based upon the estimated daily volume of flow originating from each city as determined by Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (refer to Section 2, Billing of the attached revised agreement). Request council approval of a sewer use /connection agreement with the City of Woodbury, and authorize the appropriate budget change in the Sewer Fund to reimburse Woodbury for sewage treatment costs. Attachments: 1. Sewer Use /Connection Agreement with the City of Woodbury 2. Location Map (Color copies provided to City Council) Agenda Item H2 SEWER USEICONNECTION AGREEMENT This agreement, made and entered into this day of , 2006, by the City of Maplewood (hereinafter "Maplewood "), a municipal corporation of the State of Minnesota and the City of Woodbury (hereinafter "Woodbury "), a municipal corporation of the State of Minnesota. RECITALS 1) WHEREAS, Maplewood has requested permission from Woodbury to connect a portion of its public sanitary sewer system to the Woodbury sanitary sewer system for the purpose of transporting sanitary sewage from Maplewood's Sewer District 51(W), and the following agreement is intended to reflect the mutual understanding and agreement to accomplish this purpose. 2) WHEREAS, Maplewood and Woodbury understand and agree that the additional sanitary sewer use shall require an increase to the rate to be paid by Maplewood as a part of the parties joint sewer use. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises made herein, the parties agree as follows: SECTION 1 TERMS 1) Woodbury does hereby grant permission to Maplewood to connect Maplewood's sanitary sewer conveying sanitary sewage from Maplewood's Sewer District 51(W), the New Century Development, to the Woodbury sewer system east of Century Avenue South. 2) The Maplewood sewer system to be connected to the Woodbury sewer system shall be used solely for the purpose of conveying sanitary sewage, and Maplewood shall not permit or allow any storm Agenda Item H2 water runoff to be connected to the sewer system. 3) Maplewood and Woodbury shall each be responsible for the maintenance and repair of their respective sanitary sewer systems. Maplewood agrees to hold harmless, indemnify, and defend Woodbury from any and all claims for damages to persons or property arising from intentional misuse or negligent use, operation, or maintenance of the sewers that are owned and maintained by Maplewood and authorized to be connected to the Woodbury sewer system pursuant to this agreement. Woodbury agrees to hold harmless, indemnify, and defend Maplewood from any and all claims for damages to persons or property arising from intentional misuses or negligent use, operation, or maintenance of the sewers that are owned and maintained by Woodbury. Under no circumstances, however, shall a party be required to pay on behalf of itself and other parties, any amounts in excess of the limits on liability established in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 applicable to any one party. The limits of liability for some or all of the parties may not be added together to determine the maximum amount of liability for any party. 4) It is agreed between the parties hereto that the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) shall estimate the amount of sanitary sewage attributable to the Maplewood properties hereby authorized to be connected to this Woodbury sewer system and shall accordingly charge Maplewood for its proportionate cost of sewage treatment, conveyance, and related costs in its annual billings. Woodbury and Maplewood shall cooperate with and provide all necessary information to the MCES so as to permit the proper billing to Maplewood and credit to Woodbury for this sewer use. SECTION 2 BILLING Woodbury shall maintain the sanitary sewer lines from the Maplewood connection to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) interceptor that consists of 1,221 feet of 12 inch line on Century Avenue South from the Maplewood connection to Courtly Road, then 1,133 feet of 12 inch line Agenda Item H2 from Courtly Road to the 24 inch line south of Lake Ridge Townhomes to 814 feet of 24 inch line from the manhole south of Lake Ridge Townhomes to the MCES interceptor. Maplewood shall pay $200.00 per year to Woodbury for said maintenance to be performed on a cleaning schedule of once every four years. The charge to Maplewood represents one -half of the cost to perform said maintenance. Woodbury shall submit an annual bill to Maplewood before March I" of each year. This charge shall be annually adjusted on the anniversary date of this agreement to reflect a proportional increase commensurate with the same percentage increase experienced by the City of Woodbury for its sanitary sewer annual operating budget increase using 2006 as the base year. For major maintenance, such as repairing or replacing the Woodbury sanitary sewer line (pipe) or manholes, Maplewood and Woodbury will participate in the cost, including preliminary engineering, detailed design and inspection, in proportion to the estimated daily volume of flow originating from each City as prepared by Metropolitan Council Environmental Services. SECTION 3 DURATION This agreement shall be in force and in effect from , 2006. Upon mutual consent of Maplewood and Woodbury, this agreement may be amended and /or terminated at any time. Each party will be liable for its share of costs as described in this Agreement in the billing cycle incurred to of the date of the termination. After such termination, the parties shall have no further obligation or responsibility under this agreement. Upon 60 day written notice Maplewood may unilaterally terminate this agreement if Maplewood has completely disconnected from the Woodbury sanitary sewer line and provides proof of the disconnection to Woodbury. Agenda Item H2 SECTION 4 MEETINGS Maplewood, through its Public Works Department or designee, agrees to meet at the request of Woodbury should any issues arise under this Agreement. The purpose of said meetings shall be to discuss issues which affect the substantive rights of the parties under this Agreement. The time and place of any such meeting, hereunder, shall be determined by the parties with reasonable notice to one another. The parties retain the right to conduct meetings through other electronic means as is acceptable to both parties_ SECTION 5 AGREEMENT SUBJECT TO DATA PRACTICES ACT This agreement shall be subject to the Minnesota Data Practices Act, at Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, comparable provisions and Federal law. SECTION 6 MEDIATION OF DISPUTES Any and all disputes between the parties under and concerning this agreement, including its formation and the entering into the clause itself, shall be subject to mediation. The dispute shall be submitted to a mediator selected and agreed upon by the parties within thirty (30) days. In the event that the parties cannot agree to a mediator, a mediator shall be chosen by the Chief Judge of the Ramsey County District Court. The costs of the mediation shall be equally divided between the parties. SECTION 7 COMPLETENESS OF THE AGREEMENT This document contains all the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and any alterations or variations of the terms of this Agreement shall be invalid unless made in writing and signed by the parties. Agenda Item H2 There are no other understandings, representations or agreements, written or oral, not incorporated herein. If any part of this Agreement is declared null and void by law, the remaining paragraphs of said agreement shall be valid. SECTION 8 CONTROLLING LAW This Agreement is made pursuant to Minnesota State law and Minn_ Stat. § 471.59 (Joint Exercise of Powers). In the event of a dispute, the laws of the State of Minnesota shall be controlling. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on this day of , 2006 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Mayor City Manager Approved as to form by Legal Counsel CITY OF WOODBURY Mayor City Administrator Approved as to form by Legal Counsel Agenda Item H2 SANITARY SEWER DISTRICT 51 Agenda Item H3 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager FROM: R. Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works /City Engineer DuWayne Konewko, Environmental Manager SUBJECT: Waterfest Appropriations for 2006 DATE: April 25, 2006 INTRODUCTION Ramsey - Washington Metro Watershed District's (RWMWD) annual Waterfest will be held on Saturday, May 20, at the Lake Phalen Park Pavilion from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. A 5K run -walk around Lake Phalen will start at 9:00 a.m. The RWMWD is requesting financial support from the City to assist in sponsoring this event. The requested amount is seven hundred and fifty dollars ($750). Background The City of Maplewood has sponsored this event in previous years. The City has a good working relationship with RWMWD and partnering with them on this type of an event allows us to combine our resources and deliver a stronger educational message to a much larger audience. Monies in the storm sewer maintenance budget have been set aside for educational purposes. As in the past, the City will provide staff to work at this event. Representatives from Public Works and Community Development Departments along with the Nature Center will assist the RWMWD in facilitating this event. The Waterfest will feature the following activities and exhibits this year: student exhibits of artistic, scientific and service projects; watershed and ecosystem exhibits and games; clowns, jugglers, face painting, and skits; environmental computer games and indoor science projects; stream monitoring; fishing lessons; and voyageur canoe rides. DISCUSSION The Waterfest provides a unique opportunity to enhance awareness on issues surrounding the protection of our natural resources. Waterfest also presents the City with a unique venue to work towards the fulfillment of our goals and outcomes concerning the Storm Water Management Program. One of the requirements of this program is to educate the public about environmental issues. Waterfest will take this one step further and provide the public with projects that can be utilized at home to help reduce pollution or contaminants from reaching our water resources. Education on storm water runoff (non -point source pollution) is key in understanding the role of storm water runoff and water quality. Waterfest will directly speak to this issue and stress the importance of mitigating and controlling on -site runoff. Rain gardens are one of many options that will be discussed at Waterfest. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the appropriations for Waterfest. Funds are available in the storm sewer maintenance budget. Staff will provide City Council with a follow -up summary of Waterfest by July 15, 2006. Agenda Item H4 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager FROM: Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer Bill Priefer, Public Works Operations Analyst SUBJECT: Approve Purchases for Kenwood Area Street Improvement Project, City Project 05 -16 DATE: May 1, 2006 INTRODUCTION It is necessary to contract for the services of outside contractors for the Kenwood Area Street Project 05 -16 for the television inspection of sanitary sewers, the engineering testing of soils, concrete and bituminous, and for the removal of trees from the right of way. Since these purchases will exceed the ordinance - allowed expenditure amount of $5,000, and the purchases will be between $10,000 and $50,000, two written quotations were obtained from prospective contractors for all three required services DISCUSSION Written quotations for the television inspection of sanitary sewers were received from Pipe Services Corporation for $0.42 per foot or $8,820 for 21,000 feet, and from Infratech for $0.58 per foot or $12,180 for 21,000 feet. Authorization for the purchase of television inspection services in the amount of $8,820 from Pipe Services Corporation is requested. Written quotations for engineering testing services were received from American Engineering Testing, Inc. for $37,824 and from Braun Intertech Corporation for $40,092.50. Authorization for the purchase of testing services in the amount of $37,824 from American Engineering Testing, Inc. is requested. Written quotations were received from Hugo's Tree Care based on the Engineer's estimated quantities for the removal of ninety -five (95) trees for $48,581 and from S & S Tree for $85,017. Authorization for the purchase of tree removal services in the amount of $48,581 from Hugo's Tree Care is requested. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that council authorize the purchase of services from Pipe Services Corporation, American Engineering Testing, Inc. and Hugo's Tree Care that are required for the completion of the Kenwood Area Street Improvement Project, City Project 05 -16. Attachments 1. Quotation from Pipe Services Corporation 2. Quotation from Infratech 3. Quotation from American Engineering Testing, Inc. 4. Quotation from Braun Intertec Corporation 5. Quotation from Hugo'sTree Care 6. Quotation from S & S Tree 7. Engineer's Tree Removal Schedule 8. Location Map Agenda Item H4 PIPE SERVICES CORP. � E � P Yaw X � _ April 25, 2006 Bill Priebe City of Maplewood 1902 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 RE: City Project 05 - 16 Kenwood Area Improvements Dear Bill: As requested in your April 19, 2006 correspondence, we have prepared a quote for television inspection of the Kenwood Area street reconstruction project sanitary sewers. Our price is $0.42 per foot based on the following provisions: CONTRACTOR to provide a typed report and VHS video tape or DVD. 2. CONTRACTOR to float- string lines using available hydrants or existing flows. All hydrant connection fees and water use charges will be waived. Field work will be completed in stages with each stage comprising no less than 2,000 feet of sanitary sewer. Thank you for considering our firm for this project. Sincerely, PIPE SERVICES CORPORATION f ,t Andy Martin, P.E. AM /nm 15880 Lundstead Road • Carver, Minnesota 55315 e Phone (952) 448 -7884 ® Fax (952) 448 -9086 Apr 24 06 0101 Greg Ranter 763 420 8007 P.1 Agenda lte 1-14. _ n Infrastructure Technologies 21040 Commerce Blvd. Rogers, MN 55374-93 I Phone 763 428 6488 1 Fax 763 428 6489 Web Site www_infratechcatalog -co-i ZMEO- To: William Priebe City of Maplewood RE: Televising Quote Project: City Project 05-16: Kenwood Area Improvements Bid Date: 4 -26 -06 Infratech is pleased to present this proposal for Televising as required for the above - mentioned project. Televising APuroximately 21,000 LF of 8" -10 "Sanitary Sewer Cc? $0.58 1LF The above price includes mobilization, all equipment, labor, per diem and material to perform televising for this project. The above price does not include cleaning the pipe prior to televising. If cleaning is required please contact Infratech for a price. Please phone with any questions or concerns- Thank you for considering Infratech. Sincerely, Greg Ranta Project Administrator Infratech Maplewood 4 -26 -06 AMERICAN ENGINEERING T ESTING, INC. ESTIMATE COST FOR SERVICES O AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING. INC. f4M Agenda Item H4 CONSULTANTS ® ENVIRONMENTAL, GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALS ® FORENSICS On, April 17, 2006 we (AET) were requested to provide services for the following project: Our services were requested by Steve bummer of City of Maplewood Our "Client for the project has been designated to be: City of Map l .wna P� b1�Wl}rks Deb amen[ Address: 1902 county Road B East, Maplewood, MN 55109 Telephone: 651 249 2400 Pax: 651 249 2409 A. AET will provide services for Client according to the following work scope: Description Unit Qty Unit Price Total 1) Std Proctor, Method A ea 20 100.00 $2000.00 2) Gradation ea 52 83.00 4316.00 3) Density, Nuclear ea 185 25.00 4625.00 4) Trip Charge ea 75 75.00 5625.00 5) Concrete Compression Test ea 48 50,00 2400.00 6) Plastic Concrete Testing and Casting Cylinders hourly 100 56.00 5600.00 7) Concrete Cylinder Pick Up ea 48 50.00 2400.00 8) Coring of Bituminous Pavement and Densities ea 54 75.00 4050.00 9) Extraction and Gradation ofBituminous Mix ea 30 160.00 4800,00 10) Nuclear Gauge Density Tests hourly 24 67.00 1608.00 11) Bituminous FDR ea 6 1 2) SRW Compression Testing 2 2 200,00 400.00 Total $37,824.00 B Printed/T)Med Name- David G. Wirth Title: Project Manaaer Date: 4/17/2006 Tnie 00CUMOM Shaul not tie lepruduG9tl, ekLOOI in JUL without written eppraval nt Amorican Enein —vi%0 Teettng, Inc. 556 Cleveland avenue North . St. Paul, MN 55114 Phone 651- 659 -9641 o Toll Free 866 -972 -6364. Fax 651 -659- 1379. www.aFnengtost.com Ottices throughout Flori". Ivtutneseta, South Dakota & Wisconsin AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNMY EMPLOYER 651 591379 TO 92 92409 P.02/02 ** TOTAL PAGE.02 ** 04/14/2006 15:03 FAX 651 487 1812 BRAUN INTERTEC Braun lntettec Corporation Client. City of Maplewood Project: Street Improvement Project, Maplewood AM Compaction Testing Utilities 28.00 Mps at 230 Hours Roadways 22.00 ?rips at 250 Hours 125.00 Flours 54.00 6,750.00 Sieve analysis through No. 200 Sieve (ASTM C 136, D 1140 or C 117) 42.00 'Tests 88.00 3,696.00 Nuclear moisture-density meter charge, per hour 125.00 Hours 1 12.50 1 562.50 Proctor test ASTM D 698 or ASTM D 8.00 f Tests 1 123.00 984.00 Trio charge 1 50.00 Trips 1 25.001 1,250.00 Phase Total- Concrete Testing 28.00 Hours 54.00 1,512.00 52.50 Hours 56.00 2,940.00 Sidewalks 3.00 Trips at 2.50 Hours 350.00 Rice spStfic gravity (ASIM D 204 t) 6.00 Tests Curb & Gutter MOO Trips at 2.50 Hours 103.00 3,090.00 Extracted aggregate gradation (ASTM D 5444) 30.00 Concrete Cylinder Pick up 71.00 2,130.00 Thickness and density of pavement core (ASTM D 2726) 48.00 i Tests 11.00 Hours 42.00 462.00 11.00 7Nps at 1.00 Hour Compressive strength of concrete cylinders (ASTM C 39), per unit 192.00 Tests 19.50 3,744.00 48.00 Sets of 4.00 Cylinders Trip charge 32.00 Trips 25.00 800.00 Compaction Testing 1 :.110 Trips at Z.00 Hotvrrs 28.00 Hours 54.00 1,512.00 Bituminous Coring 9.00 Trips at 3.00 Hours 27.00 Hours 110.00 2,970.00 Nuclear moisture -densi meter char e, per hour 28.00 Hours 12.50 350.00 Rice spStfic gravity (ASIM D 204 t) 6.00 Tests 54.00 324.00 Asphalt Content (ASTM D 2172f6307) 30.00 Tests 103.00 3,090.00 Extracted aggregate gradation (ASTM D 5444) 30.00 Tests 71.00 2,130.00 Thickness and density of pavement core (ASTM D 2726) 48.00 i Tests 35.00 1.680.00 Specialty testing 1.001 1 374.001 374.00 Phase Total. $374.00 Project Manner 45.010 Hours 95.00 74,275.00 Sr. Project En ineer 0.00 , Hour 128.00 0.00 Project Assistant 13.00 ' Hours 48.00 4.00 Phase Total: S4.899.00 Table 1: Estimated Costs Page I of 2 Providing engineering and environmental solutions since 1957 04/14/2006 15:04 FAX 851 487 1812 BRAUN INTERTERC 0004/004 Agenda Item H4 Providing engineering and environmental solutions since 1957 Table 1: Estimated Costs Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item H4 QUOTATION FORM MAPLEWOOD CITY PROJECT 05 - TREE REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL Accessible Trees —Cost per Diameter Inch 0 - 12" - 5- au 12 + -20" 16 20+ - 31 "+ Limited Access —Cost per Diameter Inch 0- 12 " ���� 12+ - 20" /C 20 + - 30" a 31 "+ STUMP REMOVAL ONLY: per Diameter Inch TREE TRIMMING Broken Branches n O Dead Wood j 5 t 00 Full Prune z of ` d OR Tree Trimming 61C ', LOAD HAULED: $ P er_ HUGO'S TREE CARE j JOHN E. OLSEN (651) 429 -4705 Certifiers Ar6©rist per Diameter hlch per Diameter Mich per Diameter Inch per Man Hour 70 Cubic Yard Load 'j , Agenda Item H4 QUOTATION FORM MAPLEWOOD CITY PROJECT 05 -16 TREE REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL Accessible Trees —Cost per Diameter Inch 0 - 12" s / , S — , - d 12T -20" $ ao 20+ - 30" Yr 31 + Limited Access —Cost per Diameter Inch 0 - 12" 1 12+ - 20" it) 20+ - 30" A3 31"+ 4 qr, 0 0 STUMP REMOVAL ONLY: % ! per Diameter Inch TREE TRIMMING Broken Branches 7 per Diameter Inch Dead Wood 7 per Diameter hlch Full Prune _ � per Diameter Inch OR i1,,,/ Tree Trimming A/ 71 ft, pet' ��t: � ��`�� �� c�- LOAD HAULED: $ { p er C , j Cubic Yard Load Agenda Item H4 \\PU9LIMMORKS,Pri_ Data \WORKS''�EtiGi^5FftOJDOCS \05 -16 K,,- -od SlreeW,0516DE3SCH. IdS 4119,2Cv6 1&04 AM (5) Tree Re —Iv KENWOODL I I btLLVVUUU KENWOOD E ALLEN TO BELLWOOD 111 - r. - 17+56-18+67,10-23' ft BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET/GRADING KENWOOD E BELLWOOD TO ROSELAWN 20 +54- 20 +59, 18-24'L 6 BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST SUBTOTAL 1 7 SOUTH WORK AREA SUBTOTAL 1 28 \\PU9LIMMORKS,Pri_ Data \WORKS''�EtiGi^5FftOJDOCS \05 -16 K,,- -od SlreeW,0516DE3SCH. IdS 4119,2Cv6 1&04 AM (5) Tree Re —Iv Agenda Item H4 TREE REMOVAL SCHEDULE STREET STATION & OFFSET SIZE /TYPE GRUBBING NOTES LEE STREET 0 +97 - 18'L 26" SW 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING LEE STREET 0 +97 - 17'R BUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET LEE STREET 1 +07 -18'R STUMP 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER LEE STREET 1+35-1+62,14-28'R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET LEE STREET 1+81-1+85,17-18'R 2- BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET LEE STREET 1+95-1+96,26-27'R 2- STUMPS BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREETIGRADING LEE STREET 2 +04 - 17' R 4" SW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET LEE STREET 2 +12 - 16'R STUMP 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET LEE STREET 2+15-2+16,27'R 2- STUMPS BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREETIGRADING LEE STREET 2 +21 - 17' R 4" SW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET LEE STREET 2 +25 - 18'R STUMP 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET LEE STREET 2 +64 - 24' L 14" SW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING LEE STREET 4 +06 - 24' L 12" SW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING LEE STREET 8 +14 -19'L BUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING LEE STREET 9+54-9+63,27-30'L 3- BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING LEE STREET 9 +85 -14'L 14" HW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET LEE STREET SUBTOTAL 7 PAYNE AVENUE 0 +46 - 17'L 32" SW 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING PAYNE AVENUE 0 +49 - IT IL 28" SW 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING PAYNE AVENUE 1+24-1+32,28'R 2 -6" PINES 2 FOR NEW STORM SEWER PAYNE AVENUE 1 +42 - 89'L STUMP 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER PAYNE AVENUE 1 +43 - TL 4" SW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER PAYNE AVENUE 1 +44 -108'L 20" SW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER PAYNE AVENUE 1 +44 - 25' L STUMP 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER PAYNE AVENUE 1 +45 - 68'L STUMP 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER PAYNE AVENUE 1+39-1+63,17-33' L BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER &STREET PAYNE AVENUE 1 +66 - 32'R 8" SW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER PAYNE AVENUE 1+71-1+79,24-32 R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET PAYNE AVENUE 5 +gg_g +03, 15 -26' L BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR STREET & SEW. SERV. REPAIR PAYNE AVENUE 6 +10 - 21'L 16" SW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING PAYNE AVENUE 6+33-6+37,19'L 2- BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING PAYNE AVENUE 7 +43 - 23'L 4" PINE BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING PAYNE AVENUE 8 +65 -8 +87, 11-13'R 24" SW 2 FOR NEW STORM SEWER PAYNE AVENUE SUBTOTAL 12 ROSELAWN AVENUE 10+02-11+49,25-33'L BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER ROSELAWN AVENUE 11 +82 - 29'L BUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER ROSELAWN AVENUE SUBTOTAL 0 WEST WORK AREA SUBTOTAL 19 \\PUBLiCWORK51Pn Del. \WORKSiENeL5PROJDOCS \05 K.r =r— d_ 4119 12006 104 AM (5) T R--ts Agenda Item H4 \ \PU9LtCW0RKS,PrL Data \WORKS1- =NGt05PROJDOCS \05 -16 K-d SVr ts,0516DESSCH.fds 411° ?2006 10'D4 AM (5) T R--l. TREE REMOVAL 5CHtUULt STREET STATION & OFFSET SIZE /TYPE GRUBBING NOTES 0 NO REMOVALS BELMONT LANE 0 NO REMOVALS BURKE AVENUE ELDRIDGE AVENUE 18 +14- 20 +69 1' L - 1' R 4 -6" SW 6 FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET GREENBRIER STREETS 3 +12 - 14' L BUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING GREENBRIER STREETS 3 +66 -736 'L 34" SW BY OTHERS FOR SEWER SERVICE REPAIR GREENBRIER STREETS 6+64-6+69,18'R 3 -4" PINES BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREETIGRADING GREENBRIER STREETS 10 +57 - 24'R 6" SW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREETIGRADING GREENBRIER STREETS 11+03-11+13,20-24'L 2- BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING GREENBRIER STREETS 11 +46 - 29'L 20" P I NNE BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREETIGRADING GREENBRIER STREETS 11+52-11+56,19-24'R 2- BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREETIGRADING GREENBRIER STREETS 11 +81 - 24'L 4" PINE BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING GREENBRIER STREETS 12 +43 - 22'L BUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREETIGRADING GREENBRIER STREET KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 2+07-2+31,11-17'R SUBTOTAL 4- BUSHES 0 INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 2 +77 - 20'R 12" SW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 2+76-3+63,15-28'R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 3 +64 - 21'L 12" PINE 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADINGNVALL KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 3 +71 - 27'L 12" SW 6Y OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 3 +76 - 21'L 12" PINE 1 FOR NEW STREETIGRADING/WALL KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 3 +78 - 30'L 12" PINE BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 3 +78 - 22'R 14" PINE BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 3+37-3+94,13-25L BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADINGI WALL KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 4+84-5+39,11-63'R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 5 +18 - 32'R 22" PINE BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 6+22-7+10,20-3V R 10- BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 6+70-7+06,21-23'R 3 -2" SW INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 6+94-7+70,22-26'L 5 -6 to 10" PINES BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 7+13-7+74,20-36'R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 8 +06 - 23'L BUSH NCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 9 +78 - 19'R 10" SW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 10 +24- 10 +44, 14 -23' R 3- BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 10 +81 -15'R 36" SW 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 10 +96- 11 +13, 13 -18' R 2- BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 12 +24- 12 +92, 13 -30' R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST 13+11-13+39,15-23'R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE EAST SUBTOTAL 1 3 KENWOOD LANE 1 +35 - 23'L 8" SW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 3 +33 -3 +40, 20-26'L 3- BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 4+85-5+52,15-30'R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 5+72-6+12,20-51'R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 5 +74 -51' R 12" PINE BY OTHERS FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 5 +98 - 19'R BUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 6 +12 - 2T R 14" PINE BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 6 +31 -24' R STUMP BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 6 +46 -6 +61, 26'R 2 -6" PINES BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 6 +73 - 33'R 14" PINE BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 6 +83 - 28'R 12" PINE BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 7+07-7+45,22-3W R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 9 +93- 10 +07, 20 -26' R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 10 +12- 10 +21, 20 -26' R 2 -14" PINES BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 10 +43 - 25 R 36" SW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 10 +68 - 21'R BUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 11 +93- 12 +12, 12 -26 L 3- BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 12 +56 - 22' R 14" HW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST 12+74-18'L BUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING KENWOOD DRIVE WEST SUBTOTAL 0 MOUNT VERNON AVENUE 1 +39 - 21'R BUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING MOUNT VER AVENUE 1 +80 -1 +95, 12-20'L 2- BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING MOUNT VERNON AVENUE SUBTOTAL o ROSELAWN AVENUE l3+75,36-37'L 2 -6" SW 2 FOR NEW STORM SEWER ROSELAWN AVENUE 14+33-14+70,36'L 5 -12" PINES 5 FOR NEW STORM SEWER ROSELAWN AVENUE 15 +54 - 40'L 6" SW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STORM SEWER ROSELAWN AVENUE 15 +76 -38' L SEEDLING INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER ROSELAWN AVENUE 16 +05 -36' L 16" HW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER ROSELAWN AVENUE SKILLMAN AVENUE 14+29-14+46,10-17'R SUBTOTAL 3- BUSHES 8 INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET SKILLMAN AVENUE 14+69-14+92,14-17'L 4 -4" SW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING SKILLMAN AVENUE 15 +06- 15 +35, 14 -20' L 2- BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING SKILLMAN AVENUE 16+91-18+16,12-20'R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER /POND SKILLMAN AVENUE 17 +65- 17 +73, 10 -11' R 44" HW 4 FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET SKILLMAN AVENUE 18 +51-19+19,11-22'R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER /POND SKILLMAN AVENUE SUBTOTAL 4 CENTRAL WORK AREA SUBTOTAL 21 \ \PU9LtCW0RKS,PrL Data \WORKS1- =NGt05PROJDOCS \05 -16 K-d SVr ts,0516DESSCH.fds 411° ?2006 10'D4 AM (5) T R--l. Agenda Item H4 TREE REMOVAL SCHEDULE STREET STATION & OFFSET SIZE /TYPE GRUBBING NOTES PAYNE AVENUE 0 +39 -1 +25, 15 -25' L BRUSH 0 NO REMOVALS ARCADE STREET 13 +32 - 408'R 18" SW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER /POND KELLER LAKE POND 13 +43 - 412'R 18" SW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER /POND KELLER LAKE POND KELLER LAKE POND 13 +65- 14 +76, 376 -445 R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER /POND KELLER LAKE POND 13 +67 - 401'R 8" PINE 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER/POND KELLER LAKE POND 14 +15 - 422 'R 18" SW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER /POND KELLER LAKE POND 15 +44 - 330'R 18" HW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER /POND KELLER LAKE POND 15 +83 - 297'R 10" SW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER/POND KELLER LAKE POND 15 +93 - 280'R 8" SW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STORM SEWER/POND KELLER LAKE POND 16 +15 - 267'R 4" PINE 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER/POND KELLER LAKE POND 16 +39 - 245' R 10" BY OTHERS FOR NEW STORM SEWER /POND KELLER LAKE POND 16 +51 - 238' R S SW 10" W 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER /POND KELLER LAKE POND 16 +82 - 220'R 8" SW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER /POND EAST WORK AREA -1+06-2+13,12- L SUBTOTAL 9 FOR NEW STORM SEWER &STREET TREE REMOVAL SCHEDULE STREET STATION &OFFSET SIZEITYPE GRUBBING NOTES PAYNE AVENUE 0 +39 -1 +25, 15 -25' L BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREETIGRADING & WM PAYNE AVENUE 0 +59 - 20'R 26" SW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET PAYNE AVENUE 1 +16 - 20'L 16" HW 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING & WM PAYNE AVENUE 2 +16 - 20' L 18" HW 1 FOR NEW STREETIGRADING & WM PAYNE AVENUE 2 +48 - 21'L 22" HW 1 FOR NEW STREETIGRADING & WM PAYNE AVENUE 2+38-2+59,15-25'L BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREETIGRADING & WM PAYNE AVENUE 3 +13 - 20'L 34" SW 1 FOR NEW STREETIGRADING & WM PAYNE AVENUE 3 +54 - 21'R BUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER &STREET PAYNE AVENUE 4 +47 - 23'R 14" HW 1 FOR NEW STORM SEWER & STREET PAYNE AVENUE 5 +48 - 20'L 22" HW 1 FOR NEW STREETIGRADING & WM PAYNE AVENUE 5 +81 - 20'L 22" HW 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING & WM PAYNE AVENUE 6 +54 - 20'L 32" SW 1 FOR NEW STREETIGRADING & WM PAYNE AVENUE SUBTOTAL I 9 SEARLE STREET -1+06-2+13,12- L BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STORM SEWER &STREET SEARLE STREET 0 +62 - 15'R 10" SW 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING SEARLE STREET 1 +25 -16'R 32" SW 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING SEARLE STREET 1 +83 -16'R 32" SW 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING SEARLE STREET SUBTOTAL 3 VIKING DRIVE 4+87-5+61,14-33'R BRUSH INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING VIKING DRIVE 4+94-5+03,25-26'R 2 -12" PINES 2 FOR SAN. SEWER MAIN REPAIR VIKING DRIVE 7 +75 - 19'R 6" PINE 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING VIKING DRIVE 11 +65 - 19'R 20" SW BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING VIKING DRIVE 12 +30 - 19' R 8" SW 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING VIKING DRIVE 12 +32 - 19'R 6" SW 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING VIKING DRIVE 12 +33 - 19'R 4" SW 1 FOR NEW STREET /GRADING VIKING DRIVE [ 13+90-14+51,16-21'R 5 - 6" PINES BY OTHERS FOR NEW STREET /GRADING VIKING DRIVE 7 +63- 18 +57, 18 -30 R I I 2 - BUSHES INCIDENTAL FOR NEW STREET /GRADING VIKING DRIVE SUBTOTAL 6 NORTH WORK AREA SUBTOTAL 18 TREE REMOVAL SCHEDULE SOUTH WORK AREA GRUBBING SUBTOTAL 28 SOUTH WORK AREA WEST WORK AREA GRUBBING SUBTOTAL 19 WEST WORK AREA CENTRAL WORK AREA GRUBBING SUBTOTAL 21 CENTRAL WORK AREA EAST WORK AREA GRUBBING SUBTOTAL 9 EAST WORK AREA NORTH WORK AREA GRUBBING SUBTOTAL 18 NORTH WORK AREA PROJECT TOTAL 95 ry C CI 10t PROJECT TOTAL nRITDArTr)P NOTES BUSH AND BKUGH KtmUVAL Onxl<a_ Dc uvana✓�w CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL BUSH /SHRUB RELOCATIONS WITH PROPERTY OWNERS AS DIRECTED. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL TREE REMOVAL WITH THE CITY S SUBCONTRACTOR. GRUBBING IS PAID FOR EACH ROOTBALL REMOVED AND PROPERLY DISPOSED OF OFF SITE AS DIRECTED. \kFUEUC`: 0RKS\ Pr i_ Dala \WORKS;ENG',OSPRCJDOCS\05 -16 K-d Slt fe 10516DESSCH.Ha 4 %1+2006 10:04 AM (5) Tree Removals 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 C SUMMER °o C CT. i, i - 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 H5 TO: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager FROM: R. Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works /City Engineer DuWayne Konewko, Environmental Manager SUBJECT: Authorization of Contract Services for City Hall Campus Plans — Phase 11 DATE: April 25, 2006 INTRODUCTION The City Council approved the formation of an internal committee and the hiring of a consultant to conduct a feasibility study for the improvement of the City Hall Campus in April of 2005. The following reasons were cited as the impetus for this study: The City of Maplewood is already a leader in many environmental areas. Approval of the feasibility study and implementation of the outcomes will strengthen the City's commitment in the area of environmental protection. The City is requiring all development projects to address non -point source pollution and provide plans to lessen or prevent runoff from leaving the site. Implementation of the outcomes will also serve to educate the public and enhance awareness on environmental protection. The Environmental Utility Program requires existing residential and commercial parcels to address storm water runoff issues. The overall goal of these programs is the protection of our water resources. The City should lead by example and be out front in promoting these causes. Background In reviewing construction and development proposals, the City is responsible for ensuring that developers comply with all applicable rules and regulations. Minimizing environmental degradation and mitigating environmental 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 the City Hall and Public Works Campus. 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 and facilities. 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 the City and other agencies to put into place rules and provisions to limit or control runoff and to protect the quality of our water resources. Rain gardens, porous parking lots, and native plantings are all possible preventative measures that a builder or developer can use to lessen or prevent storm water runoff. The Environmental Utility Program also recognizes the need to control runoff. The fund provides for a credit if the homeowner or business can demonstrate that a parcel retains all or a portion of the rainfall that it Agenda Item H5 receives. The City will reduce the utility fee by a percentage equal to that percent of the parcel which produces no external runoff. Discussion With support from City Council, the City hired Ms. Sherri Buss, Landscape Architect from Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, to work with City staff to prepare a feasibility study. In conjunction with this, staff put together an internal committee of City employees to discuss and evaluate proposed projects. To better understand what employees thought about the campus and to determine what was important and meaningful to them, a survey was developed and submitted to all City employees for their comment. A total of forty -two surveys were returned by City employees. Results and comments from the surveys were tabulated and a City Hall Campus Concept Plan was developed to serve as an outline for the purpose of guiding the discussion. The concept plan includes a full range of environmentally sound development practices, addresses existing site problems including slopes and drainage issues, circulation, aesthetics, and includes information on Best Management Practices (BMPs). The concept plan also identifies a wide range of development practices prescribed in City Ordinances. This includes erosion and sediment control, storm water management, rain gardens, native plantings, porous pavement, wetland buffer improvements, and site preparation requirements. The Ramsey - Washington Metro Watershed District also was involved in supporting the concept plan and providing technical expertise. Meetings were then held with City staff and our consultant to review the concept plan and begin identifying features of the plan that would become part of the overall campus plan. Because staff knew that financial resources were very scarce and that the City Council was concerned about having to financially support the findings, staff decided to put together a list of projects that staff could champion from start to finish with very little outside support. Staff spent many meetings discussing these concerns and eventually produced a list of thirteen "Staff Driven Projects ". The projects include trail construction, buckthorn removal, restoration of slopes, native plantings, informative signage, rain gardens, restoration of Wicklander Pond, sediment traps, and many other projects aimed at showcasing and educating the business community and citizens. One of the goals staff hopes to achieve with these projects is the ability to conduct and gather research on different technological advances for applications on porous pavement and sediment control. Another goal of this project is to showcase and demonstrate a few of these projects to aid in creating "hands -on" learning opportunities for educating children, residents, and businesses in the community. Staff agreed to complete these projects within four years. Upon concluding this phase, a draft campus master plan was provided to the Environmental Committee for review. The Environmental Committee reviewed the plan and made comments and recommendations on various components of the plan. Staff then incorporated these recommendations into a second draft and submitted this back to the Environmental Committee for more comments. The Environmental Committee reviewed the changes and staff held one more meeting to discuss strategy, roles of different departments, implementation, and direction. One of the keys to the success of this project was an underlying theme for all City Departments to work together to resolve issues and challenge themselves. SUMMARY The City Council spoke to three major concerns regarding the approval of the City Hall Campus Feasibility Study at the meeting in April of 2005. The first concern was ensuring that the Environmental Committee would be involved in the process. The second concern was ensuring that City staff assumed a leadership Agenda Item H5 role in the design and implementation of the outcomes because resources are scarce, and the third concern is the need to focus on improvements that do not require large contributions from the budget to complete. Staff discussed these concerns and felt very compelled to address them and continually refer back to them to ensure that the process and outcomes were in line with those expressed by the City Council. Staff was committed to the development of a plan that exceeded City Council's expectations. In addition, staff wanted to recommend outcomes that required involvement from all City employees. In responding to these concerns, staff offers the following: The Environmental Committee was instrumental in reviewing recommendations and commenting on the plan. City staff was very much involved in the creation of the thirteen "Staff Driven Projects" with input from all departments. Finally, staff is committed to completing these projects with very little outside support and assistance. Staff is now positioned to begin working on phase II with a consultant to provide additional details and support to the concept plans. Work will include planting designs, species lists, tree replacement schedule, prairie plantings, rain gardens, and the design of infiltration basins in and around City Campus. Upon completion of the development of the concept plans, staff will be largely responsible for implementing the outcomes. Staff will again be working very closely with the consultant in the development of these conceptual plans. The contract with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. shall not exceed $14,000. Monies have been set aside in the budget for this expenditure. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the approval of the City Hall Campus Plan Phase II for contract services with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. (not to exceed $14,000) for the following reasons: 1. The City of Maplewood is already a leader in many environmental areas. Approval of this plan and implementation of the outcomes will strengthen the City's commitment in the area of environmental protection. 2. The City is requiring all development and construction projects to address non -point source pollution and provide plans to lessen or prevent runoff from leaving the site. The City also should adopt these principles at City locations. 3. Implementation of the outcomes and kiosk displays will also serve to educate the public and enhance awareness on environmental protection. In addition, most of these measures can be implemented at home, which allows residents the opportunity to mitigate their own runoff. 4. The Environmental Utility Program requires existing residential and commercial parcels to address storm water runoff issues. This program also provides an incentive in the form of a credit to residential and commercial parcels that choose to implement measures aimed at curtailing runoff from the site. 5. The overall goal of these programs is the protection of our water resources. The City should be out front in promoting these causes and should lead by example. 6. City staff has made a commitment to work towards the completion of the outcomes specified in the City Hall Campus Plan. Item H6 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk DATE: May 2, 2006 RE: Temporary Gambling — 3.2% Beer Robert Reistad, on behalf of St. Paul East Parks Lions Club, has applied for a temporary gambling license and a 3.2 beer permit for the Ramsey County Fair that will be held from July 12 through the 16 th. This is an annual event for the St. Paul East Parks Lions Club. Approval is sought for the following temporary gambling resolution. RESOLUTION BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, that the temporary permit for lawful gambling is approved for St. Paul East Parks Lions Club. 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. MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Parks and Recreation Director DATE: April 27, 2006 for the May 8, 2006 City Council Meeting Agenda Item H7 SUBJECT: Maplewood Community Center Request for Proposal for Food Catering Services INTRODUCTION The Maplewood Community Center has contracted with Suzanne's Cuisine for exclusive catering services for the past seven years. We have been extremely pleased with Suzanne's Cuisine catering and our clientele has provided consistent high marks for the food quality, service and pricing format. Suzanne's Cuisine, in addition to being the exclusive food caterer, is also the current liquor license holder for the Maplewood Community Center. Staff has prepared an updated request for proposal to contract with up to three caterers effective January 1, 2007. BACKGROUND The Maplewood Community Center opened to the public in October 1994. The M.C.C. boasts a state - of- the -art banquet facility that can accommodate up to 350 people. Annually we host over 150 large group events including 25 to 40 weddings. To my knowledge, the city of Maplewood was the first public community center to enter into an exclusive catering agreement for food and beverage that provided the city with a percentage of revenue from gross sales. We currently receive 10% on all food and 25% on all beverages. The city generates $18,000 to $33,000 annually in M.C.C. revenue based on this exclusive catering agreement. As indicated, staff is very pleased with Suzanne's Cuisine and will be encouraging them to submit a proposal for council consideration in 2007. Having said that, first we believe that it is always good public policy to review and update contracts on a regular basis. Secondly, it is our intent to modify the catering proposal to include additional caterers. The request for proposal seeks a maximum of three exclusive full - service providers to provide catering service for the Maplewood Community Center. It is our intent to have two food caterers with the potential for a third to establish a "niche" market. We believe there is growth potential with a "niche" market focusing on ethnic food such as Asian, Italian, etc., as a specialty. The third caterer that we are looking to secure is for lunch or small group businesses that would be economical for groups of 30 to 60 people. Options might be pizzas, subs and/or Asian food. It is our intent to complete the R.F.P. process, which includes a number of steps ranging from submittal of proposals to food sampling to recommendation and onsite visits. Our timeframe calls for the city council to make the ultimate decision on August 14, 2006. In addition to the complete review process, we will be hosting a question and answer session on June 1 at 2 p.m. in the Maplewood Community Center, including a tour as well as walking through the proposed request for proposal. We are currently working with the city attorney to develop a second R.F.P. for liquor provision. It is our hope to have one liquor provider, which may or may not be one of the selected food catering businesses. It is our intent to bring this before the council for consideration at the first meeting in June. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the city council adopt the attached request for proposal for food catering services for the Maplewood Community Center effective January 1, 2007. kh \food catering rfp mem.mcc Attachment 2 City of Maplewood • i•• • Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal May 2006 Purpose of Proposal The City of Maplewood is seeking proposals to enter into an agreement with a maximum of three (3) exclusive food service providers to provide catered food service in the Maplewood Community Center (MCC). The intent is to select a maximum of three (3) food service providers (Caterers) to supply food and/or non - alcoholic beverages for banquets, special events, meetings and other functions conducted at the MCC. Our intent is to locate two (2) full service caterers; one of which may service a special niche market. The niche market might include ethnic foods or some unique concept that we may not have considered yet to fulfill our markets needs. In addition, we are looking for a third caterer to meet the less expensive luncheon business, such as a pizza or sub /sandwich type operation. The intent is to have up to three (3) Caterers available for food service by January 1, 2007. Renters will be able to choose any one of the three (3) Caterers selected to handle food service needs for their event. The MCC Events and Operations Supervisor and Manager reserve the right to offer alternative food options at their discretion if the group is 50 people or less or another reason is determined. Before December 31, 2006, events still in search of food service will be required to use our current exclusive MCC Caterers. After January 1, 2007 the selected Caterers will be the only food service providers available to renters, unless exempted by the City Council. Customers and rental groups may also order food through the MCC concession stand. The exclusive Caterers may or may not be responsible for nor allowed to provide alcoholic beverage for the MCC. For the exclusive privilege of being one of the three Caterers, the Caterers will be required to pay the MCC a percentage of the revenues generated from MCC events on a monthly basis. Community Center Banquet Room Information The banquet facility at the MCC is designed to seat approximately 350 people. The banquet room can be The MCC has been in the meeting and event business for nearly twelve (12) years and averages over 25 weddings and over 400 meetings per year. The banquet room can also be divided into four (4) rooms for separate functions. The MCC also houses several other meeting and event spaces. The combination of banquet facility and sheltered outdoor patio makes it a premier banquet facility for weddings and other events. Moreover, the MCC is actively marketed to maintain its popularity. Weddings, meetings, fundraisers, tradeshows, corporate events and community special events — the room is frequently booked 8 -12 months in advance. Weekday events include business luncheons, workshops and seminars, sport team banquets, recitals, senior luncheons /suppers and more. The MCC is primarily responsible for marketing the facility; however, the selected caterers will provide marketing support and assistance. About the Maplewood Community Center's Customers The MCC customers are diverse in age and cultures. Our customers have high expectations and varying food needs. Caterers are required to offer food appealing for all customers and offer a wide price range of menu options. Kitchen and Storage The MCC has one licensed catering kitchen adjacent to the banquet room. Caterers can use this kitchen to warm/serve foods using existing equipment and shelving. In addition, the MCC has limited storage that will be available to rent at a predetermined rental rate. Equipment brought in by the Caterer must meet health department and city /state codes. It is the Caterers responsibity to provide, at their cost, accommodations as required by authorizing agencies for such things as grills, pig roasters, etc. The intent is that the Caterers will supply food, service staff, tableware and linens for banquets, buffets, meetings and special events. The Caterer may or may not be responsible for providing alcoholic beverages but will be asked Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal May 2006 to serge or clear beverages at tables as part of the meal function. The selected Caterers must secure all property, as the MCC will not be responsible for lost or stolen items. Financial Arrangements The selected Caterers will be required to pay the MCC a percentage of the revenues generated through food service, beverage service and other services provided, including rental items and decorations. The percentage paid to the MCC will be based on the final gross bill, excluding tax and gratuity. Caterers must include in their proposal the percentage payable to the MCC as an exclusive caterer. The MCC will consider only those proposals that offer the MCC percentages that are a minimum of: • 8% of all gross sales for service scheduled Monday through Thursday, 6:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. • 12% of all gross sales for service scheduled Monday through Thursday, 4:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. • 15% of all gross sales for service scheduled Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays 6:OOa.m. to 1:OOa.m. Accounting Procedures The collection of deposits and fees for all catering charges is the sole responsibility of the Caterer. Non - payment by a client to the catering company for services rendered will not negate payment of the commission revenue to the MCC. The Caterer agrees to pay the MCC the commission revenues based on the final billing for each event. The Caterer is responsible to provide one copy of the final billing for each event in a given month to the Events and Operations Supervisors by the 15` of the following month, along with payment. Delinquent commission payments are charged $50 every 30 days, starting with the first day payment is late. The City reserves the right to inspect all financial records for an event. Caterer must provide documentation within two business days upon request. An MCC representative will collect the room rental fee, room deposit, security officer and rental equipment fee. Caterer(s) Responsibilities • Provide professional staff that will maintain a consistently high level of service and appearance. • Provide pre -event customer service in a tirnely and professional manner. • Provide food tasting for current and potential MCC customers at varied times with a minimum of 4 times per year. • Wait staff must be able to distribute and clean up alcoholic beverages at tables as part of a meal function if requested. • Provide multi -level price list with wait staff, tableware and linens included. • Provide varied menus to meet customer's needs and accommodate small and large events. • Provide appropriate staffing to prepare, serve and host food events. • Provide sufficient daytime staff when necessary. • Provide MCC with a copy of the current Health Department License and Certified Food Managers License during the term of the contract. • Provide MCC with proof of bonding by the State of Minnesota. • Work with customer directly to provide food service for their event. • Provide marketing/menu information to assist MCC with potential renters. • Designate an on -site coordinator for each event to work with MCC staff throughout the event. • Coordinate set -up of room(s) with MCC staff. • Follow all procedures and policies set by the MCC pertaining to the food operation. • Adhere to standards set forth in Minnesota Statures and the Department of Health. Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal May 2006 • Work cooperatively with beverage service provider at events, including clearing drinks/bottles off tables. • Responsible for keeping the kitchen, storage areas, and receiving areas clean. • Assist with cleaning and maintenance of banquet room as needed. • Provide a detailed accounting of events held at the MCC and make fee payments to MCC in a timely manner, per month by the 15` of following month. • Provide no more than two sponsored City events, at cost, with no commission received by the City of Maplewood. • Meet the insurance requirements set forth by the City of Maplewood. Maplewood Community Center Responsibilities • Provide Catering kitchen with existing equipment (warming ovens, walk -in cooler, freezer, prep and work area and rinsing dishwasher). • Charge and collect rental fees to rental groups and schedule events. • Provide tables and chairs for banquet room set -ups and set the room in an accurate and uniform fashion. • Custodial service for cleaning and setup. • Identify one (1) liquor provider for full beverage service through a separate agreement. • Work cooperatively with Caterers and coordinate monthly meetings to ensure successful events. • Provide overhead expenses; lights, heat, air conditioning, etc. • Provide necessary cleaning supplies for the maintenance of the MCC kitchen. • License the kitchen with the Minnesota Department of Health. • Arrange meetings with Caterers and Beverage Provider as needed. • Provide additional event support; including, but not limited to (i.e. AN equipment and sound). Fees /Costs • Identify specific menu, cost per plate /person and any other extraneous fees potential customers would be responsible for, i.e. tax, gratuity, etc. • Identify how changes to menu items and fees will be handled allowing enough lead time for MCC to keep their information current. Price changes need the approval of MCC Manager or Events and Operations Supervisor before they can be implemented. Prices may only be increased once per year at designated time each year. • Identify any service beyond that stated above that will benefit the MCC or MCC customers (i.e. advertising, marketing, existing clientele base sponsorship of special event(s), unique offerings, etc...) • Provide three level priced menus for the following: Fees include all costs: tax, gratuity, etc. Buffet Dinners and Sit Down Dinners: 10 choices $14 to $18 /plate 5 choices $19 to $24 /plate 5 choices $25 to $35 /plate Buffet Lunches and Sit Down Luncheons: 7 choices $7 to $10 /plate 5 choices $11 to $15 /plate 5 choices $16 to $20 /plate Continental Breakfast to Sit Down Breakfasts: 3 choices $4 to $8 /plate 3 choices $8 to $12 /plate 3 choices $13 to $18 /plate Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal May 2006 References • Caterer shall furnish three (3) dates in June 2006 or July 2006 when they will be providing catering service so that City of Maplewood representatives can attend to see first hand how service staff performs. Please provide inforination on menus being served, number of people attending and type of event. • Caterer shall include at least five (5) event references that demonstrate a full range of Caterers experience. Experience must include wedding receptions and/or banquets. Each event should include: type of event, menu, who event was for, where it was hosted and the total number of people in attendance. Please include any extraordinary elements of the event. • Caterer shall identify members of their staff that will provide catering service at events, their background experience and number of years associated with the Caterer. • Caterer shall identify member(s) of their staff that will be responsible for supervising events, their background experience and number of years associated with the Caterer. • Caterer shall furnish three (3) dates between July 1 -15 and preferred times to prepare a meal for the city representatives to sample a menu selection with meals priced at approximately $15 per person and $25 per person, as they would be offered to banquet customers with additional 3 Appetizer, and 3 dessert options. The MCC Manager or Events and Operations Supervisor will contact Caterers to schedule times once the scope has been narrowed. Terms of Agreement Non - performance: It is the Caterer's responsibility to familiarize themselves and their staff as to the requirements of the contract and to perform all tasks in an acceptable timely manner. It is not the City's responsibility to remind the Caterer of the contract requirements. This includes knowing and enforcing facility rules pertaining to the grounds, room, or patio use (i.e. decorating, candles, permitted driving /access areas etc). The agreement shall be effective January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2009. If Caterer's contract is not chosen for the following contract period, Caterer will remain responsible for providing services to the rentals booked at the MCC for which they had committed to before the time of contract termination. The Events and Operations Supervisor and the catering company owner (or owner's representative) shall work to positively resolve any service /performance issues that may arise. If the issue is not able to be resolved within 60 days, either party may terminate this agreement with a thirty (30) day written notification. The MCC reserves the right to terminate the contract with the Caterer with a 30 day written notification if there are service, performance, health or safety issues that are impeding the success of reserved events. At the discretion of the MCC Manager or Events and Operations Supervisor, the Caterer will remain responsible for providing service to the rentals booked at the MCC for which they had committed at the time of the written notification. In consideration of being allowed to use the MCC, the Caterers hereby voluntarily assumes all risks of accident or damage to its property and to the persons and property of its employees. The Caterers hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Maplewood and Maplewood Community Center, respective officers, employees, agents and insurers from damages solely caused by the intentional action of the Caterers representatives and employees. Responses The respondent shall supply Five (5) copies of the Request for Proposal suitable for reproduction and distribution to appropriate City officials. Responses are to be delivered to Maplewood City Hail, no later than 1:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 15, 2006. Maplewood City Hall is located at 1830 East County Road B, Maplewood, MN 55109. Note: Faxes and e- mailed responses will not be accepted. Responses are to be received no Later than 1:00 p.m. S Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal May 2006 on June 15, 2006. It is anticipated that the formal contract would be awarded by City Council on Monday August 14 tH . Responses are to include the following: • Name, address, phone, fax, e -mail and website address of responding company • Name, address, phone, fax, e -mail of representative of responding company • Detailed description of catering service • History of company • Revenue percentages as described in the section titled "Financial Arrangements" • Price range proposals as listed in the section titled "Fees /Costs" • Sample Menus as described in the section titled "Fees/Costs"; include current menu and menus for the previous year • Identify any additional services as listed in the section titled "Fees /Costs" • References as described in the section titled "References" • Statement of intent to provide requested services for the MCC • Statement of capability for licensing, bonding and insurance • Statement of marketing plan with goals and objectives Send responses to: Bruce Anderson Director of Parks and Recreation Maplewood City Hall 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 proposals may not be withdrawn for 60 days after the receipt of py oposals without the consent of the City of Maplewood. Request for Information Any interested responder may contact the following individual with questions. All questions must be submitted in writing. Russell Schmidt Events and Operations Supervisor Maplewood Community Center 2100 White Bear Avenue Maplewood, MN 55109 Fax: 651- 249 -2249 Email: russ .schmidtk.'.ci.maplewood.mn.us A pre - proposal question and answer meeting will be held on June 1st at 2pm at the Maplewood Community Center, 2100 White Bear Ave. A tour of the banquet and kitchen facilities will start at 2pm, with the meeting starting at 2:30pm. We will not be scheduling individual tours outside of this date. Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal May 2006 No Contact Proposing Caterers and their representatives are prohibited from contacting any elected official for purposes of lobbying to secure this contract. Acceptance /Rejection of Proposals The City of Maplewood intends to enter into a contract with Caterers that best satisfies the needs of the City. The City of Maplewood reserves the right to reject any and all proposals and to act in the best interest of the City and its citizens. This RFP does not commit the City to award contract or share in any expenses of preparing these proposals, or travel expenses related to the proposal or interview process. Agenda Item H8 MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Parks and Recreation Director DATE: May 1, 2006 for the May 8, 2006 City Council Meeting SUBJECT: 2006 Joint Powers Agreement between the City of Maplewood and the City of Oakdale regarding the Operation of Tanners Beach INTRODUCTION Attached is a copy of the joint powers agreement between the city of Maplewood and the city of Oakdale for operation of Tanners Beach. This will be the sixth year that the city has provided administrative and lifeguard services for the city of Oakdale. The contract is similar to previous years with the addition of a five percent increase. BACKGROUND The city provides lifeguard services for three municipalities: the cities of Oakdale and Mahtomedi and White Bear Township. The contract has been reviewed in the past by the city attorney regarding form and content. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the city council authorize staff to enter into the agreement and have the authorized parties sign the contract. kphloakdale joint powers 06.contractstagreements.mcc Attachment 2006 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF OAKDALE AND THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD REGARDING THE OPERATION TANNER'S BEACH This agreement made and entered into on the day and year hereinafter set forth by the City of Maplewood/ Maplewood Community Center (MCC) and the City of Oakdale (Oakdale) both of which are governmental subdivisions of the State of Minnesota. This contract is effective May 1, 2006 to September 1, 2006 and will be reviewed on a yearly basis by both parties. PURPOSE Oakdale is desirous of having the MCC hire, train, and manage all personnel to work at Tanner's Beach from June 10- August 13, 2006. AGREEMENT Now, therefore in consideration of the mutual understanding herein expressed, the City of Oakdale and the City of Maplewood agree as follows: The MCC shall provide the following services: a. Determine the hours of operation for Tanner's Beach and beach program based on Oakdale recommendation. In the event of poor weather conditions, the MCC will be responsible for the decision of closing the beach and / or canceling programs. MCC will notify the City of Oakdale when programs have been canceled or the beach has been closed. MCC will also be responsible for opening and closing the beach facility on a daily basis and administration of keys to personnel. b. Develop Oakdale's Tanner's Beach program schedule. MCC will submit program information to Oakdale before publication. C. Recruit, interview, hire, train and evaluate all aquatic staff. Aquatic staff may consist of a beach coordinator, lifeguards, swim instructors, swim aides and concession attendants. MCC will hire, evaluate, discipline and terminate employees. d. Manage pay records and issue paychecks to all aquatic personnel working at Tanner's Beach. C. Ensure employees working at Tanner's Beach are employed by the City of Maplewood and follow Maplewood personnel policies. Employees must meet the minimum requirements to work in the appropriate positions Lifeguards - current certification in Red Cross Lifeguard Training - current certification on C.P.R. for the Professional Rescuer - current certification in Red Cross waterfront lifeguard training Swim Instructor - current certification in Red Cross Water Safety Instructor - current certification on C.P.R. for the Professional Rescuer - authorized instructor in the St. Paul Red Cross Chapter Swim Aides - trained and authorized as an MCC Water Safety Aide. Comply with the following standards related to the swim lesson program. (I.) At no time should any class or part of a class be unattended. (2.) A lifeguard must be on duty during and between all classes and programs. (3.) The maximum instructor to child ration should be as follows: Parent/child classes 1:10 Preschool classes 1:6 Youth classes (Levels 1 &2) 1:9 Youth classes (Levels 3 -6) 1:10 g. Monitor aquatic personnel certification to ensure that all certifications remain current. Expired certifications will result in being released from duties. It. Administer water examinations for all lifeguards. 2 i. Conduct in- service training sessions each year. In- services consist of both in and out of water training sessions. Attendance at these in- service training sessions will be mandatory. Lifeguarding, teaching, or swimming skills will be evaluated at the "in — water" in- service and information vital to the success of the aquatic program will be given at the "dry -land" in- services. j. Review and visit the Tanner's Beach to critique and advise staff. k. Critique staff by either conducting "on- the -job" evaluations for lifeguards or critiquing a class for swim instructors and aides. 1. Ensure staff follows all policies and procedures as authorized providers of the St. Paul Chapter of the American Red Cross. m. Maintain all course records and any other information required by the St. Paul Red Cross Chapter. n. Establish all class schedules and program fees with input from Oakdale. o. Review enrollment and make decisions relating to class status. p. Oversee the daily upkeep of the aquatic facilities and communicate all maintenance needs immediately to Oakdale. q. Administer aquatic program evaluations and provide a copy of the summary to Oakdale. 4. The City of Oakdale shall provide the following services: a. Obtain concession permits and contracts for Tanner's Beach. b. Advertise aquatic programs in Oakdale Update newsletter. C. Handle all swim lessons and aquatic programs registrations for Tanner's Beach. Oakdale will follow class maximum sizes when taking registrations. Oakdale will allow Maplewood residents to register at the resident rate and Maplewood will allow Oakdale residents to enroll at the resident rate. d. Supply the MCC staff with class list one week prior to the start of class. Communicate to participants when there are changes to their classes. (For example, classes are cancelled due to low enrollment or beach is closed due weather.) e. Maintain the beach and beach facility and concessions. f Reimburse the City of Maplewood for lifeguard, swim instructor, swim aide and concession staff salaries (as outlined by City of Maplewood). Reimburse the City of Maplewood for expenses needed for the operation of the concession stand, or beach. g. The City of Oakdale hereby agrees to provide the City of Maplewood with an annual administrative fee of$8,750, payable according to the schedule listed below. The City of Oakdale will retain all registration fees for swimming and aquatic programs as well as and concession revenues from Tanner's Beach. 1. The first of such payments, in the amount of $2,916.67, shall be made to the city of Maplewood no later than June 30, 2046. 2. The second payment, in the amount of $2,916.67, shall be made to the city of Maplewood no later than August 4, 2006. 3. The final payment, in the amount of $2,916.66, shall be made to the city of Maplewood no later than September 1, 2006. 3 The City of Oakdale agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Maplewood, its officers and employees from any liability, claims, damages, cost, judgment and expenses including attorney's fees resulting directly or indirectly from an act of mission with respect to the suitability, design, usual maintenance, and operations of the facilities provided by and maintained by the City of Oakdale and its agents. The City of Oakdale represents that said facilities are suitable for the coordination and for the aquatic programs. All policies of the insurance shall provide that the insurance company will notify the City of Maplewood at lease thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of any policy cancellation, modification, or non - renewal. The City of Oakdale agrees to comply with the Minnesota Data Practices Act and all other State and Federal laws relating to data privacy of confidentiality. The City of Oakdale will immediately report to the City of Maplewood any request from third parties for information relating to this agreement. The City of Oakdale agrees to promptly respond to inquiries from the City of Maplewood concerning data requests. The City of Oakdale agrees to hold the City of Maplewood, its officers, and employees harmless for claims resulting from the City of Oakdale's unlawful disclosure of use of data protected under State of Federal laws. k. The City of Oakdale agrees to abide by the requirements of the American with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), the Human Rights Ace (Minnesota Chapter 363), and (Title7) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. These laws deal with discrimination bases on race, gender, disability, religion, sexual preference and sexual harassment. Violation of any of the above laws can lead to termination of this agreement. S. Notices Any notice, demand correspondence that is authorized and required under the agreement shall be in writing, shall be sent by hand or delivered certified mail the other party as follows: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed effective and will be in effect for the year 2006. Dated: Dated: CITY OF OAKDALE By: Mayor AND By: City Administrator CITY OF MAPLEWOOD By: Mayor AND By: City Manager 0 Agenda Item H9 MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Parks and Recreation Director DATE: May 1, 2006 for the May 8, 2006 City Council Meeting SUBJECT: 2006 Joint Powers Agreement between the City of Maplewood and White Bear Township regarding the Operation of Bellaire Beach INTRODUCTION Attached is a copy of the joint powers agreement between the city of Maplewood and White Bear Township for the operation of Bellaire Beach. This will be the sixth year that the city has provided administrative and lifeguard services for White Bear Township. The contract is similar to previous years with the addition of a five percent increase. BACKGROUND The city provides lifeguard services for three municipalities: the cities of Oakdale and Mahtomedi and White Bear Township. The contract has been reviewed in the past by the city attorney regarding form and content. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the city council authorize staff to enter into the agreement and have the authorized parties sign the contract. kphlwb tnshp joint powers 06.contractstagreements.mcc Attachment JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF WHITE BEAR AND THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD REGARDING LIFEGUARD SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on the day of , 2006, by and between the Town of White Bear (the TOWN), and the City of Maplewood /Maplewood Community Center (MCC); both of which are governmental subdivisions of the State of Minnesota located in the County of Ramsey. PURPOSE 1. The TOWN has leased, from the County of Ramsey, the property located on the south shore of White Bear Lake in the Town of White Bear, known as "Bellaire Beach ". 2. The TOWN is desirous of having MCC hire, train, and manage all beach personnel who work at "Bellaire Beach" from May 27, 2006 to September 4, 2006 (Labor Day). 3. Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, provides that two or more governmental units, by agreement entered into through action of their governing bodies, may jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common to the contracting parties or any similar powers, including those which are the same except for the territorial limits within which they are exercised. AGREEMENT Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual undertakings herein expressed, the Town of White Bear and the City of Maplewood /Maplewood Community Center, agree as follows: 4. That MCC shall provide the following services: a. MCC will determine the hours of operation for Bellaire Beach based upon TOWN recommendations. MCC will be responsible for the operations at Bellaire Beach from May 27, 2006 through September 4, 2006 (Labor Day). The beach shall be open only on weekends and Memorial Day until June 10, 2006 at which time regular hours shall commence. The beach shall be open only on weekends and Labor Day after August 25th, 2006. In the event of poor weather conditions, the MCC will be responsible for the decision of closing the beach. MCC will also be responsible for opening and closing the beach facility on a daily basis and administration of keys to personnel. b. Recruit, hire, train and evaluate all lifeguard staff. MCC will hire, train, evaluate, discipline and terminate employees. C. Manage pay records and issue paychecks to all aquatic personnel working at Bellaire Beach. d. Ensure employees working at Bellaire Beach are employed by the City of Maplewood and follow all Maplewood personnel policies. Employees must meet the minimum requirements to work in the appropriate position. Lifeguard: • All lifeguards hired must hold a current certificate in American Red Cross Lifeguard Training and CPR for the Professional Rescuer. • The MCC will monitor Aquatic Staff certifications to be sure that all certifications remain current. • All aquatic staff is required to maintain current certifications. Expired certifications will result in being released from duties. • In the event of an expired certification, the MCC will remove the person, fill their shift with certified staff and make every attempt to renew the individual's certification in order to return to work as soon as possible. • In an effort to encourage fitness and develop strong lifeguards, the MCC will administer the Cooper Swim Test to all lifeguards at the start of their employment along with other skill tests. These skills are also performed periodically throughout the year at mandatory in- service trainings. • Lifeguards who are not achieving "good" standards according to the Cooper Test will need to attend additional training sessions conducted by certified lifeguard Training Instructors and Water Safety Instructors. This will help to improve their swimming skills. • Lifeguards who are selected to work at the beach must be American Red Cross Waterfront certified, have six months experience working at the Community Center, and have demonstrated excellent dependability and responsibility. These high expectations are to insure that all staff who are working off site 2 are aware and following Maplewood policies and work well independently. • The TOWN will be able to participate in the final selection of guard staff should they desire, but the final hiring selection shall solely be the responsibility of MCC. e. Give an orientation to lifeguard staff on beach management, rules and regulations, preventive responsibilities, emergency procedures, operation of facility, suggest in- service training curriculum of the Bellaire Beach 2006 summer season. f. Administer Bellaire Beach for the entire 2006 beach season. g. Conduct minimum of five in- service training sessions (one every two weeks). In- services consist of both in and out of water training sessions. Attendance at these in- service training sessions will be mandatory. Life guarding skills will be evaluated at the "in- water" in- services and information vital to the success of the aquatic program will be given at "dry- land" in- services. h. Visit Bellaire Beach a minimum of once per week during the months of June through August, to critique and advise staff on operations and gather input from participants. There will be an Aquatic Program Representative or Head Lifeguard available on site during times that the beach is open. Head lifeguards must be a minimum of 18 years of age and have excellent guarding, customer service, and leadership skills. MCC administrative staff will also conduct "On the Job Evaluations" for lifeguards periodically throughout the year without previous warning to the staff being evaluated. The skills evaluated in an "On the Job Evaluation" may be guarding technique, CPR skills, first aid skills, and prevention of accidents. After evaluating the lifeguard, the administrative staff will meet with the staff individually and discuss any critiques, or comments that they have to improve life guarding or teaching techniques. j. All employees will be evaluated for their performance formally at the end of the summer season. Employees will also be evaluated on a less formal basis midway through the summer. k. Ensure staff follows all policies and procedures as authorized providers of the St. Paul Chapter of the American Red Cross. 3 Oversee the daily upkeep and cleaning of the Beach facilities including the guard house and toilets. Any maintenance or mechanical problems will be immediately reported to the TOWN. M. Oversee use of other Bellaire Beach facilities including picnic shelter, picnic tables and grounds. Patrol the entire park once per day to clean -up litter, empty trash receptacles into park dumpster as needed. Clean beachfront daily including removing weeds and other debris from shoreline. Remove weeds and remove trees which tend to grow in shallow water areas of beach. n. MCC agrees to abide by the requirements and regulations of the American with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), the Human Rights Act (Minnesota Chapter 363), and (Title 7) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. These laws deal with discrimination based on race, gender, disability, religion, sexual preference and sexual harassment. Violation of any of the above laws can lead to termination of this agreement. 5. That the TOWN will provide the following services: a. Provide proper signage for beach. b. Reimburse MCC for lifeguard salaries (as outlined by MCC) on a monthly basis. C. The TOWN hereby agrees to provide MCC with an annual fee of $18540, payable in three (3) monthly payments of $6180 each. d. The TOWN agrees to indemnify and hold harmless MCC, its officers, and employees from any liability, claims, damages, cost, judgments, and expenses including attorney's fees resulting directly or indirectly from an act or omission with respect to the suitability, design, usual maintenance, and operations of the facilities provided by and maintained by the TOWN and its agents. The TOWN represents that said facilities are suitable for beach operation. e. All policies of insurance shall provide that the insurance company will notify MCC at least thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of any policy cancellation, modification, or non - renewal. f. The TOWN agrees to comply with the Minnesota Data Practices Act and all other State and Federal laws relating to data privacy or confidentiality. The TOWN will immediately report to MCC any requests from third parties for information relating to this Agreement. The TOWN agrees to promptly respond to inquiries 12 from MCC concerning data requests. The TOWN agrees to hold MCC, its officers, department heads, and employees harmless from any claims resulting from the TOWN's unlawful disclosure of use of the data protection under State or Federal laws. 6. This Agreement will remain in effect through September 4, 2046, and after which time the parties shall meet to discuss any renewal of this Agreement for the following year. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Town of White Bear and the City of Maplewood /Maplewood Community Center have caused this Agreement to be executed on their behalf by their proper officers, Council and Board. TOWN OF WHITE BEAR By: ROBERT J. WEISENBURGER, Chair ATTEST By WILLIAM F. SHORT, Clerk- Treasurer CITY OF MAPLEWOOD By: MAYOR And By: CITY MANAGER 5 Agenda Item 11 T[): City Manager FROM: Tom Ekoband. Senior Planner SUBJECT: Noise-Control Ordinance Amendment DATE: April 18, 2006 INTRODUCTION The planning commission had requested that staff study the noise-control ordinance and present suggestions for revisions. DISCUSSION The Current Ordinance The biggest Drob|S0with the current ordinance is its lack of clarity. The code addresses the important aspects 0f noise control, but b was written iO@O unclear fashion and iS confusing and hard to interpret at times. Proposed Revisions Staff's proposed changes dO the following: * Clarify that the excessive noise can be enforced anytime, not just during specifically- prohibited hours. ° Necessary maintenance equipment (lawn mowers, power equipment and snow blowers) are recognized aa necessary and are largely exempted. w Snow plowing or snow blowing is a necessity and may occur during evening hours. COMMITTEE ACTIONS April 17,2O08: The planning commission recommended approval [fnoise-control ordinance changes as shown in the attached amendment. Approve the proposed changes kJ the noise-control ordinance. p: ordoummer 5 0O TO: City Manager FROM: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Noise-Control Ordinance Amendment DATE: April 18, 2006 On February 6, 2006, the planning commission discussed the city's Noise-Control Ordinance and directed staff to review the ordinance for possible changes. Mayor Longrie also requested that the city attorney be present at the planning commission for this discussion. Trevor Oliver, with the city attorney's office, was present for this discussion with the planning commission on April 17, 2006. Planning Commission's Initial Discussion Comments The following is a summary of the points made or questions raised by the planning commission on February 6: • Noise limitations should be placed on Saturdays when people sleep in and wish to be outside. • What has the city's experience been with handling noise complaints? Are neighbors satisfied? • Police have stated that they cannot enforce noise limits between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. • It appears that noise can only be regulated between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. Monday- Saturday and all day Sunday. Not any other time. • There is a problem with daytime noise that the police do not regulate. In this example, it was a neighbor playing drums. • There needs to be a clarification as to when the noise ordinance can be enforced. The commission should get the city attorney's perspective on the noise ordinance for clarity for everyone involved. • Would the use of power tools by a neighbor be regulated by our code? • On weekends, when people want to get their outside projects done, they might be working until dark which could be 9 to 10 at night. This is later than the 7 p.m. deadline. • Does the noise ordinance apply to those operating a snow blower before 7 a.m. which could easily happen? • The ordinance should be written to be enforceable at any time. • The police chief should comment on the ordinance since they are the enforcers. • Perhaps the ordinance should differentiate between continual noise that may go on for weeks or that of snow plowing or lawn mowing. • A problem these days, as opposed to when the code was first written, is that there are more "common noises" now. For example, power tools, chain saws, snow blowers, leaf blowers.. . • Perhaps the concern should be more about activities like tree trimming, backhoes, dump trucks, etc. These should wait until 8 a.m. or later. Section 18 -111 of the city code, the noise - control ordinance, addresses noise issues in two ways. Refer to the attached ordinance. In summary, it states: Paragraph (a) • No person shall make disturbing noises that annoy others. This is always in force. • Exemption: City sponsored activities (for example, the Fourth of July fireworks) or activities where the city has issued a permit. • Noise is specifically prohibited between the hours of 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. Monday — Saturday and all day Sunday. These are considered to be times of particular concern for noise control. Paragraph (b) • The city manager may waive the requirement of noise limitations where a noisy activity would not cause a nuisance and where this activity would not be within 350 feet of a residential use. • The manager's decision may be appealed to the city council. • A waiver to be allowed to make noise closer than 350 feet to residential uses must be approved by the city council. Staff must notify these residential neighbors of the city council meeting. 2 DISCUSSION Enforcement Staff asked Police Chief Dave Thomalla for his comments regarding the current ordinance. Chief Thomalla said the following: The biggest issue is the vague language about annoying or disturbing noises and how that relates to the language about hourly restrictions. Many of our officers believe the noise ordinance is ONLY in effect from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. It becomes somewhat ambiguous as to what is meant by annoying. What annoys one person may not annoy another. The Current Ordinance The biggest problem with the current ordinance is its lack of clarity. The code addresses the important aspects of noise control, but it was written in an unclear fashion and is confusing and hard to interpret. The noise-control ordinance should: • Prohibit disturbing noises at any time of the day or night. • Provide a clear means for enforcement. Allow normal and commonly- accepted necessary noise-making activities such as snow blowing, lawn mowing and the use of power tools. In general, it must not be so prohibitive that a homeowner cannot maintain their home and property because of the need for necessary machinery. For example, persons must also be allowed to use lawn equipment in the daylight evening hours since that may be the only time available for a homeowner who works during the day. • Regulate the hours of work and disturbance caused by construction activities. The current code does most of these things, but staff has proposed some changes for the planning commission's consideration and comment. Proposed Revisions Staff's proposed changes do the following: • Clarify that the excessive noise can be enforced anytime, not just during prohibited hours. • Necessary maintenance equipment (lawn mowers, power equipment and snow blowers) are recognized as necessary and are largely exempted. • Snow plowing or snow blowing is a necessity and may occur during evening hours. COMMITTEE ACTIONS April 17,2000: The planning commission recommended approval 0fDOiS8-00DtR}l- ordinance changes as shown in the attached amendment. Approve the proposed changes t0 the noise-control ordinance. p:oon!_dvpbord\noneord40S#5 Attachments: Noise-Control Ordinance Amendment 4 Attachment 1 The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances: IT N N • T N ff I • &i A D • T F ` • Section 1. Section 18 -111. Prohibition generally; exception. (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): (a) At no time shall any No person shall make or cause to be made any distinctly and loudly audible noise that unreasonably annoys, disturbs, injures or endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace, safety or welfare of any person or precludes such person's enjoyment of property or affects such person's property values. if the event or activity is sponsored by the city or is authorized and has a permit for such activity issued by the city this prohibition does not apply. The Th is- general noise prohibition stated above shall always be in effect, however, any excessive noise during the following hours of noise prohibition shall be strictly enforced. is no limited by specific restriction of subsecti^n'Q, L b`, of this section. There shall be no excessive noise or disturbance Any violation of this general prohibiti between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7 a.m. Monday through Saturday and all day Sundays a per se violation of this division These hours of noise prohibition apply to construction business institutional and residential activities. (b) Exceptions. 1) This ordinance allows the following types of noise - generating activities that are necessary and typically occur in all parts of the city during daylight hours, but not before 7 a.m.: lawn mowing, the use of landscape - maintenance equipment, power tools, etc. All forms of snow clearing may be permitted anytime due to necessity. 2) If there is an event or activity that is sponsored by the city, or a party has a permit for a noise-generating_ activity issued by the city, the prohibition noted in paragraph (a) does not apply. (c) Repetitive or continual noises, that may not be audibly loud, may be equally disturbing. Such noises shall also be prohibited. (d) The city manager may waive the requirement in subsection (a) of this section where the activity would not cause a nuisance and where the proposed activity would not be within 350 feet of a residential use. The city manager's decision may be appealed to the city council. n waiver within 350 feet of a residential use m, pct be approved by the city council. If an appeal is filed, the The property owners within 350 feet of the proposed activity shall be notified of the waiver request at least ten days before the council meeting. A list of the property owners, certified by an abstract company or the county abstract office, shall be submitted with the waiver request. Section 2. Section 18 -112. Construction activities. All construction activities, including the use of any kind of electric, diesel or gas - powered machine or other equipment, shall be subject to this division. A copy of this division shall be attached to each construction permit issued by the city. The applicant for the permit shall be required to sign the copy, acknowledging that he has read and understood it, before a permit can be released. Section 3. Section 18 -113. Enforcement. (a) Police department authority. The police department shall enforce this division. The police department may inspect private premises other than private residences and shall make all reasonable efforts to prevent violations of this division. (b) Civil remedies. This division may be enforced by injunction, action for abatement or other appropriate civil remedy. (c) Noise impact statements. The council may require any person applying for a change in zoning classification or a permit or license for any structure, operation, process, installation or alteration or project that may be considered a potential noise source to submit a noise impact statement on a form prescribed by the council. It shall evaluate each such statement and take the evaluation into account in approving or disapproving the license or permit applied for or the zoning change requested. (d) Criminal penalties. Every person who violates any section of this division is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall, upon conviction, be in accordance with section 1 -15. Each act of violation and each day a violation occurs or continues constitutes a separate offense. Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect after publishing in the official newspaper. .• - ••• • ,•• • -• • • - • il• Attest: City Clerk M DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, APRIL 17, 2006 a. Noise Control Ordinance Code Amendment (8:14 — 8:44 p.m.) Mr. Roberts said on February 6, 2006, the planning commission discussed the city's Noise- Control Ordinance and directed staff to review the ordinance for possible changes. Mayor Longrie requested that the city attorney be present at the planning commission for this discussion. The largest problem with the current ordinance is its lack of clarity. The code addresses the important aspects of noise control, but it was written in an unclear fashion and is confusing and hard to interpret. Staff asked Police Chief Dave Thornalla for his comments regarding the current noise ordinance since the police department enforces the noise complaints. Chief Thornalla said the biggest issue is the vague language about annoying or disturbing noises and how that relates to the language about hourly restrictions. Many of our officers believe the noise ordinance is only in effect from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. It becomes somewhat ambiguous as to what is meant by annoying. What annoys one person may not annoy another. Staff has proposed to clarify noises that would be allowed and the ordinance amending the noise- control requirements is shown on page 5 of the staff report. Staff is looking for direction on how the noise control ordinance should be changed. Commissioner Yarwood said given the fact that this is subjective as to what is and isn't noise has there been any thought of putting the noise decibel level in the ordinance? Mr. Roberts said no. Mr. Oliver said there are two ways to go about that. One thing is the city may consider adopting the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's (MPCA) noise standards in Chapter 7030 in the Minnesota Rules. That sets out decibel levels for daytime and night time. The MPCA has more time to dedicate to noise measurement than the Maplewood Police department does but that is one potential source that the city could use and refer to and not have to come up with a certain set of noise guidelines. Mr. Oliver said the City of Minneapolis has a provision for noise above the ambient level. If it is higher than 10 decibels, then it's a violation. The question is how to put together an ambient noise level after somebody has made a report regarding noise pollution. Commissioner Grover asked how frequent noise complaints arise in the City of Maplewood such as the complaint for the St. Paul Pioneer Press building on Gervais Avenue? Planning Commission -2- Minutes of 04-17-06 Mr. Roberts said noise complaints don't come in very often. Noise complaints could be answered by the Maplewood Police department so the Community Development department may not even be aware of them. For example, say somebody is playing their stereo loudly at 4:00 p.m. and it's disturbing the neighbors, should that be a noise violation or not? The person playing the music doesn't think there is a problem because it's the middle of the day and they want to play their music loudly but the neighbor calls the police complaining that they are bothered by the neighbor's loud music. This is subjective and many times the police have to make a judgment call. The complaints that come in for commercial buildings that are brought to the attention of the city council are few and far between however. Commissioner Grover asked how the noise amendment meets what the city staff and the city council see on a regular basis and how this would meet the police department's ability to act on the noise ordinance? It seems there are two needs here. There is the issue that one person's noise is not necessarily another person's idea of noise. The other issue is that the police department understands they can only enforce the noise ordinance between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. He asked if the changes recommended by Tom Ekstrand address these issues? Mr. Roberts said there is no way for staff to write a noise ordinance that covers all situations. Looking at what is proposed in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) staff is hoping 95% of the problems are covered in this noise ordinance amendment. Staff thinks the change in the noise ordinance will help the situation but is it perfect, no. Commissioner Desai asked if the noise control ordinance should be handled by staff in Community Development and the Planning Commission? He said maybe this should be handled by the city council in conjunction with the police department who enforce the noise ordinance. Personally he believes this ordinance doesn't belong in the hands of the planning commission. Mr. Roberts said that's a very fair statement. The noise ordinance isn't a land use or zoning issue; however, if the city deals with conditional use permits and is concerned about noise and activities, the staff puts conditions on hours of operation and tries to prevent bothering the surrounding neighbors. The unfortunate situation is there is no other commission to filter the noise ordinance through or get more input on before it goes to the city council. Staff could have taken this directly to the city council but felt it was important to get feedback from the planning commission since the noise ordinance was brought up previously by the commission. Mr. Oliver said while it appears that most of the noise issues here are stereos, lawn mowers and snow blowers, there is also the question of the types of uses that go into the city. The MPCA requires Maplewood, since they regulate land uses, to take noise issues into account when looking at new uses. The bulk of the noise issues are not planning commission material however, there is a large piece that is. Especially when we are talking about coming up with objective and subjective measures for new industrial uses. Commissioner Trippler asked what the sentence means on page 5 in the middle of item (a) which states: The noise prohibition stated above shall always be in effect, however, any excessive noise during the following hours of noise prohibition shall be strictly enforced? Planning Commission -3- Minutes of 04 -17 -06 Mr. Oliver said it is difficult to say how you strictly enforce something where the standard is hard to pinpoint because a noise that bothers one person may not bother the other person. He believes Mr. Ekstrand was trying to put that sentiment into words. Commissioner Trippler asked if it would be appropriate to move the sentence (If there is an event or activity that is sponsored by the city or, a party has a permit for such activity issued by the city, this prohibition does not apply.) into paragraph (b) because that is an "exception "? Mr. Oliver said yes. Commissioner Trippler said in section 3. Section 18 -113 item (a) it states The police department may inspect private premises other than private residences and shall make all reasonable efforts to prevent violations of this division. He asked what the difference was? Mr. Oliver said that is not a new part of the code and that already exists in the code. He interprets that sentence to mean a detached garage away from a dwelling, additional lot, business property or another privately owned property. Commissioner Trippler asked if that meant that the police cannot enter a private residence without a search warrant or without being allowed or invited in? Mr. Oliver said with the enforcement of any crime, regular search and seizure rules would apply. Unless the police have some other type of an exception to a warrant, they are not going to be allowed to go in. Commissioner Trippler said he thinks it's important to clarify this ordinance for the police department because they are struggling with trying to understand the noise ordinance and how they are to enforce it. The confusion needs to be eliminated so they can do their job properly. He would like to see the ordinance changed a little bit. He would recommend the following changes: (If there is an event or activity that is sponsored by the city or a city permit ° p h a s ° p ermit for such activity has been issued, by the c ity, this the above prohibition does not apply.) And the correction of Nose Control to Noise Control. Commissioner Desai said he believes the city should check with other neighboring city's to see what their Noise Ordinances are to see how noise is measured. It would be very useful and helpful to have examples of this for the police department to enforce regulations. Commissioner Trippler said as a former MPCA employee his experience with the noise ordinance is that they have employees that can spend time measuring noise decibels. The Maplewood Police department doesn't have that kind of man force or time to deal with measuring noise decibels. It's nice to have special criteria to follow or rely on but the problem is being able to "enforce" the criteria. But based on the idea to use the MPCA noise ordinances the ordinance would almost never be able to be enforced. Planning Commission -4- Minutes of 04-17-06 Commissioner Hess said without a way to measure the noise decibels it is still a subjective situation. One person's noise is another person's music. Usually there is a noise decibel level and a duration period that they are trying to determine if it exceeds the ambient level. Without the proper tools for the police department to measure the noise decibel he wasn't sure how this situation could ever be handled. Mr. Roberts said that would require the police department to have decibel meters that they could take to the site and they would have to have the proper training to measure that noise as well. Commissioner Trippler said the practical application of the noise ordinance is that the police department as they currently operate tries to work out some kind of a reasonable agreement between the person making the noise and the person that is annoyed by the noise. In order to work out a compromise he doesn't believe they need a decibel meter. The problem is the police department doesn't believe they have the power to enforce noise problems because they think the noise ordinance is for the hours of 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. and anything other than that the police think they don't have the authority to enforce it. That is the real problem. The police department is not looking for the ability to write out tickets, they just need the noise ordinance to bring to the person and make sure they understand what it means. Right now the way the ordinance is written it's confusing and needs to be written clearer to be properly enforced. Commissioner Yarwood said his vision wasn't to officers walking around with a decibel meter but to have them on hand as a fall back if there is a chronic problem. Commissioner Trippler said the city can institute stricter noise ordinances and the state can always regulate the 70130 noise rule. Mr. Oliver said to some degree you can follow the 70130 rule. The City of Minneapolis has a large noise ordinance and even have a specific section on stereo usage with more definite ways to measure noise levels. Mr. Roberts said the Minneapolis noise ordinance is very lengthy. The question is just how large does the noise ordinance need to be to say what you intend to get across. Mr. Oliver said the City of Saint Paul uses the MPCA noise standards and basically states do not irritate your neighbor with noise. That is the approach he would take if he was asked to draft this noise ordinance. Commissioner Trippler moved to recommend the adoption of the changes to the Noise Control Ordinance Code Amendment with the changes recommended. Commissioner Kaczrowski seconded. Ayes - Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Hess, Kaczrowski, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood The motion passed. MEMORANDUM Agenda Item |2 TO: City Manager FROM: Tom EkSband. Senior Planner SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment-Accessory Buildings APPLICANT: City Staff DATE: April 21, 2006 VVhi|8 reviewing 8 recent request by resident to build 8 garage larger and taller than 8|k]vved by ordinance, staff found a need to amend the city ordinance for accessory buildings. Currently, the city ordinance allows larger garages by conditional use permit /CUP\. The ordinance, however, states that the largest garage that can bH permitted by CUP iG1 square feet. This ordinance, furthermore, states that garages cannot be taller than the dwelling even by approval Of@CUP. Staff feels that these maximum limits are too restrictive iOSituatiODSvhere@Resi(ent has the lot area UJsupport a larger/taller garage, proper screening or seclusion and where there is support for it by the neighbors. Another problem with the current limitations i8 that they force @ homeowner k} apply for Gvariance fora garage larger than 1 square feet O[ taller than the house. With the findings required bv state statute for variance @ppn}v@|' there is little Or no likelihood for granting @ variance for such requests. Request Staff i3 requesting that the city council amend the ordinance to eliminate the maximum square footage and height |innh8tk)ns so8 larger/taller garage can b8 permitted bvCUP. Our goal iS not b} b8[oDl8 more |SDiHDt in the 8pp[0v8| Of larger garages, but instead to simplify the procedure for the review of such requests. The council can still control the size and height through the CUP process. COMMITTEE ACTIONS On April, 17, 2008 the planning 0ornrnissk]n discussed this ordinance amendment and moved to forward it tD the city council for consideration. The planning commission, however, did not agree with staff with the proposed changes Ofdropping the maximum garage area and garage height limitations. They felt these should b9 kept in the ordinance. Approve the ordinance amendment allowing garages to be larger and taller than the limits expressed bv ordinance bv conditional use permit with DO required maximum. The maximum size for 8garage that i9 larger and taller than ordinance limits would b8 determined by the city council based OOthe circumstances Of each individual proposal. Attachment: p:ord\aooe000ry buildings nmamendment 1 . Ordinance Amendment for Accessory Buildings Attachment 1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ACCESSORY-BUILDING REQUIREMENTS The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances: Section 1. Section 44-114. Accessory Buildings. (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): (a) The areas of accessory buildings on a lot in an R-1 residence district shall be limited to the areas in the following table: Lot Areas (sq. ft.) Detached Buildings Without an Attached Garage Attached Garages Without Detached Garage Buildings Combination of Detached and Attached Garage* Buildings lot • of 11 Ili 768 768 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,100 1,100 1,250 1,250 1,250 (garages) 1,250 1,000(all other accesso buildings) so I ••1 *The total area of all detached accessory buildings shall not exceed the areas in column *The total of all attached garages shall not exceed the areas in column P 0. (b) A private garage shall not exceed 16 feet in height as viewed from the street as measured from grade. (c) The city council may approve an increase in height or area by conditional use permit. However, the maximum area of any one building shall not exceed the maximum area allowed for an attached garage in subsection (a) of this section and the height shall not exceed the height of the house. (d) Detached garages shall not include living space. No commercial use of a garage shall occur unless authorized by the city council. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect after publishing in the official newspaper. The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on 2006. Attest: Alm City Clerk DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, APRIL 17, 2006 a. Conditional Use Permit — Oversized Accessory Structure (2345 Maryland Avenue) (7:17 — 8:13 p.m.) Mr. Roberts said John Wykoff is requesting that the city approve a conditional use permit (CUP) for his property at 2345 Maryland Avenue. He would like to add a 36-foot by 56-foot detached garage to his property north of his existing accessory buildings. Mr. Wykoff wants this new garage to house a 45-foot-long motor coach. He purchased this motor coach with his father to convert into a recreational vehicle. The proposed garage would be centered between his side property lines and have approximately 19 to 20 feet of setback from each adjacent property. Staff has misgivings about this request. Building such a large storage garage would be a temptation for illegal commercial usage in the future after Mr. Wykoff sells the property. A building of this nature would easily be a temptation for a future homeowner to operate an auto- repair garage from this residential lot. It is true that the city has regulations against such occurrences, but these violations are difficult to regulate when they happen. Staff asked, why create a problem? Another problem is the sheer size and mass of the proposed garage. The proposed building would be very large and visually very noticeable and overwhelming for neighbors. Staff does not feel that approving such a large garage on residential property is a good idea. As noted, it opens the door for code violations to occur in the future. The garage would also be visually overwhelming. The applicant already has an over-size garage for his home occupation. Staff feels that the proposed structure exceeds the regulations of the city code far too much. The only plus staff sees is that there weren't any abutting neighbors that voiced any concern about this proposal. There were over forty neighborhood surveys sent out with five responses received. Four were supportive of the request and felt it was better to keep the bus-repair activity out of view in the proposed garage and one person had concerns about this proposal. Staff is recommending denial for the proposed conditional use permit requested by John Wykoff at 2345 Maryland Avenue for the construction of a 36-by-56-foot, 2,016-square-foot, 20-foot-tall garage on his property for the storage and repair of a motor coach. Denial is based on the following reasons in recommendation A. items listed as 1-3 in the staff report. If the city council or planning commission wishes to approve this conditional use permit, staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for a larger and taller garage than allowed by ordinance, subject to the following conditions in recommendation B. items listed as 1-15 in the staff report. If the city council or planning commission approves Recommendation B, they should also approve the attached code amendment for accessory buildings on page 21 in the staff report. This ordinance would allow garages to be larger and taller than the limits expressed by ordinance by conditional use permit with no required maximum. Maximum sizes would be determined by the city council based on each individual proposal. Planning Commission -2- Minutes of 04-17-06 Commissioner Hess said he would be abstaining from the discussion and voting because he was an acquaintance of the applicant, John Wykoff. Commissioner Pearson said he responded to the neighborhood survey and he felt there was a conflict of interest for him to vote on this proposal. Chairperson Fischer said she didn't think that would disallow Commissioner Pearson from voting on this proposal just because they were within the notification distance of a proposal. Chairperson Fischer asked staff to clarify this matter? Mr. Roberts said as long as there is no financial interest it would be fine for Commissioner Pearson to vote on this proposal. Commissioner Dierich asked if the 16 foot garage height ordinance only applied to detached garages and not attached garages? It would seem this would be a common problem in the City of Maplewood if this ordinance applied to attached garages. Mr. Roberts said the 16 foot garage height ordinance is only for detached garages. However, there are attached garages that are taller but there's usually living space above the garage and the garage space itself is not taller than 16 feet tall. Commissioner Dierich said she noticed the immediate neighbors on either side of the applicant did not have any comments. Mr. Roberts said the comments staff received are in the staff report and the neighbors on either side of the applicant did not respond. Commissioner Trippler said looking at the ordinance staff is recommending amendments to what was the rational to increase the garage sizes in the ordinance? Mr. Roberts said on page 21 of the staff report, under the ordinance amending accessory- building requirements in item (a), in the middle column, the word Detached was added and on the line that has 42,000+ square feet, the line accessor was added. Otherwise the garage sizes have not changed. What has changed is paragraph (b) removing the wording as viewed from th street and adding as measured from grade and paragraph (c) where the three lines are stricken and reduced to one sentence. Commissioner Dierich asked if a CUP would always come before the planning commission and never be done administratively? Mr. Roberts said correct. Unless somebody changes the code down the line for a conditional use at this point, CUP's are approved by the planning commission. Commissioner Dierich said the city rarely enforces CUP's. For example, on the Schlomka property the planning commission required no outdoor storage but yet when you look at the site there are tractors, vehicles and other things on the property, so from what she can see the city rarely enforces any of the conditions put on a CUP. Planning Commission -3- Minutes of 04-17-06 Mr. Roberts said the city staff tries to stay on top of enforcing the CUP's. When complaints come in city staff inspects the complaint. He said this is another reason city staff does the annual CUP review. Commissioner Dierich said she would prefer that the planning commission do the annual review of the CUP's due to the lack of enforcement of the conditions placed on the CUP. Commissioner Desai said when he drove behind the proposed site on Lakewood Drive he thought right away this proposed garage would be a visual detraction in comparison to the homes in the neighborhood and would stick out like a sore thumb. He said you may not see the oversized garage from Maryland Avenue but you would definitely see it from Lakewood Drive. Maryland Avenue is not as well traveled as Lakewood Drive. Lakewood Drive is an area where many people drive and the area carries a lot of traffic to and from 3M so the proposed oversized garage would really look out of place in this area. Chairperson Fischer said three car garages are very common these days and she asked if the allocated square footage under this ordinance is still adequate for the types of construction and the types of vehicles and toys that require additional storage today? Mr. Roberts said he's sure if people asked if they could build a larger garage or storage space they would if it was allowed. He said with a 10,000 square foot lot it starts to become a balancing act regarding how much storage you want on a property and how large the structures are that you can have. Staff is comfortable with the number of requests that come in. Chairperson Fischer said that's another reason the code had been amended to take into account that larger lots could accommodate larger garages or accessory buildings. Mr. Roberts said correct. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Planning Commission -4- Minutes of 04-17-06 Mr. John Wykoff, the applicant, 2345 Maryland Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said he and his dad purchased a 1989 Prevost Motor Coach from the Voyageur Bus Company last year to convert into a motor home. Brand new it would cost $500,000. It was so nice on the inside that they felt bad taking the bus seats out because it had just been reupholstered, it had 3 brand new televisions in it, 30 different radio stations can be played on it at the same time and it was absolutely beautiful, but his dad wanted to convert it to a motor home. He said he then started taking the seats out etc. He said he is self employed, doesn't work for the government and he depends on people to give him business. In the summer months he letters boats for the rich and famous so the more people that buy boats, the better off he is. Because of the price of gasoline the boat business is pretty slow out there. Even the rich complain about the price of gas. So in the summer months he doesn't have time to work on this motor home. He would only be able to work on the motor home in the winter months in the off season for boaters. He said his driveway is not eroding as stated in the staff report. He said he dug drainage ditches to divert the water from washing out the rocks on his property. There are other properties around his home that more than half of the property is impervious and those people are not being asked to put rainwater gardens in. He said he doesn't know how much it costs to have a rainwater garden but he did get an estimate for the trees to be planted that the city is requiring which is estimated to cost $4,000. It's going to take him awhile to save up enough money to put a cement driveway in. One of the reasons he doesn't want to put a cement driveway in yet is he knows if he gets the permit to build the garage he wouldn't want to drive a cement truck over the concrete driveway because it would bust it up. But he said he would put the concrete driveway in if he gets the permit to build the garage for the motor home. If he doesn't get permission to build the garage he and his dad are going to work on the motor home outside. He said if he didn't have anything to do right now, it would still take him 9 years to finish converting the motor home to an RV while storing in the proposed garage. Without the permit to build the garage it would take about 19 years to convert the motor home to an RV outside on his property. Mr. Wykoff said he's only one person and his dad is 90 years old and can't do very much. Commissioner Dierich said she thought there was a city ordinance stating you can't have a large oversized recreational vehicle sitting in your yard and the applicant just stated he would leave it outside while working on it which could take 19 years? Mr. Roberts said vehicles that are licensed as a "recreational" vehicle are allowed and there are no size limits. "Commercial" vehicles have size and weight limits in the City of Maplewood. He understands this motor coach is a commercial vehicle but understands that once the motor coach is converted to an RV it would be considered a recreational vehicle. Commissioner Trippler asked if there was another location off -site that the applicant could work on this motor home? Mr. Wykoff said he is not a millionaire and he explained he was self employed and it would cost too much money to rent a space and work on the motor home off-site. Commissioner Trippler asked if the motor home could be worked on at his father's property? Mr. Wykoff said his dad lives with him. He said his dad didn't make a lot of money in his life time either and it was his dad's dream to own a motor coach. He said if you bought a motor coach like this it would cost about $1.5 million brand new. He said this is called the poor man's Prevost. Planning Commission -5- Minutes of 04-17-06 Chairperson Fischer asked Mr. Wykoff if he had any questions for the planning commission? Mr. Wykoff said he is against planting the trees that are required in the staff report. He said he cannot plant the trees himself so he would have to hire someone and that would cost about $4,000. He doesn't know what the cost of the soil testing will be, he doesn't know what it means to require noise barriers or what that means, he doesn't have a problem with a security system in the garage because he said he has one now and he said he doesn't know what a rainwater garden is or what that consists of, if he could do it himself, or how expensive that would be. He found out that a 2 1 /2 inch caliper tree weighs 450 pounds and him and his dad could not lift the tree and set it in the ground themselves. He said he didn't know what the 150% escrow would cost that was required, or if he could even able to afford that. He said he is going to build a "first class" building here and everything on his property is first class. He said when he bought his home it was not first class, it was a HUD house and it had a Harley Davidson motorcycle parked in the middle of the living room, the house was trashed and nobody wanted it. Commissioner Kaczrowski asked if the applicant looked into renting a commercial space to work on this motor coach and storing it compared to the costs to build this large garage and all the fees involved for the requirements by the city involved in this proposal? He believed it's less expensive to rent a commercial space compared to the concrete driveway, rainwater garden, security system, noise barriers, permit fees, tree requirements, and the cost to build the garage, etc. Mr. Wykoff said yes he checked into a commercial space and that it would be way too expensive and would add to the cost of doing this project. All of his tools and stuff would be off site and he said he would have to have "two" of everything. Chairperson Fischer said no one is in the audience to speak regarding this proposal. The planning commission then closed the public hearing. Chairperson Fischer asked the planning commission for their comments. Commissioner Yarwood said his feeling is as much as this exceeds the normal city guidelines for the size of accessory buildings or garages on properties, if you don't abide by the city code and you allow this proposal, at what point does the city follow the city code requirements? This may be nice to convert a bus into a motor home but he can't find a compelling reason to allow this proposal over what the City of Maplewood normally allows. If it were him, he personally would have put more thought into if it would even be possible to have the motor home on the property and if it would be allowed by the city to work on the motor home on the property prior to purchasing the motor home. Another issue is if you wouldn't be allowed to work on this on the property where could you work on it if you purchased it and how long would it take to do the renovations given the resources and time you have etc. It doesn't appear that the applicant weighed all the factors before purchasing the motor home. He said he cannot find a reason to approve this proposal. Chairperson Fischer asked if Commissioner Yarwood was making a motion to deny this proposal then? Planning Commission -6- Minutes of 04-17-06 Commissioner Yarwood said yes. Mr. Wykoff asked if he has a voice in this discussion? Chairperson Fischer said the planning commission has closed the public hearing portion of the meeting and have already moved forward with making a motion to forward to the city council. The motion made by the planning commission is only a recommendation; the city council makes the final decision. Commissioner Yarwood moved to deny the proposed conditional use permit requested by John Wykoff, of 2345 Maryland Avenue, for the construction of a 36-by-56-foot, 2,016-square-foot, 20- foot -tall garage on his property for the storage and repair of a motor coach. Denial is based on the following reasons: 1. The proposed garage would exceed the amount of garage space allowable by conditional use permit by 766 square feet. 2. The proposed garage, in addition to the applicant's previous large garage, would be overwhelming visually on this residential property. 3. There is too much risk for abuse of zoning requirements by permitting such a large garage on residential property. The city often gets requests for non-conforming businesses on properties when there are large out buildings. Examples of these businesses are: auto repair, landscaping businesses and contractors with commercial vehicles to store. Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes — Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Kaczrowski, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood Abstention — Hess Commissioner Hess abstained from voting because he is an acquaintance of the applicant. The motion passed. This item will go to the city council on May 8, 2006. Chairperson Fischer said she would like the planning commission to considerthatthe city council does not always go with the recommendation given by the planning commission. If in the case the city council would consider granting this proposal, would the planning commission prefer to have a motion made regarding recommendation B stating if the city council wishes to approve this conditional use permit what the conditions would be as written by staff? Commissioner Grover asked the chairperson if she is asking if the planning commission should vote on recommendation B as well? Planning Commission -7- Minutes of 04-17-06 Chairperson Fischer said in the past she remembered a proposal that the planning commission recommended denial of and the commission didn't put any other conditions on the proposal. Then the city council approved the proposal. When the city council was questioned about the decision the city council said if the planning commission had other conditions they wanted to place on the proposal why weren't they included in the report before it went to the city council. Commissioner Grover asked staff if that was the intent of recommendation B in the staff report? Mr. Roberts said he understands recommendation B to be for the city council. If the planning commission already voted to deny the proposal, staff wouldn't recommend the commission make a separate motion for recommendation B. Chairperson Fischer asked if recommendation B would go to the city council anyway as it is shown in the staff report? Mr. Roberts said staff would leave recommendation B in the staff report and unless there is a strong minority report, the planning commission already made a recommendation to deny the proposal so there would be no need to make a motion on recommendation B. Chairperson Fischer asked staff how the planning commission should address the recommendation of approval of the ordinance on page 21 of the staff report? Commissioner Dierich asked if she could make a recommendation to strike recommendation B in the staff report? Chairperson Fischer said the planning commission is not voting on recommendation B. Mr. Roberts said if you want to make that a motion so it is recorded in the minutes you can, but staff would leave recommendation B in the staff report for the city council. Commissioner Dierich said her feeling is the more options that are put on the table for the city council the more doorways you allow the city council to walk through. She understands the political reason staff wants to do that but on the other hand the planning commissioners were chosen to represent the city's interest. When the planning commission recommends denial of a proposal you shouldn't leave a second door open as the backup. The planning commission doesn't review proposals to make a denial or recommendation to the city council and have a backup in case the city council chooses a second option. Mr. Wykoff said he wanted to take every person in this room to court and sue them. He asked for the names of every person in the room to be written down now. Chairperson Fischer asked the planning commission if they wanted to allow Mr. Wykoff to make a statement? The planning commission replied no. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Trippler said he would agree with Commissioner Dierich's comments to strike recommendation B from the staff report. Planning Commission -8- Minutes of 04-17-06 Mr. Wykoff threw his book across the room and his papers emptied out on the floor. While picking up his papers he screamed foul language at the planning commission. Commissioner Trippler said he believes it sets a bad precedence if the planning commission starts second guessing what the commission thinks the mayor and the city council want to hear and he doesn't believe this is the purpose of being an advisory committee. Mr. Wykoff screamed another foul word to the planning commission before exiting the city council chambers. Commissioner Trippler said the purpose of an advisory committee is to give the city council the commission's opinion of what they would like to see or not to see and clearly the planning commission thinks this garage proposal is a bad idea and recommended denial to the city council. The commission didn't recommend denial and then think if the city council doesn't agree with the commission, here is a second option to consider. What he hears staff saying is recommendation B will remain in the staff report for the city council but requires no motion by the planning commission since they recommended denial of the proposal. Commissioner Grover said the planning commission has the pleasure of having a city attorney present this evening. He asked if the planning commission had the ability to strike information in the staff report? He also said this discussion would be part of the planning commission minutes so the city council would have the opportunity to read the discussion that took place. He said even though he respects the opinion of Commissioner Dierich he has no problem leaving recommendation B in the staff report. Mr. Roberts said the planning commission could ask the city attorney that question. Chairperson Fischer said she has no problem leaving recommendation B in the staff report as well. Commissioner Grover said he strongly believes that this proposal should be denied and he would not consider recommendation B. This is the first time he has seen another option given in the staff report and he asked how often this happens because since he was chosen to serve on the planning commission 1 1 /2 years ago, this is the first time he has seen this option in the staff report. Mr. Roberts said staffs first recommendation was to deny the proposal. However, staff does not want this to get to the city council and have the council make any conditions up as they go. This way if the city council disagrees with the recommendation to deny this proposal staff would have things properly laid out ensuring nothing could is missed. Including this in the staff report is for the city council's benefit. This is an unusual situation. For the most part staff is committed one way or the other regarding proposals. Mr. Roberts introduced the city attorney to the planning commission. Mr. Trevor Oliver, one of the city Attorneys with Kelly & Fawcett, addressed the commission. Planning Commission -9- Minutes of 04-17-06 Commissioner Grover asked the city attorney if the planning commission had the ability to strike text from the staff report when this is forwarded to the city council? Mr. Oliver said his opinion would be no. The staff report and the opinion of the planning commission are two different things. Staff owes certain duties to the city council and if staff feels that certain conditions should be in the staff report then it shall be so stated. It's very clear that the staff recommendation is to deny the proposal and it's been stated very clearly that the planning commission recommended denial of this proposal and that information will be very clear when the city council reads the minutes from this evening's meeting. You can still have consideration motions on the ordinance in part C regardless of how it was structured in the staff report, if the commission chose to discuss that. Mr. Roberts said the planning commission will have the benefit of having a PC representative to give their report at the city council meeting as well. Commissioner Dierich said since the recording secretary has recorded the discussion and the planning commission has given a firm opinion about this, she would withdraw her recommendation to strike recommendation B from the staff report. Commissioner Grover asked if there is something that is driving staff to include recommendation B? Mr. Roberts said the city council appears to listen to the neighbors regarding proposals and three or four of the neighbors had no problem with the garage proposal being built. If there were neighbors voicing disapproval of the garage and staff was recommending denial of this proposal, then there would be no need to include a second option or recommendation B in the staff report. However, being that there is a slight chance this could still be approved by the city council even though staff and the planning commission recommended denial, the city council for a lack of neighbor descent, could view that as approved by the neighbors and could prove to be okay with the city council. Staffs opinion is, if by chance the city council thought this proposal was appropriate, the conditions would be laid out correctly ahead of time. Recommendation B in the staff report reads as follows: If the city council wishes to approve this conditional use permit, staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for a larger and taller garage than allowed by ordinance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The city council must first amend the Accessory Buildings Ordinance to permit a garage larger than 1,250 square feet in area and taller than 16 feet. 2. All construction shall follow the plans approved by the city date-stamped March 24, 2006. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 3. The proposed construction must be substantially started and or the proposed use utilized within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. Planning Commission -10- Minutes of 04-17-06 4. The council shall review this permit in one year. 5. The applicant must present a grading and drainage plan to the city's engineering department for approval of an on-site stormwater management system. My Wykoff shall install a rainwater garden on the west side of his property to catch the runoff from the proposed building as well as from the existing garage. This is needed because the property is near the 30 percent impervious-surface area maximum currently required within the Beaver Lake Shoreland Overlay District. With the additional garage, it would increase to 35 percent. 6. The gravel driveway on the west side of the house is eroding. This driveway shall be graded to divert any silt-laden runoff into the boulevard and percent it from entering Maryland Avenue. This driveway shall be paved from the property line a distance of 20 feet into the property. A rainwater garden would also be beneficial in this area and may be required. 7. The applicant shall comply with any additional requirements of the engineering department based on the plan to be submitted by the applicant. 8. Mr. Wykoff shall submit a landscaping plan for the area east of the proposed garage to provide screening for the two neighbors to the east. This plan shall provide at least eight trees, four for screening for each neighbor. The applicant shall work with staff to determine placement and the type of trees. Evergreens shall be at least eight feet tall and deciduous trees shall be at least 2 1 /2 inches in caliper, balled and burlapped. 9. The applicant shall comply with all building code requirements. There shall be no plumbing in the garage including floor drains, sinks or bath facilities. 10.The garage shall have sufficient insulation and noise barriers to assure that the noises associated with the restoration of the bus do not interfere with the day to day activities of the neighborhood. 11. There shall be adequate lighting and security mechanisms on the garage to prevent thefts from or burglaries of the facility. 12. The applicant shall provide escrow in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of planting the trees and providing the required paving and stormwater-control elements prior to getting his building permit. 13. The use of the proposed garage shall be limited to the applicant's residential needs and the storage and repair of his motor coach. Any commercial use of this building is prohibited. 14.There shall be no excessive noise allowed anytime. Noise is especially prohibited by ordinance between the hours of 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. Monday through Saturday and all day Sunday. 15. Staff may approve minor changes to these conditions. Planning Commission -11- Minutes of 04-17-06 Is. Code Amendment — Accessory Structures Chairperson Fischer asked the planning commission if they have any problems with the code amendment for accessory buildings as it's written on page 21 in the staff report? Commissioner Grover asked if this ordinance had been an issue in any other situation otherthan the proposal the planning commission reviewed this evening? Commissioner Pearson said the more testimony he heard from Mr. Wykoff the less confident he is that this proposal would go forward and that the steps required by the city would be taken if this proposal for an oversized garage were approved. Planning Commission -12- Minutes of 04-17-06 Commissioner Trippler said he doesn't have a problem with the recommended changes to the ordinance with the exception of part C. Commissioner Grover asked if Commissioner Trippler meant he doesn't think a conditional use permit should be possible and the variance process should be required? Commissioner Trippler said he understood if the application meets the criteria it can be processed as a conditional use permit, but if the application doesn't meet the criteria then it has to go through the variance process. That was the purpose of removing the second part. Commissioner Desai said he thought that would read better. Commissioner Dierich said as she understands it the "use" permit is different than the building piece. You are approving the use of the permit and not the building itself. She thinks this puts two items together that don't really belong together. Mr. Roberts said there is some truth to that statement, although recently staff had been processing them by conditional use permit so the use of the property with the large garage and the uses that would occur in the garage would also be covered under that same permit. Planning Commission -13- Minutes of 04-17-06 Commissioner Trippler recommended the attached code amendment for accessory buildings as shown in the staff report on page 21 of the staff report. This ordinance would allow garages to be larger and taller than the limits expressed by ordinance by conditional use permit with no required maximum. Maximum sizes would be determined by the city council based on each individual proposal. Chairperson Fischer seconded. Ayes — Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Hess, Kaczrowski, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on May 8, 2006. Agenda Item 13 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer Erin Laberee, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Kenwood Area Street Improvements, Project 05 -16 1. Approve Resolution for Adoption of Revised Assessment Roll DATE: April 28, 2006 INTRODUCTION On April 24, 2006, the city council received fourteen assessment objections at the Kenwood Area Street Improvements assessment hearing. Recommendations for action on each of the fourteen objections are provided for the council to revise or confirm the final assessment roll for the project. Ten storm sewer assessments were proposed to properties on Edgerton Street with frontage to Oehrlines Lake. The planned work for Oehrlines Lake has been postponed until 2007, therefore the benefit received to these properties will not occur under the Kenwood Area project and their assessments should be cancelled. Background The proposed assessments for the Kenwood Area Street Improvements were submitted to the city council for adoption at the April 24, 2006, meeting. Residents were provided with the required 14 -day advanced notice of the city's intent to levy the assessments, and the residents were required to file a written notice if they objected to the assessment amount. Fourteen property owners provided written objection as follows: Susan and Oakley Surine, 1995 West Kenwood Drive (PIN 172922140022): The Oakleys disagree with the 2 -unit assessment that has been applied to their lot. They request their assessment be reduced to a 1 -unit assessment. 2. Shirley Skelton, 2075 Greenbrier Avenue (PIN 172922120044): Ms. Skelton requests her assessment be deferred as it presents a financial hardship. 3. Arlene Vian, 675 Roselawn Avenue (172922130015): Ms. Vian is a senior citizen and has indicated that the proposed assessment will create a financial hardship. She requests a senior citizen deferment. She also requests that the 2 -unit assessment applied to her property be revised to a 1- unit assessment. 4. Ronald Rygwalski, 2086 Edgerton Street (172922120028): Mr. Rygwalski objects to the commercial storm sewer assessment rate that was applied to the front footage of his commercial property. He also requests a senior citizen deferment. 5. Joseph Cote, 1942 Lee Street (172922130016): Mr. Cote is a senior citizen. He has indicated that the proposed assessment will create a financial hardship and requests a senior citizen deferment. 6. Kim Dean, 108 Kenwood Drive East (172922410067): Ms. Dean requests her assessment be deferred as it presents a financial hardship. Agenda Item 13 7. James and Joanne Roehl, 785 Kenwood Lane (172922140003): Mr. and Mrs. Roehl request their assessment be revised. They were assessed in 1991 for watermain improvements. They believe they have paid for street and sewer improvements. 8. Shirley A. Nelson, 2242 Payne Avenue (082922430005): Ms. Nelson is requesting a senior citizen deferment and revision of assessment. 9. Shirley Blomstrand, 1990 Kenwood Dr. E (172922140090): Ms. Blomstrand requests a cancellation and revision of the proposed assessments to her property. She was assessed 2 street units and 2 storm sewer units due to her sub - dividable property. 10. Rodney Schmidt, 1958 Kenwood Drive West (172922140047): Mr. Schmidt is requesting the deferral of the 2n unit assessment proposed to his property. 11. Leland Wolf and Maureen Frazer, 734 East Viking Drive, (082922440026): Mr. Wolf and Ms. Frazer originally requested a senior citizen deferment. They called Erin Laberee on April 21, 2006 requesting a change to their original objection and asked for a cancellation of the assessment due to disabilities and fixed income. 12. Jennifer John, 728 East Viking Drive (82922440027): Ms. John requests a deferral and cancellation of the assessment due to financial hardship. 13. James L. Pomroy, 200 Kenwood Drive East (172922410063): Mr. Pomroy requests a revision and cancellation to his assessment from 2 units to 1 unit as he has no immediate plans to subdivide his property. 14. Dave and Michael Nelson, 689 Skillman (172922120034): Dave and Michael Nelson are objecting to the full street reconstruction assessment applied to their property. They indicated in a survey that they did not want concrete curb on the street in front of their property. All property owners requesting deferments or senior citizen deferments have been mailed an application packet. Recommended Adjustments The following action is recommended on each objection request: 1. Susan and Oakley Surine, 1995 West Kenwood Drive (PIN 172922140022): Grant deferral of second unit assessment, without interest, until such time property is developed, subject to a signed agreement by the property owner. If the property is not developed within 15 years from the date of the assessment hearing, the deferred assessment shall be cancelled. 2. Shirley Skelton, 2075 Greenbrier Avenue (PIN 172922120044): Grant senior citizen deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. 3. Arlene Vian, 675 Roselawn Avenue (172922130015): Grant senior citizen deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. Grant deferral of second unit assessment, without interest, until such time property is developed, subject to a signed agreement by the property owner. If the property is not developed within 15 years from the date of the assessment hearing, the deferred assessment shall be cancelled. Agenda Item 13 4. Ronald Rygwalski, 2086 Edgerton Street (172922120028): Grant cancellation of assessment as the maintenance work proposed in Qehrlines Lake has been delayed until 2007. 5. Joseph Cote, 1942 Lee Street (172922130016): Grant senior citizen deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. 6. Kim Dean, 108 Kenwood Drive East (172922410067): Grant deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. 7. James and Joanne Roehl, 785 Kenwood Lane (172922140003): Deny revision of assessment as benefit to the property is received. In 1991 the Roehls' property was assessed for water main and a water service. Street improvements were not assessed to the property at that time. The 1991 assessment is attached. 8. Shirley A. Nelson, 2242 Payne Avenue (082922430005): Grant senior citizen deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. Deny revision of assessment as benefit is received to the property. 9. Shirley Blomstrand, 1990 Kenwood Dr. E (172922140090): Grant deferral of second unit assessment, without interest, until such time property is developed. If the property is not developed within 15 years from the date of the assessment hearing, the deferred assessment shall be cancelled. 10. Rodney Schmidt, 1958 Kenwood Dr. West (172922140047): Grant deferral of second unit assessment, without interest, until such time property is developed, subject to a signed agreement by the property owner. If the property is not developed within 15 years from the date of the assessment hearing, the deferred assessment shall be cancelled. 11. Leland Wolf and Maureen Frazer, 734 East Viking Drive (082922440026): Grant senior citizen deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. Deny cancellation of assessment as benefit is received to the property. 12. Jennifer John, 728 East Viking Drive (82922440027): Grant deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. Deny cancellation of assessment as benefit is received to the property. 13. James L. Pomroy, 200 Kenwood Drive East (172922410063): Grant deferral of second unit assessment, without interest, until such time property is developed, subject to a signed agreement by the property owner. If the property is not developed within 15 years from the date of the assessment hearing, the deferred assessment shall be cancelled. Deny cancellation of second unit assessment. 14. Dave and Michael Nelson, 689 Skillman, (172922120034): Deny revision of assessment as benefit to the property is received. Concrete curb is standard on all new streets as it protects the structural integrity of the pavement and is cost effective in the long term regarding future pavement improvements. Agenda Item 13 It is recommended the following storm sewer assessments be cancelled as the properties will no longer receive benefit under the Kenwood Area project due to the postponement of work in Oehrlines Lake to 2007. Parcel ID Owner Street Street Assessments Number 172922120026 MICHAEL D RYAN 0 EDGERTON ST N $ 750.00 172922130078 BRUCE D WOLD 2010 EDGERTON ST N $ 750.00 172922120057 JOHN D HATLESTAD 2044 EDGERTON ST N $ 750.00 172922120056 ALLAN F WERLING 2054 EDGERTON ST N $ 750.00 172922120051 MYRON L BJORNSTAD 2074 EDGERTON ST N $ 1,500.00 172922120028 RONALD S RYGWALSKI 2086 EDGERTON ST N $ 1,500.00 172922120027 FLOYD E ERICKSON 2094 EDGERTON ST N $ 750.00 172922120025 MICHAEL D RYAN 2160 EDGERTON ST N $ 750.00 172922120024 MICHAEL D RYAN 2166 EDGERTON ST N $ 750.00 172922120023 MICHAEL D RYAN 2170 EDGERTON ST N $ 750.00 BUDGET IMPACT If the recommended cancellations to the assessment roll are approved, the total assessments would be reduced by $9,000.00, from $1,422,700.00 to $1,413,700.00. No adjustments to the budget would be required at this time. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the city council approve the attached Resolution for the Adoption of the Revised Assessment Roll for the Kenwood Area Street Improvements, Project 05 -16. Attachments: 1. Resolution: Adoption of the Assessment Roll 2. Assessment Roll 3. Location Map 4. Assessment objections (14) Agenda Item 13 a ADJUSTMENTS TO ASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on April 24, 2006, the assessment roll for the Kenwood Area Street Improvements, City Project 05 -16, was presented in a Public Hearing format, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and WHEREAS, fourteen property owners filed objections to their assessments according to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, summarized as follows: Susan and Oakley Surine, 1995 West Kenwood Drive (PIN 172922140022): The Oakleys disagree with the 2 -unit assessment that has been applied to their lot. They request their assessment be reduced to a 1 -unit assessment. 2. Shirley Skelton, 2075 Greenbrier Avenue (PIN 172922120044): Ms. Skelton requests her assessment be deferred as it presents a financial hardship. 3. Arlene Vian, 675 Roselawn Avenue (172922130015): Ms. Vian is a senior citizen and has indicated that the proposed assessment will create a financial hardship. She requests a senior citizen deferment. She also requests that the 2 -unit assessment applied to her property be revised to a 1- unit assessment. 4. Ronald Rygwalski, 2086 Edgerton Street (172922120028): Mr. Rygwalski objects to the commercial storm sewer assessment rate that was applied to the front footage of his commercial property. He also requests a senior citizen deferment. 5. Joseph Cote, 1942 Lee Street (172922130016): Mr. Cote is a senior citizen. He has indicated that the proposed assessment will create a financial hardship and requests a senior citizen deferment. 6. Kim Dean, 108 Kenwood Drive East (172922410067): Ms. Dean requests her assessment be deferred as it presents a financial hardship. 7. James and Joanne Roehl, 785 Kenwood Lane (172922140003): Mr. and Mrs. Roehl request their assessment be revised. They were assessed in 1991 for watermain improvements. They believe they have paid for street and sewer improvements and request their assessment be revised. 8. Shirley A. Nelson, 2242 Payne Avenue (082922430005): Ms. Nelson is requesting a senior citizen deferment and revision of assessment. 9. Shirley Blomstrand, 1990 Kenwood Dr. E (172922140090): Ms. Blomstrand requests a cancellation and revision of the proposed assessments to her property. She was assessed 2 street units and 2 storm sewer units due to her sub - dividable property. 10. Rodney Schmidt, 1958 Kenwood Dr. West (172922140047): Mr. Schmidt is requesting the deferral of the 2nd unit assessment proposed to his property. 11. Leland Wolf and Maureen Frazer, 734 East Viking Drive, (082922440026): Mr. Wolf and Ms. Frazer originally requested a senior citizen deferment. They called Erin Laberee on April 21, 2006 requesting a change to their original objection and asked for a cancellation of the assessment due to disabilities and fixed income. Agenda Item 13 12. Jennifer John, 728 East Viking Drive, (82922440027): Ms. John requests a deferral and cancellation of the assessment due to financial hardship. 13. James L. Pomroy, 200 Kenwood Drive East, (172922410063): Mr. Pomroy requests a revision and cancellation to his assessment from 2 units to 1 unit as he has no immediate plans to subdivide his property. 14. Dave and Michael Nelson, 689 Skillman, (172922120034): Dave and Michael Nelson are objecting the full street reconstruction assessment applied to their property. They indicated in a survey that they did not want concrete curb on the street in front of their property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: A. That the City Engineer and City Clerk are hereby instructed to make the following adjustments to the assessment roll for the Kenwood Area Street Improvement, Project 05 -16: 1. Susan and Oakley Surine, 1995 West Kenwood Drive (PIN 172922140022): Grant deferral of second unit assessment, without interest, until such time property is developed. If the property is not developed within 15 years from the date of the assessment hearing, the deferred assessment shall be cancelled. 2. Shirley Skelton, 2075 Greenbrier Avenue (PIN 172922120044): Grant senior citizen deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. 3. Arlene Vian, 675 Roselawn Avenue (172922130015): Grant senior citizen deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. Grant deferral of second unit assessment, without interest, until such time property is developed. If the property is not developed within 15 years from the date of the assessment hearing, the deferred assessment shall be cancelled. 4. Ronald Rygwalski, 2086 Edgerton Street (172922120028): Grant cancellation of assessment as the maintenance work proposed in Oehrlines Lake has been delayed until 2007. 5. Joseph Cote, 1942 Lee Street (172922130016): Grant senior citizen deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. 6. Kim Dean, 108 Kenwood Drive East (172922410067): Grant deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. 7. James and Joanne Roehl, 785 Kenwood Lane (172922140003): Deny revision of assessment as benefit to the property is received. In 1991 the Roehls' property was assessed for water main and a water service. Street improvements were not assessed to the property at that time. The 1991 assessment is attached. 8. Shirley A. Nelson, 2242 Payne Avenue (082922430005): Grant senior citizen deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. Deny revision of assessment as benefit is received to the property. Agenda Item 13 9. Shirley Blomstrand, 1990 Kenwood Drive E (172922140090): Grant deferral of second unit assessment, without interest, until such time property is developed. If the property is not developed within 15 years from the date of the assessment hearing, the deferred assessment shall be cancelled. 10. Rodney Schmidt, 1958 Kenwood Drive West (172922140047): Grant deferral of second unit assessment, without interest, until such time property is developed. If the property is not developed within 15 years from the date of the assessment hearing, the deferred assessment shall be cancelled. 11. Leland Wolf and Maureen Frazer, 734 East Viking Drive, (082922440026): Grant senior citizen deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. Deny cancellation of assessment as benefit is received to the property. 12. Jennifer John, 728 East Viking Drive (82922440027): Grant deferment, subject to receipt of necessary documents to be approved by the city engineer. Deny cancellation of assessment as benefit is received to the property. 13. James L. Pomroy, 200 Kenwood Drive East (172922410063): Grant deferral of second unit assessment, without interest, until such time property is developed. If the property is not developed within 15 years from the date of the assessment hearing, the deferred assessment shall be cancelled. Deny cancellation of second unit assessment. 14. Dave and Michael Nelson, 689 Skillman (172922120034): Deny revision of assessment as benefit to the property is received. 15. Michael Ryan, (172922120026): Cancel storm sewer assessment as no benefit is received. 16. Bruce Wold, 2010 Edgerton Street (172922130078): Cancel storm sewer assessment as no benefit is received. 17. John Hatlestad, 2044 Edgerton Street (172922120057): Cancel storm sewer assessment as no benefit is received. 18. Allan Werling, 2054 Edgerton Street (172922120056): Cancel storm sewer assessment as no benefit is received. 19. Myron Bjornstad, 2074 Edgerton Street (172922120051): Cancel storm sewer assessment as no benefit is received. 20. Floyd Erickson, 2094 Edgerton Street (172922120027): Cancel storm sewer assessment as no benefit is received. 21. Michael Ryan, 2160 Edgerton Street (172922120025): Cancel storm sewer assessment as no benefit is received. 22. Michael Ryan, 2166 Edgerton Street (172922120024): Cancel storm sewer assessment as no benefit is received. 23. Michael Ryan, 2170 Edgerton Street (172922120023): Cancel storm sewer assessment as no benefit is received. Agenda Item 13 B. The assessment roll for the Kenwood Area Street Improvements, as amended, is hereby accepted, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. Said assessment roll shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. C. Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 15 years, the first installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2007 and shall bear interest at the rate of 5.9 percent per annum for the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2006. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. D. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, but no later than November 1, 2006, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of the payment, to the office of the city engineer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and they may, at any time after November 1, 2006, pay to the county auditor the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. E. The city engineer and city clerk shall forthwith after November 1, 2006, but no later than November 15 2006, transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted by the council on this 8th day of May 2006. 40 " LL O Z U) w t5 CD W CL 0 (n 0 to Z M I Z U) < o -- - - - - - - - - - - - rA E EA f H6 dHYH6 f IVHdHS E EA f H6 d1-1 . - - - - - - - - - i( 3 h Qr E w Ui 0 O O 0 E — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — E cn C� Ili J2 15 0 W w w w w w w w w w z z z z z z z Z Z Z Z Z W W W W W W W W W W Z z z z z z z > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < z z z z z z z w w w w w w w w w w w w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z Z Z Z Z < < < < < < 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 < < < < < < < 0 Q 0 g iii Z p w m 0 Z Z w LO tD . .. . . . . . ON NO N N N N N N N N N �2 �2 I N I N I N I N P P P 40 LL " in Z CD w t5 5; CD W CL 0 (n 0 to Z U. I Z U) < o M M M 0 ? M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M o? M M M M M M M o? M M M fR V3 t4 d3 V3 4H EA EA fR V3 t4 d3 VHE Hf VHdHS E EA f Hl dHYHE I V 1 - 1 0 E 0 E '0 0 O - - - - - lz F F F F F F F F I I I I I I I I tf a 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 AR r 0 of G 0 J2 15 LL LL 0 0 � yy d3 H3 f5 N3 E9 EA FA H3 d3 H3 fPr V3 ER EPr FA V3 d3 H3 f5 N3 E9 EA FA H3 d3 H3 fPr V3 ER EPr FH V3 d3 H3 f5 LL m 0 LL D — — — — — — — — — — — — — — of W w w w W Lu W w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w I w w w w w w w Z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z W W W W W W W W W W > F- F- F F- F- F- < w Z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z w w w w w w w w w w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :E :E it � :E ZE Z :E :E 2E z � :E 2 Z ZE :E :E it li K of Or E af ae W w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w W of 0 �2 �2 N IX? N 11) m a w tCl m 0 M U) 0 LLI IN P P — N I — i — — N — N — � — I N — — N — N — 1 1 — P — I N — rn — N — P — I — P — — N — I N — P — P — N — N rn — P — P — — N — 0 O Z U) w CD W wh CL 0 (n 0 0) Z M Z U) < o 2 cl � . cl � . 0 ? . . M . M M . . M . cl � . . o ? . cl i . . . o� . c�� . M . . M o ? . M . N C E 3 w 0 rA fR V3 t4 d3 V3 4H EA EA fR V3 t4 d3 VHE Hf VHdHS E EA f Hl dHYHE I V 1 - 1 E 0 E E 0 Qr E w 0 '0 0 Ol E O - - - - - - - - O 0 E — — — — — — — — — — — E r 0 G 0 O 1 J2 0 0 yy d3 H3 f5 N3 E9 EA FA H3 d3 H3 fPr V3 ER EPr FA V3 d3 H3 f5 N3 E9 EA FA H3 d3 H3 fPr V3 ER EPr FH V3 d3 H3 f5 � LL m 0 D — — — — — — — — — — W w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w z z z Z z Z z z z z z W w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w h ~ ~ ~ F- ~ ~ ~ F- ~ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > U) U) (1) w 0 0 0 w 0 0 0 O LLILLIWLLI < < w < LUW < W < www < < w < W wwww < wwwwww�LJ�LJ�Ll�LJ�LJILJ4JLIJ4JILJLII < < < 0� 0� QC Of a� 0� C� Of Q� Of Ir Er K a� D� 0� m m w w Z z z z z W w w w w w W w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w If cr w w Q� w C� Ir Ir of aL If .0 {o 10 Ol 0 0 to 0 C? C, 0 E — — — — — — — — — — — — — — �2 �2 �Ll 'i N N " N N N N N N N N N N I I I IN IN I P P P I I 0 Z U) w O CD W wh CL 0 (n 0 0) Z M Z U) < o N N N N N C\! N C\! N M o? cli M M M M M M o? M M cN� rA fR V3 t4 d3 V3 4H EA EA fR V3 t4 d3 VHE Hf VHdHS E EA f Hl6 d3 V3 Y3 EA ER V3 SA ER a LL . Qr Ui O 0 E — — — — — — — — — — — — — O Q O O O O O O O O O O — — — — — — — E J2 0 yy d3 H3 f5 N3 E9 EA FA H3 d3 H3 fPr V3 ER EPr FA V3 d3 H3 f5 N3 E9 EA FA H3 d3 H3 fPr V3 ER EPr FH V3 E9 EA FA � LL m — — — — — — — — — — z z z z z z z z z Z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z �Y �Y �Y �Y �Y �Y �Y �Y �Y �Y �Y �j �y �y 41 �Lj �y �y Lli Lli LLJ LLI 0 0 0 z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w LL, LL, w z z z z z z z If Ir C C� If Er of a� If cr K C� Ir Ir of a� If Ir aj LL, aj w 1 w F M g 0 tE �2 Z2 7 M l t2 �2 — — — — — — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - P cn 0 Z U) w O CD W wh CL 0 (n 0 0) Z M Z U) < o 2 O 40 N N N N C\! C\! N N N Iri N N N N N N N M M M M m m M m m m M ch fR V3 U3 d3 V3 4H EA EA fR V3 U3 d3 VHE Hf VHdHS E EA f Hl dHYHE I V 1 - 1 a LL . N U7 U3 U7 U7 U7 if3 - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - Qr E N 0 O O 0 E — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - — — — — — — — E J2 0 yy d3 H3 Hi V3 E9 Efk F13 H3 d3 H3 Hi V3 ER EPr FA H3 d3 H3 Hi V3 E9 Efk FA H3 d3 H3 Hi V3 ER EPr FH H3 d3 H3 Hi � — — — — — — — — — — W w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w of � If Ir G � fr Er of � If cr K � Ir Ir of � If Ir � � Ir Er of � If Ir K � of of of � of 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z W w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w N 1 N N — N — — — — N — N — — — — — — P I P P P P 1 P I I P I N I N 1 1 P P 0 Z U) w O CD W wh CL 0 (n 0 0) Z M Z U) < o 2 rA fR V3 t4 d3 V3 4H EA EA fR V3 t4 d3 VHE Hf VHdHS E EA f Hl dHYHE I V 1 - 1 0 E N U7 U3 U7 U7 U7 if3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - E w 0 '0 0 Ol O O 0 E — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — - — — - — — — — — — — — — — — — E o r 0 N cn I ls) 1) U7 ll) ll) ll) to U? � IQ U7 t!J 0 10 0 w 0 0 J2 m E! w 0 0 yy d3 H3 f5 N3 E9 EA FA H3 d3 H3 fPr V3 ER EPr FA V3 d3 H3 f5 N3 E9 EA FA H3 d3 H3 fPr V3 ER EPr FH V3 d3 H3 f5 � 0 LL m LL D — — — — — — — — — — aY of cr ol of T Ir of a' of Of of af ff Er Cf a' of cr of of of Ir of a' of Of of af Df Of of z z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3: 3z 3: 3: 1� 3 3: 3: 3 3: 3: ": 3: � 3: 3 3: 3: 1� 3 3: 3 3 3: 3: 3� 3: � 3: z W z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z W z W z W z W Z Lil Z w tti 10 m M m C� N w A I m — w — - m — �o — -0 - I D - m — m — C� — m - m — m — m - — m m m C, m m 0 c� 0 0 0 0 0 2 N N N N N N N N N N N " N I I N I N P IN I I 0 cn Z CD U) w CD W wh CL 0 (n 0 0) Z M Z U) < o 2 0 fR V3 t4 d3 V3 4H EA EA fR V3 t4 d3 VHE Hf VHdHS E EA f Hl dHYHE l V 1 - 1 0 E Qr '0 0 Ol O O E 0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — E Z o r 0 N cn N 0 w 0 0 J2 m E! w 0 0 yy d3 H3 f5 N3 E9 EA FA H3 d3 H3 fPr V3 ER EPr FA V3 d3 H3 f5 N3 E9 EA FA H3 d3 H3 fPr V3 ER EPr FH V3 d3 H3 f5 � 0 0 ' t 0) LL D — — — — — — — — — — w w Z z z z z < z < z z z z z z z z z Z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z 0 0 w w w w w w w w z z > > > 0 0 0 0 0 ae < < < 0 0 0 0 0 w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w W w w w w w w w WWWWLLILLJLLJWWWWWWWWW w z z zzzzzz z z z z z .WWW�'> wwwww D ❑ 0 0 10 1 0 N o M 1 1 R I N I T T Z M _2 ch �2 �2 �2 r> �2 �2 _2 Z2 M _2 M _2 c2 �2 ;t r2 �2 �2 �2 �2 �2 Z2 N N N N N N N . . . . . N N . N . . . . . N . N . N I I I I I I IN 1 I I I IN I' cn 0 Z U) w O CD W wh CL 0 (n 0 0) Z M Z U) < o 2 Cl! N Cl! cl� Cl! fR V3 t4 d3 V3 4H EA EA fR V3 t4 d3 VHE Hf VHdHS E EA f Hl dHYHE I V 1 - 1 a LL . Qr O O 0 E — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — O O O N — — — — — — — E o N cn 0 E V c N a 0 0 10 0 0 w 0 0 J2 m E! w 0 yy d3 H3 f5 N3 E9 EA FA H3 d3 H3 fPr V3 ER EPr FA V3 d3 H3 f5 N3 E9 EA FA H3 d3 H3 fPr V3 ER EPr FH V3 d3 H3 f5 � LL m LL D — — — — — — — — — — W w w w w w w w Z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z j > j j > j z W w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w I I I I I I I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > m < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < z z z z z z z z z z W Z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z w z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 � Z2 M t2 O. P P F F P F F i F F 40 " Z U) w t5 CD W CL 0 (n 0 Z M Z U) < o 2 . - "I cli C O U1 U7 N N U) 0 1 ? 0 1 ) C; 1 ? 0 IQ IQ u) 0 IQ u( u? 0 U) H3 d4 Ln 0 F- 4 N 0 0 O LL 0 E U) 0 0 fR V3 t4 d3 V3 4H EA EA fR V3 t4 d3 VHE Hf VHdHS o w E 1-1-1 z 65 2 04 , 5 1 0 '. N CO Ci cn N 0 0 R M 0 lL D E Z O 0 E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E o AR or O O O O q 9 9 9 9 9 9 q q 9 9 q 9 9 q 9 O O O O q AR E 10 0 J2 to U CO LL LL o Im O W w w w w w w Z w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w > > > > > > > < < < `� `� < < Z Z Z Z Z Z Z < < < < < < 1=1 w 10 w N 1=1 w 0 9} Z i t 2 w m N In 0 rl- . - "I cli O CD O 0 C; H3 d4 Ln 0 F- 4 N 0 0 O LL 0 E U) 0 0 o w z 65 2 04 , 5 1 0 '. N CO Ci cn N 0 0 R M 0 lL D I I \I V w VIKING DR. n LLJ 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 61 11-1 Exhibit 1: Project Location Kenwood Area Street Improvements City Project 05-16 Agenda Item 13 To: Diana Longrie, Mayor Wednesday, April 12.2006 Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk City of Maplewood, Maplewood, MN APPEAL OF ASSESSMENT by Susan and Oakley Surine, 1995 West Kenwood Dr., Maplewood We are a single household, but we have been assessed $10,520.00 for the Kenwood street project. This assessment is double the per household charge. We are appealing this double charge and ask to have our assessment changed to the assessment for one household. Our reasons for asking for this change are: 1. We have attended two informational meetings regarding the Kenwood street project where we were clearly given to understand that we were to be assessed $5400.00 per household unit. 2. We were asked on a questionnaire if we wanted to install additional sewer and water facilities to part of our property at the time of this street project. We promptly replied that we did not want to install any facilities because we did not intend to sell any part of our property separately and we never intend to subdivide any part of our property. 3. We do not believe that we have two parcels in a true sense. We have always kept this small additional footage as a garden. 4. We have been planning to have $5400.00 ready to pay the assessment. It would be a hardship to arrange payment double the nominal and fair amount on such short notice. 5.We are both over 65; Oakley is 88. Oakley has been retired for 25 years on a fixed income. His modest pension has never been increased since 1982. We feel obligated to have some savings if either of us would develop a need for nursing home care. 6. We suggest a plan to guarantee to meet the requirements of your definition of one residential unit. We will agree never to attempt to subdivide and offer for sale any portion of our property as a separate buildable lot. We would agree to a 60 year agreement or any other term the city would prefer. We would sign this agreement, have it listed on our abstract or title or any way agreeable to you. We thank you for your consideration of this appeal. Respectfully submitted, Oakley Surine Susan Surine r ; t Agenda Item 13 SHIRLEY SKELTON 2075 Greenbrier Avenue Maplewood, MN 55117 (651) 771 -0755 March 20, 2006 Mr. Steve Kummer Department of Public Works City of Maplewood 1902 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 Re: Tax Assessments for Street Improvements Dear Mr. Kummer: I am writing this letter to you in reference to our phone conversation of March 13, 2006, regarding the proposed tax assessments for street improvements in my neighborhood. This home and lot were selected and built in 1967 for our growing family. We have always loved and have taken pride in our home in IVlaplewood. The economic picture was extremely better at that time with my husband's income, than it is now. I am now 73 years old and had been married for 40 years, when my husband divorced me seven years ago. My alimony payments which he pays to me monthly, are much less than what is needed to maintain the home. I was also deprived of any medical or dental insurances. And, I have no other recourse than to pay my real estate taxes with my Social Security income. Due to dire necessity, I returned to work three years ago. _ had not worked for many years, because of a back disability, resulting from a nursing injury. I only work part -time, because that is all I can handle physically. I am also a diabetic, and I do have other health problems, too. Also, the home was left in poor condition. I have a bank loan for home improvements and a government loan for a new furnace. Being single at this age, I have few deductions, and I have to pay taxes quarterly on the alimony which I receive. In addition to the high heating bills and insurances, I feel very discouraged, as it hardly pays for me to work. I am struggling to maintain this home, and any additional taxes which you are proposing would create a heavier economic burden for me, which I cannot handle ?! Agenda Item 13 Mr. Steve Kummer Page 2 Therefore, I am petitioning the City Council for an appeal for a deferrment of the assessment taxes. Your prompt reply in this matter will be so greatly appreciated. Respectfully yours, Shirley =Sikelton Agenda Item 13 ASSESSMENT HEARING OBJECTION FORM KENWOOD AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 05 -16 Address of assessed parcel C �ckc `v 0 j� Property identification number: (12 digit number) Do you wish to address the city council tonight? ❑ X Yes No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the city council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the city clerk no later than the close of tonight's city council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the city council consider (check one): a. A Deferral of assessment b. Senior citizen deferment (eoer& ears of age) C. ❑ Cancellation of assessment d. �K Revision of assessment Reason for the request: AL A 0 � z Print Name Signature Date �I( - T Address of Property Owner Zip Telephone Agenda Item 13 ASSESSMENT HEARING OBJECTION FORM KENWOOD AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 05 -16 Address of assessed parcel c903(1:�7 011 � y Property identification number: i — (12 digit number ) — — — — Do you wish to address the city council tonight? ❑ Yes No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the city council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the city clerk no later than the close of tonight's city council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the city council consider (check one): a. ❑ Deferral of assessment b. Senior citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) C. ❑ Cancellation of assessment d. Revision of assessment Reason for the request: e- 00 Print Name Sig nat a ate Address of Property Owner Zip Telephone Agenda Item 13 ASSESSMENT HEARING OBJECTION FORM KENWOOD AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 05-16 Address of assessed parcel I q Ll ? L_ e ' 4r-e e -(- Property identification number: (12 digit number) Do you wish to address the city council tonight? Yes No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the city council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the city clerk no later than the close of tonight's city council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the city council consider (check one): a. L] Deferral of assessment b. Senior citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) C. D Cancellation of assessment d. L1 Revision of assessment Reason for the request: //$igna re Print Na me t� Date IWA/ b,5V7 Address of Property Owner Zip Telephone APR-le-2006 09:!5'�g rn Easr YwCe 651 res 3565 P. 01 Agenda Item 13 &w6l i« City of Maplewood To whom it may concern: \uou wr on behalf ufthe letter l received for City Project #O5-l6Assessment. Pin l live ct|08KcuvwoodDrive East which io the smallest house im the neighborhood. Because of financial problems there may bea chance I will not be living there much |mugor l rece m statement that vvcwere responsible for paying $5,360.081ovvonduthdo p ocL 1um currently behind oomoy house taxes due twfiuuooio] problems and 7 was inthe process of fi\iughaokrupny but decided tmgo with Debt consolidation. Although this seemed like the better way to go, I have a certain amount of my check that is withdrawn twice a month tn pay mmy bills which leaves roo with nothing after nmy other smaller bills. I also had surgery which caused me to lose a portion of my wages, and I have to have 2 more surgeries io t next few months. My fianc6 who lives here with me and our daughter was hurt on his job 3 years ago and disabled, Having only one income for periods uia time was very, very hard oous. He is currently receiving some S.S.I and that io enough to cover our mortgage, and car loans. J understand nr* need t* have work done om our streets and sewer; however, it\yvery difficult for people like ourselves who arc barley making it and are asked to contribute. Wo arc doing all vve can to keep our home and vvi(bibe grace of god vve will be able to. {[ there im any way vvm can avoid having to pay this vvcare asking for your help and Please let us know the out come of the hearing after the 24 m . Thank you for your help in this Matter. Kim Dean l08KunwpmdDrive East Maplewood, D4N55l\7 651.793.7298 Agenda Item 13 ASSESSMENT HEARING OBJECTION FORM IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT t Address of assessed parcel Property identification number: —7 2 - - l �? - bra V (12 digit number) Do you wish to address the city council tonight? ❑ 17 Yes N o Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the city council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the city clerk no later than the close of tonight's city council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the city council consider (check one): a. Deferral of assessment b. ` ' Senior citizen deferment (over 66 years of age) C. L Cancellation of assessment d. YK Revision of assessment Reason for the request: , Print Name f gnature bate Address of Property Owner Zip Telephone James and Joanne Roos 1 Agenda Item 13 185 Kenwood Lam Wand Nft=t8 55111 16511111 -1132 Maplewood City Council City of Maplewood 1830 East County Road B Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 April 10, 2006 Dear City Council Members, During 1.991 we were assessed 3,375 dollars. This assessment included our street replacement and storm sewer improvements. As a result of the assessment we have a 30 -foot wide street and it is in relatively better condition than most residential streets in Maplewood. Thus, we have already paid for a new street. It just doesn't seem fair to assess us again for street work. We are now informed the 1991 storm sewer was improperly designed. It appears we are going to be assessed again to correct City of Maplewood engineering mistakes. We really can't understand why we should pay for errors in judgment of Maplewood's engineering department. As part of the 1991 project we had asked to have curbs and gutters installed. The city /engineering department refused to consider our request. Obviously, 1991 expenditures for this work would have been much less than 2006 costs, We do not oppose paying for curbs and gutters. However, we have previously paid for street and sewer improvements. We feel it is unreasonable to incur 1991 and 2006 assessment charges of 8,635 dollars. We, therefore, request a "Revision of Assessement." If further clarification is deemed necessary please give us a call at (651) 771 -7132. Your consideration of our request is most sincerely appreciated. Si,cerely Jim and Joanne Roehl CITY 0= MAP�EWOUD E TY �UAz 8 MAP�EWUOD, MlNNESUT� DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WDRKS - Y ED r= " �_::3����������� Agenda Item 13 THIS 1S THE ONLY STeTEMENT YOU WILL RECEIVE [T IS IMPORTANT THAT YOU READ AND FULLY UNDERSTA�oD YOUR RIGHTS AND OBLI8ATIO�vS CERNING TH1S ASSESS�4ENT �S S�ATED ON T�E ATTACHED wDTlCE DF ASSESS�E�sT _ �«q ASSsssmEmT FOR P�RCEL IoEmTI�ICATIo� Nur�En 17-2�-22-14-��@� Is �s �O��oWS� �,5ATER SERVlC£ AT **$7510.00m EACH = SEkLR SERVIcE A� **�50�.�mm EA�H = - x YOUR TDTFL ASSESSMaiT FOR THIS PARCEL IS ���m R�QUESTING IwF�R�ATION O� CORmESPONoING ABOL/T TwIS STATE�EwT,PLE�SE REFER IDEmTIFIoeTzDw munB�* zz�-mm�3. o x3TE: O��EcT1OwS TD THI� ASSESSMEmT wILL 8E ACCEPTED nE CLOSE OF THE sssSSMENT H�ARINs. ABSOLUTELY �O OBJEcTIOws (ORAL oR Iw WmzTINS) To Awr P�RT = THIS ASSESS;vENT STATEMENT WILL BE ACCEPTED BY THE C1TY CLERK DR �HE v {�PLEWOOD CITY COLw�C.IL HFTEH THE CLDSE OF THE ASS�S�MENT HEAR1N8, �-22-91 ------------------------------------------- ° DETPO4 W PE0�M12, PORTIM WITH ?'a9 PAYIEN o/P NU. amam " ASSESSMENT PAYMENT for PROJECT W3. 04-07 CITY WIDE WM & MlSC IMPROVE PIN 17-29-22-14-0003 TOTAL ASSESSMENT ****$3,3/5.00 , " " TOTAL PAYMENT ENCLOSED - $ PARTIALPAYMEITTOF: ASSESS-SMEI-41'1' ASAUTHDRIZED. CITv 0= MAcLEwOc�� 183 E � � . CUUmTr R�AD B MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA 55am9 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Agenda Item 13 - PRO��CT NO, V,4 CIT3f WIDE WM & MISC IMPR3v� i THIS' IS THE owLY STATEmPNT YOU WILL PEoEIVs [T IS IMPORTANT THAT YOU WnzTING/ To Amv PART READ ANfl FULLY ��NDERSTAND YOUR RIGHTS �ND OBLIGATIO�vS RNING TH1S ASSESSMENT o� AS STATED On THE AT�ACHED WOTlCE �F ASSESSME��T "�ARING. AFTER THE CLOSE OF T�E ASSESS�1ENT HEARI/VG, �-22-91 / - �un �SSESsnEmT FDR PARCEL CA o"! mu*��� 17-29-22-14-�0�� � � ' z0m WATER MA14 - RES UNIT oT $a,625.@0)0 TO T��Is �S�ESSMEWT wIL� BE EACH TFo� C�O�E 8F THE m ABSOLLITELY �O OBJ�cTzoNs {on�� O� zm WnzTING/ To Amv PART THIS ASSESSMENT STATEMENT WILL BE ACCEPTED BY THE ClTY CLERK DR o� HE iAPLEWOOD ClTY COU��CIL AFTER THE CLOSE OF T�E ASSESS�1ENT HEARI/VG, �-22-91 / SEWER U AT EACH � 0)zl0 **$500.000 EACH _ V YOUR TOTAL ASq:ESSy4EWT FOR THIS PARCEL IS --- X��w R�QUESTIw8 IwFORr�T]O� OR CORRESPONDlm� ABOUT T*lS STATEr�EwT,�LEAGE REFER lz PA�oE� ID�mTzFzCA7IOw wumo�� z7-�9_��-z+-mmmo. " u]TE: DB�ECT1[�xS TO T��Is �S�ESSMEWT wIL� BE ACCE/ LvvT1� TFo� C�O�E 8F THE �sESSwBvT HEARIwG. ABSOLLITELY �O OBJ�cTzoNs {on�� O� zm WnzTING/ To Amv PART THIS ASSESSMENT STATEMENT WILL BE ACCEPTED BY THE ClTY CLERK DR o� HE iAPLEWOOD ClTY COU��CIL AFTER THE CLOSE OF T�E ASSESS�1ENT HEARI/VG, �-22-91 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " DETQ04JW RETURN T,413PO87DCV 9ITH YD0 P0Y�ENT " ASSESSMENT PAYMENT for PROJECT WO. @4-m7 CITY WIDE WM & MISo IMPROVE P!N 17-a9-22-14-0003 TOTAL ASSESSMENT ,3/5.00 TOTAL PevMEWT ENCLOSED - $ m PAHTIAL PAYMENT OF T AS AUTHORIZED~ v |3 ASSESSMENT HEARING OBJECTION FORM KENVVOODAREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 05-16 / Address of assessed p3nC8| Property identification number: c) M2 digit number) []o you wish bJ address the city council tonight? | | yoe No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the City Council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the city clerk no later than the close of tonight's city council assessment hearing, Your request will become part Of the public hearing record. | request that tile city council consider (check nn8\: a. [I Deferral of assessment b. 1/% Senior citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) C. 0 Cancellation of assessment d assessment ' '~^`'~'- - Reason for the request: � Print Name Signat6re Date Address of Property Owner Zip Telephone Agenda Item 13 ASSESSMENT HEARING OBJECTION FORM KENWOOD AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 05 -16 Address of assessed parcel a r Property identification number: (12 digit number) Do you wish to address the city council tonight? ` j ❑ Yes No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the city council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the city clerk no later than the close of tonight's city council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the city council consider (check one): a. ❑ Deferral of assessment b, ❑ Senior citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) C. ❑ Cancellation of assessment d. ❑ Revision of assessment Reason for the request: Es d, Print Na a Signature Date Address of Property Owner Zip Telephone Agenda Item 13 ASSESSMENT HEARING OBJECTION FORM KENWOOD AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 05-16 Address of assessed parcel DK we-%I Property identification number: (12 digit number) Do you wish to address the city council tonight? ❑ Yes No Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the city council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the city clerk no later than the close of tonight's city council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the city council consider (check one): a. X Deferral of assessment b. ❑ Senior citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) C. ❑ Cancellation of assessment d. ❑ Revision of assessment Reason for the request: CAI) U IV P0 0.) �CA—c ('L JCL L Print me Signature Date '7 7 Address of Property Owner Zip Telephone Agenda Item 13 b. Senior citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) � c. ., C Cancellation of assessment .2 t d. ❑ Revision of assessment Reason for the request: Address of assessed parcel Property identification number: Do you wish to address the city council tonight? Yes o Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the city council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the city clerk no later than the close of tonight's city council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the city council consider (check one): a. Deferral of assessment 0+c(-( ASSESSMENT HEARING OBJECTION FORM KENWOOD AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 05-16 (12 digit number) - �3 � z Ldo VZ2 Z 2 Print Name Signature Date /K Address of Prope Owner Zip Telephone APR -2 6 1338 THE HOMESTEAD AT MPLWD 6517705779 P.01f 01 VO I f ` Agenda Item 13 Do you wish to address the city council tonight? I] Yes N0 Please complete this form if m be co mpleted t and fii d the to y use This form or cancel your assessment. Your clerk no later than the close of tonight's city council assessment hearing. request will become part of the public hearing record. 1 request that the city council consider {check one }: a. K Deferral of assessment b, 1..1 Senior citizen deferment {over 65 years of age} C. Cancellation of assessment d. ❑ Revision of assessment Reason for the request: - f t art- rzua 00 1111 Wn l 1 9q vu kt /ate flog t, c c z _ 6 Sign re Bate Print Name 772,10/7 Zip Telephone Address of Property dVvner ASSESSMENT HEARING OBJECTION FORM KENWOOD AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 05 -16 em 13 Address of assessed parcel 0, k(U1 0 U Property identification number: (12 digit number) Do you wish to address the city council tonight? ❑ ❑ Yes No f Please complete this form if you intend to appeal to the city council to defer, revise or cancel your assessment. This form must be completed and filed with the city clerk no later than the close of tonight's city council assessment hearing. Your request will become part of the public hearing record. I request that the city council consider (check one): a. ❑ Deferral of assessment b. ❑ Senior citizen deferment (over 65 years of age) C. 0 Cancellation of assessment d. ® Revision of assessment Reason for the request: g , AC «$ o Print Name S N 0 Address of Property Owner Zip Telephone cis April 19, 2006 Office of the City Clerk City of Maplewood 1830 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 PIN 172922410063 Project 05 -16: Kenwood Area Street Improvements RE: Objection to the Assessment To whom it may concern: Agenda Item 13 My property at 200 Kenwood Drive East received a 2 unit assessment for the proposed street improvements. While this is a large property, it does not, currently, contain two buildable lots. This fact was confirmed by the City of Maplewood in letter dated March 1, from the Maplewood Engineering Department (copy attached). The first paragraph of that letter reads as follows: "During the design of this project, it was observed that your house is situated on half of your property. After discussions with the city planner, it was noted that a lot split might be granted by variance, if so requested. This opinion does NOT guarantee that a lot split will be granted. If requested, you will still need to apply for a variance, which can only be granted by the city council." On one hand, the city is telling me that I do not currently own two buildable properties and that even if I wanted to request a variance there is no guarantee that it would be granted. On the other hand, by assessing me for 2 units, the city is taxing me for a property that, by its own admission, does not exist. If one looks at a flat map, it would appear that my property could easily be divided into two units. Unfortunately, the flat map does not take into account the topography of the property. Without significant excavation, fill, retaining walls, and removal of mature trees (the properties most valuable asset) there is not another suitable building site on the property. There is a reason my home is placed on "half' of the property. It is the only position on the property that lends itself to the placement of a home -sized structure. This is not a simple case of a property owner with two lots, one vacant and one containing a dwelling. My property contains three very small lots, none of which are buildable by current standards. My home is built across two of the existing lots. Because of the location of the dwelling redrawing the lot lines is possible, but not without destroying the aesthetic character of the property. I have no intention of asking the city for a variance on this property. I am also realistic enough to know that no one can predict the future, neither the city nor myself. If, at some point in time, a variance were requested for this property, it would then be appropriate to charge the owner of the property whatever fees and assessments were necessary to make the variance possible. To charge those fees and assessments in advance of something that may never happen seems unconscionable. I ask that you take the information above into consideration and assess my property for what it is, 1 unit, and not for what someone thinks it could possible become at some indeterminable time in the future. incerely, i James Pomroy 200 Kenwood Drive East Maplewood, MN 55117 651- 303 -3304 (cell) f Agenda Item 13 Together 14 Casa March 1, 2006 James L. Pomroy 200 Kenwood Dr. E. Maplewood, MN 55117 -2508 PIN 172922410063 PROJECT 05 -16: KENWOOD AREA STREET IMPROVEMENTS During design of this project, it was observed that your house is situated on half of your property. After discussions with the city planner, it was noted that a lot split might be granted by variance, if so requested. This opinion does NOT guarantee that a lot split will be granted. If requested, you still need to apply for a variance, which can only be granted by the city council. Because we design new streets for maximum development, we are inquiring if you wish to have a 4" PVC sewer and 1" copper water service installed for the other half of your property. If you agree, you would pay for the $3,420.00 cost with the attached separate private agreement with the city, and there would be NO additional restoration costs. If you disagree, we would ask that you sign and return to us the enclosed waiver stating you have no intention, while you remain the owner, of requesting a lot split. This would ensure deferment until that time when future actions warrant such installations. Keep in mind that if you or a future owner desire services to be installed in the future, the cost would be significantly higher as it would include road reparations, in addition to the typical connection costs, which are periodically adjusted for inflation. Enclosed is a request/waiver form and self - addressed, stamped envelope for your reply. Please call if you have any questions or comments. MAPLEWOOD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT jW Enclosures DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 657 -249 -2400 FAX: 651 -249 -2409 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 1902 COUNTY ROAD B EAST MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 04/2412006 16:39 6517708724 OAKRIVER TECHNOLOGY PAGE 01 Agenda Item 13 May 24,2006 To: Karen Guilfoile, City clerk Der ' �6 City of Maplewood 1902 Fast County Road B Maplewood, IYiN 55109 Subject: Assessment Objection on PIN 4172922120034 We are writing to object to the assessment against our property in the amount of $4,510 for the Kenwood area street improvement project. We are writing to object to this on the basis that this assessment includes the cast for curbs, The Kenwood project involver, many different streets, some of the streets currently have curbs and others (which we are on) do not. During the meetings held to discuss the project there were two elements that were disturbing: I.) There were apparently 4 different levels of street improvements that could have been chosen for the repair of the streets. Those 4 levels were not discussed in detail at the meeting. The level of repair chosen by the City automatically included curbs or curb repair for all of the streets regardless of whether they were wanted by the residents on that street or not. Because of a lack of discussion of the various options, I believe many residents were not able to clearly assess what was being discussed or that indeed there was an option among the 4 that did not have curbs. 2) Also, the impression: was given during these meetings that the residents would be able to provide their input into the platy and a survey was mentioned, However,, on the survey form the only discussion of curbs had to do with what type of curb the residents wanted. The survey did not ask the question. whether the residents wanted curbs or let them know the extra cost that would be included if they wanted curbs. ln. our survey that we returned we did write in on it that we did not want curbs and d id not want to pay for curbs but dial not hear anything back from the city on this. Finally, there has not been any cost justification provided to the residents to outline the benefits and potential future cost savings from putting in the curbs now. It appears, from the limited information that we have, that the curbs are costing each resident an additional $1,500 - $2,000. This is approximately 40% of the total assessment which is a substantial amount to have added to the cost without having a costtbeneftt analysis provided. We believe that the City should have conducted a proper survey of all of the residents that are on streets not having curbs today, laying out the option of curbs or no curbs, pro's and con's, the extra cost of having the curies installed, and a cost justification. Sincerely, . % Dave Nelson. Michael Nelson Agenda Item L1 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner SUBJECT: Easement Vacation LOCATION: 2249 Kenwood Court DATE: April 19, 2006 INTRODUCTION Mr. James Tschida, the owner of the property at 2249 Kenwood Court, is proposing that the city vacate part of an existing drainage and utility easement. This easement is along the west property line of his lot. Mr. Tschida wants the city to vacate this easement area to provide him space to build an addition onto his existing garage. (Please see the applicant's statement on page three and the maps and plans on pages four through eight.) BACKGROUND On September 25, 1989, the city council approved the final plat for the Pare Addition. (This plat created all the properties on Kenwood Court.) DISCUSSION The city acquired the easement in question in 1989 when the developer of the Pare Addition (the plat) recorded the final plat with Ramsey County. Mr. Tschida is requesting the vacation because his proposed garage addition would encroach about 2.6 feet into the five - foot -wide easement. (See the site plan and survey on page six.) The city engineering department stated that the city does not have a need for the existing easement. The city and the adjacent property owners have no plans to build any utilities in this location. Maplewood has no plans to develop or use the existing easement for utilities and the city does not need it for any utilities. However, the engineering department noted that the city needs a legal way to access the drainage and utility easement across the northern part of the property. In trade for the city vacating the existing easement, city staff is requesting that the property owner grant to the city an additional five -foot -wide easement near the east property line of the lot. Such an easement over the property will allow the city access to the drainage area to the north and would provide more space to install underground utilities if the city decides that there is a need for such improvements. COMMISSION ACTION On April 17, 2006, the planning commission recommended approval of the proposed vacation, subject to the recommended conditions of approval. RECOMMENDATION Approve the resolution on page nine. This resolution is for the vacation of part of the drainage and utility easement on the west side of the property at 2249 Kenwood Court. The reasons for the vacation are as follows: It is in the public interest. 2. The city and the property owner do not need or use the existing easement for utility purposes. 3. The two properties adjacent to the easement have adequate utilities and drainage. This vacation is subject to the property owner: Granting to the city an additional five -foot -wide drainage and utility easement over the east part of the property, subject to the approval of the city engineer. 2. Maintaining the drainage on the west side of their house and garage on their property and within the five -foot -wide easement on the adjacent property. REFERENCE INFORMATION Application Date The city received the complete application and plans for this request on March 15, 2006. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a land use proposal. As such, city action is required on this proposal by May 12, 2006. P: \sec8 \easement vacation - 2006 Attachments: 1. Applicant's Statement 2. Location Map 3. Address Map 4. Site Plan and Survey 5. Floor Plan 6. Proposed House Elevation 7. Vacation Resolution 2 Reasonable Use - The only site on the property that a third car stall can be located is adjacent to the existing double attached garage. Unique Circumstances - Due to the extreme topography of the lot, the initial builder/developer located the dwelling in the extreme southwest comer of the lot. Essential Character - Two of the six homes on the cul-de-sac have third-stall garages that encroach on the five-foot set back requirement, Spirit and Intent - Adequate spacing for utilities, drainage and the maintenance of general M, Z� aesthetics will not be materially impaired because at its narrowest point more than 18 feet will remain between the front of the proposed garage addition and the existing garage on the adjacent property. Z4 . /7 <= _ U( VI::) 414 1 (0 James Tsc�ida /Beth Tschida Date W 152006 a Z\ N I Location Map 2249 Ken4vood Court Attachment 2 Z\ Attachment 3 11 i r . ..... L M . .............. (o 2227 am F 1 21 5 21 5 L 21§5 L . 0 240,""' C) -- - - - -.. CN 00 Cy') ............ 11 i r . ..... L M . .............. (o 2227 am F 1 21 5 21 5 L 21§5 L . 0 240,""' C) -- - - - -.. Cy') (D 2006 John Oliver & Ass "'i S89 9 1 8. 2 EDGE OF--' WATER S -DRAINAGE & U DUTY EASEMENT - m 7- 0 PROPOSED DRAINAGE & > a � 5 � s FINQ1 U 77L I TY CA SEVEN T AREA- 400 SQUARE FEET Ila el- b V 11 41- Now WALL— 71 z oom WALL DECK Q� 38, 79 _T1 rn LINK N I" 4AS k ELECTRIC FENCE -METERS -CONCRETE C1 WALL Q DC CL - NX ig ml I I ti KENWOOD COURT r. SOU TH WS T tL CORNER OF - WT 16. co ig ml I I ti KENWOOD COURT 'S: I Attachment 2- T- 0 C) - cc � �� �� \ �. /� ��( r� ( \ � ` ƒ �w � . � �\ /\ Attachment 5 T- 0 C) - cc Lim I� 'a 3 I_1�T3• U MIRVJ VACATION RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Mr. James Tschida, the property owner, applied for the vacation of the following: Part of the five- foot -wide drainage easement that is along the west property line of the property at 2249 Kenwood Court described as follows: A five- foot -wide strip of land over, under and across, that part of the existing drainage and utility easement as platted and dedicated in Lot 16, Block 1, Pare Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof, Ramsey County, Minnesota, the westerly line of said strip is described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 16; thence northerly along the west line of said Lot 16, a distance of 27.00 feet to a point of beginning of the line to be described; thence continue northerly along said west line, a distance of 47.00 feet and said line there terminating. All in Maplewood, Ramsey County, in Section 8, Township 29, Range 22. WHEREAS, the history of this vacation is as follows: 1. On April 17, 2006, the planning commission held a public hearing about this proposed vacation. The 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 also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the vacation. 2. On May 8, 2006, the city council reviewed this proposal. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. WHEREAS, after the city approves this vacation, the public fee title interest in the property will go to the following described properties: Lot 16, Block 1, Pare Addition (2249 Kenwood Court) (PIN 08- 29 -22 -44 -0045) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above- described vacation for the following reasons: It is in the public interest. 2. The city and the property owner do not need or use the existing easement for utility purposes. 3. The two properties adjacent to the easement have adequate utilities and drainage. 9 This vacation is subject to the property owner: 1. Granting to the city an additional five - foot -wide drainage and utility easement over the east part of the property, subject to the approval of the city engineer. 2. Maintaining the drainage on the west side of their house and garage on their property and within the five -foot -wide easement on the adjacent property. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on May , 2006. 10 im MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, APRIL 17, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 11. ROLL CALL Vice - Chairperson Tushar Desai Commissioner Mary Dierich Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Michael Grover Commissioner Harland Hess Commissioner Jim Kaczrowski Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner Dale Trippler Commissioner Jeremy Yarwood Present Present Present Present at 7:05 p.m. Present Present Present Present Present Staff Present: Ken Roberts Planner Lisa Kroll Recording Secretary Trevor Oliver Attorney at Law with Kelly & Fawcett V. PUBLIC HEARING a. Easement Vacation (2249 Kenwood Court) (7:05 — 7:17 p.m.) Mr. Roberts said Mr. James Tschida, the owner of the property at 2249 Kenwood Court, is proposing that the city vacate part of an existing drainage and utility easement. This easement is along the west property line of his lot. Mr. Tschida wants the city to vacate this easement area to provide him space to build an addition onto his existing garage. The city acquired the easement in question in 1989, when the developer recorded the final plat with Ramsey County. Mr. Tschida is requesting the vacation because his proposed garage addition would encroach about 2.6 feet into the five -foot -wide easement. The city engineering department stated that the city does not have a need for the existing easement. The city and the adjacent property owners have no plans to build any utilities and the city does not need it for any utilities. However, the engineering department noted that the city needs a legal way to access the drainage and utility easement across the northern part of the property. In trade for the city vacating the existing easement, city staff is requesting that the property owner grant to the city an additional five- foot -wide easement near the east property line of the lot. Such an easement over the property would allow the city access to the drainage area to the north and would provide more space to install underground utilities if the city decides that there is a need for such improvements. Commissioner Trippler asked if the easement vacation is approved would that have an affect on the variance because this is within five feet of the property line? Mr. Roberts said that is correct. The city cannot process the variance until the city knows if the easement vacation is approved. Planning Commission -2- Minutes of 04 -17 -06 Commissioner Trippler asked if the applicant proceeds with this would the applicant be coming back before the planning commission for a variance? Mr. Roberts said the administrative variance for the garage setback does not require planning commission or city council action. If the neighbors adjoining this property agree to this and sign a petition, staff can handle the variance administratively. Commissioner Grover asked what the neighbors think of the easement vacation? Mr. Roberts said the neighbors have already signed the petition and submitted the paperwork. He said that's how all of this was started. City staff put a hold on the variance request until the easement vacation went through the appropriate steps. Commissioner Hess asked if the proposed garage addition roof overhang was included in the easement encroachment? Mr. Roberts said the code refers to the foundation line as a wall line and a small roof overhang like this isn't an issue and is commonly done. Commissioner Hess said he is concerned about the fire safety and the closeness of the proposed garage addition to the house next door's living space? Mr. Roberts said he estimated the neighbor's garage to be 12 to 15 feet away which does not include the living space. At the time of the building permit process the building inspectors may require additional sheetrock in the garage to meet the fire code, but that would be handled during the building permit review. Commissioner Hess said he noticed the third parking stall addition is more than 10 feet wide (which is the common size) and if this garage addition was only 10 feet wide this would not require a variance. He asked if the laundry room and storage area were new additions to this addition proposal as well? Mr. Roberts said he understood the laundry room and storage space would be included in the proposed garage addition. He said there are some parking stall additions that are 10 feet wide which is narrower than what the applicant is requesting and would not require as much of a variance. That may be a question for the applicant but the difference in size may relate to the stairs and how the back is laid out with a straight wall down the one side. Commissioner Trippler asked if the neighbor to the west had signed the petition stating they are okay with the easement vacation? Mr. Roberts said yes. Commissioner Trippler said when he visited the site he noticed this was the only house on the cul- de -sac that would be so close to their neighbor. He asked if staff had considered that when working on this proposal? Planning Commission -3- Minutes of 04 -17 -06 Mr. Roberts said the easement vacation is a separate matter. Regarding the setback, the city could take that into consideration. The code on a side setback, garage to garage, if the neighbor adjoining it approves it and it doesn't look way out of character or isn't an excessive request, the city really has no choice other than to grant it and it has been the practice of the city to approve those requests. It has been city staff's opinion if the two neighbors are happy and they can coexist on a small setback variance of two or three feet, the city won't interfere. City staff did not look at the rest of the setbacks of the other homes on the cul -de -sac, staff was primarily focusing on just these two properties. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Mr. Dennis Prohofsky, 755 Montana, St. Paul, father -in -law of James Tschida, the applicant, addressed the commission. He said he's retired and has put a lot of time into the application to help his son -in -law out. He said there are two other properties here with three stall garages and one of those is closer to the property line. He said he included that information in his application. All adjacent neighbors have agreed to this proposal and they would like to proceed with the next step. Chairperson Fischer asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak regarding this easement vacation. Nobody came forward. Chairperson Fischer closed this portion of the public hearing. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the resolution on page nine of the staff report. This resolution is for the vacation of part of the drainage and utility easement on the west side of the property at 2249 Kenwood Court. The reasons for the vacation are as follows: 1. It is in the public interest. 2. The city and the property owner do not need or use the existing easement for utility purposes. 3. The two properties adjacent to the easement have adequate utilities and drainage. This vacation is subject to the property owner: Granting to the city an additional five -foot -wide drainage and utility easement over the east part of the property, subject to the approval of the city engineer. 2. Maintaining the drainage on the west side of their house and garage on their property and within the five -foot -wide easement on the adjacent property. Commissioner Grover seconded. Ayes — Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Hess, Kaczrowski, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on May 8, 2006. Agenda Item L2 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer SUBJECT: TH 61 Improvements and County Road D Court Improvements - City Projects 03 -07 and 04 -25: Resolution for Modification of the Existing Construction Contract, Change Order 1 DATE: May 2, 2006 INTRODUCTION Changes to construction contracts require council approval. A resolution directing the modification of the existing construction contract on the TH 61 and County Road D Court project is recommended. Background On July 25, 2005, the city council awarded the construction contract for roadway construction for a combined project of the TH 61 Improvements, the County Road D Court Improvements and the TH 61 East Frontage Road Improvements to Shafer Contracting, Inc. in the amount of $1,655,169.43. This is the first change order to be considered on this project. Attached is an explanation from SEH, our consultant engineer, on the necessary changes. The total amount of the change order is $44,907.30. The project budget needs to be revised due to the new funds being provided by MnDOT. The remainder of the items are part of the contingency allocation for the project. Change Order 1 is summarized below: ❑ Temporary Signs ($1,147.00): These temporary signs were used to work with local businesses. ❑ Subgrade Work on County Road D Court ($10,080.00): The soils under County Road D Court were much worse than noted in our soil borings and needed to be corrected. ❑ Retaining Wall ($21,580.30): A retaining wall was constructed to allow the shortening of the roadway as part of a design revision worked out with the local property owners. The City saved funds, estimated at $15,000 for easements and over $23,000 of construction costs, in exchange for this project revision. ❑ Supplemental Agreement No. 1 ($12,100.00): MnDOT requested that Maplewood add the work to connect the TH 61 traffic signals to our contract. This will be 100% paid by MnDOT. Budget Impact The first three items within this change order fall within the revised project budget approved by the city council at the December 12, 2005, meeting. A budget revision is required at this time to increase the amount due from MnDOT by the $12,100 in Supplemental Agreement No. 1. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution directing the modification of the existing construction contract, Change Order No. 1, for the TH 61 and County Road D Court Improvements, City Project 03 -07 and increase the project budget by $12,100. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Change Order No. 1 3. Supplemental Agreement No. 1 Agenda Item L2 RESOLUTION DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PROJECT 03 -07, CHANGE ORDER No. 1 WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made Improvement Project 03 -07, TH 61 and County Road D Court Improvements as part of a combined project, 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 03 -07, Change Order No. 1, as an increase to said contract by an amount of $44,907.30, such that the new contract amount is now and hereby established as $1,698,929.73. 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 No. 1 as a contract increase in the amount of $44,907.30. The revised contract amount is $1,698,929.73. A revision to the project budget is required at this time. The Finance Director is hereby directed to increase the project scope by an amount of $12,100 as revenue from the Minnesota Department of Transportation. SE H April 28, 2006 Mr. R. Charles Ahl, PE City of Maplewood 1830 E County Rd B Maplewood, MN 55109 -2702 Dear Mr. Ahl: Agenda Item L2 RE: Maplewood, Minnesota T.H. 61 Area Improvements S.A.P. No. 6222 -150 (TH 61 =001) City Project Nos. 03 -07, 04 -06, 04 -25 SEH No. A- MAPLE0402.01 Submitted for your review is Change Order No. 1 for the TH _61 Area Improvements project. An explanation of the needs and associated costs for this change order is as follows: Item: Temporary Business Signs The adjacent businesses along TH 61 expressed concerns that during the lane closures and detours associated with the lane expansions, their driveways would become indiscernible, resulting is a loss of business. Temporary business sibs were placed on TH 61 at the driveways to delineate the driveway access locations. Eight signs were used at a total cost of $1,147. Item: Subgrade Excavation and Select Granular Borrow — D Court. No soil corrections were anticipated for the reconstruction of D Court in the original contract. During the installation of the water main it was revealed that the existing material was not suitable for roadway subgrade. Removal and replacement of the unsuitable material totaled $10,080. Item: Modular Block Retaining Wall — D Court Original plan as bid proposed the location of the cul de sac for D Court at the west right of way line for TH 61. Subsequent to bidding, it was determined that the eastern 250 feet of D Court served no purpose for adjacent property owners and could be deleted. In order to construct the cul de sac 250 feet to the west of the original location, a modular block retaining wall was required to compensate for grade differences. The cost of the wall was $21,580. The associated savings for shortening the roadway considering the cost of bituminous pavement, Class 5 gravel base, subgrade removal and replacement, concrete curb and gutter, and sod is approximately $23,650. Hence, the final contract quantities and payment for this section of roadway will be slightly less. Continued savings for the City will be realized by a reduction in maintenance costs and storm water runoff. Item: Supplemental Agreement No. I hort Elliott H endrickson Inc., 3535 Vadnais Center :Drive, St. Paul, MN 55110 -51` 6 SEH is an tiquai opportunity emp;oyer ( www,sehi,eic.corn 1 65„490.X100 1 400 32.5.2055 1 65 1. 2150 fax Mr. R. Charles Ahl, PE April 28, 2006 Page 2 Agenda Item L2 The State requested that the interconnect cables between the traffic signals at County Road D and 694 be replaced. The cost of this work is $12,100. This is 100% reimbursable from the state and results in no increase in cost for the City of Maplewood. Please don't hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments. Thank you. Sincerely, / 1 4 Steven E. Heth, PE Project Manager, Associate Enclosures nm xAkolmap1e104020 RwordWp4co Icty.doc c: Tom Henry, SEH SEH CHANGE ORDER City of Maplewood OWNER 03 -07, 04 -06, 04 -25 OWNER'S PROJECT NOS. T.H. 61 Area Improvements PROJECT DESCRIPTION The following changes shall be made to the contract documents: Description: 1. Extra signs for businesses on Highway 61. 2. One foot sub grade common excavation for County Road D Court. 3. One foot select granular borrow for County Road D Court. 4. Retaining wall at Hillcrest Animal Hospital. 5. Supplemental Agreement No. I Purpose of Change Order: 1. Increased visibility of the detour to the businesses. 2. Sub grade material became too unstable for use in the roadway. 3. Used to stabilize the sub grade for County Road D Court. 4. Required to decrease impact on the Hillcrest Animal Hospital property. 5. Add item for signal interconnect. Agenda Item L2 March 16, 2006 DATE 1 CHANGE ORDER NO, A- MAPLE0402.01 SEH FILE NO. Basis of Cost: ® Actual ❑ Estimated Attachments (list supporting documents) 1. Invoices from Shafer. ($1,147.00) 2. Actual quantity of subcut that was removed. Measured in the field. Contract bid price $4.50cy = $2,835. 3. Actual quantity of material used. Measured in the field. Contract bid price $11.50 cy = $7,245 4. Invoice from TMS Construction. ($21,580.30) 5. Invoice from Honda Electric. ($12,100) Contract Status Original Contract Net Change Prior Change Orders Time Cost $1,655,169.43 0 Change this Change Order No. 1 $44,907.30 Revised Contract $1,698,929.73 Recommended for Approval: Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. by 7 + " Steve Heth Agreed to by Contractor BY ShaferContr 1zgC Inc. Approved for Owner: BY City of Maplewood TITLE TITLE Distribution Contractor 2 Owner 1 Proiect Reoresentative i xAko\maole\04020 I \word\co 1.doc SEH Office 1 1/04 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 3535 Vadnais Center Drive, St. Paul, MN 55110-5196 SEH is an equal opportunity employer I www.sehinc.com 1 651.490.2000 1 800.325.2055 1 651.490.2150 fax Job:746 T.H. 61 Improvements in Maplewood Special Signs Description Size Cty Gulden's & Venburg - w /Arrow 36 x 36 2 Sparkle Auto w /Arrow 36 x 24 1 Agenda Item L2 Unit Unit Price Total S.F. $ 18.56 $ 33100 S.F. $ 18.50 $ 111.00 Total $ 444.00 C� Job:746 T.H. 61 improvements in Maplewood Special Signs 08/1712005 Agend L2 Description Size QtL Unit Unit Price Total Gulden's & Venburg - Follow detour 30 x 36 1 S.F. $ 18.50 $ 138.75 Gulden's & Venburg - (Right Arrow) 36 x 36 2 S.F. $ 18.50 $ 333.00 Total $ 471.75 } Job:746 T.H. 61 Improvements in Maplewood Special Signs 0912612005 Description Size Qly Lexas of Maplewood 30 x 30 2 Agenda K6fn L2 �,� , ry a Unit Unit Price Total S.F. $ 18.50 $ 231.25 Total $ 231.25 TMS COMTRUCTIONINC 5990 MEADOWLARK LN PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372 952-226-6300 OFFICE 952-226-6301 FAX Bill TO SHAFER CONTRACTING INC P.O, BOX 128 SHAFER, MN 55074 Agenda It m L2 ffivoice Invoice 0 8 006 160 P.O. No. Terms I Project Description Qty Rate Amount MODULMZ BLOCK RETAINING WALL r4. T 61 (COUN 965 20.33 19,618.45 RD D CIR) Total SO.00 Payments/Credits $19,618.45 Balance Due $19,618.45 TP qPW,4 >d I CKfn1') I TnCO0777rC r2r - n7 000711 T JTn C� Agenda Item L2 ELECTRICAL WIRING PROPOSAL 0 M nWML ewe 5075ffle[MOtt,P,O,,&r% M Uretto, 55357 Punk MV 4A"413 413 ,FAx M3) 498 -87711 tubrSu.lrtTt •r>'m- alQeuie. t VAtZ M14105 CUSTOMER A,DDR LOCATION OP JOB SFBCFICATIONS OF JOB celw rivg f fav Contradom " bet's O, f IRMI.&M1292 l>1.EL — C3.0 Date: Septexotivr I4, 2003 To. S hafer Cout meting Attar: Frank Weiss Fax.- 651-257-3778 Fyram. Jeff Pizo.k RE: TH 611V12pleweed SP 6222 -I50 The following Is pridug per the S.E.H. memo: Remove 014125 Pair Imtte rconn eet 63,3111 60 Install new 6 Pair Intereonneet $7 4.00 Grawl Total; $11,000.00 l) The materials dr d we rl—man0h1p #brnithed ender this WVQW Ibili cImPlY With W ruift And rrViNtloRi Iat forth In the Notionai iticcCrlcll Codo add A 1 OW11 and Inaal rMilmdo jgmverning eucA Kart ThR prtt'a gdbtrar ;ndudes rMirZd IAMMICA, A-RJ pw mit and ;oarertion feel. Any f hanpit In (beibOve siteaf ieiatSona drat) be meda in wrhing, and as evidence origreement sha be aigoed by bath nartier. TIK mtratt tr /bail not d,! 8100 t`r9p684'bir or 4nblt for any Ims, dimdgt or detity due in - me t begphd his conirel. rrrhp purchaser dlpom ni the ifrulyerty by ple or Ommin btfort this tuntraet b" betty 11141MICA the ruts itnMid nowt mt orihe coM ict slitilt bminc due and pey0le at onto, AN equIlimm and devim inatal[W ae it part of thle ptvitosal A411 be gvaraittNd for 2 period of n >lo,yLtlh pttfS .d . oYlNacttlriliteae. f2 tts �aaol ■c} rsr #fltl. ContrSM7 111211 he limited to the rephReemen#ofdetective p6ru. This rrropastt m4y be MthdVAWn t}Y a if net 20'epte4 within . .."�"Q— _ dips front the xb*ye datt. Wo to nart 4r hen nec ACCUTANCE 1[rspeetrauylu�rttlttc �, The abny' pr+mpa€ l and ternts of paymaht art hst'Aby neaepted and you err, authorfZed to do T" work at ;p4Gtt#tt0 ontrr+cto - ---------- x UMMQr 87 a ; ' vets Signed MOT f Agenda Item L2 SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 1 CONTRACTOR; FEDERAL PROJECT NO. (none) S. P. 6222 -150 (TH 61), SAP Shafer Contracting Company Inc. 138 -010 -11 City Nos. 03 -07, 04 -06, 04 -25 ADDRESS: LOCATION OF WORK: Trunk Highway 61 at County Road D in 30405 Regal Avenue Maplewood, Minnesota Shafer, Minnesota 55074 This Contract is between the City of i�A+l and Contractor as follows: WHEREAS: The Contract between the City of Maplewood, the Minnesota Department of Transportation and Shafer Contracting Company Inc. provides for the installation of a new interconnected traffic signal system at Trunk Highway 61 and County Road D, signal revisions to the Trunk Highway 61 /interstate 694 ramp signal systems, and revised interconnection between these signal systems, all in the City of Maplewood, Minnesota. WHEREAS: The plans originally called for the existing 25 Pair No. 19 traffic signal interconnect cable to be maintained and reused between the Interstate 694 South Ramps signal system and County Road D, with a new 25 Pair No. 19 interconnect cable being furnished and installed from the controller cabinet at County Road D to the inplace controller cabinet at Beam Avenue. The existing 25 Pair No. 19 cable from the County Road D intersection location to Beam Avenue was to be removed and disposed of. WHEREAS: Due to several circumstances during construction, the existing 25 Pair No. 19 cable from County Road D to the Interstate 694 South Ramps signal system was impacted such that splices in the cable at three (3) separate locations would be required to keep the existing interconnect cable inplace and operational. Minnesota Department of Transportation traffic signal personnel have decided that this cable should be removed in its entirety and replaced with a new unspliced 6 Pair No. 19 interconnect cable throughout this cable run to ensure the operation and integrity of this cable. WHEREAS: Work to be included as part of the interconnect cable work will include, but not be limited to the following: (1) furnish and install new 6 Pair No. 19 interconnect cable between the Interstate 694 South Ramps controller cabinet and the County Road D controller cabinet, (2) remove and dispose of existing 25 Pair No. 19 interconnect cable between the controller cabinets listed above , (3) direct bury new interconnect cable where currently inplace direct buried interconnect cable exists (as well as install through inplace handholes and conduit as currently shown on the project signal plans), and (4) complete all restoration and backfilling work through this area after all interconnect cable work is completed. WHEREAS: The Engineer, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and the City of Maplewood concur that this work shall be completed as part of this project to ensure the operation and integrity of the interconnect cable. WHEREAS: Unit prices need to be established for the furnishing of all labor and materials necessary to complete the above - mentioned work items. THEREFORE: It is hereby understood and agreed that: 1. The Contractor shall furnish all labor and materials necessary to complete the removal of the inplace 25 Pair No. 19 interconnect cable and installation of new 6 Pair No. 19 interconnect cable as listed above. 2. All work shall be performed to the satisfaction of, and as directed by the Engineer. Agenda Item L2 SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 1 Page 2 of 2 3. Payment for all work required by this Agreement will be made at negotiated unit prices as listed below. 4. Contract Time will not be affected by this Agreement, except as may be provided under the provisions of MnDOT Standard Specification 1806. 5. The Contractor shall not make claim of any kind of character, whatsoever, for any other cost or expenses they may have incurred, or which they may hereinafter incur, as a result of performing the work or furnishing the materials required by this Agreement. ESTIMATE OF COST Increase (Negotiated) Item No. Item Unit Unit Price Quantity Amount Group 2104.501 Remove Cables L. F. $3.30 1,100 $3,630.00 2565.603 6 Pair No. 19 Interconnect L. F. $7.70 1,100 $8,470.00 Total Increase This Agreement $12,100.00 Group Distribution: 100% S.A.P. 138- 010 -11 $12,100.00 MnDOT Metro District Cooperative Agreements Engineer Dated: f - Agenda Item L3 AGENDA REPORT TO: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director /City Engineer SUBJECT: Roselawn Avenue (Rice to 1 -35E) Traffic Issues, Project 05 -25 — Authorize 2006 Monitoring DATE: May 2, 2006 INTRODUCTION A number of residents in the Roselawn area signed a petition in 2005 regarding the degradation of their neighborhood due to traffic on Roselawn and Jackson. An investigation found that heavy vehicle traffic, mostly buses from the Comfort Bus facility, were exceeding some noise standards and were in the very high levels for local collector streets. The Council directed that additional monitoring should occur in 2006. Authorization for this monitoring is requested. Background The 2005 Roselawn Traffic Study was in response to a petition dated June 10, 2005, from 60 residents along Roselawn and Jackson requesting an investigation into the "heavy truck and commercial school bus traffic" along Roselawn and Jackson. On July 25, 2005, the City Council authorized the City Engineer to have a traffic consultant conduct an investigation and appropriated $12,000 for that study. The findings were presented on December 12, 2005, and concluded that Roselawn and Jackson experience nearly 10 times the normal bus volumes for collector streets in Maplewood and that the daytime noise standard was exceeded with buses on these routes and was not exceeded when buses were not in daily operation. On April 10, 2006, the City Council placed conditions on the conditional use permit for the Comfort Bus facility that restricted the number of buses on Roselawn and Jackson to a total of 162 buses per day. The Council condition also directed additional monitoring by the City Engineer during 2006 such that a report could be made before November 1, 2006. The proposed follow -up study would include monitoring of the roadway speed and traffic volumes, a count of the number of buses, some additional monitoring of traffic noise to determine if the noise levels have decreased, a 2 -3 day monitoring of air quality (a neighborhood concern), and observing of major traffic flows to quantify the percentage of traffic that is heavy truck and school bus vehicles. The cost of this monitoring and compilation of the data, along with some recommendations for modifications, is $12,000 - $15,000. Budget Impact The cost of this study (up to $15,000) will need to be paid from the Public Works Department's administrative budget for consulting services. This line item is an annual allocation of funds for consultant studies of various problems during the year. The 2006 allocation for this fund is $20,600. This expense will likely deplete the funds in this account and eliminate other investigation, such as traffic counts and investigation of other engineering -type issues, for future projects. Those requests will need to be funded by the contingency fund. No transfer of funds is needed at this time. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Engineer to retain a traffic consultant at a cost not to exceed $15,000 to investigate and monitor impacts of traffic along Roselawn Avenue between Rice Street and 1 -35E and on Jackson Street, and the City Engineer shall report back to the City Council before the second meeting of October 2006. MEMORANDUM To: Interim City Manager Copeland From: City Clerk Date: May 1, 2006 Re: Agenda Order Introduction Item L4 Since some interest has been expressed to you by council members regarding the "Order of Business" for council agendas, I have prepared this memorandum for council consideration. Usually at the first council meeting of the year, the city council reviews and considers changes in the policy and procedure manual entitled "Rules of Procedure for City Council Meetings." Section 1. F. addresses "Order of Business" which establishes the order in which council business is to be conducted. It has been suggested that Public Hearings be moved closer to the beginning of the agenda to facilitate addressing scheduled items where the public is given an opportunity to address the council. I would further suggest that while it has been past practice to publish hearings at specific times, (i.e. 7:00, 7 :10, and 7:15) that published notices specify that Public Hearings begin at 7:00 p.m. Consideration The following Agenda order is submitted to council for consideration. F. Order of Business A. Call to Order B. Pledge of Allegiance C. Roll Call D. Approval of Agenda E. Approval of Minutes F. Public Hearings G. Visitor Presentations H. Appointments /Presentations I. Consent Agenda J. Award of Bids K. Unfinished Business L. New Business M. Council Presentations N. Administrative Presentations O. Adjournment MEMORANDUM To: Interim City Manager Copeland From: City Clerk Date: May 1, 2006 Re: Code Revision - Intoxicating Liquor Introduction Item L5 In 2005 State Statute 340A.504 was revised changing off -sale intoxicating liquor license hours from 8:00 p.m. to 10 :00 p.m. on Monday through Saturday. Our city code currently allows off -sale hours from 8 :00 a.m. to 8 :00 p.m. Monday through Thursday and until 10:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday. I have had requests from some of our license holders to change the city code to reflect the State Statute change. As you are aware, we are making various updates and revisions to the Intoxicating Liquor License Code and will be bringing it to you in June for consideration. This is a minor revision of the code and we would Tike to implement it expediently for the benefit of our off -sale license holders. The code, with revisions follows: Off -Sale Intoxicating Liquor Licenses -Code Revision Sec. 6 -116. Hours of sale. (b) No sale of intoxicating liquor may be made by an off -sale licensee: (1) On Sundays; (2) Before 8:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p.m. on Monday through Saturday; (4)(3) On Thanksgiving Day. (5} On Christmas Day, December 25; or bt4 on the eN 'iMg stleh &5 , ' - stfbseetien (b)(1) dffetfgh (;) ef is see" - . 614 ' 69 sale M&Y be ffiade tffitil 10.00 p.m., &ieept that fie off sale shall be made aftef: 8.00 p.m. en Ghfistmas Eve, Peeembef . (5) after 8 :00 p.m. on Christmas Eve, December 24. Consideration Suspend the rule found in Section 10 C. of the council Rules of Procedure for City Council Meetings requiring two readings of an ordinance change. Council may suspend the rule since the action would not result in a violation or conflict of any due process rule. Also include the proposed code revision in the motion. r .. TO: Department Heads FROM: Greg Copeland, Interim City Manager RE: PREPARATION OF 2007 BUDGET — PHASE 2 DATE: May 2, 2006 The 2007 Budget Preparation Instructions and Calendar are attached and generally track the format and requests for the current budget year. The City of Maplewood is facing significant budget challenges in 2007. Our costs for employee healthcare are rising and could exceed 2006 levels by 24% in 2007. Utility costs for our buildings are well over budget due to the same gas and electricity rate increases we all face at home. I have also become aware of large deferred building maintenance costs which have accumulated over several years. I am working with staff to develop a plan to protect these critical City facilities by making the required improvements. The City Council has not formally given a budget target and due to the fact that the Legislature has not completed its work and the Supreme Court has not ruled on the multi- million dollar tobacco healthcare fee /tax issue, it is too early to be precise in giving a concrete budget target in dollars. However, I want you to prepare budget requests that will allow the City Council to work within the existing property tax levy for general fund purposes. Departments that collect charges, fees, levy assessments, or have other revenue streams should update these fees and assessments to reflect inflation and/or real cost increases which you can document to propose increases. Departments, where practical, should consider activities which they are performing and what priority they have in their department's mission as the City Council will be examining service delivery in reviewing budget priorities in this time of limited Departments that wish to expand service levels and can produce a revenue stream to capture costs should develop proposals that do not require property tax funding. This is an opportunity to be creative and entrepreneurial in meeting any citizen demands for service which have not been considered in previous years. Departments should make their submission in such a manner as to indicate careful review of existing service levels, staffing levels, and use of technology to reduce staffing costs and increasing efficiency through direct citizen services using digital technology. Departments should look for any opportunity to organize their work or deliver services that take advantage of cooperative and/or sharing agreements to better accomplish the overall City service goals. Talk to your fellow department heads to explore areas where you can work together to deliver better services at lower costs. The City Council will meet in workshops with departments to hear presentations from you on your budget requests. The schedule for these will be forthcoming. The City Council has three members for which the 2007 Budget will be their first budget and they want to be in on the process at the beginning to ensure the finished product reflects their values and goals, within available resources for the citizens of Maplewood. Please review the budget preparation calendar. June I s ` is the due date for initial submissions. If you have questions on the instructions, contact Dan Faust, our Finance Director. Dan and I would request you to submit with your 2007 Budget, for each program, a list of cuts in priority that would reduce the program budget to an amount equal to the 2006 budget, in the event such reductions must be made. This will make any necessary allocation decisions more consistent with your department's priorities and performance objectives when viewed in the context of the overall City priorities as they are determined through the budget process. Enclosed with this memo are the following: 1. 2007 Budget Preparation Schedule 2. 2007 Budget Preparation Instructions for Department Heads 3. Small Equipment and Capital Outlay Request Forms 4. Personnel cost initial estimates for 2007 5. Computer printouts titled Expenditure by Account Again, contact Dan Faust, Finance Director if you have any questions regarding any of the above materials. CC: Administrative Assistants 2007 BUDGET PREPARATION SCHEDULE March 20 Assistant Finance Director prepares initial draft of Debt Service Budget. thru March 29 April 6 Finance Director analyzes prior year cash flow to determine size of General Fund balance needed for working capital in 2007 Budget. April 13 Interim City Manager sends department heads instructions for submission of budget information on department objectives and performance indicators. April 10 Finance Director supervises preparation of 2006 and 2007 personnel cost estimates and thru preliminary budget for the Employee Benefits Fund. April 21 April 24 Finance Director supervises preparation of budget worksheets and prepares budget thru instructions for department heads. April 28 April 28 Council -staff retreat to set priorities for CIP and Budget May 2 Interim City Manager distributes budget preparation materials to department heads. May 12 Department objectives and performance indicators due. May 8 Finance Director supervises preparation of preliminary revenue estimates. thru May 26 May 23 Interim City Manager and Finance Director meetings with department heads to discuss thru department objectives and performance indicators. May 25 May 31 Finance Director prepares initial draft of Capital Budget. thru June 2 BUDGET REQUESTS DUE AS FOLLOWS: June 1 Finance Director June 1 Information Technology Director June 2 Human Resources Director June 2 R.E.A.L. Director June 5 Fire Chief June 7 Public Works Director June 9 Police Chief June 12 Parks and Recreation Director June 14 Community Development Director June 16 Interim City Manager June 19 Finance Director prepares a preliminary report for the Interim City Manager on the thru Budget. June 20 June 20 Assistant Finance Director prepares preliminary proposal for increase in ambulance charges effective January 1, 2007. June 21 Finance Director advises department heads of planned budget revisions subject to receipt of additional information from department heads. 2007 Budget Preparation Schedule Page 2 June 22 Department heads prepare additional information for the Interim City Manager regarding thru planned budget revisions that they disagree with. Final General Fund revenue estimates June 23 prepared by Finance Director. June 26 Interim City Manager and department heads discuss budget requests. June 28 Interim City Manager and Finance Director meetings with department heads to discuss Thru budget requests. Final decisions made regarding Operating, Capital and Debt Service June 30 Budgets. July 5 Finance Department uses data from Interim City Manager to prepare data processing input thru to obtain printout of final draft of the Proposed Budget expenditures. Budget document July 21 pages submitted by departments are revised. H.R. budget increased for cost of pre- employment physicals for new positions added. July 24 At Council meeting, Interim City Manager reads press release on the budget and Council schedules special meetings to review the budget. July 24 Finance Department secretary makes final changes on all pages for the Proposed budget; thru also, Proposed Budget duplicated and assembled. July 31 August 1 Proposed Budget delivered to Council. Finance Director prepares written budget summary. August 2 Budget document sent to Maplewood library for citizens to review. Information on proposed budget added to city web site. August 3 Special Council meetings with City Manager and Finance Director to review the Proposed thru Budget and approve a proposed tax levy and budget. September 8 September 11 At regular Council meeting, the public hearing date on the proposed budget and proposed tax levy are approved by the Council. (Legal deadline is September 15.) September 14 Finance Director requests GTN to update budget video for public hearing. October Finance Director finalizes proposals for increases in license and permit fees. November 20 Deadline for the county auditor to mail a notice to each taxpayer. December 4 Public hearings and Council adoption of the Budget and tax levy. Legislature has reserved and these dates for cities. Finance Director arranges publication of public hearing notice not less December 11 than two, no more than six, business days before the first hearing. December 20 Finance Director prepares tax certification forms for Ramsey County. (Tax certification due Thru by December 29.) Summary Budget Statement published in accordance with the State December 21 Auditor's guidelines. Certification of Compliance with Truth in Taxation and Property Tax Levy Report requirements filed with State Department of Revenue. (Due by December 29.) C:"DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS`,LI ANSEN \LOCAL SETTINGS�TEYIPORARY INTERNET FILES \OLK1304 SCHEDULE.DOC Agenda Item N2 From: Steve Lukin Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 10:10 AM To: Greg Copeland Subject: Staff EOC Training Greg, As you are aware, on May 2 we had an EOC (Emergency Operation Center) training and exercise. This is the first time that this training has been provided to all the department heads, their second in command and other employees that would be actively involved in an emergency. We had 28 participants. This training was to provide them with the insight into the operation of an EOC and what their roles and responsibilities would be in the event that the EOC would be opened. We also had a mock tornado come through the city, in which participants had to take an active role by providing feedback and answering questions in how they would respond in the areas of their expertise. Chuck Ahl, Dave Thomalla and I meet on a bi- monthly basis to keep each other up -to -date with changes in emergency management that are essential to the city of Maplewood. Also in the past, we have done some short training meetings with department heads at our staff meetings. I would like to thank Jay Morson for his assistance in putting together the training and facilitating the mock tornado emergency. Our next step will be to have a training session for the city council to provide them with their roles and responsibilities in a disaster and how an EOC functions in an emergency. I was very pleased with the participation from everyone and I am very confident that in the event that the EOC would have to be opened, we are better prepared to meet the challenges. Thanks.