HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978 11-02 City Council Packet..AGENDA t
Maplewood City Council
7:30 P.M., Thursday, November 2, .1978
Municipal Administration Building
Meeting 78-30
(A)
CALL TO ORDER
(B)
RO CALL
(C)
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1, Minutes 78-26 ( September 14 )
(D)
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
(E)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
(F)
AWARDING OF BIDS
1. Sale of Used Squad Cars
(G)
APPROVAL OF A CCOUNTS
(H }
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Rezoning - M- l to R -1 -- 1111 E . County Road " C" - Second Reading
1 g
{Z)
VISITOR PRESENTATION
(J1)
NEW BUSINESS
1, Lot Divisions
a. South of the Gervais Avenue Alignment and Welst. of
English Street ( Rein Development Co.) _
2. Final_ Plat -- Revise Conditions ( Crestwood Knolls) _
3. Final Plat Union Cemetery
4., Moratorium on Hiring _
5. Certification. of Election Judges
6. Aerial Mapping
70 Disposal of Old Financial Records
t V)
r r) T 1"NT P T T. PP P CF TNTTA T T n N.q
MINUTES OF MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:.30 P.M., THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 1978
Council Chambers, Municipal Building
Meeting No. 78 -26
A. CALL TO ORDER
A special meeting of the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, was held in the
Council Chambers, Municipal Building, and was called to order at 7:31 P.M. by
Mayor Greavu.
B. ROLL CALL
John C. Greavu, Mayor Present
Norman G. Anderson, Councilman Present
Roger F. Fontaine, Councilman Present
Earl I. Nelson, Councilman Present
Donald J. Wiegert, Councilman Present
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mayor Greavu moved to approve the Agenda as amended:
1. Hazel and County Road B.
2. Record Keeping.
3. Labor Negotiations.
Seconded by Councilman Wiegert. Ayes - all.
D. PUBLIC HEARINGS..
1. Street Improvements - Maple Green Area - 7:30 P.M.
a. Mayor Greavu convened the meeting for a public hearing regarding
the construction of Sanitary Sewer, storm sewer, water main, curb, gutter,
and streets in Maryland Avenue from Century Avenue to Lakewood Drive;
Ivy Avenue from Ferndale Street to Century Avenue; Ferndale Street from
Maryland Avenue to Ivy Avenue; and Sterling Street from Stillwater Road
to Maryland Avenue. The Clerk read the notice of hearing along with the
dates of publication.
b. Mr. James Orr and Mr. Scott Harvy, Schoell and Madson, Inc., pre-
sented the specifics of the proposed improvement.
c. Commissioner Prew presented the following Planning Commission report:
Commissioner Rossow moved the Planning Commission recommend to the
City Council that the Maryland Avenue and Sterling Street improve-
ments of Alternative No. 1 do not conflict with the City's Plan.
The City Council at some later date, based upon more information as
to the future development of the Cave property, the property to the
north, and the completion of Barton Ashman Study, give consideration
to the improvements of Ferndale and Ivy as outlined in Alternative
No. 1.
Commissioner Prew seconded. Ayes - all.
- 1 - 9/14
d. Mr. San Cave spoke as to his need for Ferndale and Ivy to be construc-
ted to benefit his development.
e. Mr. Steve Oman, Maple Greens Development, spoke on behalf of the proposal.
f. Mayor Greavu called for proponents. None were heard.
g. Mayor Greavu called for opponents. The following presented their
opinions:
Mr. Ray Kaeder, 1083 Sterling Avenue
Mr. Mac Yeagle, 1084 Sterling Avenue
Mr. George Everett, representing the Maplewood- Ferndale Association
Mr. Bill Lorenz, President, Maplewood- Ferndale Association
Mr. Cal Newbauer, 1049 Sterling Avenue
Mr. Alf Hobbins, 2687 E. Maryland Avenue
Mr. Jerry Johnson, 2665 E. Maryland Avenue
Ramsey County Commissioner Hal Norgard spoke regarding the County's
concern of drainage going to Beaver Lake.
Mr. Roland Vogel, 2674 E. Maryland Avenue
Mr. Richard Kaeder, 2637 E. Geranium Avenue
Mrs. Charles Decker, 1034 Sterling Avenue
Mr. Murray Tannicichuk, Century East Apartments, 1237, - 1247 - 1257
No. Century Avenue
Mr. Dick Christensen, 2682 Maryland Avenue
Mrs. Sharon McGinnis, 2695 Maryland Avenue
Mr. John Mortensen, 2638 E. Geranium Avenue
h. Mayor Greavu closed the public hearing.
i. Mayor Greavu introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption
78 -9 -183
WHEREAS, after due notice of public hearing on the construction of sanitary
sewer, storm sewer, watermain, curb and gutter, and streets on Maryland Avenue
from Century Avenue to Lakewood Drive; Ivy Avenue from Ferndale Street to Cen-
tury Avenue; Ferndale Street from Maryland Avenue to Ivy Avenue; and Sterling
Street from Stillwater Road to Maryland Avenue, a hearing on said improvement
in accordance with the notice duly given was duly held on September 14, 1978,
and the Council has heard all persons desiring to be heard on the matter and
has fully considered the same;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA,
as follows:
1. That it is advisable, expedient, and necessary that the City of
Maplewood construct streets, curb and gutter and all necessary
appurtenances on Maryland Avenue from Century Avenue to Lakewood
Drive; Ferndale Street from Maryland Avenue to Ivy Avenue, Ivy
Avenue from Ferndale Street to Century Avenue; and Sterling Street
from Maryland Avenue to 308 feet South of Geranium Avenue.
2. The City Engineer is designated engineer for this improvement
and is hereby directed to prepare final plans and specifications
for the making of said improvement.
- 2 - 9/14
3. This improvement is hereby designated to be apart of Project No. 77 -12 and Project No.
78 -2.
Seconded by Councilman Nelson. Ayes — all.
j. Councilman Fontaine introduced the following resolution and moved its ado tp ion:
WHEREAS, after due notice of public hearing on the construction of sanitary sewer, storm
sewer, watermain, curb and gutter, and streets on Maryland Avenue from Century Avenue to
Lakewood Drive; Ivy Avenue from Ferndale Street to Century Avenue; Ferndale Street from
Maryland Avenue to Ivy Avenue; and Sterling Street from Stillwater Road to Maryland Avenue,
a hearing on said improvement in accordance with the notice duly given was duly held on
September 14, 1978, and the Council has heard all persons desiring to be heard on the matter and
has fully considered the same;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA, as follows:
1. That it is advisable, expedient, and necessary that the City of Maplewood construct
sanitary sewer, storm sewer, watermain and all necessary appurtenances in the area of
Maryland Avenue, from Century Avenue to Lakewood Drive; Ferndale Street from Maryland
Avenue to Ivy Avenue; Ivy Avenue from Ferndale Street to Century Avenue; and Sterling
Street from Maryland Avenue to 308 feet South of Geranium Avenue.
2. The City Engineer is designated engineer for this improvement and is hereby directed to
prepare final plans and specifications for the making of said improvement.
3. This improvement is hereby designated to be apart of Project No. 77 -12 and Project No,
78 -2.
Seconded by Councilman Wiegert. Ayes — all.
k. Mayor Greavu moved to rescind his motion of approving the he improvement.
Seconded by Councilman Anderson.
Ayes — Mayor Greavu, Councilman Nelson.
Nays — Councilmen Anderson, Fontaine and
Wiegert.
Motion failed.
Mayor Greavu recessed the meeting for 5 minutes at 11:10 P.M.
Mayor Greavu reconvened the meeting at 11:25 P.M.
E. VISITOR PRESENTATION
-3- 9/14
1. Mr. Robert Rugloski
a. Mr. Rugloski, anc. insurance agent, requested information on the ad for bids
for the Maplewood City Employees' health plans.
b. Council referred the matter to the City Attorney for handling.
F. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
1. Brown Property - Keller Parkway
a. Councilman Anderson questioned fir the Water Tower assessment for Project
No. 75 -16 could be deleted from Mr. Brown's property as the back property is
a ponding area.
b. The assessment for Mr. Brown was handled in accordance with Council's
policy.
C. No action taken.
2. Peterson, 2091 Belmont Lane
a. Councilman Anderson moved first reading of an ordinance to rezone the
at 2091 Belmont Lane from M -1 and Farm to R -1 (single residence)
Seconded by Mayor Greavu. Ayes - all.
3. Ramsey County
a. Council commented on the lawsuit filed by Ramsey County regarding appealing
the assessments for Water Imp. 75 -16.
4. Hazel and County Road B.
a. Mayor Greavu questioned progress on the Hazel and County Road B problem.
b. Staff stated the sod would be placed as soon as possible.
5. Record Keeping
a. Mayor Greavu questioned if records of sich leave and vacation are kept on
all City employees.
b. Staff stated records are kept on all employees.
6. Labor Negotiations
a. Mayor Greavu questioned what the hang -up is on the Public Work's
negotiations.
b. Staff presented a progress report.
G. ADJOURNMENT
12:00 Midnight.
City Clerk
- 4 - 9/14
October 30, 1978
STAFF REPORT
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Acting City Manager
Subject: Sale by Bidding of Used Police vehicles
As has been the P ractice -the past few years,, the used police vehicles were
placed with Minnesota Auto Salvage Pool, 2384 English Street. They were
advertised in the ' S t . Paul newspapers, and the following bids were
received:
Pool Number 2440 - 1975 Plymouth Sedan
*10 D Y ke's Auto, 1- 507 - 372 -29364 $ 412.00
r Pool Number 2441 - 1977 Plymouth Wagon
_ - *1. Allied Salvage, 521 -8811 $13,388.88
2. H. Chaner, Northern Auto Parts 1,229.99
3. D ke' s Auto 917.10
y .
4. Peter Stewart, 1061 Ohio Street, WSP. 810.00
5, Charles Hlolark, 738 -1855 600.00
Pool Number 2442 - 1977 Plymouth Wagon
*1, Allied Salvage, 521 -8811 $1,388.88
2. H. Chaner, Northern Auto Parts 1,229-99
3. E. E., 1848 Prosperity Avenue 1,000.00
4. Dyke's Auto 902.10
5. Edward Mitchell, 216 Westchester, SP 835.00
Pool Number 2443 - 1977 Plymouth Wagon
*1. Allied Salvage, 521 -8811 $1,388.88
2. H. Chaner, Northern Auto Parts 1,
'852olO
r 30 Dyke's Auto
4. Peter Stewart, 1061 Ohio Street, WSP 735.00
Pool- Number- 2444 - - -- 19.7 7_ P 1ymout Wagon -
- - - -
1. Allied Salvage, 521 -8811 $1,388.88
2. Northern Auto Parts 1 1 229.99
30 D y ke's Auto 912.10
Staff recommends, based on the above, that we accept the bids from Allied
Salvage in the amount of $1,388.88 for each of the 1977 Plymouth wagons and
the sale bid from Dyke' s Auto in the amount of $412.10 for the 1975 Plymouth
sedan.
Action by Council
E n d o r 3 e
Modif ed-..,
Re j e c t e d..._ _ ___, „
Da e
i
i
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Counci
FROM: Acting City Manager
-
SUBJECT: Rezoning (Second Readi ng
LOCATION: 1117 E. County Road C
APPLICANT: Leon Mi
DATE: October 24, 1978
The City .. Council gave first reading to a rezoni from M -1 , Light Manufacturing
to R -1 , Single Family Residential on October 19, 1978. The on gi nal staff
p
re ort is enclosed. Staff would recommend that the Council give the proposed
A
rezoning second reading.
4-
_r
End-or S
Yod if i
j ec-te
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Ci ty Counci 1
FROM: Acting City Manager :.
SUBJECT: zone Change .(M -1 -to R-1)
LOCATION: 1117 E. County Road C
APPLICANT: Leon
DATE: September 14, 1978
Request
The applicant is requesting approval to rezone a portion of his property presently
zoned f °, -1 , Light I ndus tri al to R--1 , Si ng 1 e Fami ly Res i denti al . Staff is requesting
that the si,ial l M-1 zoned portion of the adjacent lot to the west also be rezoned to
R -1.
4
Existing Land Use
1. There are two parcels involved. Each is occupied with a single family dwelling.
2. The subject parcels are deep lots measuring 70 by 1284 feet and have lot areas
of 2.47 acres each.
r Proposal `
1. The applicant is proposing to change the zoning of the southerly end of his
property at 1117 E. County Road C from M -1 to R -1.
2. Staff is proposing that the southerly end of the parcel at 1111 County Road
C also be rezoned from M -1 to R -1.
�- Surrounding Development
Northerly: Undeveloped Land
he -r1 -y C-o -u-n ty- R'o- a -d —C=a n-A-S i -n-g 1 -e -- Fa-m 1 y dw-e— l- l4n -gs -
-_Easte - l-y Undeveloped land and -- Highway 61
Westerly: Single fatliily dwellings
Pl anning Considerations
1. The southerly portions of both, lots (the developed areas) are zoned M-1, Li ht
I ndu -s tri a l and R-1. Single Fame l.y Resi den ti a l ( see map) . The remaining nor �herly
p.arti ons are zoned F, Farm Residential
2. The Comprehensi Land Use Pl an designation for the portions of both lots proposed
for the rezoning is Rm, Medium Density Residential. The northerly portions
are designated . as OS, Open Space.
,,. ,,.. ... ... . . .. ..•.•_.. . ..... - .•.v t..y i.N •... ..... - r r ! yw ...... ...., . • W.. r f r ~ _ ..•;. n-tn. w.r .. ...y .e.w....r... - .... ..a gr.....nn ,. .. w. ^N•+r ANi'.w+It•. f' 4J.. InT1►'I- rl.V+s ..n...lar 4"'. . Iw... ... .rin ... ... .+-.v- "..... . ..
l ' 3. ,The a pplicant is planning on building a garage on his property at 1117 E. County
Road C i n the M--1 zoned area. Since residenti uses . are not permitted in an
M -1 zone the applicant's dwelling is a nonconforming building and use,
40 Section 915.010 (11) of the City Code defines . a' nonconforming building
or use as, "A building or a use of land or of a building existing at the
effective date of this ordinance, which does not conform with the require -- l
ments of thi ordinance, or a use authorized under--- l 1 hereof."
a
50 Section 912.010 5 dealing with the extension of a nonconforming.use states,
"No existing building or premises devoted to a use not peri �i tied in the di strict
i n which such bui l di n or premises is located, except when required by law or
g
order shall be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, substituted or structurally
al tered unless the use thereof is changed to a use permitted in the, district
in which such building or premises is located,, except as provi dod .•herein . "
6. The applicant, therefore , must get the -M--1 zoned portion of, his property
rezoned to R-1 in order to construct the new garage,
Analysis
r The p rezoning is consistent with the City's Land Use P l a n and would
. p p g
al low the applicant better use of his property. Staff is also reconimendi ng the
rezoning of the adjacent M -1 land to the west. To leave that small triangular
portion of land zoned M -1 would be contrary to the Comprehensive Plan . and be
of no value as industrial property.
Recommendation
Ap of the proposed zone change from M -1 to R -1 for both of the subject parcels.
pp p p
..- o�.•* vw�•. qh• h• L�. r• y+......N.• 4Y. Mr, �• y.. �.«.....•+ r+., wM• r••+ yr.........•«. �. c,.`•.. �N�v; �"•, �t"{' �f'••. r..-.....•:.. w, �;.. ns••..... c....f..>•... �.. �.. wr;• �., tyr�ryr ay7, v.,<.., r. h• eAn:., r,• v, 1. �. r».• ClFt •ae•a....,•+re•!.«*•.s•o +w►�+.. i.+a�7rr�TV•rrre7"w :r<.. . .re vD'tyJr•a w..x+.v.,N•wTt•.: IfV•" Y •�nrlL•Jt.+:..'iWw+a YYn..•.�- rW..�•V.,.., •. � •• ^
, �i .. •..,� >. �ry>!"•'• v., y. �y, )y.ar,rtYJ-8'7r.+•Nrr- •'O.,•.., ...ti . .
i
I
Notice is hereby. given that the Maplewood City Council wl 11 conduct
a public nearing on Thursday, October '19 , 1978 at 7:45 P.M, in the Council
Chambers of the Maplewood Municipal Bui 1 di ng .located at 1380 Frost Avenue
Maplewood, Minnesota.
The purpose of said hearing shall be for the City Council to publicly
hear and consider all remakrs regarding a petitioned change in zoning
r district classification filed by:
APPLICANT: Leon Mills
1117 E. County Road C
Maplewood , Minnesota 55109
REQUESTED ZONING CLASSIFICATION: R -1, Single Family Residence
EXISTING ZONING CLASSIFICATION: M-11, Light Manufacturing
PROPOSED REZONE PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Subject to County Road C the E
70 feet of W.1/2 of SW 1/4 of SE
1/4 of Section 4, Township 29
Range 22.
Subject--to Co-unt Road C the W
_70 - feet of the _E 140 -feet of Gd
.1/2 of SW 1/4 of SE 1/4 of*
Section 4, Township 29, Range .22
MORE COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS 1111 E. County Road C
1117 E. County Road C -
ANY PERSONS HAVING INTEREST IN THIS MATTER
ARE INVITED TO ATTEND AND BE HEARD
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
�r
19 VADNAIS HEIGHTS (bi
L
o
BEAM
• 60
Kohlmcn
Gervois
Lck
Lake
� f
✓ ✓-
✓_w..`._.�� _ K LMQN AVE.
IKZ •. ,. .1.....v 1 � r.- vrww, •+ ✓ti .r ✓rte /
J R• ct \ - to
-_- - �, p ROAD
J W
LU
Ld o w
ui
GERVQIS
AVE.
RD, 82
ma
w
•
WING —Keller , p j LARK AVE
Q
- L7ke.,_v _ 2 - COL)N 1 Y
_WVV_•1.1N � .
✓✓ �`
ELELAND a K�-- 25 z f
JUNCTION AVE.
.
B U R K E AV.
_ BU RKE
'"� J Q• ts, i
ELDRIDG
4.4
N r.
BELMONT
�4 ...._ �1,A14 we > AELMO
KILLMA N S. �N Vc. v SKILLhlA i
f7 K w D LA.
er �
9 -14 -78
DATE
i
SCALE PG
..v _. .« .. � _.. - - .. ... ?. - .. -" . A ' ti. •z• .. ... .;•a .'1 r :t .. .. ,.. � /••..n f ` r .. � •!:.<.....: .:e•. ♦.vvrr• ...- 7•_r••. r•y�- ...�.•_...+•.+..r.....,,.',•!^. 1, .• /�►• -- ... �! _ .. �. i;
� ti
• .r w• ..w ,� r � M r• M r Mr 1.•• •.w. w. w r •.r w ..�.�..�.....wr� ...,.
•
' •
� N
c 6c e Dol
( 1.
00 O Q�
Toto,t z- 1 c►c_ .
• N •
n►p
• Z$
y 1 .9.4- oc .
. J
' r o
o
• !iCO O •
+
�
• tat
(' µ
9 -14 -78
DATE
T�
p \i .
S
. .. .. .. -. .. .. �- t. . •. ....., ... ... .. .._ ... .. .. ... _ ... ... .. . ,t. ... -... . .., ,.. .•.a+w. �•.• 1. -e ... I•s�.•.�i..�+W. {a .. ..� �. -...., ♦- r, ..w. .... ... �. � �.� t4'j•�� .
FT
E A t19• c. :
0
0 •
a
�
�
.,�
� u
ci
a�
fill
1117
V4r`
t
v
N
--
.60
O
Apo.""'-
• �
/ �• 11 ;`
,•
IT 1
X
t
(' µ
9 -14 -78
DATE
T�
p \i .
S
. .. .. .. -. .. .. �- t. . •. ....., ... ... .. .._ ... .. .. ... _ ... ... .. . ,t. ... -... . .., ,.. .•.a+w. �•.• 1. -e ... I•s�.•.�i..�+W. {a .. ..� �. -...., ♦- r, ..w. .... ... �. � �.� t4'j•�� .
FT
It.DJO rNING PROP 01MER
REZONE P EUT Ion t
( PETITION F
F ,
;• ➢4 wood
Y
4
owner
collectively represent 50% o� more of the
fie, the undersigned property own Y "
• of the re quested. rezone property described
adjoining property . owners within 200 feet
• accordance with Section 915 of the Maplewood
on the attached application in
Municipal Code.
•I F
change e ' n official za ' ng cl.assi� .catia�Z
. -: -- '� petition the Maple wood City. Council f o g
on the attached described property from N .
- ,'' zoning to
zona.ng .
• nstituted land owners , on the certif ied abstract
Our names can be verified, as legal co which is re uired
• nd within 350 f eet of the requested rezone area) q
(listing owners of la
A. ..�. -� nct on with the rezone application and this p
.o etition.
bc. ��1ed �.r� con�
• `s name on this p etition is indication of that
The written signature of any . person p
Ts understanding of the proposed zone, the proposed location and an endorse
-
..,r s o n
�- ment for approval of such change* ABSTRACT CERT .
LIST NO
SIGI�TUR F. PRINT NAME .
i • .
.�
`1
w
JAME-S L-K
q -F
Alf
r
I
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1978 7:30 P.M.
.
1380 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD,MINNESOTA
1. CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chairman Prew called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M.
F
r
20 ROLL CALL
Commissioner Lester Axdahl Absent
Commissioner Richard Barrett Present
Commissioner Paul E l l efson Absent
Commissioner Lorraine Fischer Present
Commissioner 14i 11 i am Howard Present
Commissioner Edward Ki shel Present
Commissioner Beverly Kroi ss Present
Commissioner Joseph Pel 1 i sh Present
Commissioner Duane Prew Present (Chairman)
Commissioner Kenneth Rossow Absent
Commissioner Gary Sherburne Absent
3, APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Barrett moved approval of the agenda as presented
Commissioner Kishel seconded Ayes all.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
6. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
7* COMMUNICATIONS .
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Zone to R - ) Chan g e (M-1 1 -- 1117 E . County Road C (Mills )
Secretary Olson said the applicant is requesting approval to rezone a
portion of his property which is zoned M-1. Light Manufacturing to R-1, Single
Family Residential . Staff is requests ng that - the small M -1 zoned portion of
the adjacent property, 1111 E. County Road C, also be rezoned to R -1 . Both
parcels s are presently occupied with single family dwell i ngs . Staff feels
the zone change would be in conformance with the Comprehensive, Plan, therefore,
recommend approval.
Mr. Mills said the owner to the west, 1111 E. County Road C, does agree
to the rezoning of his parcel.
'Chairman Prew asked if the owner of 1111 E County Road C had been
contacted by the City,
. 1
it '
Secretary Olson said yes and he does agree to the rezoning.
Comilli ssi oner Pel 1 i sh asked if the owner to the west should also join in
the petition or present his petition for a zone change so it would not have
to be -reviewed again .by the Commission.
r
Secretary Olson said the zone change for the property,. 1111 E. County Road
C, is initiated by Staff, therefore it i not neces•s ary for that owner to
submit a separate application. The public hearing notice would include both
parcels, for. zone change.
Commissioner Howard moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the
Ci t Co uncil approval of the a_ phi cati on fQr ro oni nq_ to ..�, -1 : Si Hale Falb- -
Residenti _ of th parts_ 1111 E Cou Road C_ a nd _1 E. C oun ty Road C_
th at are zoned M- l , Li qht Manufacturi since the P l a n n i n g Commi "s s i on
finds that the proposed rezoning to be consistent with the Maplewood
�.�. e sive Dau--and wuld ---- enabla--the to make better use of the
.oro.perties.
Commissioner Pel l i sh seconded Ayes all
9. OLD BUSINESS
A. Street vacation - Barclay Street (Liptak)
Secretary Olson said the applicant is requesting approval of vacation of
Barclay Street from Laurie Road to Cope Avenue. The Commission previously
reviewed a request for vacation of just a portion of this street, 130 to 133
feet of right --of -way .from Laurie Road north. The-Commission at that time
asked the applicant to expand on his petition to Cope Avenue. There i's
presently a well worn pedestrian trail across the right -of -way. Staff
is recommending vacation of the street, subject to retaining a 30 foot
walkway-utility easement.
Jim Liptak, 1487 E. Laurie Road, said he started the petition. He did
researched with the State of Minnesota as to proposals for Hazelwood and
traffic flow projected through 1983. He said they have no specific studies
�• proposed until after 1983. �n 1970 or 1973 there. was a brief study done on
the possible location of an interchange at Hazelwood and Highway The
plan that was approved at. that time was to have a bridge constructed
over Highway 36 for Hazelwood. This would not be constructed. prior to 1990's .
-- Therefore traffic flow w i l l not be affected by vacation of. - this - portion of
Barclay Street. The idea of this petition was to get away from the nuisance
that exists with the walkway. They have also been maintaining the property.
` Raymond Robertson, 1470 Lark, said he wished the vacation of the street
to keep cars from driving through. There have also been motorcycles goi ng
through. He has also had a problem with vandalism. He thought if a
walkway would be installed, the problem would still exist.
Shirley Li nanski , 1486 Cope, said she would also l i k e the street
vacated.
Dennis Peterson, 1480 Lark, said he would like to see the vacation
approved. He has had vandalism at his property.
Mr. Liptak said he did talk with Owens Fami and other fami 1 i es ,, they
also wish the vacation approved.
.. .. � :k. .. .. .•-. '.N••., w.9'.1• ^f. .r ..n >. "!•., .. .. .. v. .e � w•,...,w ....... ........ ..... .... ... «... ... .�.�..... .. . . �.. .,.. •.n ,......... ,. -..... �.- ... .. .... ... _ .. .., __.,. .,. _... -. .. , .... .... � .......... r .. . +t ._... .`.. �.. ,. .... ,.... .. ._ ...,•� „ .._ .. .. .. �. . 'rt
MEMORANDUM
TO Mayor and City Council
FROM: Acting City Manager
SUBJECT: Lot Division �.
APPLICANT: C. G. Rein Development Co.
LOCATION: South of the Gervai s. Avenue alignment and West of English Street.
DATE: October - 27, 1978
e
Req uest
est
The applicant requests approval to divide one lot into two to combine. with three
adjacent parcels.
Existing Land Use
1. The subject property total 3.56 acres and has .620 feet of frontage along
undevel open' Gervai s Avenue.
2. The subject property is undeveloped.
Proposal
1. The applicant is proposing to divide the subject flag shaped lot i nto two
lots aid indicated (see map )
2. The proposed westerly lot is to be joined with the property owned by the
Asphalt Driveway Company to the south, and the small 40 foot parcel directly
to the west. Thi -s will create an "L" shaped lot totaling 3.58 acres.
3. The proposed easterly l is to be joined with the property owned by Metcalf-
Mayflower to the south, and also the adjacent parcel directly to the East.
1-letcal f -Mayf lower will then own an eleven acre tract -for their operation.
4. The subject property, presently, does not have frontage on an improved and
maintained roadway.
5. The proposed lots w i l l not be-landlocked,. however, since their future owners
presently have frontage on' the Highway 36 frontage road.
Surrounding Development .
Northerly: Undeveloped Gervai s Avenue. North of Gervai s Avenue is undeveloped
land.
Southerly George Martens Construction, Asphalt Driveway Company, and Metcalf-
Mayflower.
Easterly: Open Space and Berg- Torseth Company
Westerly: M M Development Warehouse buildings.
P1 anni ng Considerations
_- 1. The subject property is zoned M -1, Light Manufacturing.
2. The Land Use Plan has designated that this property develop as LSC, Limi ted
J
Service Commercial Center.
_ 3. Section 501.030 of the City Code states that, "No building permits will be
issued for any construction wi thin the village unless the building site is
located adjacent to an existing street which is dedicated and maintained. as
a village street, or unless provision for street construction has been made
in full compl 'i ance with this Code and in no-case until grading work as provided
herein has been .completed and certified to the clerk by the village engineer;
except that in isolated instances the council may enter an agreement with a
property owner for special handling of an unusual situation which agreement
shall be recorded so as to run with the 1 and affected."
Public Works Considerations
.Y 10 Presently, there is a study being conducted on the feasibility of putting
-. Gervai s Avenue through from Highway 61 to English Street.
9-.
2. It is anticipated that this roadway will be constructed next year.
Analysis
Formally, Staff would not recommend approval of this type of division, since the
proposed lots do not have frontage on an improved street. However, since the
adjacent property owners to the south are planning on buying the new lots and
joining them with their existing property, the chance of l andlocki ng property
will not occur.
Staff feels that it should be made a condition of this approval that new deeds
be recorded indicating the joining of the proposed westerly lot with parcels
030-20 (owned by Asphalt Driveway Company) and 050-23; and the joini ng of the pro-
posed easterly lot with parcels 05020 (owned by Metcalf - Mayflower) and parcel
030-24. By doing so the proposed lots will not be landlocked..
Recommendati on
Approval of the proposed division, provided that the new deed shall. be recorded
showing the joining of the proposed westerly lot with parcels 030 -20 and 050 -23
and the proposed eas.terly lot with parcels 050 -20 and. 030 -24.
Action by Council:
• Endorsed
R e t edC
2
., fro
w w
Q LSROOK A� '
...
22 / ; J
tt
W
6
GEF.VAIS AV E.
G RANDVIEWr AV
�� f � ��
CO. R n
V N D�i
w t
i
BURKE AV.
cn ELDRf rLV
w-- s BEL ,
,SKILLMAN
all T
W.
W w o 60
r c1 w cr'
BELL a j
ltJ
t x
lxJ �
J >>
' Q
• KING wJ cTQN AV E, v I
I
N� PR +lCE AVE. 4 O
�~ E 30 !
F--'iF— 7/ V-'
SHE F R= V E! r
-- �1( e . .--- // •-" t I COPE V E
il_ARK AVE. LARK
_
Lake 25 v - - COUNTY 0 , i! t--1 � LAUPIE
.--- -- o
u c���l� GI �L ELAND � ,P n i � 2� L A � D 1 ; �,.4 1 + i
JrJ I A` EE
11 �l ;
.J lRKE — }
"_ p •,a,fl `'� H E'LDRiDG IE J� •AtiiE. o'
Ld I
I ,
j , tF EL T� IQFJ IT' �j lA1�'E. ti'� 9
' v cr
/ K r
` = SK �cn�j:,Vr. v S AV
D D L A. - / �„ �. A 1 g
R Y LAJ
L S
FROST v !`� , A VE to ct? I G� 1 �-- cn i cf) f
•. J --, - --�- -- L , -
/
73 o il �) 9
:11 r �� St,� �, 1%,n E ? i�� I
Q I 1, J� o , r ;f.� 2 � Q m FRISBIE AV E. �` z
:zl elk
i 27 LR I t LEY
V L C ft @ ��,�� i____� S 0 � A H I A S T. _ ..s I o
Ro un _ �, �,. __._ -1 � v Y I �•:� -CA e
SOP `~�A ST.
7::, Lake • -= Pry; a I e r ��-- _�\ Z
PRI - LCE AVE
NTEU
7fr ::,
6
t
4
w w
Q LSROOK A� '
...
22 / ; J
tt
W
6
GEF.VAIS AV E.
G RANDVIEWr AV
�� f � ��
CO. R n
V N D�i
w t
i
BURKE AV.
cn ELDRf rLV
w-- s BEL ,
,SKILLMAN
all T
W.
W w o 60
r c1 w cr'
BELL a j
ltJ
t x
lxJ �
J >>
' Q
• KING wJ cTQN AV E, v I
I
N� PR +lCE AVE. 4 O
�~ E 30 !
F--'iF— 7/ V-'
SHE F R= V E! r
-- �1( e . .--- // •-" t I COPE V E
il_ARK AVE. LARK
_
Lake 25 v - - COUNTY 0 , i! t--1 � LAUPIE
.--- -- o
u c���l� GI �L ELAND � ,P n i � 2� L A � D 1 ; �,.4 1 + i
JrJ I A` EE
11 �l ;
.J lRKE — }
"_ p •,a,fl `'� H E'LDRiDG IE J� •AtiiE. o'
Ld I
I ,
j , tF EL T� IQFJ IT' �j lA1�'E. ti'� 9
' v cr
/ K r
` = SK �cn�j:,Vr. v S AV
D D L A. - / �„ �. A 1 g
R Y LAJ
L S
FROST v !`� , A VE to ct? I G� 1 �-- cn i cf) f
•. J --, - --�- -- L , -
/
73 o il �) 9
:11 r �� St,� �, 1%,n E ? i�� I
Q I 1, J� o , r ;f.� 2 � Q m FRISBIE AV E. �` z
:zl elk
i 27 LR I t LEY
V L C ft @ ��,�� i____� S 0 � A H I A S T. _ ..s I o
Ro un _ �, �,. __._ -1 � v Y I �•:� -CA e
SOP `~�A ST.
7::, Lake • -= Pry; a I e r ��-- _�\ Z
PRI - LCE AVE
NTEU
7fr ::,
a _;r
C.G. REIN DEVELOPMENT CO.
P ETITIONER
LOT DIVISION
REQUEST
cm - ;
SOUTH OF GERUAI S
WEST OF ENGLISH
srj
1 7 7:
- 6e
D A T • 0 - ,
PG.
CS C:A :LE��
y
17
c, o
18
o
Z
2C)
0 0
{,
_°
O
. ��
_
CEO�
a
04 4
r j
►
— 7-4
cJ
-
60
•�
'
•
f .moo ac.
c o
_
�
CO
5 5 C L
C>
4—e-o
11 � 7 _ � � 5 9 0?
1 9
I ;�
1 ti
�;
Lt
.' ,
110
N "mot'
rR� yc
Ln
Of
fi N
ro
t
{
'T
•
�.
�
�.�..:, r� !. 4C C . mss _. . �...�t !� �
r r n !:� C.
... -'•"••- "
• EXCP Qkiitl� \
d 0 '.
C.G. REIN DEVELOPMENT CO.
P ETITIONER
LOT DIVISION
REQUEST
cm - ;
SOUTH OF GERUAI S
WEST OF ENGLISH
srj
1 7 7:
- 6e
D A T • 0 - ,
PG.
CS C:A :LE��
a �J
`3 L1
.
1
1
0 30 •�.- ._.
r
i rz
1
L
0
r x*
. a
ca
Lh AA
o Acce-
_ e.
.. .+.....a ...
rP ` {_2�1 1.3 a a tt
b
�xce� - {aktin I `
e Q --� 010
� .
r 4 rJt, p:�l.a tai �'. 1 /49Q/ 1 _
d'
c l
426 0
I g o
E - -27 -78
T E
SLE r P'C' j
+mgt:✓
IT
MEMORANDUM
T0: Mayor and Ci ty Counci 1
FROM: Acting City Manager.
SUBJECT: Final Plat - Revision of Condition .. 4
LOCATION: Mailand Road M
i
APPLICANT: Jack Dielentheis .(Dawn Development, Inc.)
PROJECT: Crestwood K n o l l s
DATE: October 17, 1978
Re ug es t
Th e applicant i s re requesting n approval of a revision to condition 4 of the final plat
q g pp
approval, given by the Council on Apri 1 29, 1976. Council had required a driveway-
walkway easement between lots 5, 6 17 and 18 of block 2 to provide a second means
of access between Teakwood Drive and Oakri dge Drive (see enclosed map} . Please
refer to the enclosed letter from the applicant describing his .request.
If this request were approved, there would be 1147 feet of street, from Teakwood
Drive to ro c =sed Hi 1 lwood Drive, with only one means of access. Normally, this
p p
is a situation that we are trying to avoid for public safety reasons. The
construct ion of proposed Hillside Drive will resolve this problem. A feasibility
p
study for Hillside Drive has already been ordered. If Council' approves the
project, construction would probably start next summer.
There is some precedence in this case. Council recently approved a temporary
dead end street for the Van Dahl Addition on McKnight Road and a permanent
cul -de -sac of 700 feet for the Rehnberg Addition on County Road B.
Past Actions
Council tabled the preliminary plat for study of the entire question of
2-1-73:
C p y p
utilities, Mai 1 and Road, the road to the south of this project and that the property
owners i nvol ved are cal 1 ed to f nd out what they wi sh to do wi th thei r property.
6 -7 -73: The p ref i'mi nary plat was denied by Council on the basis that:
1. It i s p remature in terms of available improvement (or ordered) street access;
2 . Commits excessive l a n d to streets;
3. Encourages land development .which is in excess of designated maximum
residential density population provided in the Plan for Maplewood; and
4. Promotes excessive grading and destruction of existing vegetation.
8 -8 -74: Council denied a revised preliminary plat, as being premature in terms
of availability of street. and sewer services, has excessive land areas devoted to
-streets and does not provide for adequate protection of existing terrain and
natural vegetative cover.
1-14-76: District Court required the City to approve , the plat on the basis that
all subdivision regulations were, met.
4- 29 -76: Counci 1 approved the final plat, subject to the fol 1 owi ng conditions-.
1
-771
tR7.
and uti 1 i t easements of a minimum 12 foot width shall be prov
1 . Drainage y .
alon all rear lot li nes.
S imilar 12 foot wide easements Shall be provided
g
along side lot lines as required by City Engineer;
' i initiate rezoning of subject property to R--1. Si ng1Te Family
2. City Council shall
Residential;
k 1 and the drainage a.0 utility easements associated.
. 3. Lots 1 , 2, 13 and 14 of Bloc g _ Y
a
with these lots shall be redes i g ned to eliminate the cross 1 of easement and
al i n said easement with property l ines;
4. The temporary easement in Block. 2 connecting Teakwood Drive and Oakri dge.
Drive shall be indicated as a permanent easement. Improvement plans for the
driveway - walkway to be approved by City staff;
50 The City Engineer shall review and approve the final design of the storm
water retention p ond. There shall be two lots facing Mail and 104 by 100
foot depth and one lot facing Teakwood_ with 100 foot depth by 108.77 feet and
rest dedicated to City as pondi ng lot on Teakwood, so placed as to fall in
design of the po ndi ng • area ;
6. A 15 foot corner property line radius shall be provided on all corner lots;
7. The applicant and owner shall agree to the above conditions._ in wri ti.ng .
6-27-76 The subject property was rezoned from F, Farm - Residential to R-1, Si ngl e
7 � p p Y
Dwelling Residential .
f \t.\,, Viillil\.Itd. , . v i wig
Approval to eliminate the proposed driveway - walkway on the basis that:
1. The ro osed driveway would ruin four lots, because of the steep contours.
p p
2. Hillside Dri is anticipated to be constructed this summer.
Acton by Co Unc l l01
Re u e c V e LA-e a�e+.ew
a � a�:s�R7A'J
.�
D �, u e, -.
2
Dawn D evelopment Company., Inc.
486 Lakewood Drive / Maplewood, Minnesota 55119 / 612 - 739 -2700
October 5, 1978.
Mr. Geoff Olson
Director of Community Development
City of Maplewood
1380 Frost Avonue
0
Maplewood, Minnesota 5511 -1 9
Dear Geoff:
As we have discussed in the past, there s a tremendous problem
in trying to instal'_ the temporary access from Teakwood Drive
to Oakridge Drive. As you wi. l recall, this-temporary access is
to be loca �;ed on a 15' easement between Lots 17 and 18 and between'`'
Lots 5 and 6 all in Block 2 of Crestwood Knolls.
From its point of origination at Teakwood Drive the elevation on my
topography map is shown as 4 and its exit at Oakridge Drive is
shown as 34.8. This indicates a.change in grade of 1.3.5' in a
distance of 231.54 To accomplish this change in grade will.mean
cutting a tremendous swath through some beautifully wooded land
and, according to Suburban Engineering, I will have to allow at
least a one --to --one ratio on the side slopes, in order to accommodate
this temporary access. This will mean, for all practical purposes,
ruining four beautiful building sites.
It is my understanding that Hillwood Drive will be constructed as
one of the first projects in 1979, and, since the first occupancy
in Phase II will not occur until February of 1979, I am requesting
that the City of Maplewood reconsider the requirement for the temp—
orary access from Teakwood Drive to Oakridge Drive.
c rely,
J. H. Diel theis
President`
• • V
1
LOWE AFTC RD
l.ONOIN L A ti r
r±•�^ ♦ W
P0 N r, C
.� U
I (may •••
.. 0 0
CC
(
?3 23 .
LINWOOD AVE.
,. L AVE 7 2
( � � v ! Z
UAHL I978
cl
T28h UU
' 127
Z R22W 13(18 -R21%r
PHYL1
/f78
•
:.CT
72
HIGHWO AVE 74
J, 'Q AV MIE
I ST.
SOUTHCREST� R.
Corer
L BOX WOOD Lohe L-0-
AVE.
494
Pik I
o
a •
r
.i
10 -17 -78
DATE R
P-G.
.�y
SCALE
,9
`.
a �,� , _
-10 -x.41_ ..... - - jm.�! - .� r ;� � i � I10 j t is
30 30
kt\ 30 VA
9
- - 10969 !� O . % '% o I i +
1 e
.
i
� °� • . + �, I r , ' ? S, ' / X5.00 � . . • .
10
1 G'V-
12500
104.41 - 104.41 - - ! 0 O
,1,`.b'' - 5i' �9
2M 9Z + `
0\ • O
R. CN4 P-'-i"00
125.00 ; /25.00 r - fu - ,, . _ , , 5
V..,., N �`l
' N 69°37' 56 I t N 69 °57'58' "E. 0 t 0] ., � ��
/75. Do Q \ 126 + 125.00 ;
Al. 69*5 7'59 "'c N-89 " 6 7 +
125.00 i `� P� K , _ r , , ° _ , -
I IV. u 9 S / J E. , (� � IV ., J `J 7 51 E. Q)
-A!�
1 ?5 �O I �_� 125 GO - - _- � 4, � � � •� . ✓u
.. � ' •t.
N 89 57 � E � rvN 8� 775r3'F 1 gg 14
k9-
t �i
0:
125.00 / 5. 00 +
N. 99`67 + � �._._.� ., � 'Y 1 ' ~� E.
N ° x] 58 O
0(") ' / ?5 00 + 109 77 - 1 /25 00 � fj l 12 '
N —
O 5��5?'� E C . 1 >vS, °57's,s "� N a�=5]'� c +}: / ✓�y'j7'S'E '.
o . o c �
Z9
7
2 5
�, ►�'�- 1/0 -_ -_! _ iC0•Cr? - - -_ !G� ?.77- - -� ' - -- Ilo.00 - - -.� c.`'- 11J.v0
p s O o 'S�'�' o ! n.
n N 5/ 77 15�;- 00 'R �
12 ° _ � 77 .
O '� ¢ 85ao -- -- I�.�J -- J /5 v0 - - -h.c7J �� 7 - BJ•aJ 7y vo-
IV 69 `5 Q 0
125-00
A// (, ) 05 : ! N M o 0/ a !/ \ 7 { p r peq
I 0
Dr
- - 100.OG' - -- - -75 OO -- - =15.00 - - - 75.00- Eo.cv ;_ _. �8 - - �, s4
' + /25. co I �� �� N. $ 57 S8 G /` �, &�` 27' /.3 I S, Si
ON
7
30- l 9'S7 J � / ' f 1 `` Q o o J c' �`� (;• , �L` '}.
s t 125 CO ,0 �o z n
t „ ��'�,,.. �; r.v 8500 _ _ 75.00 _ - 75. -- 75.00 r �'! ? c� 6; o G•��
��� • 2
, CA
( ' � �,i2 ►� � E: n (.,• �� `�` r',±, - O ( / // / q �)�� / f� / jf� /] $ /�• 78 '`�' V r- � C! �7 -O l! - 1r�I ka iii �� � ,: ��i. cJvd /%
— - ,,� �• •G� a = Cl - -- -o L" � -- -- 4 7• (10
--
00 3
' �'O 3 o
IS. -- 59.00 -- a !
�2 /i
N Q
02- -J
97k
•)0(�0 i. ' - 00. 00 �4f� �5 "390. w� j - 9J r 1 l5 02 +
�,- -, +
coo N t O
e 1 e • C} C U
/0970 • -- -J
OU 00
73 93
Crestwood Knolls
: 7-78
T ' E
PG.
.•j
F �l•
SS yy
bj
r
Request
The applicant is requesting final plat approval for the Union Cemetery Annex.
Proposal
r .1. The plat would split off an 18.84 acre parcel from the existing cemetery
property.
2. This parcel is proposed to be divided and developed into grave sites.
3. Private drives have already been constructed on the subject property.
Surrounding Land Uses
1. Northerly: East Seventh Street. North of Seventh Street are several single
dwelling homes and the Michael Lane Nature Center.
2. Easterly: Single dwelling. homes.
3.' Southerly: Minnehaha Avenue. South of Minnehaha are single dwelling homes,
+ 4. Westerly: The existing Union Cemetery.
Past Actions
1. 1 6-3,0-77: Counci 1 approved the special use. permit, subject - to the fol l owl ng
condi ti-ons
a. The expansion area shall be developed in two phases, commencing with the
{ first phase on the southerly half of the 19 acre expansion area (separation
of the two is to be at a point approximately 650 feet northerly of the
Mi nnehaha. property .1 i ne) .
b. At such time as development of the northerly portion is determined that
area shall observe a 30 foot setback from the property l i n e adjacent to
7th Street for all grave sites;
y
MEMORANDUM
TO:
•
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Acting City Manager
SUBJECT:
Final Plat
LOCATION:
Seventh Street /West of Mayhi 11 /Mi nnehahaAvenue
APPLICANT:
Union Cemetery Association
PROJECT:-
Union Cemetery Annex
DATE:
October 24, 1978
r
Request
The applicant is requesting final plat approval for the Union Cemetery Annex.
Proposal
r .1. The plat would split off an 18.84 acre parcel from the existing cemetery
property.
2. This parcel is proposed to be divided and developed into grave sites.
3. Private drives have already been constructed on the subject property.
Surrounding Land Uses
1. Northerly: East Seventh Street. North of Seventh Street are several single
dwelling homes and the Michael Lane Nature Center.
2. Easterly: Single dwelling. homes.
3.' Southerly: Minnehaha Avenue. South of Minnehaha are single dwelling homes,
+ 4. Westerly: The existing Union Cemetery.
Past Actions
1. 1 6-3,0-77: Counci 1 approved the special use. permit, subject - to the fol l owl ng
condi ti-ons
a. The expansion area shall be developed in two phases, commencing with the
{ first phase on the southerly half of the 19 acre expansion area (separation
of the two is to be at a point approximately 650 feet northerly of the
Mi nnehaha. property .1 i ne) .
b. At such time as development of the northerly portion is determined that
area shall observe a 30 foot setback from the property l i n e adjacent to
7th Street for all grave sites;
y
f
c. The special al use permit t will only permit the dumping of grave excavation
p
materials in the area to be filled by grave excavation (the northeasterly
third of the subject area) . Any dumping- of f i l l materials .from off -si to
will require a fill permit.
d. All 1 andscapi ng , i s to be put in as an i ni ti al or first phase i n the develop
ment of these 19 acres so as to expedi to the growth and maturation of the
- E
a
plantings, and all area other than the proposed fill area shall be seeded.
There shall be no verti cal .grave markers or monuments to the north or east
of the 'expansion area ring road or within 150 feet of the expansion line, `
whichever i s. greater;
The lease contract for the part of the cemetery property lyi ng adjacent to
Michael Pond shall be signed upon granting of the special use permit;
e. The invert elevation of the pi pe outflow shall correspond to the desired
lake water level, this shall be worked out .with City staff.
f. Applicant shall obtain any necessary permits from other governmental
agencies before work commences,
g. Agreement to be reached in providing a lease for a part of the cemetery
property lying adjacent to Michael Pond in return for certain .conditions,
lease to be subject to approval of Ci: ty Staff and City Attorney;
h. Owner and applicant agree to the above condi ti ons i n wri ti ng .
council also approved the preliminary plat and lease agreement.
2. 12 - 29 -77: Council vacated that portion of Seventh Street between Ferndale Street
and Sterling Street. Council also vacated Ferndale Street, between Seventh
Street and Minnehaha Avenue.
Analsi s
All of the conditions necessary for final. plat approval have been accomplished
The most important condition is the lease agreement adjacent to Michael Pond.
This agreement has been reached.
Recommendation
Approval of the final plat, subject to conditions-1 through 6 and 8 of the preliminary
plat approval and correcting the s•pel i i ng of "cemetery" on the plat •
encl osures •
final plat (September, 1978) A_
•� •ti••.sw.neaw.:
-. b}.+' �� ��ac.¢ uea:^ vwm. kAaaceoCreV :+•+n°w`r^•'ae+w.w+•n . ..
2
rn 14"
le
r e. td VfL •
yor& CC) U1
F in
., L0
t P .
C c rn. c v
V i
Q
b.
P in -so n n Ci I
F i
1i e, r
K
2/17
"' AW G N
Or
A buildin _d ) ,,Y tnient exi,-'.-s for' one T)uri-)ose — to serve the_
aletv Coll tell L at�. Jj23 �
insurin that thl(-Y. s, _its various codes be
�, aTj
led perform . In order to perform this obli in a satis-
ish
factor manner an' or must be provided or, more ac-
curatel developed. The size of the or will be determined
b a number of factors, but generall the size of the municipalit
will be the most influential not solel because of its size, but
becau'se there is normall more activit in lar commu'nities.
The components of the or must be intimatel related to
the or functional responsibilit and an Cade co'1-11-
petent staff provided if ever facet of operation is to be properl
covered. If austerity in the form of understaffing is imposed, services
will be diluted with a resultant adverse ' effect on the public.
The word or has several meanin(rs. It is best defipcd, for
our purposes, as the arran or formin into 'a coherent unit or
- - n
functioning N�,7 bole. to serve a specific purpose or need. As %vith .1-1
or success is a result of not onl ade staffing, but
also the application of certain fundamental . precepts. An attempt
will be made to distin such precepts most appropriate to the
acb-ninistration of a buildin department.
The Homo Department
a buildil)(Y department v.,ould responsible for the. admin-.
J 's
n a
construction. Sur,-
1;m i n 9--Q—
-nou.s. ca
� qjj L )jioi a, ability for:
Structural, electrical, and mechanical staffin for the examination
of lei -it, r%nl/411lr)f1;nnQ and Q r-oif-iontions for compliance with
t.
the buildin code, the electrical code, the plumbin code, and
77
. . ........ .
•
f//� w •
vF �
1
1
• ,
i .j •
T `
t
t � r
F
�• t
,r t
j
t
��'►tAN::.::ris:t:.:l:i� 1.�. :•H.�+�'e+rs w:t..J�x11�+.5;' �' r+r::.il.�. .. I ..
94iiw. Otl► i/ ri�rat ,�..�tii�f.4�� «7A^YmLrii.1C_ M�.H._.n. - +_ 4 ,qy� _ y, 1tiwiaw'1:�•Ylt4Y.N1 ��` j �� ..� �•
•
2/1$ The Organization
the mechanical code.. sonle areas the fire- pevention , ,
health code tivould be included t r CO t ;� , ii�cI
d lIl t1lzS �;I
.. Inspection of all aspects of construction and all coin ion cI1tS � r
beco a part of the structure.
. A housing inspection staff.
... A fire preventioll inspection staff.
.. . E nvironment al health inspection.
.. Zoning administration and enforcement.
.. Laboratory an staff to review test reports
necessary testing or research or to conduct
.. A. supervisory staff to perform, in addition to its normal fu
of
slip rvision are review i1c(i()J,
s
view of proposals for code amendment ai,,i
to make appropriate recommendations.
. .. An administrative and clerical staff to perform the routine
duties, as welLas provide backup p for o f unctions. offic:c,
Our ideal . building department would be staffed in numbers f
ersonnel b nc \v construction c)F
P Y activity plus the magnitude of sip },.
standard buildin;rs coupled to rehabilitation objectives. (See pa �) t *
"Determinin "c `�(
g Staffin g . }
Placing all functions and reg
ulations P ertaining to the cons - r .
..,s.....,... .4...._�..___._...- �-,_.. __..,a ��- _..�.�._.._.....,�.. t uctittll
use or _ occupancy of I�uilc�i� car st1 Ir��er t }�e contl-o) �� ►�,�
�w
Li nn ist � - ati on of ..r� ._.^ . �...�
- .- _OTiC de ?�i 1 1 e n_ t h _ l _ con sistent .�._- _- .,__- .,i,._.. . h e ( ad w oul d 1 rl j - e z�j: «�, f,
«�.��..S.�:C:,a�l.f j'il � f,',�,._.��..�_�.1� -C - ) -..�..._............•.._._... - .� , _
�... �.p..�:i�.���� �,..a- �,...� � .g�?.� z ��_� i �.z�_ in ��• l 1. i�� �
th u nity , of connnlalld c vests ult lniate auth ority an res �����,
M ..r _�y .,_ a � "�
i _:.._:
o IlCl ?ic�l1 '�cj�.�al. Unfortunately this concept l «,c
followed and thr the United States there are n is not u '
regulatory agencies within the s- m..rous builcl��,.,
ame political subdivisions. Z Ix-sc
agencies often operate, or function, i.n depcnclen tly of each other, and
may not even have a method to coordinate th eir activities even wlicit
they are involved in the same project. Building pen and ins ectieti�
may be made by one dep or divisio n i , • , i
el ectr ica l permits �ltit1
inspections b another, and plumbing or mechanical by still anotl
Such div is not only a scandalous waste of man power , lint t1w
frustrations and aggravations suffered b the lly
contribute si nificalztl to . y p ublic undoubtc c
adm inistration.
y the com plaints about codes or cocl
ministration.
In quest' once building official wbo administered a bureau th.it
issued only building permits and made only building; ins ectioiis,
as to the r easons for this type of o rg a nizat ion , he rep tIiat 11is
municipality opp t g � ,
munic p Y vas o '- p o assignments in \vbich once departlnt�nt
becam a catchall for many different duties and lie viewed (11Et
variety of functions alluded to in the opening as NON - RELATED.
Homogeneous Assignment
The principle of homogeneous assignment is simp the rincil)le
of specializing tale %vork of or anl"T,at10nS and i Y pruc�
g T ,
organization should no be a ca tchall unit %vith. many unrlalatecl
functions, but should have one special job to do or if it has inore
�+r++srx� %d'i[�- �Y'�'^�? het° ly. �* i.^�l°:-a�*�•;!,�;'a!•,2��F7�'4 :q ?,�?
^ ...�ra�.7,••�Jy�7gK �;4 ^' :7.� {� "•3 .l�y:,, 'r. �7/ :S.t.'il"4.`t .{ r ,._•.. v,i;) �r 1 .J,
1 _ a 1 ,y /��i �y ,(. , .. a. � L, '••':t• °•,�• lM.:{ S: L�ri�t. �f�. s3i` ��1QYVuDCCW: sirirdSi1431Ri .iMfi�oswe+us.:awvc.+.+... •�.
. ' eVy'71t'i'^' -•,y.//�,•fN+.s : AiM�A. tiK' ��' i�sY+ n. l. �i3idliii�, lF xu3: di..:. W2tiiG. 1Yt. 1-'\' 1u' ati` 4�. ni. L "st�.�i:Gb•..a..ali.iE► %� *° -' �' .
r
t i
Organ 2/ 19
. t
s
• related ixllilar to each
pthc
than one, these duties should be to, and
S
� . ..... t
•
i
Le't's Consi organizations and individuals, as the princip le ap -
Ales to t11cui, separately.
F
ORG+A.NIZA I n the or gan i'ling phase., the principle 1S ap-
p
licd by grouping similar or allied functions as follows: ! _
• f. SIMILAR nature under a major
a. Grouping broad activitie o i
or ga n izational departme
r n a division within the de partment those activities
b. Group i
'%N"hich are more CLOSELY RELATED to one another.
c.
Grou I yin r into a branch -within the division those activities
which are CLOSELY ALLIED.
d. Assig to an individual %vithin the br those duties w hich are SPLGIEIC ALLY REL to one another, and which come }
within the scope of his capabilities. E
The rinci ale of llon
i b y nearly encous assignment is not new. It was grasped
• ' I? primitive people and was well developed
.,. i � y all i.
-
by the Egyptians �ptians thousands of years ago also by the Greeks
- : who lived in the fif century B. C., wrote:
Xenophon,
"In small towns, the same man makes a couch, a
door, a plough and a table; and frequently the same
person is a builder too, and is very well content if j
he can thus find customers enough to maintain him.
s
It is ilnpossiblc for a i who works at many things
m i
to do the all - %yell. But n the great cities, because
there are great numbers of people that want eac k.
particular thing - one art alone suffices for the main-
tenance of cach individual craftsman. Frequently in- .
deed, one man makes shoes for men, another for
���omen; some it hap pens that one gets rnain-
te nanee inei•c�Iy by STl "I'CI•IING shoes, another b y } i .
. CUTTING tllcrn7 out, another by CUTTING THE b
'UPPER LEA`I'HERS only, and still another by doing
none of these things, but by simply PUTTING the:. �
• pieces together. He, therefore, that is employed in
a work of smallest compass must of necessity do it
�.. - best."
The writing f Xenophon is distinguishing between a C
b jack of -all-
i
trades," common found in the smaller con an a specialist
who Nvorks as part of a team effort. This might be compared to the
utilization of inspectors to perform multiple INSPECTION duties,
f
as oppose to the iras}x�ctor who is required to perforn Zi inspection
duties and in ADDITION perform UNRELATED work.
s
Municipalities that cling to the fragmented permit a inspceti.on
responsibility would. do well to analyze a review objectively their
• P y
P
r ocedur es and organizational -str uctures, seriously considering tli�
benefits of IIO ,\IOC�ENEOUS assignments. Resulting benefits would
r
{
T r.
S
• i
.'K'+ ae.�.�.�7'` p.�.F4iRC.',� rX 1;+f +� .' ,Z!.�' 03 . . ,,.. i, � `i�i,,�� r"Y..�o�.
• ..' ^' "H'>]`;;. • i'•i.}; ^ ' ', / _ - . ,• /• , ., .[Y.Y. •. .. M . .. � 1.�1".y�!''� %•:!••� • •' / .. .. _I
�,,,..,t •r• � ""' 's!t"`,�T?'�'�y t'�i'�''f�"'RT�%�'
k
! r •wNl
}
L'
:i
.e :1�: , 1.?`.J1i:f1�,:� • .•fwl,±t�S`�. ♦'�.x, � . �. a•. 1r.. i�41: �1�s/. �I' iG'!" Lia1wa.'' t .Aj:�.l�wti•�L:.'�gyi� °�L.IWev m:::...
k
2/,20 The Organiz' ion s
include better manpower utilization, and e with its attendant
savi In costs, and, equally mj)ortant, infinitely improved service `
and public relations.
' � r
Administration of the Codes
x
The CODES administered by t h e b uil din g de artmc canno be
effe _ _1c�ss�)rovisi for ADLt 1, I L sta # #il��,_�irc. sti � �Iic:.c. Littca
is�g� b�� _ _ �. _ _ .r- .- --•- -- if
there .
„ I t con�li Ila has �1 aw s re �ulatinn constrilctiol�
.. ,..... _ . ...._w._.._..__ ._ _.. �._.___.....__ �_...... _.___:...._ ...�....._..
there arty inadet�tlate pi Y1. ions for administration and enforce. 'Inent.
lea. _- ww.wr.i .w...aw..e„w-a. u. eu. w. �✓ c.: w.. n. w.•..........-. ua- rv....+. n.. a• s> m., o+ nsr: anwa.-.. a. wse... snmti.. a.+. .w+•+..�au
Cones can be administered effectively, in the public interest, or
in a Nvay Inimical to the best interests of the community. The harm
alluded to in this case refers to an inadequate program of inspection.
(See this Chapter --- Substandard 1i�lingr ffieia1 '
.�5...p�_oviclec�,�ih an adcc uat staff, an b a ck ed b�� his stip��riors and
.__ .� . y a ,..... _..._._..... i. _... � -- _ _ ��� . _. _ db ...... �.... .. -
' C-) Ilu l 2a11, c an apIANY an3L g?de in an (. ffcctive and cy7�vial
__
man It should follow then that t
��llbllc S } bE' t1Stc1S inter-
ested r1� _gooct acl_Ipistratioz c�f.�eoc as i noacl cod es. (Se
XI -- Publicity Through the Press.)
Some of the complaints about codes are unfair becituse, they
are actually about code misinterpretations or poor administration
rather than because of the codes themselves. Some complaints are
based on apparent code brevity, and there may be some validilty to
this complaint (sec Problem Expressions and Lan guage, page 97).
But if a code Nvere written in a manner In w hich there was an attempt
to spell out every single detail, it wo of necessity fill many voltimes.
Its bulk and inertia would create additional problems. To operate; ' \vith
a reasonably sized text, interpretations are unavoidable,. but. to mini-
mize misinterpretations they must be based on knowledge of the
code's intent.
How Much Discretion
The official charged with the adb of building laws has
a tremendous responsibility. with such responsibility must go a
commensurate amount of author No matter how det the
codes may be, he must to some extent exercise p judgment
in deciding what constitutes compliance with the code. Most building
officials know that there is a certain amount of discretion inherent
in the codes, but many, fearful of the consequences of mistakes in
judgment, strive for exact compliance REGARDLESS . OF THE IN-
DIVIDUA.L CIRCUIiSTANC E S. As a consequencc, they find them-
selves hopelessly trapped. Some of the hesitation relative to inter-
pretations of the coda is because most codes contain sections that
list penalties for infractions and state that such infractions are actually
misdemeanors punishable by fine or imprisonment. The presence of
penalty provisions Places *the code in the shadow of a penal code
which rcciuil•es STRICT interpretation. Ilut a building code is essen
tially a . I3I N4EDIA.L LAW, that is, one intended to be construed
"P7 tJ,1 ^aak �+r�,T'tR''L�4i' �7°d1'*M�%�°ft�a` ?1ti r sesrt. MV�4zx�vL ^ ;�^tstetv`at^?i�t/►oo.eFe. i si�s^y - ,r# mpa+2 y°jtmr.sr ,�N.t�s:� s�•:[�+r„+�.`
'�_� �.i ^i ±.t. ti' .t': :.r' s+., . f::: _r L t:�� j '�,J. �•'� -. f'v Z �•' 1 ,• ''S ..
. .. ._. a. lNJ.L�LM +IVli;. .':1dlrs: > ..•�'•. ;.:1.�� +... t.'.fr..,a•c'j•b�1e`s'. •F!.: 'Yl::.._ . [.�..t• tlui:.r:..:r.i :l.:' ;5 �:• .Fri ' �+;x: •r7•v:•,: . . ..
' t
AdrOnistration of the Codes 2/21
lit)cnall and belle-ficiall to overcome dic mischief that the le
I)ody intended to be remedied.
It rc wisdom to navi safel between these two approaches,
.111(i 111an buildin of' 'ficials Nvill choose the safe, route, at ]cast for
the earl y ears in their new roles. (Later .,oil in this book the reader
encounter dan entr on ainc"nclin(r the code for increillsed discretion.
0
ri-lis should not be confused with the sul) matte r j ust discussed,
J)ut sliould be referred to so th a distinction t)cL\vccn the t
# - 1 1J) j ccts is clearl understood.)
1--low does a building official g et the wisdom needed to k6cp from
0
bein overwhelined? There are no simple wa It re y ears
of experience, \Nrith g ood support from the legislative body as well
t) 0 .1
as the g eneral public. It re attendance at meetin with other
buildin officials. This places a responsibilit upon. his superiors
to see that lie has the opportunit to ac the necessary wisdom .
and glen provide him Nvith the appropriate luckin so that lie can put
that wisdom into practice.
External Assistance
Most buildin codes provide some help for the building official w i th
respect to interpretations of his buildin code b creating for him
a board of appeals. This ma relieve him of some of the personal
responsibilit for code interpretations. it is 'particularl important
when there is much at stake.
The buildincr official has substantial authority. He can appl
penalties, Clite expensive ie. can issue stop -work
- 13C7�
orders, Which can be ver costl to a builder lie can order -work re-
moved that has been com ail,.d can even order the demolition of
a structure that violates the code. These are all in addition to the
misdemeanor penalties reserved for the discretion of the courts. The,
j udgment exercised b the buildin official in administerin THESE
b > e-
provisions, as Nvell as the da administration of the codes is,
hi a lar measure, a reflection of his capabilit
D.epartmental Status
Gerald B. Wilson, then Superintendent of Building for the Cit
0
Nvor�-in for a 'Nfaster's de chose as his
of Glendale, California'., e7l %
thesis, "BUILDING DEPARrl"MENT ORGANIZATION. _% Ile con-
ducted extensive surve and performed in-depth research of the
sub particularl on the q uestion of combi-iiing the duties of a
buildin regulator a with a public works department, as a
subordinate branch, Ile writes:
"The data g athered in this stud have been ver convincin
in some instances, and less so in others. In an case, it is
not intended that this work alone should be construed as a
sufficient basis for action to chan' existin departmental
or 'where the* data are most convincin it is
believed thfat the direct applicabilit to a 'Specific municipalit
mi easil be tested. An anal review of the functional
77 7
I
j.
2/22 The. Organization
relationships bct\N, the studied elcillen of g overnment Can
rather easily bc- conducte(i in Ally ij),alit - Where these
.1
relationships are, found to- be similar to the ypical."ones ill
this Stud it ma b(11 M"Ise • to consider for tact-l'O'll Sonic of the'.
conclusions drawn hercill.. 11h. C'611SCS Where the data, g athered
are less convincin it is 11OPed that this stud ma y et be
ei
1.
found useful as a bcasis for furth investi leadin to
mo definite conclusions.
"The follo\N7in discussion has been desirrned to relate to
current practice, as defennined in this stud` Nvith the l
ature in the field. To hi(dilight apparent discrepancies between
current practices and functional relationships to point out
apparent voids in -the existin literature and to su pos-
sible corrective measures.
Separate Llepartment vs . Puhlic blots Department
"Perhaps the clearest indication which emer from this
stud vas that dealin Nvith the relative merits of includin
or not including, the buildin re functions in a public
works department. B the narrmvest pos sil)le inar the
Cit Manager Group of respondents favored such an arran
ment. -All othene, INCLUDING the Public NVorks Di'rector
Group were OPPOSED to this arran by resoundin
majoritie
The gross opinion of a ll
respoildell'ts, Jncludin�f
the Cit X.-fana Group, was 26 per cent in favor of
includin these functions in public works and 74 per cent
opposed.
"An analysis of the arguments proffered reveals the follow-
in reasonin
Ar in Favor
1. "Improves coordination." (Examples cited dealt Nvith
problems in g radin g , industrial waste, use of •-street
off-street parkin access. '
"Allows combination of some inspection functions. Cuts
doNvn time for Processin buildin permits.". b.
3. "Reduces Cit -Mana span of control."
4. ird
Should be part of Public Works if not headed b a
licensed en
5. "Reduces operatin expenses."
6. Improves efficienc
Arguments A
1. "Functions are too dissimilar: one is a desi and service
or the other is concerned with enforcement
one is proprietar the other re one deals with
public propert the other with privat "
e propert
2. "Sufficiently • 1 ue 4
ini and important to rate direct contact
..�ii: tip: �e. �' isbWa4ci... �aZi. 3' ti,.' :. iw�frwti! yrS.A+Yt'Nlutitr�.!LSffsYP:S.:• Ira ::.K'A /.5.�.►i1T.i7[Ait.fW:a'u cWVxn+:w..y.:s. m.�.alwaw+.wwr ... w ..,....•..........v...r......�. ..-. ..��.� .._._
.'a'�.F �.�JyaRotiiY►1fA.8l+rtx+�.l.
Administration of the Codes 2/23
3. "Building regulation be comes lost and less effectual -
when a subsidiary of Public works."
4. "If co with anything, should be Planning in the
interest of coordination, and. in efficiency."
.5. "Distinct fronn Public 1jvorks in design, concept, financing,
etc."
6. "Relationship bctvvrccn public worlcs and building too
ininor to justify co m bination. Im portance and uniqueness
of problems in building re make direct Voic tG
. city manager important.
7. "Build official is an orphan in public « orks. Engi-
neering work done is not the same type as that done in
public works. Efficiency and effectiveness are endangered
by taking directions from a man who is not intimately
familiar with the field. City Manager does not get the
true picture."
S. "Permit fees may be used to defray unrelated costs of
municipal government, rather than to improve quality
of service."
9. "Reduces efficiency of operation."
"It is interesting to note that the reasons offered above pro-
vide a very strong verification of the results of an earlier
survey conducted by the International Conference of Building
Officials. That survey, which asked this same question. of
building officials over a major portion of the' United States,
was subject to criticis in t hat it v as directed only to building
officials. It rriig ht reasonably be contended that such a group
would have a natural bias away from absorption by a larger
element of government. The opinions quoted herein, while
extremely sini r to those of that earlier survey, came repeat-
edly from city managers, public tivorks directors and planning
directors, as xell as from }wilding officials.
Factors to be Considered in Evaluating Alternatives
"The reader, at this point, might reasona ask, `If the
building regulation functions are not to be included as a
bureau '\N7itlIin the puNic Nvorks department, where and how
should they be accommodated ?` The responses received to
several other questions asked, contributed materially to the
answering of this question. For example:
1. "Planning directors, by a decisive majority, indicated
that their most frequent interdepartmental contact was
with the building department. 2. "Building officials, by an equally decisive majority, in-
dicated their primary interdepar contact was the
planning department.
3. "Equa significant but on the negative side w as the
fact that two respondents in the public works group
indicated that the building department was a primary
t j ra
l;
2/24 The Organizat
interdepartmen contact wi th oiil y four of those r �c- s
dcl.Its eve eve illCllti tl�c� building building pon-
departrl�ient for. any
degree of int('j•cl('partllit`iital contact.
4. " Those who clid not bcli(,y(� t he iz builclin r
tioi�s should be includcc� � �� regulation funs-
Z the pu blic Nt o ks departnient
w asked to indicate where they thought th ese functions
could best be accommodated, �vl�cr����s tl�cy usually in-
dictated a belief that the building regulation functions
ctions
should constitute a separate de partment, '" 'Then any com-
bination Nvas suggested it xvas invari .
which included the plann � a c
p l ng functions. No other pro -
posal was consistently offered, although several other
minor suggestions were revieNved. The idea of a general
Inspection Department' occur h e r e and it is dis-
cussed separately.
5. "Wbile the respondents, as a rou �l >•
de
dep endence for the • , , , , g p' placed their hea�ic,st
i e discover y of actual or potential zoning
violations on Complaints from All Sources,' the building
b
{
p r cnt vas rated higher. than was the planning
department as a source for this kind of information.
"In analyzing the arguments offered on favoring nc
the building re�rtioi� fungi g lusion of
zatioil , g� ° gu func in a piil�lic works t3 r ga ni- ...
e v ery soon concludes that these arguments d0 not
uniquely apply to a combination with that articular
government. p ' ,agency
of
g As a mat ter of fact, virtually identical ar u-
ments can be phrased which would favor combining bu
regulation and planning, 'l.d�i �• g -
i g� j n( from the comments by
respondents reported immediately above, the gains in coordin-
ation from such a combination ;-oulcl be considerably realer.
Certainly, the respondents from i very irll g roups have v �g
indicated a much Treater need f � clearly
or liaison between building
and planning than building nd public works
appear that these az•�rLiln g p It sloes not
ents present a very strong ease for
combining building regulation N pith public works.
f
Analysis of Arguments opposing inclusion in Public worliis
"If oiie applies the s";rne logic used in analyzin the favoring
arguments, once more, it may be seen that mo st g g
rnents offered do not uniqu e
� � ost of the a rgu -
iuely apply to building - public works
combinations. WitIz only slight modifications in wording
many of them express . the standard arguments which are
always pr esented when any smaller segment of an admin-
istrative hierarchy is threatened with loss of i denti ty
absorption into a larger Y er bod • y through
It is not intended to imp that the
herein opposing. absorption p ' ' e ai gumc,nts offered. _
Rathe p • � a P by works are invalid.
er, it is i ntend ed to make i clear that these arguments
which are offered so commonly usually ARE valid to some. -
degree. A general problem which management often faces is
6'r'
i, ' y; •, + 1-:.. i N •r h .'.. r :. �i# JL+ S�IY�H�+ 3: AiG63' a�oclilyl:. Ma'1fIR41�lYt�id?..:.���:..L
• ti►.G1� � i + ', �jil'. T�v? Y. 7rai: �+? ��il�" 8�' �: Ai' tA1t;, hJ1:« d•:' X: aLC T, �Ii�, d. 6�. '1'1�L't:;l%a.::6.•i4s�.d�3:+ fat.: �+' f�: J�31�..: �i. 4tiN.rxri:un.,e....'aa:•���N+.+w...
� . • r u.,i:.tr,.nads'.•l�.4,�tj1Yl:lr �i�
0.
,
}
j
Administration of the Codes 2/25 �
`When does the degree of validity in.• -,u•guments such as these �. r
7 1 Y ._
justify depar tmental status?
"Compromise between managcment need to limit span of L
Control and the cry for departmental stature is frequently �
necessary. Careful comparison of alternatives and quantitative 4
M'11)'sis, where pos sible, is required for drawing of the most
logical departinental lines.
"There is an feature which
by aINvays present, at least
by inference, in these `standard" arguments for departmental
status -- f e-ir that the department head in the larger organiza-
tion will not know, 'understand, and sympathize with the
problems and needs of the subordinate group. Put in terms of
this particular study, an assumption that the director of
public works would characteristically be poorly informed or
trained in the building regulation field is apparent in the
arguments presented. Is this assumption a reasonable one?
A review of the public works group questionnaire reveals
the fact that not one respondent in this group had any back - s
ground in building regulation work. In addition, another r
review, of the pertinent comments by respondents reported.'
immediately above demonstrates a belief on the part of the
vast majority of the public Nvorks director group that contacts
with the building department in their jurisdiction were of
little or no importance to them in the execution of their
duties. This is in marked contrast to the comments by bo
4 I
building officials and planning directors regarding their urgent
need for close liaison. Based on the data gathered in this
study, it seems that directors of public Works virtually NEVER
have any background in building regulation. Apparently the
assumption that they are poorly informed or trained in the �
building regulation field possesses validity.
Conventional Methods of Organizing Administratively
"For the I pui pose of this analysis, it is convenient to use
the now _conventional organizational method originally de-
veloped by Luther Gulic. `1. method provides for the level-
,
opment of administrative organizations wherein activities are
g roup
ed in accordance with their characteristics. Among the
principal categories used in this method are organization by
purpose, b }' process, 13y clientele, and by area. By adapting
this method to the organization of municipal governments, it ►
appears th at most major city departments are organized along
lines of purpose. Public works is one major exception to this
practice, being organized along lines of process --- that process
being engineering. Sub- groups in public works are commonly
organized along pur lines.
fi
"One of the commonest reasons for placing the building
regulation functions in the public works group can be stated r
as a bolief that building regulations belong; to the same major
7
i`'�►;S'f7YA"awo!rw „•yla� r ,','C•l'i 5 �'7j."^ - '77`v n
. "^•73:f'. +•7Sfi�"'�91^�C7• �: 1�'1,. • i • � n• n „�V• 7.`y. t': .' . i. 1 • • . +' SM .. K;� • / ! a i .J
t
f
`x7 ' ,,l
1 l n.ulYifk� • dh�J'L..a.i.rC.l:iA r,r:. :.+: ei..V`vw.:+c,"..- 1 !� t 1 ,.- .� ` .(, ,,p �. ,, y . �( , '. • - ..y( .; ,
✓,i �fil ' .: N�l %+u'7..MrrrM+LM.i1►1�GIW , '�ii.YrIiWYL�;�i1L� {:i 1 � i �afWLFk/ nd CY r�. . �� • AliifiYIYYI'licE.t�py„ "ry' y } � .
m �T
2/26 The Organization
�� • `process' grouping as do the more cominon elements of p ublie F
' works. While k �Ny ith engineering. process' is apparent, r
the data gathered secin to indicate that the `purpose' of
the building depa has very little fundamentally in
common with the `ptirpose' of the groups gathered together
in the public «7orks department. Perhaps, then, it is improper
to let `p rocess' grouping govern in this instance, i the
municipality is large enough to employ NvelI- qualified persons
{` in the building department. Certainly, the -grouping method
chosen should take into consideration such factors as smooth-
ness and efficiency of operation and reduction of interdepart-
mental conflict. If these factors are not carefully considered,
an apparent reduction in span of control might actually have
a crippling effect on managerial efficiency.
In the preceding paragraphs, a reasonable doubt has been
raised as to the merits of including the building regulation
functions in a pu )lic .Nvorks department. This doubt has been
developed from the standpoint of the qualifications of public
works directors and from the standpoint of conventional
methods for the grouping of administrative functions. At the
same time a remar clear expression from both building
officials and planning; officials has been noted, indicating
mutual belief that they are each other's major interde p
. Y j i art-
mental contact, '
"Particular circumstances in individual cities will, of (course,
justify a variety of departmental ar rangements. It is not at
all impossible to have a director of public works w ho is well
r versed in building regulations in addition to the more usual
fUl - ICtionS of a p Nwo nature such as street and sewer
s .
construction, wat erw orks, refuse disposal, harbor facilities
and traffic regulation. Ho «-ever, the - amount of interaction
betA -teen. building and planning seems to Indicate more
probability of the development of an administrator kvith a
thorough lino «Tledge and understanding of these two fields.
It seems reasonable to believe that it is possible to be a good
public works director, and know little of building regulations.
t
"It seems a good deal less. likely, based on the extent of t
interde artmental activity re orted, that a building official
; ul � � �' g
co unction efficiently without an excellent background I
or knowledge of city planning; or that a planning •, p g director
could function eff icien tly without an excellent knowledge of
building regulations.'
Substandard Status
Titles, assigned to those officials administering building depart -
ments, and titles designating the office responsible for adininistrIation
and enforcement of building codes, are probably the most varied
• � r j
i
f
t , ,
r ' '
I '
4 -
` ��ti nr. yyw� �.y�w� •,iY t+naA" h'r ;�^,'C C,^. ♦!� n4r'rtN�� - �?:f"1� Y�'A'�l'T" Ian"•..'."•; t' �r.'' YN,` t' f'' r�x: lrt,` Y" Y>! '7.{c;— .+Y,fi!•'1�:•7'�.�' : y'.li �,. 7��
Y!.i � 1:"L.T�}� �l 3li^�`�.1 �!'.��.�•. ��f l., l�f Y. M" �}^ 1. _C,� !-! �' r 1 ' �.. `! . ! � 1 c' '� t / •' • s t .
... ..• ... ! .J .7/....f.I.Y -:�. 1!J' tJ. ll.' l .. ..:1. M.•!. / '.J : ••:..(✓!:2 b.. /.. .� ..
... { .: ;.. }. :.r -t., Y.'j. t Yr. r,. . i„1- .. ",. t :1t V.p .�]: 4.' X } ' ,1 �.. CA ; ''�•
.,�; " t' �v, M�itil �J5r e. r+: �: rctA ::.a;a.3.v�a:L,uuaa;:...w a..'+�. gun, t► �. �. w. . s�: r�. K.; ip„ G :a.r#ia1c...a�.�«spa.c,.,at +: act. k., �63rac�tidw+ wL...+.: o. . re..:, r. u�., ue�wras3� '�ct•C,lba, ..�.ak�•�::;
way. .:.: � a.'+s� d7:'2�,b;Ay,R x,ek'w�wsf11iW7 '►..�u'�` .«
t
Y
Substandard Status ' 2/27 '
• d inconsistent of all to be fo in m u nic ipal government. There
��I� Y L
411re probably as many reasons as there arc differences but that fact
ill. no ova y diminishes the m
negative effect of such diversity. Uniform
identification of b the dep artin c11ts and the administrators must
precede real ga1I1S ill status and commensurate c ' rewa "
� COIl01I1iC
This non - un ifo r mity is, of course, not the only inhibiting factor, but _
contributes to a greater extent than may be generally realized.
The accurate total. number of differing titles which designate the
office; responsible for the a dminist ratio n and enforcement of the
comnluni.ties' building code is probably unknown but is considerably
in excess of I50. The differing titles designating building officials `
is likewise formidable. It is little \voridcr that the general public
is confused about the function, and., at times, the existence of a _
"Building Department."
t
Titles such as "Commissioner of R ildifigs," "Building Superintend-
cnt Director of Buildings, or Building Officer are a few examples
of the confusing array of titles. To the uninitiated, these titles are
easily confused with a proprietary function, usually custodial.
The building department is similarly disguised Nvith designations `
tc Y • 3 » rc » cc
such as Office of Buildings,
" O ffice of inspection, J�epar
of Plar wing and Housing," and other titles intended to identify
t
the office which issues perinats and males inspections. If such
diversity were applied to other municipal functions -\N1hich provide
service directly to the public, such as the fire or police departments, t
attention would soon be focused on the need for easy - arid universal
identification. These t- =vo agencies, of course, are expected to respond
to emergencies and must be readily available and easily identified.
The need is so app arent that almost all telephone - directories From- ,
inently display their numbers and all telepholte operators can give
immediate assist� Building Departments do not function as
emergency agencies and cannot be expected to receive this type of
attention, but the' obscurity innocently imposed by manifold titles
and descriptions can be an ann oy an ce. to citizens attemp to
ide ntify, and contact, a building departmen which cannot be easily.
located in a telephone directory. The array of titles includes:
Department of Building �
Department of Inspection Services
Building Inspectie }n Services
Bureau of Building Inspection
Department of Building and Housing Control
Department of Engineering r
Building Inspection Department �
Department of Buildings and I roperty Conservation
Division of Building Inspections 44
Buildi Department f
Department of Public Safety
Department of Codes Administration �.
Department of building Inspections
Department of L Inspections
. c:r l .•r `' �T, �•; .�i�`."� •�,.•:�`1F,�.,'•,;'(,�c ,.., ' I .;egickyr� ^ �ea i. 'R"
a
1
r
�, ,�+ t /Rl': ,,.•.1 ..;' +Y • • .i '.r�_' • "�t ii' �'' °c r " ". "� ,+r L: t1; � . ; Q'• ', ',7^ -
A.
k
.3k f.
2/28 The Orgianization
1-1ousin Development Administration
Department of Rent and Housin Nilaintenaned
Dcpl,irtment of — a(,I=i nf ill i till,,
Uniform dcpartni(-%ntal and buildin official titles are desirable
from at least three points of
E as y identification for both the buildin professionals and the L
g eneral public. L
Emplo status is improved because the position he fills is �.
identified with all important municipal function.
The possibilit of status g ains b buildin officials is enhanced
because an attentio'n. focused upon an buildin department
is associated with the local buildin department provided it is
carr a.n'. identickal desi
Even an adverse publicit accomplishes the same task. A political
.leader, readin about charges made. a an department, or
emplo of another inui t�)
-iicipalit makes mental comparisons, con-
sciousl or unconsciousl He would probabl fail to re an
relationship if the title to his department is dissimilar' to the one
bein publicized.
There seems to be a trend towards title uniformit even thou its
pace is a slow. Dominant amon titics for buildin depart -
ments i s "Department of Buildin and Safet and amon titles for
buildin officials is "Director of Buildin and Safet Stich- office
titles are apparentl exclusivel reserved for departments which are
completel autonomous. Those \vhich are 'subordinate a(Tencies to
other departments are Usuall identified. as "Buildin i'nspection
Division," or some sirnilar title -which indicates that it is a branch
operation of some ma department. The head of such a division
is usuall titled "Sup crint-C-ndent of Buildin or "Buildin Inspector,"
but seldom is the title "Director of Buildin and Safet conferred
Upon an such division. (This information was g athered from a limited
national surve conducted in 1969.)
Obli Effect of Obscurit
Ali additional factor to be considered in the q uest for uniform
identification is the ne effect the never-endin procession of
titles :creates ill salary considerations. Since onl a, f of the si
A
cant number of titles ccan be positivc. ideritifie d as department heads,
the utilization of salaries paid to some code administrators Nvho are
not department heads in comparative, salar surve (the cop
s has a dilutin effect because obviously there- is bound
to be a disparit bct%vccn the Salar of a buildin official 'who is a
true department head administerin an autonomous department., as
compared to that of a buildin official who is only in char of a.
division of a ma department. A sup(-.-Tintendent o� building in one
municipalit ma be a department ]lead, while in another communit
within the "benefits comparison influence, the supbrinte-ndent of
buildin mi not ]lead a department and his salar reflects that
I '77T!�Zrl
� fie. r d H yy ` •
v , r . A , � . ., rv�. , 't�et�tL •+ `• ' k�iY .Sl�ttS�i+k.1i�`�+l+L1E'u. ' +sYi�.2b1� • .' .
- ' 1 • i � .. = ;.Jn '' +y�j:.�WYii'' J'•at'L simk+xia
S . 't . fAia�Oa. 1+ r.+ t1: 17itS+= w: ✓`s.�i.�i6..'i'.;�(n.'1�+. � = rw
.. y
Substandard Status 2/29
fact. tJi11
cuss the, sa lary survey bei made = t�il:es this feet: into account,
g, to hc, misleadin
. ', r Y isleadi and if .used as a salary detemi-
the rc�sZ�1t5 re goin
inane, grossly unfair•
T here. is no quest that a comparison of the range of respon j
alicl aecotl prove of a cic*partment head, to that of a division heed, ;
141ot.1ld prove to be significant, and economic considerations should
reflect that difference. r
tles idcntifyln g building officials, con-.
If there were only TWO ti
fusi in salary comparisons would lac eliminated, or at least diniIn-
i.shed. The tNvo titles alluded to «cou be:
DIRE OF BUILDING AND SAFETY, when administer --
i a truly 11U1nUgE'Ilc'.OUs department. (See Chapter 11 -- The
Homogeneous Department)
. SUPERINTENDENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY, designat-
ing a non department head.
Attain of uniform identification for building departments and
Attainn .
bu i lding officials will certainly produce no startling changes in ;
either personal or departmental status, but it w ill remove a. hindrance
that may well be a keystone which, when removed, n - cause the
collapse of other inhibiting blocks to status improvement. So that
the possibility of misunderstanding is minimized, it must be empha-
sized that status improvement means the upgrading of building
regulation itself and is not meant to Imply that it should have
immediate application to incumbent building department personnel. r
Detrimental Effects of Existing Uniformity
4•
Unlike the manifold titles describing building officials, many titles
of subordinate personnel are nationally unifonn, BUT THIS FACTOR
IS DET1��l�IENT��I�. This statezne��t may seem to Iack consistency
\N ith the previous entry on the building official, but a clarification
will soon illustrate the point. The existence of identical titles for
building inspectors, plan chcck engineers, etc., Nvoulcl seem to be
ideal and would be except that in m,iny cases DUTI �' S N, TO
THE EXTENT THAT rrlI "
E TITLE "BUILDING INSPECTOR
MUNICIPALITY WOULD I-IAN ONLY A ST�IGI - IT E-
IN ONE LATIONSHIP TO Jk "BUILDING INSPECTOR IN ANOTHER.
For example, the duties of the "b uilding Inspector" in one community
might include enforcement of the building, electric, plumbing, and
mechanical codes, \N7hilc in an adjacent community a "building in
spector" `could be expected to become proficient only in the admin-
istration or enforcement of the building code. If each were performing
at a similar level of proficiency, obviously the one performing multiple
duties should- receive a higher rata of compensation than the one
with singular duties. A comparative survey of positions performed
in a superfic manner would in all lll:clihood fail to examine the
'significant differences between these two apparently "similar" posi-
tions and, as a consequence, justifiable adjustments in salary disparities
might never be reconciled. what is the answer? Uniform job titles are
�i.'.°,l�".f"'!'pr�`e ' ' .r• s' �P" Ml.�,�rr^°,��.t'p'�'Fr'�`��"�.. _..
fi
14
MR
1.
2/30. The Or
not enou Unless the are accompanied b uniform j ob descriptiolls
the can onl hinder flic ( for e Obviousl this fact i '
or is
important onl if salaries are inflItienced.b those of other communities.
The Plan
To brin such a concept to fruition could onl be accomplished
throu the efforts of one or more of the model code groups to
provide N6despread application. The plan would Nvork as follows:
An number of inspector classifications could be developed mimer-
icall and would include buildin electric, phimbin mechanical, or
combination. Example:
Buildin inspectors would be cate as Grade 1, I III
IV, V, VI, etc.
Electrical inspectors as Grade L 11 etc.
Plumbii)g inspectors as Grade 1. 11 etc.'
Combination inspectors as Grade 1, 11,. etc.
The next level of inspector would be the senior gr ad e :
Senior buildin inspector.
. Senior electrical inspector.
. Senior plumbin inspector.
. Senior combination inspector.
The next level of fi-ispector could be called:
Supervisin buildin inspector.
Supervising electrical inspector.
0
Supervisin plumbing inspector.
Supervisin combination inspector.
The next cate of inspector would be:
* Chief buildin inspector.
4 Chief electrical inspector.
0 4 Chief plumbin inspector.
0 Chief combination inspector.
For each one of the numerical dcsi well as the other
titles,' a j ob description %vould be drawn. This NN70U Id provide at
least 10 cate of inspectors in each of the trades mentioned.
A municipalit would then simpl adop and utilize an of the titles
and j ob descriptions that pertain to its particular needs. In this
manner a Grade 11'buildin inspector in one municipalit utilizin
the plan would be performin identical duties with a Grade, 11 buildin
Inspector cmplo� ye d b a munic some di away also utiliz
L
dist
in the plan. This carne procedure -%vo'uld be applied to all specialized
functions %vithin the buildin department. If such a plan were develop-
ed and utilized, it would have beneficial aspects not onl to the
buildin department b to personnel departments who could then
utilize standard formats in advertisin emplo opportunities. It
would simplif examinin procedures and, most importantl would
brin uniformit to replace Nvbat onl can be considered chaos.
4•
4.
' � 1.::••��Sw+itdw�rLi':XI�' �.'`�ri.wi:�:,n .+::i.ti2•�'R45M.�
a
Effects of.
f Unrelated Additional Duties
r►"�+.t6icui `#..+�6a�~`1:3i�at `' ` :,�.' ", '
2/31
4
t
Effects of Unrelated Additional Duties
Th - e ffect ive building departments are those whose total
�.he most effect 4
• • �- Admin istration an en forcement of
fr�nctron �el.,I spccificall} to
s codes r 7ul�tting construction. Ef
the fectr�'c'Ilc'ss in the. primaprimary v variou
> > 1ill isI l es when there is a Imposition of unrelated. duties.
Ol)iectiv e din
s
th construction industry is one of the most dynamic enterprises
Is and methods of construction arc, intro-
of our society. New materia ;
cons tantiv.. In order to ren - lain abreast of the ever - changin
deiced
,
sccne, building departmen personnel should b given time to con-
temp the trends. Lich time is, not forthcoming w hen ? personnel
are required to perform duties such as • "license collectin( or per -
formin work o il mun icipal b i n which their trade or era t
is em to red. True, this gets more ` mileage out of an employee --
but, a�
whet cost? It is almost
ost a guarantee that his perforance as {
an inspector - will be marginal at best.
The administrator of a building department burdened «pith such
handicaps should make every effort to enlighten his superiors to
the necessit r of divorcing the budding depa from these import-
ant
but unr elated, duties which tend to dilute the effecti of
ins sectors by diverting their time and energies to other functions.
�, 4
2
Reason for Fees
I3ulldln a t
n rtmens (Yeneral c harge fee's for perm its and services.
,� dam•_ -, . - -� --
f ...- �-zz. .. ^ -asp -
�tlCh Zees �lI "(' IIltt I1 tC) I'�1V Me costs C) ()�t'r �tl � � {�.��r.,�
fpDeur.e.au;nas . nwrsx'• <. ,,. ..eucasa• .....+.._.c .ew.
lou C'C l� O,��C'I''itlll � (' 1i'I`lS )ti
l�1)f.'•I1t. �t�Cal��' t 1C' C'C'S C' ��lr �y- _�.
seldom is t fi le case. Building departments leave I d
lighs and lows,
and it is cliff icu t or lillp ossible to forecast construction trends, an
budg accordingly. There are some signs, and they can be most
helpful, but at best forecasting is quite subjective.
If a b u ilding d o artnlent consistently shows a profit, one of t«'O
b
things is wron
The fees are excessive for the service provided, or
j ... The department is inadequately equipped or staffed.
In all likelihood, the second condition xvill be found to prevail.
Man jurisdictions loot: upon fees collected for permits as an addi-
Y l
tional source of revenue and have no qualms about impoverishing
their building department in order to make it a profitable venture.
This is a tragic situation for several reasons, among which are:
... It imposes an additional form of taxation on a segment of the
r
public far in excess of what that segment receives in return
because, as previously stated, if the department is properly
and adequately staffed and equipped, there ,'Fill be little if
1 Y
any profit.. Obviously, if there is a profit, the public is not
receiv i in g the scrvices for w it was assessed, and the fees it
paid are being used to subsidize other functions.
.. The general public is being shortchanged. Although the excess
fees are helping the General Fund, the structures that are being
s
{
i
i
t
4
t
: �: X. r t • .,,r �•:�?t.tcq�t:;�¢; , rawtnpylL � +v' ' �s�f�rtlaWt=�'°•"'g -'t";"!�C"�F�j�"�9�;r�' ° ,i�• " �..•r,Y a , .� �:..
WRIT 117v�wT.?* r. t1 �!' o.' i'Y x�K.;; r s�� �++e7'.,..�•r.�w�r- !f;.�. ^. ..
J
r
MEMORANDUM
e
TO* ACTING CITY MANAGER
FROM: STAFF
REGARDING: CERTIFICATION OF ELECTION JUDGES
DATE OCTOBER 27, 1978
Attached are the names of the Election Judges for the General Election, November
7 1978. Passage of a resolution approving the list is necessary.
A ,• r
4
Acti by Council
E ndorsed .-, ..
� R � 6
lrll o d.1. I° 1 ed.,-
Date
® E SOLVL,'D 4tliat the City
Council of Mal)lewood, Minnesota, accepts the following
list of glection Judges for
the 1978 State General Election., Tuesday, November 7',
1978:
Precinct #1
Precinct �� 7
_ _
Eleanor Mathews, Chairman
Margaret Wolszon, Chairman
Maryls Hartmann
Marcella Flackey
Mike Wasiluc _
Betty Haas
Lorraine Schneider
Myrtle Malm
Wyman Hageman
Precinct #2
Precinct #8
Pat Thompson, Chairman
Jean Myers, Chairman
Bea Hendricks
Audrey Ellis '
John Nichols
Lorraine Fischer
Kathleen Dittel
Rita Frederickson
Evelyn Axdahl
Evelyn Tarara
Precinct #3
Y
P #9 ;
`.: Jeanne Schadt, Chairman
lda.Szczepanski, Chairman
Barb Leiter
Mary Johnson
Doris Broady
June Munkholm
Ruth Mcvann
Anna Hogan
Julie LeClaire
Mildred Grealish
Precin 114
Precinct #10
Caroline Warner, Chairman
Anne Fosburgh, Chairman
Marjory Tooley
Lucille Cahanes
Elsie Wiegert
Dorothy Arbore
Joyce Lipinski.
Mary Lou Lieder
Millie Haugan
Pat Lindner
Precinct #5
Precinct #11
Jeanne Hafner, Chairman
Delores Lofgren, Chairman
Sibbie Sandquist
Maxine Olson
Emma. Klebe
Sara Oleson
James Ball
Delores Fitzgerald
Phyllis Erickson
Jeanette Hage
Precinct #6 & 6A
Precinct #12
Marcella Molohon, Chairman
Mary Libhardt,.Chai.rman
Kathy Zappa
Sylvia Brown
Lorraine. O'Connell
Delores Fastner
Delores Burke
Karen Burton
Jan Wilkins
Audrey Duellman
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council.
FROM: Acting City Manager
SUBJECT: Aeria Mapping
DATE 0 c tob r t 30, 1978
The 19 79 Budget contains $30, 000 for aerial mapping of a portion
of the City. Mapping flights can only be made between snow and
# $ ,,_ , 1eaf cover in the fall and spring Staff feels it would be highly
advantageous to select a mapping company and complete the flight
during the fall, as topographic data could then be made available
for projects currently under review.
In addition staff is askin g g for a budget transfer to allow
encunnbering the funds for a portion of the project during 1978. Under
the City accounting system, funds are allocated to the budget at
the .time of ' encumberance . The amount encumbered for the project
in 1978 will be subtracted from the $30,000 avai lab le in, the 1979
budget.
The City has asked for proposals f om Mark Hurd Aerial Surveys, Inc.
and Aero -M tric Engineering, Inc. These �f irn _are un ,the principal
A i l photogra- engineeri.n companies in the Midwest.
Proposals and a recommendation as to the selection will be presented
at the Council meeting.,
Ac t r ..:
J
e t e d.,
D%
MEMORANDUM
TO Mayor and. City Council
FROM: Eric Blank, Acting City Manager
RE Disposal of Old Financial' Records e
DATE : October 30, 1978
Authorization is requested to make application to the State for disposal
of old financial records.
For the past several years, the City has been microfilming its financial
records. The main reason for microfilming has been to conserve valuable
space in the City Hall--microfilming results in a 96/ reduction in the
number of file cabinets and space required for records storage. Once
records are microfi the original copies are packed and sent to
Howe Moving and Storage Company o (The State Auditor requires that the
on gi.nal copies be kept for six years.) The microfilm copies .are kept
in the City Hall vaul t.-
It has now been over six years since the first records have been micro-
filmed. State law requires that the attached resolution and application
be submitted for approval. It should be noted that the application
requests approval to destroy only the original copies-, The microfilm
.copies will be kept as a permanent record.. (Also, records dated
q p d rior
to the years indicated have not been microfilmed. Consequently the
original copies are sti kept on file.)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution.
f,V-
Acs ion by Council:
E! ox..41.f i
Ise c c, c e ,�,
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, M. S . A. 138.17 governs the destruction-,of city records ; and
WHEREAS, a list of records has been presented to the council with a
request-in writing that destruction be approved by the council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
1. - That the Finance Director is hereby directed to apply to the
Minnesota State Historical Society for an Order authorizing
destruction of the records as described in the attached list..
2. That upon approval by the State of the attached application,
the Finance Director is hereby authorized and directed to
destroy the records listed.
41
PR-1 (Rev. 73) Application No.
MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIE`fY Date Received
117 University Ave., St. Paul, MN 55141
APPLICATION FOR AUTHORITY TO DISPOSE OF RECORDS
IlV$1 f�UCTlOt1lS: Mako.oric�inai and three copies. Complete items 2, 3, �, �, G and 9a, U c. Use reverse side of form to continue records description. If r»ore spac:c�
is noedUd, use white bond paper sit spaced. Send original and two copies to the above address. Detain one copy whii-e your application is being processed.
n, which will be your authority to dispose of records. "The approved copy should be retained permanently.
1'ou will rcceivc� an approved copy of your applicatio
NOTE: Laws of 1971, Chapter 529, Section 3 reads as follows: "it is the policy of the legislature that the disposal and preservation of public records be coil trolit:.;
exclusively by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 1:38 and by this act, thus, no prior, special or general statute shall be construed to authorize or prevent the disposal of
ptrblic records at a time or in a manner different than prescribed by such chapter or by this act and no general or special statute enacted subsequent to this act shai i
be construed to authorize or prevent the disposal.of public records at a time or in a manner different than prescribed in chapter 138 or in this act unless it expressiy
exempts such records from the provisions of such chapter and this act by specific reference to this section."
1. TO: -Minnesota Historical Society
2. FROM: City of Ma Finance Department
Agency or Office Subdivision or Section
3. Quantity of Records; cubic feet 12.5 or linear feet
4. Location of Records: City Ha & Howe Storage
5. Y
5. Laws other than M.S. 138.17 that relate to the destruction or safekeeping of
the records: None to our knowledge
5. I certify that the records listed on this application are accurately .described,
and that they have no further administrative, legal, or fiscal value for this
agency.
A uthorized ignature
FINA -N CE DIRECTOR
isle
7. AUTHORIZATION
Under the authority of Wnnesota Statutes
135.17, it is hereby ordered - that the records
listed on this application be destroyed,
excep t as sh o iA „n b el o vv (i ten? 8).
Director, Minnesota Historical Society
Legislative or State Auditor
Attor General
Date
Date
Date
S. Exceptions to Destruction. (For use by Director, legislative Auditor, State Auditor, and Attorney General only.)
.41.
9. Description of Records - Describe each record series or type of record separately. Number each series, beginning with "1 ”,
a. Series No.
1,
b. Name of record, form numbers, content, usage, arrangement, original, duplicate, or microfilmed { c. Inclusive Dates
Financ Records
Monthly
Batch Proof
Original
Monthly
Sub-Ledger
Or igina 1
Monthly'
Sub - Ledger Payroll Deductions
Original
Monthly
Budget Report
Or igina 1
End of Year
SA-Ledger
Origina
Monthly
General Ledger Books
Original
Accowits
Payab Listings
Original
Monthly
Manic Statements
Original
End of Year Vendor Cards
Or igina l
1971
1971
1971
1971
1.971
1971
1.970 & 1971
1971
1971
(Contin .
n.ws•.y •z.•R.a�.t.�l.N'Y.(RL.Rn{f1'.' #'•.4 e.: .. � :. _ - .h w.w...r,.�yf'r......�.... .. ,. ... ....
•' .. - 7� K. 6. t.:. 4' 9r vu. a• svr•• aa•-. r^ rn .Nr.'wJ.irrar.r.wwrrv....�...r vv.s•w ��'v.v• :•v• - e•: ,, ri+.• n. s- x. �. rL'�!.RN1i�a�.+7o-!'��.r ;.iY: T " *' :..vy..��K`^i "�1?y'f'T �., �'r� 'rnK�•a � '. - ?..........:•. • .. ..
a.. Series No.
z, of record, f6rm numbers, content, usage, arrangement, original, duplicate, or microfilrned
e. Inclusivo Dates
Con' t .) Financ l_a l_ Recor
Expenditure Vouchers & Documents (#8870 Y115163)
Original
1970
&1971
Recrelpt Books ( #3181 - 119704)
Original.
1970
&'1971
Memo & Journal Entries
Original
1971
2,
Payroll Records
=
Cancelled Payroll Checks ( #1 X13673)
Original.
1970
&
1971.
Bi-Monthly Payroll Registers
original.
1970
&
1971
Quarter to Date Payroll. Registers
Original
1970
&
1971
_
Payroll Deduction Listings
Original
1970
1971
Payroll Deductions Sub-Ledger
Original
1971.
3.
Sewer Billing Records
Listing of Amounts Billed by Account, First
'
.
Quarter thru Fourth Quarter
original
1970
&
1971
Listing of Pay on Account, Second
r
Quarter thru Fourth Quarter
.
Original
n
r
1971