HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013 01-28 City Council Meeting PacketThe Listening Forum begins at 6:30 p.m. before the second and fourth regularly scheduled City
Council meetings and replaces Visitor Presentations on the City Council Agenda.
AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 P.M. Monday, January 28, 2013
City Hall, Council Chambers
Meeting No. 02-13
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1. Acknowledgement of Maplewood Residents Serving the Country
C. ROLL CALL
Mayor’s Address on Protocol:
“Welcome to the meeting of the Maplewood City Council. It is our desire to keep all
discussions civil as we work through difficult issues tonight. If you are here for a
Public Hearing or to address the City Council, please familiarize yourself with the
Policies and Procedures and Rules of Civility, which are located near the entrance.
Before addressing the council, sign in with the City Clerk. At the podium please state
your name and address clearly for the record. All comments/questions shall be
posed to the Mayor and Council. The Mayor will then direct staff, as appropriate, to
answer questions or respond to comments.”
D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Approval of January 14, 2013 City Council Workshop Minutes
2. Approval of January 14, 2013 City Council Meeting Minutes
F. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS
None
G. CONSENT AGENDA – Items on the Consent Agenda are considered routine and non-
controversial and are approved by one motion of the council. If a councilmember requests
additional information or wants to make a comment regarding an item, the vote should be
held until the questions or comments are made then the single vote should be taken. If a
councilmember objects to an item it should be removed and acted upon as a separate item.
1. Approval of Claims
2. Authorization to Make Payment for Eden Systems Yearly Support Contract
3. Approval for Police Department to Accept Squad Light Bars
4. Approval for Police Department to Accept Donation from Schmelz Countryside
5. Approve Purchase of 1 Ton Truck and Two John Deere Park Maintenance Machines
6. Approval of Resolution to Increase the Scope of the Feasibility Study, Order
Preliminary Design, and Increase the Project Budget, Arkwright-Sunrise Area Street
Improvements, City Project 12-09
7. Approval of Change Order No. 3, Gladstone Area Improvements – Bid Package 1,
Project 04-21
8. Approval of Police Department Expansion Project Items
9. Commission Handbook Revisions for the Housing and Economic Development
Commission
10. Conditional Use Permit Review for LaMettry Collision Auto Repair, 2951 Maplewood
Drive
11. Conditional Use Permit Termination for Allowing Parking as a Primary Use, 2951
Maplewood Drive
H. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 7:00 pm – First Reading of the Wetland Ordinance Amendment
I. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Approval of 2013 Rules of Procedure for City Council and Council Meetings Manual
2. Approval of a Resolution Authorizing Submission of Request for State Bonding Funds
for East Metro Training Facility
J. NEW BUSINESS
1. Conditional Use Permit Revision–Woodland Hills Church Food Shelf Proposal, 1740 Van Dyke Street (Simple-Majority Vote Required for Approval) a. Planning Commission Report b. CUP Revision Consideration 2. Consider Resolution Adopting Living Streets Policy, City Project 11-11 3. Consideration of a Resolution Supporting the Findings of the Gateway Corridor Alternatives Analysis Study 4. Meeting of Economic Development Authority [Council serves as the EDA]
K. AWARD OF BIDS
1. TH 36 / English Street Interchange Improvements, City Project 09-08
a. Resolution Receiving Bids and Awarding Construction Contract
b. Resolution Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll
c. Approval of RCRRA License Agreement
L. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
None
M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
None
N. ADJOURNMENT
Sign language interpreters for hearing impaired persons are available for public hearings upon
request. The request f or this must be made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk’s
Office at 651.249.2001 to make arrangements. Assisted Listening Devices are also available. Please
check with the City Clerk for availability.
RULES OF CIVILITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY
Following are some rules of civility the City of Maplewood expects of everyone appearing at
Council Meetings – elected officials, staff and citizens. It is hoped that by following these simple rules,
everyone’s opinions can be heard and understood in a reasonable manner. We appreciate the fact that
when appearing at Council meetings, it is understood that everyone will follow these principles: Show
respect for each other, actively listen to one another, keep emotions in check and use respectful
language
Item E1
January 14, 2013
City Council Workshop Minutes 1
MINUTES
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
MANAGER WORKSHOP
5:15 P.M. Monday, January 14, 2013
Council Chambers, City Hall
A. CALL TO ORDER
A meeting of the City Council was held in the City Hall Council Chambers and was called
to order at 5:18 p.m. by Mayor Rossbach.
B. ROLL CALL
Will Rossbach, Mayor Present
Robert Cardinal, Councilmember Present
Rebecca Cave, Councilmember Present
Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present
Marvin Koppen, Councilmember Present
C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Councilmember Cardinal moved to approve the agenda as submitted.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
D. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
E. NEW BUSINESS
1. Commission Interviews
a. Heritage Preservation Commission
b. Parks & Recreation Commission
The following individual was interviewed for appointment to the Heritage Preservation
Commission; John Gaspar.
The following individual was interviewed for reappointment to the Parks & Recreation
Commission; Mike Wilde.
2. Discussion on Off-Sale Liquor License Distance Requirements
City Clerk Guilfoile gave the report and will bring back a modification to the code in
March 2013. City Attorney Kantrud offered additional information to the council.
Packet Page Number 1 of 221
Item E1
January 14, 2013
City Council Workshop Minutes 2
3. Update on Labor Negotiations
a. Declaration of Intent to Close Meeting, State Statute 13d.03
Mayor Rossbach moved to close this portion of the meeting at 6:17 p.m.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes – All
The Motion passed.
Mayor Rossbach opened the meeting at 6:38 p.m. and gave a brief overview of the
discussion held.
F. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Rossbach adjourned the meeting at 6:39 p.m.
Packet Page Number 2 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
1
MINUTES
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 p.m., Monday, January 14, 2013
Council Chambers, City Hall
Meeting No. 01-13
A. CALL TO ORDER
A meeting of the City Council was held in the City Hall Council Chambers and was called
to order at 7:02 p.m. by Mayor Rossbach.
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
C. ROLL CALL
Will Rossbach, Mayor Present
Robert Cardinal, Councilmember Present
Rebecca Cave, Councilmember Present
Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present
Marvin Koppen, Councilmember Present
D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The following items were added to the agenda:
M1 Trash Pickup
M2 Maplewood Monthly
M3 Family Service Center
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the agenda as amended.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Approval of December 10, 2012 City Council Meeting Minutes
The following correction to the minutes was noted: Item number E2 be changed to reflect
Councilmember Koppen seconded the motion.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the December 10, 2012 City Council
Meeting Minutes as amended.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
F. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS
1. Appointments to Commission
Packet Page Number 3 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
2
a. Heritage Preservation Commission
b. Parks & Recreation Commission
Assistant City Manager Ahl gave the staff report
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the Resolution to appoint candidates to
the commission as indicated.
RESOLUTOIN 13-1-835
BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
Hereby appoints the following individuals, who have interviewed with the Maplewood
City Council, to serve on the following commissions:
Heritage Preservation Commission
- John Gaspar, term expires April 30, 2014
Parks & Recreation Commission
- Mike Wilde, term expires April 30, 2015
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes –
The motion passed.
2. Resolution of Appreciate for Dave Edson (33 Years of Service) – Public
Works Employee
Mayor Rossbach read and presented Dave Edson with a resolution of appreciation. He
further presented Mr. Edson with a clock from the City.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the Resolution of Appreciation for Dave
Edson.
RESOLUTION 13-1-836
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
WHEREAS, Dave Edson has been an employee of the City of Maplewood for 33
years, from December of 1979 to January of 2013 and has served faithfully in that
capacity; and
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has appreciated Mr. Edson’s loyalty, insights,
and hard work within the Public Works Department; and
WHEREAS, Dave has contributed his knowledge, skills, and abilities for the
betterment of the City of Maplewood over a period of 33 years; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Edson has shown dedication to his duties and has consistently
contributed his skills and effort for the benefit of the City and its Citizens.
Packet Page Number 4 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
3
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED for and on behalf of the City of
Maplewood, Minnesota, that Dave Edson is hereby extended our gratitude and
appreciation for his 33 years of dedicated service.
Passed by the Maplewood City Council on January 14, 2013.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed
3. Resolution of Appreciation for Peter Fischer – Parks & Recreation
Commissioner
Mayor Rossbach read and presented Peter Fischer with a resolution of appreciation.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the Resolution of Appreciation for
Commissioner Fischer.
RESOLUTION 13-1-837
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
WHEREAS, Peter Fischer has been a member of the Maplewood Parks and
Recreation Commission since January 1st, 1993 and has served faithfully in that
capacity; and
WHEREAS, Peter has freely given of his time and energy, without compensation,
for the betterment of the City of Maplewood; and
WHEREAS, the membership of the commission has appreciated the experience,
insights and good judgment Peter has provided over these many years; and
WHEREAS, Peter has shown sincere dedication to his duties and has
consistently contributed his leadership, time and effort for the benefit of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED for and on behalf of the City of
Maplewood, Minnesota, and its citizens that Peter Fischer is hereby extended our
gratitude and appreciation for his dedicated service.
Passed by the Maplewood City Council on January 14, 2013
Seconded by Councilmember Cardinal Ayes – All
The motion passed
4. Fish Creek’s Minnesota Get Together
Councilmember Juenemann invited citizens to an event being held on February 22nd at
the MCC to help support the Fish Creek Acquisition Project. Additional information can
be found on the city website.
Packet Page Number 5 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
4
G. CONSENT AGENDA
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve agenda items G1-G7.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
1. Approval of Claims
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the Approval of Claims.
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE:
$ 157,851.72 Checks # 88722 thru # 88768
dated 12/04/12 thru 12/11/12
$ 291,134.52 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 12/03/12 thru 12/07/12
$ 145,821.65 Checks # 88769 thru # 88821
dated 12/10/12 thru 12/18/12
$ 405,358.82 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 12/10/12 thru 12/14/12
$ 93,034.53 Checks # 88823 thru # 88879
dated 12/24/12
$ 207,871.03 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 12/17/12 thru 12/21/12
$ 465,163.05 Checks # 88880 thru # 88908
dated 12/31/12
$ 320,384.55 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 12/24/12 thru 12/28/12
$ 314,798.44 Checks # 88923 thru # 88967
dated 01/08/13
$ 215,401.43 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 12/31/12 thru 01/04/13
$ 2,616,819.74 Total Accounts Payable
PAYROLL
$ 520,890.39 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 12/07/12
Packet Page Number 6 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
5
$ 1,371.92 Payroll Deduction check # 9987658 thru # 9987661 dated 12/07/12
$ 525,682.09 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 12/21/12
$ 1,098.00 Payroll Deduction check # 88800 thru # 88801 dated 12/21/12
$ 572,848.27 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 01/04/13
$ 1,098.00 Payroll Deduction check # 9988841 thru # 9988842 dated 01/04/13
$ 1,622,988.67 Total Payroll
$ 4,239,808.41 GRAND TOTAL
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
2. Approval of Designation of Depositories for Investments
Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the Resolution designating depositories for
investments.
RESOLUTION 13-1-838
DESIGNATION OF DEPOSITORIES FOR INVESTMENTS
BE IT RESOLVED, that the following be and hereby are selected as depositories
for time deposits of the City of Maplewood:
Alerus Financial (fka Prosperan Bank, Washington County Bank)
Wells Fargo Bank
US Bank
4M Fund
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the deposits in any of the above depositories
shall not exceed the amount of F.D.I.C. insurance covering such deposit unless
collateral or a bond is furnished as additional security, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that funds in the above depositories may be
withdrawn and wire transferred to any other depository of the city by the request of the
Finance Manager or Assistant Finance Manager.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that these depository designations are effective
until December 31, 2013.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
Packet Page Number 7 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
6
3. Approval of a Lawful Gambling License for Hill Murray Mother’s Club at The
Dive, 3035 White Bear Avenue
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the lawful gambling resolution
application for Hill Murray Mother’s Club to operate at the Dive located at 3035 White
Bear Avenue.
RESOLUTION 13-1-839
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, that
the premise license for lawful gambling is approved for Hill Murray Mother’s Club to
operate at The Dive located at 3035 White Bear Avenue, Maplewood, Minnesota.
FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council waives any objection to the
timeliness of application for said permit as governed by Minnesota Statute §349.213.
FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council requests that the Gambling
Control Division of the Minnesota Department of Gaming approve said license
application as being in compliance with Minnesota Statute §349.213.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it further resolved that this Resolution by the City
Council
of Maplewood, Minnesota, be forwarded to the Gambling Control Division for their
approval.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
4. Approval of 2013 Master Group Contract Between City of Maplewood and
Medica Insurance Company
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the master group contract with Medica
Insurance Company for 2013.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
5. Approval of 2013 Service Agreement Between City of Maplewood and
Financial Concepts Inc. (FCI)
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the service agreement with Financial
Concepts, Inc. for the year 2013.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
6. Approval of 2013 Fuel Contracts with Yocum Oil
Packet Page Number 8 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
7
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the gas and diesel fuel contracts with
Yocum Oil.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
7. Approval of Change in Order No. 1 for Maplewood Mall Sidewalk
Improvements, Project 11-09
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the Resolution Directing Modification of
Existing Construction Contract, Change Order No. 1, for the Maplewood Mall Sidewalk
Improvements, City Project 11-09
RESOLUTION 13-1-840
DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
PROJECT 11-09, CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered
made Improvements Project 11-09, Maplewood Mall Sidewalk Improvements, and has
let a construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes and,
WHEREAS, it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and
designated as Improvement Project 11-09, Change Order No. 1.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, that:
1. The mayor and city engineer are hereby authorized and directed to modify the
existing contract by executing said Change Order No. 1 which is an increase of
$37,525.00.
The revised contract amount is $203,300.00.
Adopted by the Maplewood City Council on this 14th day of January 2013.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
H. PUBLIC HEARING
None
I. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
J. NEW BUSINESS
Packet Page Number 9 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
8
1. Consideration of a Resolution Requesting Ramsey County Withhold Public
Auction for a Tax-Forfeited Property, 1160 Frost Avenue.
Assistant City Manager Ahl gave the staff report and answered questions of the council.
Acting Chief Kvam answered additional questions of the council.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the Resolution requesting Ramsey County
withhold the parcels at 1160 Frost Avenue from public sale or auction for six (6) months.
RESOLUTION 13-1-841
REQUEST TO WITHHOLD PARCELS FROM PUBLIC SALE
WHEREAS, Ramsey County has informed the City of Maplewood of the
opportunity for the city to acquire a use deed or purchase tax forfeited lots.
WHEREAS, the properties are located at the west of the Gladstone Savannah on
Frost Avenue, legal property identification numbers as follows:
PID # 16-29-22-42-0001 and PID # 16-29-22-42-0002
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood, has the option to request a six-month
extension to delay the County’s sale of these parcels to the public. The city can use this
time to further evaluate the city’s need for this property and to submit the required
documentation as needed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council hereby formally
requests by that Ramsey County withhold these two parcels on Frost Avenue for six
months from public sale or auction. This will enable the city time to more thoroughly
analyze its need for the parcels for public purposes and to submit the necessary
application materials.
The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on January 14, 2013.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
2. Approval of 2013 Liquor License Renewals for Club, Off-Sale, On-Sale, and
Wine
City Clerk Guilfoile gave the staff report and answered questions of the council.
Councilmember Cave moved to approve the 2013 Annual Liquor License Renewals for
Club, Off-Sale, On-Sale, and Wine.
Seconded by Councilmember Cardinal Ayes – All
The motion passed.
Packet Page Number 10 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
9
3. Approval of 2013 Rules of Procedure for City Council and Council Meetings
Manual
City Clerk Guilfoile gave the staff report and answered questions of the council.
Councilmember Cardinal moved to return visitor presentation after approval of minutes,
item F on the agenda.
Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes – Council Members Cardinal
and Cave
Nays – Mayor Rossbach, Council
Members Juenemann and
Koppen
The motion failed.
Mayor Rossbach moved to approve City Council Workshops to a start time of 5:00 p.m.;
accept recommendations regarding ad hoc committees as it relates to audio recordings
and retention; and a group picture of the city council be included with each “Council
Corner” article. Staff will bring language clarifying the schedule for councilmembers
writing in the Maplewood Monthly at the next meeting for approval.
Seconded by Councilmember Cardinal Ayes – All
The motion passed.
4. Approval of 2013 Policy and Procedures for a Public Hearing
City Clerk Guilfoile gave the staff report.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the Public Hearing Policies and
Procedures as they are listed and currently exist.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
5. Consideration of 2013 City Council Appointments
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the 2013 Council Appointments
Acting Mayor Kathy Juenemann
Area Chamber of Commerce James Antonen
Karen Guilfoile (Alternate)
Auditor Contact Rebecca Cave
Will Rossbach (Alternate)
Community Design Review Board Marv Koppen
(4th Tuesday 7:00 p.m.) Mike Martin (Staff Liaison)
Packet Page Number 11 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
10
Data Compliance Officers:
Responsible Authority Karen Guilfoile
City Personnel Officer Terrie Rameaux
City Law Enforcement Officer David Thomalla
Dispatch Policy Committee Kathleen Juenemann
Environment & Natural Kathleen Juenemann
Resources Commission Shann Finwall (Staff Liaison)
(3rd Monday 7:00 p.m.)
Fire Relief Association Will Rossbach
Relief By-Laws require Mayor Gayle Bauman(Staff Liaison)
to be member of the Board
Gateway Corridor Group Will Rossbach
Chuck Ahl (Alternate)
Green Team Kathleen Juenemann
(Monthly as Needed) Shann Finwall (Staff Liaison)
Heritage Preservation Marv Koppen
Commission David Fischer (Staff Liaison)
(2nd Thursday at 7:00 p.m.)
Housing Economic Bob Cardinal
Development Commission Mike Martin (Staff Liaison)
(2nd Wednesday at 7:00 p.m.)
Human Rights Commission Kathleen Juenemann
(2nd Tuesday at 7:00 p.m.) Bob Cardinal (Alternate)
Karen Guilfoile (Staff Liaison)
Joint Ice Arena Board Rebecca Cave
Marv Koppen
Will Rossbach (Alternate)
Municipal Legislative James Antonen
Commission Will Rossbach
(Monthly on Wednesday) Kathleen Juenemann (Alternate)
Official Newspaper Maplewood Review
Pioneer Press (Alternate)
Parks & Recreation Rebecca Cave
Commission DuWayne Konewko
(3rd Wednesday at 7:00 p.m.) Jim Taylor/Audra Robbins (Staff Representatives)
Park System Plan Task Force Bob Cardinal
The Partnership Marv Koppen
Dewey Konewko (Staff Liaison)
Packet Page Number 12 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
11
Planning Commission Bob Cardinal
(1st & 3rd Tuesday at 7:00 p.m.) Tom Ekstrand (Staff Liaison)
Police Civil Service Commission Kathleen Juenemann
(Meets as Needed) Terrie Rameaux (Staff Liaison)
Ramsey County League Rebecca Cave
of Local Governments Marv Koppen (Alternate)
Regional Mayors Will Rossbach
Rush Line Corridor Will Rossbach
Chuck Ahl (Staff Liaison) Chuck Ahl (Staff Liaison)
Suburban Rate Authority Chuck Ahl
(First month of quarter)
St. Paul Water Utility Will Rossbach
Transportation Advisory Board Will Rossbach
Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes – All
The motion passed.
A separate vote was taken for the Ramsey/Washington Suburban Cable Commission.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the following:
Ramsey/Washington Suburban Kim Facile
Cable Commission Bob Cardinal (Alternate)
Seconded by Mayor Rossbach Ayes – All
The motion passed.
6. Hills and Dales Area Street Improvements, City Project 09-15, Resolution
Accepting Assessment Roll and Calling for Re-Assessment Public Hearing
for February 11, 2013
Public Works Director/City Engineer Thompson gave the staff report.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the Resolution accepting the
assessment roll for 2002 Duluth Street, 2132 Atlantic Street, 2117 Atlantic Street, 1232
Shryer Avenue, 2017 Duluth Street, 1246 E. County Road B, 1237 Leland Road, 2210
Duluth Street, 1685 Howard Street, 1866 Furness Street, and 1695 Howard Street, and
calling the Assessment Hearing for Re-Assessment of subject properties for February
11, 2013 at 7:00 pm for the Hills and Dales Area Street Improvements, City Project 09-
15.
Packet Page Number 13 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
12
RESOLUTION 13-1-842
ACCEPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL AND
ORDERING ASSESSMENT HEARING FOR REASSESSMENT
WHEREAS, the clerk and the city engineer have, at the direction of the council,
prepared an assessment roll of eleven residential properties within Hills and Dales Area
Street Improvements, City Project 09-15, and the said assessment roll is on file in the
office of the city engineer;
WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on January 25, 2010 and project was
ordered to proceed; and
WHEREAS, all benefiting property owners were mailed notice of the assessment
amount and date and time of the hearing and the original Assessment Hearing was held
May 10, 2010; and
WHEREAS, the City received objections at that time from the following eleven
residential property owners:
1) Raymond R. Decker, 2002 Duluth Street
2) Connie Johnson, 2132 Atlantic Street
3) Esther D. Olson, 2117 Atlantic Street
4) Arthur Moore and Megan Nelson, 1232 Shryer Avenue
5) Kenneth G. Dufner and Therese A. Dufner, 2017 Duluth Street
6) Peggy J. Hartzell, 1246 E. County Road B
7) Jay R. Gruett, 1237 Leland Road
8) Rebecca Gurrola, 2210 Duluth Street
9) Phoenix Residence Inc. a Minnesota non-profit Corporation, 1685 Howard
Street
10) Phoenix Residence Inc. a Minnesota non-profit Corporation, 1866 Furness
Street
11) Bob A. M. Serreyn and Dominic J. Chiappetta, 1695 Howard Street
WHEREAS, the appeal by subject properties was made to Ramsey County
District Court and order of judgment calls for Reassessment as provided in Minn. Stat.
429.071; and
WHEREAS, the City intends reassess subject properties accordingly.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA:
1. A hearing shall be held on the 11th day of February, 2013, at the city hall at 7:00
p.m. to pass upon such proposed reassessment and at such time and place all persons
owning property affected by such improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard
with reference to such reassessment.
2. The city clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed
reassessment to be published in the official newspaper, at least two weeks prior to the
hearing, and to mail notices to the owners of all property affected by said reassessment.
Packet Page Number 14 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
13
3. The notice of hearing shall state the date, time and place of hearing, the general
nature of the improvement, the area to be reassessed, that the proposed assessment
roll is on file with the clerk and city engineer, and that written or oral objections will be
considered.
4. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of
the reassessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the reassessment on such
property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City of Maplewood, except
that no interest shall be charged if the entire reassessment is paid within 30 days from
the adoption of the reassessment. Owner may at any time thereafter, pay to the City of
Maplewood the entire amount of the reassessment remaining unpaid, with interest
accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment
must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of
the succeeding year.
Adopted by the City Council this 14th day of January 2013.
Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes – All
The motion passed.
7. Authorization of Funds to Investigate Parcel of Land Under Consideration
on 3M Campus for Purpose of Constructing Fire Station #1
Assistant City Manager Ahl gave the staff report and answered questions of the council.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to authorize the Assistant City Manager to enter into
an agreement with Kimley-Horn, Inc. for evaluation services up to $65,000 for evaluation
of a new fire station on 3M property with funding from the Public Safety Expansion Fund.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed.
K. AWARD OF BIDS
None
L. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
1. Approval of Joint Meeting with Oakdale City Council
Assistant City Manager Ahl gave the staff report.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve a joint meeting with the Oakdale City
Council on Tuesday, February 26, 2013 at 5:00 p.m. at Oakdale City Hall.
Seconded by Mayor Rossbach Ayes – All
The motion passed.
Packet Page Number 15 of 221
January 14, 2013
City Council Meeting Minutes
14
2. Set City Council – Management Team Retreat Date
City Clerk Guilfoile gave the staff report and answered questions of the council.
Mayor Rossbach moved the City Council hold the annual Council-Management Retreat
on Wednesday, March 6, 2013 starting at 2:00 p.m.
Seconded by Councilmember Cave Ayes – All
The motion passed.
M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
1. Trash Pickup
Councilmember Juenemann informed residents that the 2013 trash pickup rates will be
lower than the 2012 rates. She also informed residents if they have a cart issue of any
kind they are to contact Allied Waste Management directly.
2. Maplewood Monthly
Councilmember Cardinal commented on how tremendous the January 2013 issue of the
Maplewood Monthly is. He further requested that information on free Maplewood Cable
Stations be available in the lobby for residents.
3. Family Service Center
Councilmember Cardinal recognized the organizations that are providing family services
in Maplewood.
N. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Rossbach adjourned the meeting at 9:02 p.m.
Packet Page Number 16 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
AGENDA NO.G-1
TO:City Council
FROM:Finance Manager
RE:APPROVAL OF CLAIMS
DATE:
1,025,632.97$ Checks # 88968 thru # 89032
dated 01/07/13 thru 01/15/13
399,733.54$ Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated01/07/13 thru 01/11/13
184,487.63$ Checks # 89033 thru # 89068
dated 01/22/13
262,118.06$ Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 01/11/13 thru 01/18/13
1,871,972.20$ Total Accounts Payable
602,937.56$ Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 01/18/13
763.00$ Payroll Deduction check # 9988882 thru # 9988883
dated 01/18/13
603,700.56$ Total Payroll
2,475,672.76$ GRAND TOTAL
as
attachments
Attached is a detailed listing of these claims. Please call me at 651-249-2902 if you have any questions on the
attached listing. This will allow me to check the supporting documentation on file if necessary.
PAYROLL
AGENDA REPORT
January 28, 2013
Attached is a listing of paid bills for informational purposes. The City Manager has reviewed the bills
and authorized payment in accordance with City Council approved policies.
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE:
Packet Page Number 17 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
Check Description Amount
88968 04848 MONTHLY PREMIUM - JANUARY 240.67
88969 02929 LTC MONTHLY PREMIUM - JANUARY 388.66
88970 00644 MONTHLY PREMIUM - JANUARY 12,668.59
88971 01126 MONTHLY PREMIUM - JANUARY 544.00
88972 02464 FUNDS FOR ATMS 10,000.00
88973 04842 ZUMBA INSTRUCTION NSP - DEC 120.00
88974 02639 PROJ 04-21 GLADSTONE AREA PMT#4 98,832.34
02639 PROJ 11-22 MAPLEWOOD DUMP SITE #1 92,218.49
88975 04137 KARATE INSTRUCTION SEPT - DEC 2,129.00
88976 01973 CAR WASHES - DEC 64.00
88977 00555 REIMB FOR PARKING & MILEAGE 1/3-5/29 258.08
00555 REIMB FOR MILEAGE 5/29 - 8/20 178.88
00555 REIMB FOR MILEAGE 8/24 - 12/12 168.39
88978 00585 NET BILLABLE TICKETS - DEC 221.85
88979 00393 MONTHLY SURTAX - DEC 15786123035 2,934.25
88980 04265 ZUMBA INSTRUCTION - DEC 115.50
88981 01337 911 DISPATCH SERVICES - DEC 27,409.41
01337 FLEET SUPPORT FEE - DEC 455.52
88982 01337 TRUTH IN TAXATION NOTICE 2012 2,767.22
88983 01546 T-SHIRTS FOR B-BALL CLINIC 182.50
88984 01574 PROJ 11-14 BARTELMY-MEYER PMT#9 259,164.66
88985 04845 RECYCLING FEE - DEC 27,499.50
88986 04252 POLARFLEX FRONT MOUNT BLADE 2,850.95
04252 PRE-WET SYSTEM FOR UNIT #536 2,392.93
04252 GPS SPEED CONTROL 563.23
88987 04192 EMS BILLING - DEC 4,431.70
88988 01190 ELECTRIC UTILITY 14,712.12
01190 ELECTRIC & GAS UTILITY 6,878.15
88989 01798 VACCUM SERVICE DIESEL FUEL TANK 420.00
88990 01632 PERFORMANCE MCC JAN 11 & 12 6,400.00
88991 02347 MEMBERSHIP DUES 150.00
88992 00008 MEMBERSHIP DUES 100.00
88993 00135 MEMBERSHIP DUES 200.00
88994 04237 MEMBERSHIP DUES 400.00
88995 00159 REIMB FOR VEH PARTS 12/22 10.17
88996 03738 ATTORNEY SERVICE FEES/RENT - FEB 6,775.00
88997 04312 CONTRACT DISEASE TREE INSPECTION 3,958.23
88998 00379 PROJ 11-19 LARK AVE PMT#1 83,790.00
88999 04911 RENTAL OF TABLE LINENS MCC 192.38
89000 04867 PROF SRVS THRU 12/14 - TRASH PLAN 150.00
89001 00487 PROJ 09-09 TRAINING CTR PMT#2 85,984.50
89002 04846 MEDICAL SUPPLIES 376.39
89003 03597 REIMB FOR MILEAGE 12/4 - 1/3 14.83
89004 05030 EQUIP LEASE - MCC - PMT#6 4,344.07
89005 05174 BASKETBALL CLINIC INSTRUCTION 523.87
89006 00846 PHONE BASED INTERPRETIVE SRVS 22.33
89007 02336 FITNESS CONSULTANT SRVS - 4TH QTR 1,100.00
89008 03818 MONTHLY PREMIUM - JANUARY 160,740.55
89009 03270 YOUTH B-BALL OFFICIALS DEC 1-15 750.00
89010 05173 2012 PLEDGES 1,007.00
89011 01085 MONTHLY PREMIUM - JANUARY 3,051.65
89012 05175 REGISTRATION FEE & SHIRT 50.00
89013 00001 R PENDERGRASS CN 07023447 815.00
89014 00001 REIMB RP MGMT SEWER TELEVISING 350.00
89015 00001 REFUND S HEATON MEMBERSHIP 285.60
89016 00001 REFUND L OLMSTEAD MEMBERSHIP 176.72
01/07/2013 GLTC PREMIUM PAYMENTS
01/07/2013 HEALTHPARTNERS
01/07/2013 NCPERS MINNESOTA
Check Register
City of Maplewood
01/11/2013
Date Vendor
01/07/2013 AVESIS
01/15/2013 ARNT CONSTRUCTION INC
01/15/2013 THE EDGE MARTIAL ARTS
01/15/2013 ERICKSON OIL PRODUCTS INC
01/09/2013 US BANK
01/15/2013 MARY JOSEPHINE ANDERSON
01/15/2013 ARNT CONSTRUCTION INC
01/15/2013 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL
01/15/2013 DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY
01/15/2013 MARIA PIRELA
01/15/2013 VIRGINIA GAYNOR
01/15/2013 VIRGINIA GAYNOR
01/15/2013 VIRGINIA GAYNOR
01/15/2013 SUBURBAN SPORTSWEAR
01/15/2013 T.A. SCHIFSKY & SONS, INC
01/15/2013 TENNIS SANITATION LLC
01/15/2013 RAMSEY COUNTY-PROP REC & REV
01/15/2013 RAMSEY COUNTY-PROP REC & REV
01/15/2013 RAMSEY COUNTY-PROP REC & REV
01/15/2013 TRANS-MEDIC
01/15/2013 XCEL ENERGY
01/15/2013 XCEL ENERGY
01/15/2013 TOWMASTER TRUCK EQUIP. INC.
01/15/2013 TOWMASTER TRUCK EQUIP. INC.
01/15/2013 TOWMASTER TRUCK EQUIP. INC.
01/15/2013 A M E M
01/15/2013 ASSN OF TRNG OFFICERS OF MN
01/15/2013 ASSOC OF MN BLDG OFFICIALS
01/15/2013 YOCUM OIL CO.
01/11/2013 TONIC SOL - FA, L.C.
01/15/2013 10,000 LAKES CHAPTER
01/15/2013 DAVE PERKINS CONTRACTING INC
01/15/2013 DECKCI DECOR
01/15/2013 FOTH INFRASTRUCTURE & ENVIR
01/15/2013 PAUL BARTZ
01/15/2013 CHARLES E. BETHEL
01/15/2013 BRANCH & BOUGH
01/15/2013 KANSAS STATE BANK OF MANHATTAN
01/15/2013 JEREMY KLEIN
01/15/2013 LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES
01/15/2013 FRATTALONE COMPANIES INC.
01/15/2013 HEALTHEAST
01/15/2013 MARY JO HOFMEISTER
01/15/2013 MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL FUND
01/15/2013 MN LIFE INSURANCE
01/15/2013 MPFF
01/15/2013 M A TAYLOR INC
01/15/2013 MEDICA
01/15/2013 MICHAEL A. MILLER/ISN
01/15/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/15/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/15/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/15/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
Packet Page Number 18 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
89017 00001 REFUND D BOSLEY MEMBERSHIP 85.68
89018 00001 CHILD INC. - CHARITABLE GAMBLING 80.00
89019 00001 REFUND M DUNLEVY MEMBERSHIP 73.36
89020 00001 S LARSON CN 08005514 51.17
89021 00001 REFUND E ADAMS MEMBERSHIP 44.64
89022 04581 SUBSCRIPTION FOR LETS - JAN 150.00
89023 01480 TIRE BALANCER 4,145.00
89024 01836 JOINT POWER AGREEMENT - OCT-DEC 2,700.00
89025 00198 WATER UTILITY 748.13
00198 WATER UTILITY 62.46
89026 01550 ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS - DEC 3,941.80
89027 04528 ZUMBA INSTRUCTION - DEC 152.70
89028 03074 SEMIANNUAL PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE 155.71
89029 04104 REPLACE COMPRESSOR AT CITY HALL 17,870.00
89030 00529 LTD PLAN 4043120-2 - JAN 3,176.80
00529 STD PLAN 4043120-1 - JAN 2,385.71
89031 03606 PROJ 11-09 MW MALL SIDEWALK PMT#3 57,030.93
89032 04179 PROGRAM DISPLAY SIGN MCC - DEC 250.00
01/15/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/15/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/15/2013 ORION SYSTEMS/NETWORKS
01/15/2013 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL
01/15/2013 CITY OF ST PAUL
01/15/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/15/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/15/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/15/2013 SARA M. R. THOMPSON
01/15/2013 TOTAL REFRIGERATION SYS INC
01/15/2013 TRANE U.S. INC.
01/15/2013 ST. PAUL REGIONAL WATER SRVS
01/15/2013 ST. PAUL REGIONAL WATER SRVS
01/15/2013 SUMMIT INSPECTIONS
01/15/2013 VISUAL IMAGE PROMOTIONS
1,025,632.97
65 Checks in this report.
01/15/2013 UNION SECURITY INSURANCE CO
01/15/2013 UNION SECURITY INSURANCE CO
01/15/2013 URBAN COMPANIES
Packet Page Number 19 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
Settlement
Date Payee Description Amount
1/7/2013 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 35,799.65
1/7/2013 MN Dept of Natural Resources DNR electronic licenses 3,363.00
1/7/2013 U.S. Treasurer Federal Payroll Tax 105,557.22
1/7/2013 P.E.R.A.P.E.R.A.90,201.75
1/7/2013 ICMA (Vantagepointe)Retiree Health Savings 42,376.02
1/8/2013 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 28,140.11
1/8/2013 MidAmerica - ING HRA Flex plan 16,087.73
1/8/2013 Labor Unions Union Dues 2,066.35
1/9/2013 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 27,772.16
1/10/2013 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 23,903.86
1/11/2013 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 21,131.94
1/11/2013 MN Dept of Natural Resources DNR electronic licenses 2,748.00
1/11/2013 Optum Health DCRP & Flex plan payments 585.75
TOTAL 399,733.54
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Disbursements via Debits to Checking account
Packet Page Number 20 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
Check Description Amount
89033 04944 SNACK BAR ORDERS - DEC 700.03
89034 02728 PROJ 09-08 PROF SRVS THRU 11/30/12 86,196.38
02728 PROJ 04-21 PROF SRVS THRU 11/30/12 8,177.88
02728 PROJ 04-25 PROF SRVS THRU 11/30/12 431.96
89035 04316 AUTO PAWN SYSTEM - DEC 441.60
89036 01409 WETLAND MITIGATION MONITORING 724.32
89037 04252 VARITECH ANTI-ICING UNIT - 200 7,598.81
89038 01190 ELECTRIC & GAS UTILITY 966.26
89039 01798 CONTRACT GASOLINE - DEC 14,984.00
01798 CONTRACT DIESEL FUEL - JAN 9,469.53
01798 DIFF ON PRICE MARKET-CONTRACT -290.48
89040 01803 BROOMS FOR SWEEPER/PLOW BLADE 2,358.22
89041 00111 PATROL HOURS 1/1 - 1/13 1,312.50
89042 00134 ANNUAL DUES 2013 10,525.00
89043 00252 DUES 50.00
89044 02585 OFFICER CARDIAC STRESS TEST 170.00
89045 00298 CEAM ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP 60.00
89046 00420 VEHICLE CLEANING & DETAILING - DEC 181.68
89047 05028 CITY HALL SOLAR SYSTEM LEASE - JAN 397.00
05028 MCC SOLAR SYSTEM LEASE - JAN 369.00
89048 00472 CONSULTING FEES 12/31 - 01/11/13 1,250.00
89049 05177 FUNDS FROM NSP 5K DONATED TO LLS 1,752.28
89050 00986 MONTHLY SAC - DECEMBER 18,730.80
89051 01115 ANNUAL DUES 9,593.50
89052 01175 % OF PROFIT-MAINT MCKNIGHT FIELDS 2,908.95
89053 00001 MAPLE TREE - CHARITABLE GAMBLING 500.00
89054 00001 REFUND G JOHNSON MEMBERSHIP 102.12
89055 00001 REFUND M ST.CLAIR GYMNASTICS 94.00
89056 00001 J EBERHARD CN 10--013637 78.00
89057 00001 REFUND J PHILLIPPI HP BENEFIT 40.00
89058 03151 REPLENISH PETTY CASH 195.30
89059 04112 TWO WAY RADIO PARTS & EQUIP 371.79
89060 00396 TRAINING - M FORSYTHE 250.00
89061 05178 INTERPRETIVE SIGN RESEARCH 500.00
89062 03897 ANNUAL DUES 2013 1,000.00
89063 02008 SALT BRINE SOLUTION 131.03
89064 01342 MEMBERSHIP DUES 2013 50.00
89065 01387 ADMIN FEE FOR STRESS TEST - JAN 100.00
89066 01836 RADIO SRVS & MAINT - DEC 101.35
89067 03598 REIMB FOR TUITION & BOOKS 10/29-12/22 1,614.82
89068 05176 EMERGENCY CELL PHONE LOCATOR 300.0001/22/2013 T-MOBILE USA
184,487.63
36 Checks in this report.
01/22/2013 DR. JAMES ROSSINI
01/22/2013 CITY OF ST PAUL
01/22/2013 PAUL THEISEN
01/22/2013 RAMSEY CO LEAGUE OF LOCAL GOV
01/22/2013 RAMSEY COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS
01/22/2013 RAMSEY CTY CHF OF POLICE ASSN
01/22/2013 PROFESSIONAL WIRELESS COMM
01/22/2013 MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
01/22/2013 JANICE QUICK
01/22/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/22/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/22/2013 PETTY CASH
01/22/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/22/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/22/2013 ONE TIME VENDOR
01/22/2013 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
01/22/2013 MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMM
01/22/2013 CITY OF NORTH ST PAUL
01/22/2013 ENERGY ALTERNATIVES SOLAR, LLC
01/22/2013 MICHAEL A ERICSON
01/22/2013 THE LEUKIMIA & LYMPHOMA SOCIETY
01/22/2013 CITY ENGINEERS ASSOC OF MN
01/22/2013 DOWNTOWNER DETAIL CENTER
01/22/2013 ENERGY ALTERNATIVES SOLAR, LLC
01/22/2013 ASSN OF METRO MUNICIPALITIES
01/22/2013 CAPITOL CITY REG FIRE FIGHTERS
01/22/2013 CENTRAL INTERNAL MEDICINE
01/22/2013 YOCUM OIL CO.
01/22/2013 ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS, INC.
01/22/2013 ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES
01/22/2013 XCEL ENERGY
01/22/2013 YOCUM OIL CO.
01/22/2013 YOCUM OIL CO.
01/22/2013 CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS RECEIVABLES
01/22/2013 S.E.H.
01/22/2013 TOWMASTER TRUCK EQUIP. INC.
01/22/2013 KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC
01/22/2013 KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC
01/22/2013 KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC
Check Register
City of Maplewood
01/18/2013
Date Vendor
01/22/2013 HILLCREST VENTURES LLC
Packet Page Number 21 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
Settlement
Date Payee Description Amount
1/14/2013 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 26,733.67
1/15/2013 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 25,431.83
1/15/2013 VANCO Billing fee 154.50
1/15/2013 MN Dept of Revenue MN Care Tax 6,839.00
1/16/2013 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 34,835.57
1/17/2013 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 26,724.68
1/18/2013 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 11,594.60
1/18/2013 MN Dept of Natural Resources DNR electronic licenses 1,201.50
1/18/2013 US Bank VISA One Card*Purchasing card items 74,649.80
1/18/2013 ICMA (Vantagepointe)Deferred Compensation 10,101.21
1/18/2013 ING - State Plan Deferred Compensation 43,851.70
TOTAL 262,118.06
*Detailed listing of VISA purchases is attached.
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Disbursements via Debits to Checking account
Packet Page Number 22 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
Transaction Date Posting Date Merchant Name Transaction Amount Name
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC.$26.21 CLINT ABEL
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC.$38.95 CLINT ABEL
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC.$497.76 CLINT ABEL
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $23.80 DAVE ADAMS
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 MENARDS 3059 $5.67 DAVE ADAMS
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $25.91 DAVE ADAMS
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 TARGET 00011858 $21.41 R CHARLES AHL
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 MINNESOTA GOVERNMENT F $15.00 GAYLE BAUMAN
01/09/2013 01/11/2013 PAKOR, INC.$473.01 REGAN BEGGS
01/09/2013 01/11/2013 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $77.50 REGAN BEGGS
01/01/2013 01/02/2013 WEDDINGPAGES INC $311.20 CHRISTINE BERNARDY
01/03/2013 01/07/2013 BROADWAY RENTAL $777.27 CHRISTINE BERNARDY
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 BROADWAY RENTAL $58.93 CHRISTINE BERNARDY
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 KARE $1,666.00 CHRISTINE BERNARDY
01/09/2013 01/11/2013 TIGER OAK $650.00 CHRISTINE BERNARDY
01/02/2013 01/03/2013 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC.$143.29 BRIAN BIERDEMAN
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 UNDER ARMOUR DIRECT VIRT $269.98 BRIAN BIERDEMAN
01/05/2013 01/07/2013 BLUE RIBBON BAIT & TACKLE $8.55 OAKLEY BIESANZ
01/02/2013 01/04/2013 TARGET 00025197 $41.02 NEIL BRENEMAN
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 HUDSON HOUSE GRAND HOTEL $210.00 NEIL BRENEMAN
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 AUTO PLUS NO ST PAUL 392 $116.33 TROY BRINK
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 MILLS FLEET FARM #2,700 $88.72 TROY BRINK
12/31/2012 01/08/2013 MILLS FLEET FARM #2,700 ($5.76)TROY BRINK
01/02/2013 01/03/2013 THE UPS STORE 2171 $12.37 TROY BRINK
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 RED WING SHOE STORE $186.99 BRENT BUCKLEY
01/09/2013 01/11/2013 RED WING SHOE STORE $191.24 BRENT BUCKLEY
01/01/2013 01/02/2013 PAYMENT SERVICES $43.92 SARAH BURLINGAME
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 MARIPOSA PUBLISHING $61.06 SARAH BURLINGAME
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 FIRST SHRED $79.50 SARAH BURLINGAME
01/10/2013 01/11/2013 HRM USA 800.403.8285 $651.95 SARAH BURLINGAME
01/05/2013 01/08/2013 BROWNELLS INC $64.47 DANIEL BUSACK
01/02/2013 01/03/2013 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE $70.88 JOHN CAPISTRANT
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE $24.50 JOHN CAPISTRANT
01/08/2013 01/10/2013 NAPA STORE 3279016 $4.81 JOHN CAPISTRANT
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 RED WING SHOE STORE $91.06 NICHOLAS CARVER
01/02/2013 01/03/2013 VIKING ELECTRIC - CREDIT $593.16 SCOTT CHRISTENSON
01/03/2013 01/07/2013 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $12.37 SCOTT CHRISTENSON
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 WW GRAINGER $41.29 SCOTT CHRISTENSON
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 EMIL'S TAVERN AND GRIL ($28.83)SCOTT CHRISTENSON
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC.$276.15 KERRY CROTTY
01/03/2013 01/07/2013 NORTHERN TOOL EQUIP-MN $39.99 CHARLES DEAVER
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 NORTHERN TOOL EQUIP-MN ($39.99)CHARLES DEAVER
01/05/2013 01/07/2013 MENARDS 3022 $26.76 CHARLES DEAVER
01/05/2013 01/07/2013 MILLS FLEET FARM #2,700 $21.41 CHARLES DEAVER
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 G&K SERVICES 182 $87.52 CHARLES DEAVER
01/09/2013 01/11/2013 WILD BIRD STORE $27.47 CHARLES DEAVER
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $30.39 TOM DOUGLASS
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 COMMERCIAL POOL & SPA SUP $45.16 TOM DOUGLASS
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 AQUA LOGICS INC $782.80 TOM DOUGLASS
12/31/2012 01/03/2013 COMMERCIAL POOL & SPA SUP $152.12 TOM DOUGLASS
01/02/2013 01/03/2013 TRI DIM FILTER CORP $672.62 TOM DOUGLASS
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 NUCO2 01 OF 01 $241.96 TOM DOUGLASS
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 NUCO2 01 OF 01 $95.54 TOM DOUGLASS
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 NUCO2 01 OF 01 $275.85 TOM DOUGLASS
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 NUCO2 01 OF 01 $156.92 TOM DOUGLASS
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 NUCO2 01 OF 01 $205.94 TOM DOUGLASS
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 NUCO2 01 OF 01 $161.45 TOM DOUGLASS
Packet Page Number 23 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
01/11/2013 01/11/2013 TIERNEY BROTHERS INC $121.22 TOM DOUGLASS
01/08/2013 01/10/2013 HIGH SPEED GEAR $123.10 MICHAEL DUGAS
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 SEARS ROEBUCK 1122 $83.34 DOUG EDGE
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE $41.14 DAVE EDSON
01/10/2013 01/11/2013 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE $19.26 DAVE EDSON
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 U OF M CCE NONCREDIT $70.00 ANDREW ENGSTROM
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 U OF M CCE NONCREDIT $70.00 ANDREW ENGSTROM
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 WALGREENS #7388 $319.98 PAUL E EVERSON
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 COLLINS ELECTRICAL CONSTR $695.17 LARRY FARR
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 G&K SERVICES 182 $118.40 LARRY FARR
12/28/2012 01/02/2013 WW GRAINGER $92.34 LARRY FARR
12/29/2012 12/31/2012 CINTAS #470 $89.20 LARRY FARR
01/01/2013 01/03/2013 WM EZPAY $479.57 LARRY FARR
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 WM EZPAY $598.80 LARRY FARR
01/05/2013 01/07/2013 WM EZPAY $452.30 LARRY FARR
01/05/2013 01/07/2013 WM EZPAY $1,018.30 LARRY FARR
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 MINNESOTA ELEVATOR INC $1,672.14 LARRY FARR
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 GOODWILL $21.42 LARRY FARR
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 BRIN NORTHWESTERN GLASS C $668.53 LARRY FARR
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 G&K SERVICES 182 $631.36 LARRY FARR
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 G&K SERVICES 182 $338.18 LARRY FARR
01/09/2013 01/11/2013 OFFICE MAX $88.07 LARRY FARR
01/06/2013 01/07/2013 KOHL'S #0052 $96.00 TIMOTHY FLOR
01/06/2013 01/07/2013 MACY*S EAST #236 $144.95 TIMOTHY FLOR
01/06/2013 01/07/2013 RUN N FUN $66.50 TIMOTHY FLOR
12/29/2012 12/31/2012 HP DIRECT-PUBLICSECTOR $4,219.74 MYCHAL FOWLDS
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 BEST BUY MHT 00003293 $1,725.24 MYCHAL FOWLDS
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 BEST BUY 00000075 ($37.54)MYCHAL FOWLDS
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 BEST BUY 00000075 $12.47 MYCHAL FOWLDS
01/06/2013 01/07/2013 VZWRLSS*APOCC VISN $724.82 MYCHAL FOWLDS
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 IDU*INSIGHT PUBLIC SEC $855.44 MYCHAL FOWLDS
01/10/2013 01/11/2013 HP DIRECT-PUBLICSECTOR $2,035.38 MYCHAL FOWLDS
12/29/2012 12/31/2012 HP DIRECT-PUBLICSECTOR $4,176.89 NICK FRANZEN
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 BATTERIES PLUS #31 $41.77 NICK FRANZEN
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 CDW GOVERNMENT $180.28 NICK FRANZEN
01/10/2013 01/11/2013 TARGET 00011858 $26.77 NICK FRANZEN
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC.$117.00 CLARENCE GERVAIS
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 JOANN ETC #1902 $159.05 JAN GREW HAYMAN
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 VZWRLSS*APOCC VISN $107.61 KAREN GUILFOILE
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 WW GRAINGER $48.44 MARK HAAG
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 SEARS ROEBUCK 1122 $269.85 MARK HAAG
01/02/2013 01/04/2013 RED WING SHOE STORE $229.49 TAMARA HAYS
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 DOLRTREE 3150 00031500 $16.07 RON HORWATH
01/02/2013 01/03/2013 PRICE CHOPPER INC $1,196.06 RON HORWATH
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 AGM MATS INC $159.49 RON HORWATH
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 USPS 26833895523402076 $10.80 ANN HUTCHINSON
01/05/2013 01/07/2013 JOANN ETC #1970 $80.29 ANN HUTCHINSON
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 MILLS FLEET FARM #2,700 $85.65 ANN HUTCHINSON
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 TARGET 00011858 $10.70 DAVID JAHN
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $21.19 DAVID JAHN
01/07/2013 01/10/2013 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $842.96 DAVID JAHN
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 TARGET 00011858 $8.14 DAVID JAHN
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC.$16.20 TOM KALKA
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC.$132.41 TOM KALKA
01/02/2013 01/03/2013 THE UPS STORE 2171 $14.57 NICHOLAS KREKELER
01/02/2013 01/04/2013 VALLEY TROPHY $8.55 NICHOLAS KREKELER
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 SHOE MALL #10 $44.99 BRETT KROLL
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 DICK'S SPORTING GOODS619 $42.84 BRETT KROLL
Packet Page Number 24 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 HAYNEEDLE INC $189.98 BRETT KROLL
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC.$25.00 BRETT KROLL
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 LA POLICE GEAR INC $128.98 BRETT KROLL
01/02/2013 01/02/2013 COMCAST CABLE COMM $67.45 DAVID KVAM
01/03/2013 01/07/2013 MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLIC $130.00 DAVID KVAM
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 THOMSON WEST*TCD $294.16 DAVID KVAM
01/08/2013 01/10/2013 STREICHER'S MO $1,600.00 DAVID KVAM
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT $3,439.38 STEVE LUKIN
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT $3,625.27 STEVE LUKIN
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 BARNETT CHRYJEEPKIA $215.71 STEVE LUKIN
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 CENTURY COLLEGE-CE $100.00 MICHAEL MONDOR
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC $2,464.00 MICHAEL MONDOR
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC $789.66 MICHAEL MONDOR
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 MOTION COMPUTING INC $372.99 MICHAEL MONDOR
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 MOTION COMPUTING INC $2,309.45 MICHAEL MONDOR
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 CENTURY COLLEGE-BO $264.00 MICHAEL MONDOR
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 MN NURSERY & LANDSCAPE $125.00 BRYAN NAGEL
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 MN NURSERY & LANDSCAPE $125.00 BRYAN NAGEL
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 G&K SERVICES 182 $1,145.23 AMY NIVEN
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC.$290.73 MICHAEL NYE
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC.$6.73 MICHAEL NYE
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 RED WING SHOE STORE $176.44 ERICK OSWALD
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $64.44 MARY KAY PALANK
01/03/2013 01/07/2013 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 ($11.12)MARY KAY PALANK
01/03/2013 01/07/2013 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $90.72 MARY KAY PALANK
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $61.81 MARY KAY PALANK
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $64.49 MARY KAY PALANK
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $59.33 MARY KAY PALANK
12/29/2012 12/31/2012 OREILLY AUTO 00032565 $20.33 ROBERT PETERSON
01/09/2013 01/11/2013 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 ($70.64)ROBERT PETERSON
01/09/2013 01/09/2013 AMAZON.COM $35.10 PHILIP F POWELL
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 WHEELCO BRAKE &SUPPLY ($280.50)STEVEN PRIEM
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 COMO LUBE & SUPPLIES $149.97 STEVEN PRIEM
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 PRO-TECH MARKEL SERVICES $150.00 STEVEN PRIEM
01/02/2013 01/03/2013 AUTO PLUS NO ST PAUL 392 $10.77 STEVEN PRIEM
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 AUTO PLUS NO ST PAUL 392 $328.91 STEVEN PRIEM
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIP INC $1,371.32 STEVEN PRIEM
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIP INC $97.79 STEVEN PRIEM
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 FACTORY MTR PTS #1 $164.15 STEVEN PRIEM
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 FACTORY MTR PTS #1 $156.77 STEVEN PRIEM
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 AUTO PLUS NO ST PAUL 392 $38.02 STEVEN PRIEM
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 AUTO PLUS NO ST PAUL 392 $7.03 STEVEN PRIEM
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 AUTO PLUS NO ST PAUL 392 $301.05 STEVEN PRIEM
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 POMPS TIRE SERVICE, INC $691.21 STEVEN PRIEM
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 AUTO PLUS NO ST PAUL 392 $13.44 STEVEN PRIEM
01/08/2013 01/11/2013 H AND L MESABI COMPANY $1,848.19 STEVEN PRIEM
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 AUTO PLUS NO ST PAUL 392 $29.81 STEVEN PRIEM
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 AUTO PLUS NO ST PAUL 392 $15.18 STEVEN PRIEM
01/09/2013 01/10/2013 GOODYEAR AUTO SRV CT 6920 $52.00 STEVEN PRIEM
01/10/2013 01/11/2013 FACTORY MTR PTS #1 $59.32 STEVEN PRIEM
01/10/2013 01/11/2013 GOODYEAR AUTO SRV CT 6920 $52.00 STEVEN PRIEM
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 PARK SUPPLY OF AMERICA IN $378.98 KELLY PRINS
01/03/2013 01/07/2013 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $70.51 KELLY PRINS
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 WW GRAINGER $169.07 KELLY PRINS
01/10/2013 01/11/2013 WW GRAINGER $137.27 KELLY PRINS
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWSPAPE $180.00 TERRIE RAMEAUX
01/04/2013 01/09/2013 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $108.41 MICHAEL REILLY
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 HILLYARD INC MINNEAPOLIS $1,443.05 MICHAEL REILLY
Packet Page Number 25 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
01/08/2013 01/10/2013 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $556.03 MICHAEL REILLY
01/02/2013 01/04/2013 SCW FITNESS EDUCATION $200.00 LORI RESENDIZ
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 PUMP IT UP - EDEN PRAIRIE $53.99 AUDRA ROBBINS
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 TARGET 00011858 $26.47 AUDRA ROBBINS
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 MICHAELS #2744 $14.99 AUDRA ROBBINS
01/02/2013 01/04/2013 NYSTROM PUBLISHING CO $672.00 AUDRA ROBBINS
01/05/2013 01/07/2013 MILLS FLEET FARM #2,700 $99.99 ROBERT RUNNING
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $60.04 DEB SCHMIDT
01/03/2013 01/04/2013 T-MOBILE.COM*PAYMENT $31.14 DEB SCHMIDT
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $242.21 SCOTT SCHULTZ
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER $266.43 SCOTT SCHULTZ
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL COMPAN $1,130.95 SCOTT SCHULTZ
12/31/2012 01/02/2013 WM EZPAY $465.93 SCOTT SCHULTZ
01/01/2013 01/03/2013 USA MOBILITY WIRELE $16.11 SCOTT SCHULTZ
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 MN NURSERY & LANDSCAPE $325.00 SCOTT SCHULTZ
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 ON SITE SANITATION INC $3.74 SCOTT SCHULTZ
01/02/2013 01/03/2013 NETFLIX.COM $7.99 CAITLIN SHERRILL
01/02/2013 01/04/2013 A2Z RECOGNITION PRODUCTS $121.68 CAITLIN SHERRILL
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 PRESS PUBLICATIONS $302.00 CAITLIN SHERRILL
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 CUB FOODS #1599 $73.02 CAITLIN SHERRILL
01/08/2013 01/10/2013 A-1 LAUNDRY $53.56 CAITLIN SHERRILL
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 OPS CORE INC $3,809.27 MICHAEL SHORTREED
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 DRI*WWW.ELEMENT5.INFO $1,605.80 MICHAEL SHORTREED
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 KATANA FORENSICS, INC.$599.00 MICHAEL SHORTREED
01/02/2013 01/02/2013 AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS $8.56 MICHAEL SHORTREED
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $53.64 ANDREA SINDT
01/10/2013 01/11/2013 SCIENCE MUSEUM OF MN ($318.00)ANDREA SINDT
01/10/2013 01/11/2013 SCIENCE MUSEUM OF MN $318.00 ANDREA SINDT
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 CENTURY COLLEGE-CE ($100.00)JOANNE SVENDSEN
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 SPORTS AUTHORI00007112 $161.39 THOMAS SZCZEPANSKI
01/03/2013 01/07/2013 KEEPRS INC 2 $44.99 THOMAS SZCZEPANSKI
01/07/2013 01/09/2013 OFFICE MAX $36.41 BRIAN TAUZELL
01/08/2013 01/09/2013 RED WING SHOE STORE $49.99 BRIAN TAUZELL
12/27/2012 12/31/2012 NAPA STORE 3279016 $27.75 TODD TEVLIN
01/02/2013 01/03/2013 SOCKSADDICT.COM $59.97 PAUL THEISEN
01/04/2013 01/07/2013 U OF M CCE NONCREDIT $60.00 MICHAEL THOMPSON
01/09/2013 01/11/2013 WWW.THINGSREMEMBERED.COM $96.35 MICHAEL THOMPSON
12/28/2012 12/31/2012 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $514.17 KAREN WACHAL
01/09/2013 01/11/2013 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $76.34 KAREN WACHAL
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 PAYPAL *MINNESOTAEN $35.00 TAMMY YOUNG
01/07/2013 01/08/2013 PAYPAL *MINNESOTAEN $45.00 TAMMY YOUNG
01/09/2013 01/11/2013 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $92.87 TAMMY YOUNG
01/09/2013 01/11/2013 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $5.26 TAMMY YOUNG
01/10/2013 01/11/2013 USPS POSTAL ST66100207 $97.00 SUSAN ZWIEG
$74,649.80
Packet Page Number 26 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
CHECK #CHECK
DATE
EMPLOYEE
NAME
01/18/13 ALDRIDGE, MARK 3,312.93
01/18/13 BAKKE, LONN 3,547.10
01/18/13 THOMFORDE, FAITH 1,497.35
01/18/13 ABEL, CLINT 3,320.71
01/18/13 POWELL, PHILIP 2,932.47
01/18/13 SVENDSEN, JOANNE 3,329.63
01/18/13 KVAM, DAVID 4,742.02
01/18/13 PALANK, MARY 1,905.17
01/18/13 WEAVER, KRISTINE 2,356.55
01/18/13 CORCORAN, THERESA 1,908.55
01/18/13 RICHTER, CHARLENE 1,047.69
01/18/13 SCHOENECKER, LEIGH 1,646.15
01/18/13 MOY, PAMELA 1,520.44
01/18/13 OSTER, ANDREA 3,761.88
01/18/13 LARSON, MICHELLE 1,827.75
01/18/13 MECHELKE, SHERRIE 1,024.43
01/18/13 SPANGLER, EDNA 1,027.82
01/18/13 CORTESI, LUANNE 1,295.53
01/18/13 GUILFOILE, KAREN 8,282.84
01/18/13 SCHMIDT, DEBORAH 5,685.62
01/18/13 ARNOLD, AJLA 1,627.69
01/18/13 BEGGS, REGAN 1,497.35
01/18/13 RUEB, JOSEPH 2,773.80
01/18/13 SINDT, ANDREA 4,202.61
01/18/13 JACKSON, MARY 4,203.67
01/18/13 KELSEY, CONNIE 5,113.99
01/18/13 ANDERSON, CAROLE 2,184.79
01/18/13 DEBILZAN, JUDY 1,327.92
01/18/13 RAMEAUX, THERESE 6,033.18
01/18/13 BAUMAN, GAYLE 8,240.57
01/18/13 FARR, LARRY 3,215.25
01/18/13 JAHN, DAVID 2,063.62
01/18/13 KANTRUD, HUGH 184.62
01/18/13 CHRISTENSON, SCOTT 2,087.55
01/18/13 ANTONEN, JAMES 5,352.58
01/18/13 BURLINGAME, SARAH 2,074.90
01/18/13 VALLE, EDWARD 113.75
01/18/13 AHL, R. CHARLES 5,090.92
01/18/13 KOPPEN, MARVIN 435.16
01/18/13 ROSSBACH, WILLIAM 494.44
01/18/13 CAVE, REBECCA 435.16
01/18/13 JUENEMANN, KATHLEEN 435.16
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
AMOUNT
01/18/13 CARDINAL, ROBERT 435.16
Packet Page Number 27 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
01/18/13 BASSETT, BRENT 157.44
01/18/13 BAUMAN, ANDREW 2,953.29
01/18/13 ANDERSON, BRIAN 464.82
01/18/13 BAHL, DAVID 226.26
01/18/13 WENZEL, JAY 3,117.76
01/18/13 XIONG, KAO 3,196.81
01/18/13 THIENES, PAUL 3,798.74
01/18/13 TRAN, JOSEPH 2,992.55
01/18/13 TAUZELL, BRIAN 2,934.31
01/18/13 THEISEN, PAUL 6,171.79
01/18/13 SYPNIEWSKI, WILLIAM 3,122.91
01/18/13 SZCZEPANSKI, THOMAS 3,285.32
01/18/13 SHORTREED, MICHAEL 6,666.74
01/18/13 STEINER, JOSEPH 3,686.30
01/18/13 REZNY, BRADLEY 3,625.58
01/18/13 RHUDE, MATTHEW 2,819.55
01/18/13 OLSON, JULIE 2,937.06
01/18/13 PARKER, JAMES 2,453.48
01/18/13 METRY, ALESIA 6,031.50
01/18/13 NYE, MICHAEL 5,003.81
01/18/13 MARTIN, JERROLD 3,272.79
01/18/13 MCCARTY, GLEN 3,092.20
01/18/13 LYNCH, KATHERINE 2,495.00
01/18/13 MARINO, JASON 5,139.92
01/18/13 LANGNER, TODD 2,980.04
01/18/13 LU, JOHNNIE 3,134.86
01/18/13 KROLL, BRETT 2,944.76
01/18/13 LANGNER, SCOTT 3,092.20
01/18/13 KONG, TOMMY 3,131.49
01/18/13 KREKELER, NICHOLAS 876.00
01/18/13 JOHNSON, KEVIN 4,036.91
01/18/13 KALKA, THOMAS 940.28
01/18/13 HER, PHENG 2,819.55
01/18/13 HIEBERT, STEVEN 6,046.07
01/18/13 GABRIEL, ANTHONY 6,365.11
01/18/13 HAWKINSON JR, TIMOTHY 2,819.55
01/18/13 FRASER, JOHN 3,336.34
01/18/13 FRITZE, DEREK 5,821.68
01/18/13 FLOR, TIMOTHY 3,725.17
01/18/13 FORSYTHE, MARCUS 2,262.20
01/18/13 DUGAS, MICHAEL 6,137.34
01/18/13 ERICKSON, VIRGINIA 3,151.33
01/18/13 DEMULLING, JOSEPH 3,053.57
01/18/13 DOBLAR, RICHARD 4,005.46
01/18/13 CARNES, JOHN 1,918.52
01/18/13 CROTTY, KERRY 3,611.20
01/18/13 BOHL, JOHN 6,256.93
01/18/13 BUSACK, DANIEL 3,690.88
01/18/13 BENJAMIN, MARKESE 3,018.90
01/18/13 BIERDEMAN, BRIAN 6,915.15
01/18/13 BARTZ, PAUL 3,325.70
01/18/13 BELDE, STANLEY 3,395.75
Packet Page Number 28 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
01/18/13 WHITE, JOEL 303.00
01/18/13 GERVAIS-JR, CLARENCE 7,855.29
01/18/13 STREFF, MICHAEL 3,276.03
01/18/13 SVENDSEN, RONALD 3,190.80
01/18/13 SCHULTZ, JEROME 48.48
01/18/13 SEDLACEK, JEFFREY 2,953.29
01/18/13 REYNOSO, ANGEL 145.44
01/18/13 RICE, CHRISTOPHER 169.69
01/18/13 RANK, PAUL 533.28
01/18/13 RAVENWALD, CORINNE 272.70
01/18/13 RAINEY, JAMES 807.68
01/18/13 RANK, NATHAN 448.32
01/18/13 PETERSON, ROBERT 3,385.63
01/18/13 POWERS, KENNETH 702.96
01/18/13 PACHECO, ALPHONSE 270.64
01/18/13 PETERSON, MARK 523.21
01/18/13 OLSON, JAMES 3,418.49
01/18/13 OPHEIM, JOHN 509.07
01/18/13 NOVAK, JEROME 3,201.25
01/18/13 NOWICKI, PAUL 339.36
01/18/13 MORGAN, JEFFERY 747.31
01/18/13 NIELSEN, KENNETH 375.72
01/18/13 MONDOR, MICHAEL 3,259.74
01/18/13 MONSON, PETER 224.22
01/18/13 MILLER, LADD 195.82
01/18/13 MILLER, NICHOLAS 502.98
01/18/13 LINDER, TIMOTHY 2,871.81
01/18/13 LOCHEN, MICHAEL 856.48
01/18/13 KONDER, RONALD 363.60
01/18/13 KUBAT, ERIC 2,684.37
01/18/13 KARRAS, JAMIE 496.92
01/18/13 KERSKA, JOSEPH 545.28
01/18/13 JUREK, GREGORY 2,357.82
01/18/13 KANE, ROBERT 636.34
01/18/13 JANSEN, CHAD 145.44
01/18/13 JONES, JONATHAN 339.36
01/18/13 HUTCHINSON, JAMES 509.06
01/18/13 IMM, TRACY 148.47
01/18/13 HALWEG, JODI 3,302.19
01/18/13 HAWTHORNE, ROCHELLE 2,357.82
01/18/13 HAGEN, MICHAEL 403.72
01/18/13 HALE, JOSEPH 438.36
01/18/13 FASULO, WALTER 26.26
01/18/13 FOSSUM, ANDREW 3,258.58
01/18/13 EATON, PAUL 145.32
01/18/13 EVERSON, PAUL 6,322.49
01/18/13 CRUMMY, CHARLES 157.56
01/18/13 DAWSON, RICHARD 3,082.16
01/18/13 CAPISTRANT, JOHN 403.95
01/18/13 CRAWFORD - JR, RAYMOND 290.88
01/18/13 BOURQUIN, RON 861.40
01/18/13 CAPISTRANT, JACOB 218.16
Packet Page Number 29 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
01/18/13 ACEITUNO, FELIPE 86.25
01/18/13 BERGER, STEPHANIE 517.76
01/18/13 SWAN, DAVID 2,766.15
01/18/13 WELLENS, MOLLY 1,827.43
01/18/13 CARVER, NICHOLAS 3,244.09
01/18/13 FISHER, DAVID 7,495.86
01/18/13 MARTIN, MICHAEL 2,762.95
01/18/13 BRASH, JASON 2,499.20
01/18/13 EKSTRAND, THOMAS 7,259.98
01/18/13 FINWALL, SHANN 3,233.35
01/18/13 THOMPSON, DEBRA 829.76
01/18/13 YOUNG, TAMELA 2,015.75
01/18/13 KROLL, LISA 1,900.55
01/18/13 SWANSON, CHRIS 552.00
01/18/13 WACHAL, KAREN 913.88
01/18/13 GAYNOR, VIRGINIA 3,244.09
01/18/13 HAYMAN, JANET 1,464.92
01/18/13 HUTCHINSON, ANN 2,649.16
01/18/13 BIESANZ, OAKLEY 1,534.89
01/18/13 DEAVER, CHARLES 446.86
01/18/13 NAUGHTON, JOHN 2,146.15
01/18/13 NORDQUIST, RICHARD 2,148.46
01/18/13 HAYS, TAMARA 1,539.75
01/18/13 HINNENKAMP, GARY 3,672.14
01/18/13 EDSON, DAVID 2,639.95
01/18/13 HAMRE, MILES 1,584.80
01/18/13 JANASZAK, MEGHAN 1,569.35
01/18/13 KONEWKO, DUWAYNE 8,144.24
01/18/13 THOMPSON, MICHAEL 6,324.94
01/18/13 ZIEMAN, SCOTT 184.60
01/18/13 LINDBLOM, RANDAL 4,354.13
01/18/13 LOVE, STEVEN 3,529.76
01/18/13 JAROSCH, JONATHAN 3,036.65
01/18/13 KREGER, JASON 2,431.40
01/18/13 DUCHARME, JOHN 2,740.37
01/18/13 ENGSTROM, ANDREW 2,631.75
01/18/13 TEVLIN, TODD 3,250.11
01/18/13 BURLINGAME, NATHAN 2,087.20
01/18/13 RUIZ, RICARDO 1,539.75
01/18/13 RUNNING, ROBERT 2,512.09
01/18/13 NAGEL, BRYAN 7,070.80
01/18/13 OSWALD, ERICK 5,058.18
01/18/13 JONES, DONALD 4,292.11
01/18/13 MEISSNER, BRENT 2,049.03
01/18/13 DEBILZAN, THOMAS 2,146.15
01/18/13 EDGE, DOUGLAS 2,170.96
01/18/13 BRINK, TROY 4,717.49
01/18/13 BUCKLEY, BRENT 4,317.35
01/18/13 KNUTSON, LOIS 2,054.95
01/18/13 NIVEN, AMY 1,425.42
01/18/13 LUKIN, STEVEN 9,077.73
01/18/13 ZWIEG, SUSAN 3,640.32
Packet Page Number 30 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
01/18/13 FOX, KELLY 30.00
01/18/13 FRAMPTON, SAMANTHA 96.00
01/18/13 FLORES, LUIS 160.00
01/18/13 FONTAINE, KIM 612.32
01/18/13 EHLE, DANIEL 51.45
01/18/13 ERICKSON-CLARK, CAROL 49.00
01/18/13 DRECHSEL, SARAH 29.38
01/18/13 DUNN, RYAN 1,091.27
01/18/13 CRANDALL, KRISTA 255.50
01/18/13 DEMPSEY, BETH 151.50
01/18/13 BUTLER, ANGELA 102.00
01/18/13 CLARK, PAMELA 98.50
01/18/13 BRUSOE, CRISTINA 93.60
01/18/13 BUCKLEY, BRITTANY 182.10
01/18/13 BAUDE, SARAH 73.00
01/18/13 BRUSOE, AMY 79.46
01/18/13 ANDERSON, JOSHUA 521.75
01/18/13 BAETZOLD, SETH 54.38
01/18/13 AICHELE, MEGAN 112.13
01/18/13 ANDERSON, ALYSSA 16.19
01/18/13 VANG, TIM 474.50
01/18/13 VUE, LOR PAO 352.76
01/18/13 PELOQUIN, PENNYE 567.47
01/18/13 SHERRILL, CAITLIN 953.32
01/18/13 HOFMEISTER, TIMOTHY 459.56
01/18/13 KULHANEK-DIONNE, ANN 381.00
01/18/13 HER, PETER 250.71
01/18/13 HOFMEISTER, MARY 1,093.01
01/18/13 EVANS, CHRISTINE 1,456.61
01/18/13 GLASS, JEAN 2,125.10
01/18/13 BERNARDY, CHRISTINE 2,448.93
01/18/13 CRAWFORD - JR, RAYMOND 342.16
01/18/13 WILBER, JEFFREY 1,539.76
01/18/13 ANZALDI, MANDY 517.62
01/18/13 ORE, JORDAN 1,539.75
01/18/13 SCHULTZ, SCOTT 3,342.97
01/18/13 ADAMS, DAVID 1,737.88
01/18/13 HAAG, MARK 2,461.55
01/18/13 TAYLOR, JAMES 2,876.58
01/18/13 VUKICH, CANDACE 170.50
01/18/13 RYAN, ANDREW 304.00
01/18/13 SHERWOOD, CHRISTIAN 357.50
01/18/13 ROBBINS, AUDRA 5,951.96
01/18/13 ROBBINS, CAMDEN 153.13
01/18/13 LARSON, KATELYN 17.50
01/18/13 LUBKE, COLLEEN 36.00
01/18/13 KLEIN, AARON 72.00
01/18/13 KLEIN, TIM 80.00
01/18/13 FRANK, PETER 425.00
01/18/13 GORACKI, GERALD 333.00
01/18/13 BJORK, BRANDON 126.50
01/18/13 BRENEMAN, NEIL 2,267.65
Packet Page Number 31 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
01/18/13 WOEHRLE, MATTHEW 2,217.83
01/18/13 BERGO, CHAD 2,628.80
01/18/13 AICHELE, CRAIG 2,200.55
01/18/13 PRIEM, STEVEN 2,415.66
01/18/13 THOMPSON, BENJAMIN 258.75
01/18/13 VANG, GEORGE 137.75
01/18/13 PRINS, KELLY 1,744.10
01/18/13 REILLY, MICHAEL 3,241.00
01/18/13 DOUGLASS, TOM 1,756.55
01/18/13 MALONEY, SHAUNA 366.00
01/18/13 BORCHERT, JONATHAN 164.94
01/18/13 CRAWFORD, SHAWN 420.00
01/18/13 LANGER, CHELSEA 125.38
01/18/13 LANGER, KAYLYN 102.00
01/18/13 BOSLEY, CAROL 107.79
01/18/13 HITE, ANDREA 252.50
01/18/13 WARNER, CAROLYN 184.80
01/18/13 WEINHAGEN, SHELBY 105.25
01/18/13 TUPY, MARCUS 225.63
01/18/13 VANG, XANG 39.00
01/18/13 TREPANIER, TODD 198.00
01/18/13 TUPY, HEIDE 137.40
01/18/13 SMITH, CASEY 94.87
01/18/13 SMITLEY, SHARON 390.50
01/18/13 SCHREINER, MARK 36.50
01/18/13 SCHREINER, MICHELLE 139.75
01/18/13 SCHMIDT, EMILY 44.20
01/18/13 SCHREIER, ROSEMARIE 408.00
01/18/13 RICHTER, DANIEL 134.30
01/18/13 RONNING, ISAIAH 54.65
01/18/13 RANEY, COURTNEY 634.00
01/18/13 RESENDIZ, LORI 2,257.76
01/18/13 NORTHOUSE, KATHERINE 43.57
01/18/13 PROESCH, ANDY 547.25
01/18/13 NADEAU, TAYLOR 56.10
01/18/13 NITZ, CARA 19.00
01/18/13 MCCANN, NATALIE 81.00
01/18/13 MCCOMAS, LEAH 101.50
01/18/13 LAMEYER, BRENT 39.88
01/18/13 LAMSON, ELIANA 36.00
01/18/13 KOHLER, ROCHELLE 54.00
01/18/13 KOZDROJ, GABRIELLA 50.00
01/18/13 JOHNSON, BARBARA 330.28
01/18/13 JOYER, ANTHONY 51.80
01/18/13 HOLMBERG, LADONNA 224.00
01/18/13 HORWATH, RONALD 2,738.98
01/18/13 HANSEN, HANNAH 219.60
01/18/13 HEINRICH, SHEILA 231.00
01/18/13 GRUENHAGEN, LINDA 304.80
01/18/13 HAGSTROM, EMILY 40.20
01/18/13 GIEL, NICOLE 76.00
01/18/13 GRAY, MEGAN 172.35
Packet Page Number 32 of 221
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2013\AprClms - 1-11 and 1-18.xlsx
9988854
9988855
9988856
9988857
9988858
9988859
9988860
9988861
9988862
9988863
9988864
9988865
9988866
9988867
9988868
9988869
9988870
9988871
9988872
9988873
9988874
9988875
9988876
9988877
9988878
9988879
9988880
9988881 01/18/13 STEFFEN, MICHAEL 101.50
602,937.56
01/18/13 RANGEL, SAMANTHA 92.00
01/18/13 CUSICK, JESSICA 143.19
01/18/13 WALES, ABIGAIL 152.30
01/18/13 WHITE, DANICA 23.38
01/18/13 SCHREIER, ABIGAIL 83.50
01/18/13 SCOTT, HALEY 22.05
01/18/13 WISTL, MOLLY 297.00
01/18/13 ERICSON, RACHEL 32.55
01/18/13 TARR-JR, GUS 45.00
01/18/13 WISTL, MARK 96.00
01/18/13 PETERSON, HAYLIE 342.00
01/18/13 SORENSON, ERICA 28.00
01/18/13 MERRITT, MICHAEL 214.50
01/18/13 O'BRIEN, PATRICIA 30.00
01/18/13 MEISSNER, MICHAEL 176.00
01/18/13 MERRITT, JACOB 247.50
01/18/13 KUSTERMAN, KEVIN 132.50
01/18/13 LARSON, DANIEL 49.00
01/18/13 GALBA, DANIEL 270.00
01/18/13 HACKETT, ANDREW 29.00
01/18/13 FERNANDEZ, JOSEPH 350.00
01/18/13 FISHER, CHANCE 49.00
01/18/13 DOTAS, ANDREW 48.00
01/18/13 DOTAS, KENT 62.00
01/18/13 AYD, GWEN 30.00
01/18/13 BRISENO, EMILIO 132.00
01/18/13 KRATTENMAKER, MATTHEW 480.00
01/18/13 ABRAHAMSON, AMANDA 132.50
01/18/13 FOWLDS, MYCHAL 3,791.22
01/18/13 FRANZEN, NICHOLAS 5,266.34
Packet Page Number 33 of 221
Agenda Item G2
Attachments:
1. Eden Systems invoice
MRF
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager, Jim Antonen
FROM: IT Director, Mychal Fowlds
SUBJECT: Authorization to make payment for Eden Systems yearly support contract
DATE: January 17, 2013
Introduction
Support contracts for software are a major necessity due to the fact that there are always fixes and updates
and without the support contracts we’re entitled to none of these. Also, in order to speak with any of our
third party vendors a support contract is required.
Background
The City of Maplewood has been using Eden Systems for quite some time. We are now using Eden
Systems as the major software package for Finance, Community Development, Public Works, HR and
Citizen Services divisions. All city employees who work on the budget use Eden Systems.
Budget Impact
This purchase has been planned for and will be funded from the 2013 IT Fund in the amount of
$51,287.31.
Recommendation
It is recommended that authorization be given to pay the support contract for Eden Systems so as to keep
current with updates and to keep Eden Systems support available for staff.
Action Required
Submit to City Council for review and approval.
Packet Page Number 34 of 221
Packet Page Number 35 of 221
Packet Page Number 36 of 221
Agenda #G-3
AGENDA REPORT
To: City Manager James Antonen
From: Acting Chief of Police David Kvam
Subject: Approval for Police Department to Accept Squad Light Bars
Date: January 17, 2013
Introduction
The Office of Traffic Safety has awarded the Police Department two squad light bars,
and City Council approval is required before these light bars can be accepted.
Background
The Maplewood Police Department was randomly drawn to receive equipment for our
participation and effort in the 2012 October Seat Belt Mobilization conducted by the
Office of Traffic Safety. We chose two LED Whelen Liberty LC low-profile light bars.
The light bars have a value of $1,375 each, for a total of $2,750.
These Mobilizations are conducted by law enforcement agencies across the State of
Minnesota and depend on a combination of support from the City, administration, and
officers on the street to be successful. The Office of Traffic Safety acknowledged that
our department’s contribution to their program has been exceptional, and they
appreciate the hard work of our officers when they participate.
Upon acceptance of this award, the light bars will be installed on two Police Department
vehicles.
Budget Impact
There is no cost to acquire these light bars, and we would only be responsible for their
installation on the vehicles.
Recommendation
It is recommended that City Council approval be given to accept the award of these light
bars from the Office of Traffic Safety.
Action Required
Submit to the City Council for review and approval.
DAK:js
Packet Page Number 37 of 221
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GIFT TO CITY
WHEREAS, Maplewood is AUTHORIZED to receive and accept grants, gifts and
devices of real and personal property and maintain the same for the benefit of the
citizens and pursuant to the donor’s terms if so-prescribed, and;
WHEREAS, the Office of Traffic Safety wishes to grant the City of Maplewood the
following: two Whelen Liberty LC low-profile light bars, and;
WHEREAS, the Office of Traffic Safety has instructed that the City will be required to
use the aforementioned for: police purposes only, and;
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has agreed to use the subject of this resolution for
the purposes and under the terms prescribed, and;
WHEREAS, the City agrees that it will accept the gift by a super majority of its
governing body’s membership pursuant to Minnesota Statute §465.03;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, pursuant to Minnesota Statute §465.03, that
the Maplewood City Council approves, receives and accepts the gift aforementioned
and under such terms and conditions as may be requested or required.
The Maplewood City Council passed this resolution by a super majority vote of its
membership on _________________________, 20_____.
Signed: Signed: Witnessed:
___________________ ____________________ ___________________
(Signature) (Signature) (Signature)
Mayor______________ Chief of Police_________ City Clerk____________
(Title) (Title) (Title)
___________________ _____________________ ____________________
(Date) (Date) (Date)
Packet Page Number 38 of 221
Agenda #G-4
AGENDA REPORT
To: City Manager James Antonen
From: Acting Chief of Police David Kvam
Subject: Approval to Accept Donation From Schmelz Countryside
Date: January 18, 2013
Introduction
The Police Department has received a donation from Schmelz Countryside, and City
Council approval is required before the donation can be accepted.
Background
For the past several years, Schmelz Countryside has made a donation to the
Maplewood Police Department to show its appreciation and support for the work done in
the community.
This year we received a check for $2,500, and John Schmelz has asked that the money
be used toward youth and senior citizen programs.
Recommendation
It is recommended that approval be given to accept this donation and that the
necessary budget adjustments be made for the Police Department to expend the funds
as requested by Schmelz Countryside.
Action Required
Submit to the City Council for review and action.
DAK:js
Packet Page Number 39 of 221
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GIFT TO CITY
WHEREAS, Maplewood is AUTHORIZED to receive and accept grants, gifts and
devices of real and personal property and maintain the same for the benefit of the
citizens and pursuant to the donor’s terms if so-prescribed, and;
WHEREAS, Schmelz Countryside wishes to grant the City of Maplewood the following:
$2,500, and;
WHEREAS, Schmelz Countryside has instructed that the City will be required to use the
aforementioned for: programs for youth and senior citizens, and;
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has agreed to use the subject of this resolution for
the purposes and under the terms prescribed, and;
WHEREAS, the City agrees that it will accept the gift by a super majority of its
governing body’s membership pursuant to Minnesota Statute §465.03;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, pursuant to Minnesota Statute §465.03, that
the Maplewood City Council approves, receives and accepts the gift aforementioned
and under such terms and conditions as may be requested or required.
The Maplewood City Council passed this resolution by a super majority vote of its
membership on _________________________, 20_____.
Signed: Signed: Witnessed:
___________________ ____________________ ___________________
(Signature) (Signature) (Signature)
Mayor______________ Chief of Police_________ City Clerk____________
(Title) (Title) (Title)
___________________ _____________________ ____________________
(Date) (Date) (Date)
Packet Page Number 40 of 221
AGENDA REPORT
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Michael Thompson, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Scott Schultz, Fleet Superintendent
SUBJECT: Approve Purchase of 1 ton Truck and Two John Deere Park
Maintenance Machines
DATE: January 23, 2013
INTRODUCTION
The approved 2013 capital outlay budget includes funding for the purchase of one 1 ton truck with plow
and two John Deere park maintenance machines. Council approval of these purchases is required.
BACKGROUND
The two existing 1998 Toro park maintenance machines are in need of replacement. Age and
extensive engine hours result in regular repairs and they are no longer efficient to operate. The Parks
Division utilizes these machines for both summer and winter operations.
Likewise, the old 1 ton truck has considerable wear and mileage exceeding 100,000. This truck is used
by the Parks Division for year round maintenance. The primary use for this truck is for trash and
recycling pick up throughout the park system.
DISCUSSION
The proposed acquisition of two John Deere machines to replace the two old Toro machines will greatly
improve upon capabilities and efficiencies. The old 1998 Toro machines will be traded-in and credit
applied towards the purchase of the new equipment.
The new 1 ton will replace the 1999 one ton. This replacement truck is used by the Parks Division for
year round maintenance for such tasks as trash and recycling pickup, in addition to snow plowing and
towing equipment for multiple park maintenance operations. The old 1999 one ton will be sent to state
auction and proceeds put back into the fleet management fund.
BUDGET
The 2013 capital improvement plan identified $131,500.00 under CIP numbers PW06.010 and
PW09.030 for the replacement of the two Toro machines and one ton truck described above. Following
are the costs of the replacements including, trade in of old units, sales tax and delivery:
Two John Deere Machines w/ attachments $62,595.28
Less Trade in value $(7,200.00)
Sales tax $ 3,808.43
Total cost $59,203.71
Agenda Item G5
Packet Page Number 41 of 221
One 1 ton 4wd truck w/ Stake body and plow $51,835.23
Sales tax $ 3,507.80
Total cost $55,343.03
The total cost is $114,546.74. This is $16,953.26 below the estimated expenditure identified in the
Fleet Management fund. The remaining balance from the original estimate for these purchases will be
used towards other fleet equipment needs in 2013 as needed.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the city council give approval to enter into contracts with the following vendors
for these purchases under state contract:
Frontier Ag and Turf -Two John Deere Machines, MN state contract # 41934
Midway Ford -Ford F350 cab and chassis, MN state contract # 55058
Towmaster Truck Equip. -Stake body and equipment, MN state contract # 48613
Crysteel Truck Equip. - Boss V-Plow, MN state contract # 48608
Attachments:
1) Frontier Ag and Turf
2) Midway Ford
3) Towmaster
4) Crysteel
Agenda Item G5
Packet Page Number 42 of 221
Agenda Item G5
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 43 of 221
Agenda Item G5
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 44 of 221
Agenda Item G5
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 45 of 221
Agenda Item G5
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 46 of 221
Agenda Item G5
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 47 of 221
Agenda Item G5
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 48 of 221
Agenda Item G5
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 49 of 221
Agenda Item G5
Attachment 4
Packet Page Number 50 of 221
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Jim Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Michael Thompson, City Engineer/Public Works Director
Steven Love, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: Approval of Resolution to Increase the Scope of the Feasibility Study,
Order Preliminary Design, and Increase the Project Budget, Arkwright-
Sunrise Area Street Improvements, City Project 12-09
DATE: January 23, 2013
INTRODUCTION
The council will consider authorizing an increase to the existing project budget and to the authorized
preliminary design work. The council will also consider expanding the scope of the feasibility study.
BACKGROUND
On July 23, 2012 the City Council authorized the preparation of the feasibility study and established a
project budget of $80,000. This budget amount was to cover topographic surveying, soil borings,
benefit appraisal services, preparation of the feasibility study, engineering related to the feasibility
study, and wetland delineations (as needed). The feasibility project area consists of approximately 2.2
miles of roads to be reconstructed along with a significant amount of anticipated utility improvements.
The Arkwright-Sunrise Area streets are generally located east of McMenemy Street, north of County
Road B, west of Edgerton Street, and south of Highway 36 (see attached drawing). These streets are
listed in the approved 2013 – 2017 Maplewood Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) as a proposed project
for the 2013 construction season (however it has since been delayed to 2014 construction as a result of
balancing bonding needs amongst other city projects).
As part of the feasibility study process an initial review of the existing public infrastructure for the
feasibility study area and the surrounding neighborhoods has been completed. Staff has identified two
additional improvement areas in the surrounding neighborhoods that should be included as part of the
feasibility study to insure that a regional approach to the improvement project is taken. It is
recommended to evaluate the two additional areas as part of the feasibility study.
The first additional area consists of Eldridge Avenue East and Burr Street North. These roads lie just
east of Desoto Street and south of County Road B East (see attached drawing). Eldridge Avenue and
Burr Street are paved residential streets with curb and gutter. These streets have continued to
deteriorate over the years with the streets having a current weighted average PCI rating of 56 (on a
scale from 1 to 100). It is recommended that Eldridge Avenue and Burr Street be reviewed as part of
the feasibility study for a possible pavement rehabilitation project.
The second additional area includes exploring sidewalk/trail along County Road B East from Interstate
35E to Edgerton Street and Edgerton Street from County Road B to Highway 36. These segments are
County Roads and are identified in the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan for trail and sidewalk
improvements. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies these sections as major east/west and
north/south routes for pedestrian and bike traffic. This work is in line with a Living Streets approach for
improving walkability and pedestrian movements; improving pedestrian/bike safety.
Agenda Item G6
Packet Page Number 51 of 221
SCHEDULE
With the change in schedule from 2013 to 2014 the tentative schedule of the feasibility study has been
revised and is shown below:
Late July / Early August 2012 – staff initiated the project process and feasibility study by
sending an informational letter to the neighborhood residents.
Late July 2012 thru April 2013 – engineering department conducts topographic surveys,
preliminary engineering studies, research of the project area, and drafts the feasibility study.
Staff holds informational neighborhood meetings about the proposed project as the feasibility
study is being conducted.
April 2013 – Staff submits the feasibility study to Council to consider acceptance and scheduling
of a public hearing.
Staff has initiated public outreach and neighborhood meetings to discuss the project and gather critical
feedback from the residents on the proposed project. It is planned to bring the preliminary feasibility
design to several of the city commissions to gather additional input and feedback.
Staff recommends that the council authorize preliminary design work in order to better incorporate the
ideas and feedback received into the feasibility design and report. This work will include the project
area along with the additional areas proposed to be added to the feasibility study. During this time
additional neighborhood meetings will be held as changes to the feasibility design are made to reflect
the gathered ideas and feedback.
BUDGET
The City Council established a project budget of $80,000 for the feasibility study for the Arkwright
Sunrise neighborhood. The action requested at this time is for the council to increase the project
budget by $220,000 to a total of $300,000. The proposed project budget will allow the staff to continue
to work on design and refining it based on input and feedback from residents, boards, and
commissions. This interim budget is meant to carry the project up to the likely Public Hearing date
when a full project budget would be considered if the project is ordered by the council.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the council approve the attached resolution expanding the scope of the
feasibility study, authorizing design work, and establishing a project budget of $300,000 for the
Arkwright-Sunrise Area Street Improvements, City Project 12-09.
Attachments:
1. Resolution Preparation of Feasibility Study
2. Location Map
Agenda Item G6
Packet Page Number 52 of 221
RESOLUTION
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE FEASIBILITY STUDY, AUTHORIZING DESIGN, AND
INCREASING THE PROJECT BUDGET
WHEREAS, it is proposed to make improvements to the Arkwright-Sunrise Area Streets, City
Project 12-09 and to assess the benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement,
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429,
WHEREAS, On July 23, 2012 the City Council authorized the preparation of the feasibility study
and established a project budget of $80,000,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
1. The scope of the feasibility study is to include Eldridge Avenue East and Burr Street North
(which lie just east of Desoto Street and south of County Road B East) for possible
pavement rehabilitation. The scope of the feasibility study is to also include County Road B
East from Interstate 35E to Edgerton Street and Edgerton Street from County Road B to
Highway 36 for sidewalk and trail improvements (not road improvements). The City Engineer
is instructed to report to the council with all convenient speed advising the council in a
preliminary way as to whether the additional improvements are necessary, cost effective and
feasible, and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some
other improvement, and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended.
2. The City Engineer is hereby directed to conduct design work for the making of said
improvement.
3. FURTHERMORE, the finance manager is hereby authorized to adjust the project budget
from $80,000 to $300,000.
Approved this 28th day of January 2013
Agenda Item G6
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 53 of 221
Agenda Item G6
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 54 of 221
AGENDA REPORT
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Michael Thompson, Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Approval of Change Order No. 3, Gladstone Area Phase I Improvements –
Bid Package 1, City Project 04-21
DATE: January 22, 2013
INTRODUCTION
The City Council will consider approving the attached resolution directing the modification of the
existing construction contract for the Gladstone Area Phase I Improvements, City Project 04-21. The
modifications to the existing contract include additional bituminous paving, retaining wall, bridge piling
and erosion control. The change order also includes additional work required due to the contract
schedule extension into the 2012 construction season. These modifications result in an overall
increase to the construction contract. With the approval of this Change Order the council will also
consider authorizing a reduction in retainage.
BACKGROUND
The council awarded a construction contract to Lunda Construction Company for the Gladstone Area
Phase I Improvements, City Project 04-21 on June 27, 2011 in the amount of $3,529,950.25. There
have been two change orders to the contract to date with a revised approved contract total of
$3,552,467.74.
DISCUSSION
Schedule A – Street Improvements
The original project schedule identified a completion date of November 30, 2011. Change Order No.1
adjusted the completion date to June 30, 2012. The contractor was required to perform temporary
paving on the project so Frost Avenue could be opened to traffic during the winter of 2011/2012.
Additional temporary paving was also required to protect the curb and gutter during snow plow
operations. In addition, the construction engineer increased the limits of the bituminous paving on the
project to correct some existing pavement deficiencies near the original project limits. This additional
paving resulted in an increase in bituminous mix quantities.
The project included construction of a modular block wall on the south side of Frost Avenue. During
the construction staking and shop drawing approval process, it was identified that an additional row of
modular block wall would provide a more suitable grade between the trail and the modular block wall.
This additional row of modular block wall resulted in an increase in retaining wall area.
Schedule G – Frost Avenue Bridge Replacements
The foundation support for the Frost Avenue Bridge consisted of numerous piles driven deep into the
ground. Preliminary soil borings identified an assumed pile length for design purposes. Contract
quantities were determined based on this assumed pile length; however the contract also required the
contractor to perform a test pile to determine the actual pile length. The test pile resulted in an increase
in pile length depth which increased the overall quantities for the pile driving operation.
Change Order No. 2 Schedule
Change Order No.2 included a line item for Rapid Stabilization Method 3, which is a temporary erosion
Agedna Item G7
Packet Page Number 55 of 221
control measure that was used to stabilize soils during construction. As the project continued into the
2012 construction season, additional temporary erosion control measures were needed resulting in an
increase in the quantities for Rapid Stabilization Method 3.
Change Order No. 3 Schedule
The items listed in the Change Order No.3 schedule are a result of a claim that the contractor
submitted on the project due to the project completion date extending into the 2012 construction
season. The schedule extension was primarily a result of delays due to private utility relocations. City
staff and the consulting engineer met with the contractor in the fall of 2011 and communicated the need
to complete the bridge construction such that Frost Avenue could be opened to traffic for the winter.
The contractor explained that this work could be completed; however additional costs would be
incurred. The contractor was directed to proceed with the work necessary to open Frost Avenue to
traffic through the winter.
In August 2012, the contractor submitted a claim in the amount of $423,178.04 for additional costs
incurred as a result of the schedule extension. After some negotiation, the contractor offered to settle
the claim for $132,810.06 to avoid mediation and/or arbitration. City staff and the consulting engineer
evaluated the risks and costs associated with mediation and/or arbitration process and determined that
it was in the city’s best interest to settle the claim.
A summary of the costs included in Change Order No. 3 are as follows:
Revise Schedule A – Street Improvements $62,888.25
Revised Schedule G – Frost Avenue Bridge Replacements $28,380.00
Revise Change Order No. 2 Schedule $7,471.20
Add Change Order No. 3 Schedule $132,810.06
Net Contract Increase $231,549.51
Also, Lunda has requested reduction in retainage. The contractor is nearly complete with all work with
only a couple of remaining punch list items. The consulting engineer is continuing to coordinate with
the contractor to resolve all of the final quantities and the contractor will be required to submit final
documentation prior to project closeout. A retainage reduction from 5% to 1% is warranted at this time.
BUDGET
Approval of Change Order No. 3 will increase the project construction contract amount by $231,549.51
from $3,552,467.74 to $3,784,017.25. No adjustments to the approved budget are required as the
projected costs fall within the approved financing plan. Also, reduction in retainage does not increase
or decrease the total approved contact amount, thus no budget adjustments are needed for this item.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the council approve the attached Resolution Directing Modification of the
Existing Construction Contract, Change Order No. 3, for the Gladstone Area Phase I Improvements,
City Project 04-21. Furthermore, it is recommended that the council authorize the City Engineer to
reduce retainage on the existing construction contract for City Project 04-21 from 5% to 1%.
Attachments:
1. Resolution Directing Modification of Existing Construction Contract, Change Order No. 3
2. Change Order No. 3
3. Lunda Letter Dated December 27, 2012
4. Lunda Letter Dated December 7, 2012
Agedna Item G7
Packet Page Number 56 of 221
RESOLUTION
DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
PROJECT 04-21, CHANGE ORDER NO. 3
AND REDUCING RETAINAGE
WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made
Improvements Project 04-21, Gladstone Area Phase I Improvements, and has let a construction
contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and
WHEREAS, it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designated as
Improvement Project 04-21, Change Order No. 3.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA, that:
1. The mayor and city clerk are hereby authorized and directed to modify the existing
contract by executing said Change Order No. 3 which is an increase of $231,549.51.
The revised contract amount is $3,784,017.25.
2. The retainage within the construction contract is hereby authorized to be reduced, at the
discretion of the City Engineer, from 5% to 1%.
Adopted by the Maplewood City Council on this 28th day of January 2013.
Agedna Item G7
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 57 of 221
Agedna Item G7
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 58 of 221
Agedna Item G7
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 59 of 221
Agedna Item G7
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 60 of 221
Agedna Item G7
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 61 of 221
Agedna Item G7
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 62 of 221
Agedna Item G7
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 63 of 221
Agedna Item G7
Attachment 4
Packet Page Number 64 of 221
Agedna Item G7
Attachment 4
Packet Page Number 65 of 221
Agedna Item G7
Attachment 4
Packet Page Number 66 of 221
Agedna Item G7
Attachment 4
Packet Page Number 67 of 221
Agenda Item G8
Attachments
1. CFS requisition
MRF
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager, Jim Antonen
FROM: IT Director, Mychal Fowlds
Chief Building Engineer, Larry Farr
SUBJECT: Approval of Police Department Expansion Project Items
DATE: January 22, 2013
Introduction
The City Council approved funding for Phase 1 of the Police Department Expansion Project in the amount
of $500,000 on November 26, 2012. The majority of the construction project was put out for bid and was
awarded to Derau Construction on December 10, 2012. Certain items were not part of the bid package.
As they arise staff will present them to Council for approval.
Background
Phase 1 of the Police Department Expansion Project predominately involves moving Community
Development from City Hall to what is currently the Public Works building. In doing so staff has needs for
the various items shown below. These items were considered to be outside the scope of the construction
bid but are certainly part of the Police Department Expansion Project.
1. Commercial Furniture Systems (CFS) – Office furniture purchases and installation for Phase 1
utilizing US Communities pricing – $21,700
2. City of Maplewood – Staff is requesting the waiving of City permit fees for all phases - TBD
3. Mid-America Business Systems – Originally installed our Lektriever file storage units (2) and will
disassemble and move to Public Works - $14,108
4. Chris Mastell Trailer Rentals – Rental of temporary storage – Est. $5,400
5. Dumpster rental throughout project – Est. $10,000
6. Electrowatchman – City security system changes and updates – Est. $10,000
7. Line 1 Partners – Low voltage cabling throughout new areas – Est. $5,000
Budget Impact
The items listed above have been planned for and will be funded from the $500,000 that Council previously
allocated for the Police Department Expansion Project – Phase 1.
Recommendation
It is recommended that approval be given to proceed with the Police Department Expansion Project items
listed above.
Action Required
Submit to City Council for review and approval.
Packet Page Number 68 of 221
Mail Purchase Order?Yes No Requested by:
Fax Purchase Order?Yes No
Fax #
(If needed)Signed Date
Purchase Order No.
(Assigned by Finance Dept.)City Manager Approval (Capital Outlay Only):
PROGRAM ACTIVITY ACCOUNT AMOUNT Signed Date
Finance Department Approval:
FOR ACCOUNTING USE ONLY:Signed Date
S:\FINANCE\Forms\Requisition
VENDOR NUMBER
Total
purchasing guide. Therefore staff is required to provide only one quote.
20,365.00$
$ $
Sales Tax @ .065
Unit
Price Amount
21,688.73$
20,365.00 20,365.00
1,323.73$
Unit
Price Amount
$
See attached quote
Check one
CFS is a member of US Communities. US Communities is an approved collective purchasing option per our City
$
City of Maplewood
1830 County Road B East
Maplewood, MN 55109
4301 Highway 7
Commerical Furniture Services
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
INVOICE OR CHECK FUND
Deliver to Name and address of recommended bidder
$
Names of Bidders
Commerical Furniture
Services (CFS)
If low bidder is not recommended or only a single bid has been obtain, include a full explanation of reasons.
Freight
Subtotal
Quantity Description
REQUISITION
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
(This is NOT a Purchase Order)
Packet Page Number 69 of 221
Packet Page Number 70 of 221
Packet Page Number 71 of 221
Agenda Item G9
Packet Page Number 72 of 221
Packet Page Number 73 of 221
Packet Page Number 74 of 221
Packet Page Number 75 of 221
Packet Page Number 76 of 221
Packet Page Number 77 of 221
Packet Page Number 78 of 221
MEMORANDUM
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Michael Martin, AICP, Planner
Charles Ahl, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Review, LaMettry Collision Auto Repair
LOCATION: 2951 Maplewood Drive
DATE: January 22, 2013
INTRODUCTION
The conditional use permit (CUP) for LaMettry Collision Auto Repair at 2951 Maplewood Drive is
due for its annual review. The CUP allows LaMettry Collision Auto Repair to operate an auto
body repair shop. The city council gave approval to build a new building on this site which is just
north of the applicant’s old building.
BACKGROUND
August 8, 2005: The city council approved a conditional use permit for Steve McDaniels, of
Maplewood Toyota, to build a temporary parking lot on the proposed site. The back half of the
parking lot was constructed of a pervious parking material to comply with shoreland ordinance
requirements. The front half was constructed with a temporary gravel surface. Mr. McDaniels’
intention was to build a permanent building on the graveled area.
October 10, 2011: The city council approved a condition use permit for an auto body repair shop
to operate on this site.
Code Requirement
Section 44-1100(a) of the zoning code states that CUPs shall be reviewed by the city council
within one year of approval. At the one-year review, the council may specify an indefinite term
for a subsequent review or a specific term not to exceed five years.
DISCUSSION
LaMettry has completed the construction of its new building at 2951 Maplewood Drive. The
landscaping is in and all the required site work has been completed. Staff recommends
reviewing this permit again in one year to ensure the required landscaping survives.
RECOMMENDATION
Review the conditional use permit for LaMettry Collision Auto Repair in one year.
p:sec4\LaMettry CUP Review_012813
Attachments:
1. Location/Zoning Map
2. Land Use Plan Map
3. Site Plan
4. City Council Minutes, October 10, 2011
5. Community Design Review Board Minutes, September 27, 2011
Agenda G 10
Packet Page Number 79 of 221
Packet Page Number 80 of 221
Packet Page Number 81 of 221
Packet Page Number 82 of 221
Attachment 4
MINUTES
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 p.m., Monday, October 10, 2011
Council Chambers, City Hall
Meeting No. 20-11
J . NEW BUSINESS
1. Conditional Use Permit for LaMettry Collision Auto Repair North of
2923 Maplewood Drive
City Planner Ekstrand presented the staff report and answered questions of the
council. Co-owner of LeMettry Collision Richards LaMettry addressed the council
and answered questions of the council.
Councilmember Nephew moved to approve the Conditional Use Permit for
LaMettry Collision Auto Repair, North of 2923 Maplewood Drive with the Design
Review Boards recommendations.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes All
The motion passed.
Packet Page Number 83 of 221
September 27, 2011
Community Design Review Board Meeting Minutes
1
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2011
1. DESIGN REVIEW
a. LaMettry Collision Auto Repair, 2923 Maplewood Drive.
i. Senior Planner, Tom Ekstrand gave the report and answered questions of the board.
ii. Owner of LaMettry Collision, Richard LaMettry addressed and answered questions of the
board.
Boardmember Shankar moved to approe the plans date-stamped July 25, 2011, for the proposed
LaMettry Collision building north of 2923 Maplewood Drive: Approval is subject to the applicant
doing the following: (additions to the motion are underlined).
1. Repeating this plan review if construction has not started within two years.
2. Any new light poles that are installed shall match those on the site presently in place.
3. An in-ground landscaping irrigation system shall be installed as required by code for all
landscaped areas. The proposed evergreen trees to the west may not be irrigated, but the
applicant shall assure the watering of these trees for their survival.
4. The applicant shall not plow snow or dump snow into the city’s holding pond west of the site.
5. The applicant shall submit cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit before the issuance
of a grading permit to cover the cost of installing all required landscaping. This escrow shall
be in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of all landscaping.
6. The metal fascia for the canopy shall be composite metal panel in lieu of vertical flat metal
panels with vertical joints with no less than 3 feet on center horizontal joint in the middle is not
required and it is noted the color of the panel is grayish blue rather than the intense shown in
the photographs.
7. The pre-finished metal coping on the top of the tip up panels and wall pack lights shall match
the color of the tip up panels.
Seconded by Boardmember Lamers. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
Attachment 5
Packet Page Number 84 of 221
MEMORANDUM
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Michael Martin, AICP, Planner
Charles Ahl, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Termination for Allowing Parking as a
Primary Use
LOCATION: 2951 Maplewood Drive
DATE: January 22, 2013
INTRODUCTION
The conditional use permit (CUP) that allowed Toyota to operate a parking lot as a primary use
at 2951 Maplewood Drive is being brought to the city council for termination. Toyota no longer
owns the site and LaMettry Collision Auto Repair recently built a new building and moved its
operations to this site making the parking CUP unnecessary.
BACKGROUND
On August 8, 2005, the city council approved the parking lot for Maplewood Toyota south of
Gulden’s Roadhouse.
October 10, 2011: The city council approved a condition use permit for an auto body repair
shop to be construction and operate on this site.
DISCUSSION
This site now has a building and is no longer owned by Toyota. The CUP for parking as a
primary use is no longer needed for this site. Staff recommends that the city council take formal
action by adopting the attached Resolution of Termination.
Code Requirement
Section 44-1101 of the zoning code states that the city council may terminate a CUP if the use
is no longer in effect.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution terminating the conditional use permit for parking as a primary use since
the site now has a building and is used for auto repaur.
P:sec 4\Toyota_2951 Maplewood Drive_CUP Termination_012813
Attachments:
1. Location map
2. Site plan
3. August 8, 2005 city council minutes
4. Resolution for CUP Termination
Agenda Item G11
Packet Page Number 85 of 221
Location MapMaplewood Toyota
Attachment 4
Venburg Tire
page #2
Gulden's
OpenParking
LaMettryCollission
MaplewoodToyota
Parking Ramp& Car Sales
MaplewoodToyota
Attachment 1
3
Packet Page Number 86 of 221
Packet Page Number 87 of 221
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 88 of 221
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 89 of 221
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 90 of 221
Attachment 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TERMINATION RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Mr. McDaniels, of Maplewood Toyota, received approval from the Maplewood City
Council on August 8, 2005, for a conditional use permit allowing parking as a primary use.
WHEREAS, Maplewood Toyota no longer owns this property which is now home to LaMettry
Collision Auto Repair, therefore there is no need for this conditional use permit.
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property at 2951 Maplewood Drive. The legal
description is:
SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 29, RANGE 22, EX N 409.5 FT & EX W 197.4 FT OF NWLY
469.5 FT & EX S 698 FT THE FOL; THE E 723.4 FT LYING WLY OF HWY OF SE ¼ OF NE ¼
(SUBJ TO RD & EASEMENTS) IN SEC 04, TN 29, RN 22.
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit termination is as follows:
1. On January 28, 2013 the city council terminated this conditional use permit since the
applicant, Maplewood Toyota, no longer owns this property and there is now a building on
site.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council terminates the above-described
conditional use permit because parking as a primary use it no longer an acceptable use for this
site.
The Maplewood City Council ___________ this resolution of termination on January 28,
2013.
Packet Page Number 91 of 221
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page Number 92 of 221
Agenda Item H.1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jim Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
SUBJECT: First Reading of the Wetland Ordinance Amendment
DATE: January 23, 2013 for the January 28 City Council Meeting
INTRODUCTION
The wetland ordinance was adopted in December 2009. Because wetlands adjacent lakes are
used by residents differently than freestanding wetlands, the City Council included reduced
buffer requirements for these wetlands. The ordinance included a sunset clause which has the
reduced buffers expiring at the end of 2012, or when the City revises the shoreland ordinance,
whichever comes first.
Since that time, the Department of Natural Resources has not moved forward with amendments
to the State’s Shoreland Rules. Therefore, the City was not required to modify our shoreland
ordinance based on those new rules. Because of this the Environmental and Natural
Resources (ENR) Commission is recommending the removal of the reduced buffer sunset
clause from the wetland ordinance in addition to other minor amendments to the ordinance.
DISCUSSION
Wetland Ordinance
The wetland ordinance states the following:
Buffers for wetlands adjacent to lakes. In light of the fact that lakes perform different
functions than wetlands and streams and are used for different recreational purposes,
wetlands adjacent to lakes and their designated buffers shall have alternative buffers.
The following alternative buffers for wetlands adjacent to lakes will apply until Dec. 31,
2012, or until the city adopts a new shoreland ordinance that includes the regulation of
these wetlands, whichever comes first.
Buffer Wetland Classes (for Wetlands Adjacent to Lakes)
Manage A Manage B Manage C
Minimum Buffer Width 75 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft.
The ordinance specifies buffers for freestanding wetlands as follows:
Buffer Wetland Classes (for Freestanding Wetlands)
Manage A Manage B Manage C
Minimum Buffer Width 100 ft. 75 ft. 50 ft.
Shoreland Ordinance
The City of Maplewood adopted its shoreland ordinance in 1996. The ordinance was drafted to
meet the state shoreland rules currently in place. The ordinance creates a shoreland overlay
district which regulates lands located within 1,000 feet of a DNR protected water. The
shoreland district overlays existing zoning districts, so that any parcel of land lying in an overlay
district also lies in one or more of the underlying zoning districts. The objectives of the
ordinance are to protect, preserve, and enhance the quality of surface waters; protect the
Packet Page Number 93 of 221
2
natural environment and visual appeal of shorelands; and protect the general health, safety and
welfare of City residents. The ordinance regulates development standards within the overlay
such as setbacks from the ordinary high water mark to a structure, etc. There are no
regulations for wetlands in the shoreland ordinance.
UMUC Capstone Project
In April 2011 Jana Haedtke, a student from the University of Maryland University College
(UMUC), presented her group’s Capstone paper titled Maplewood Wetland and Shoreland
Regulations for Wetlands Adjacent Lakes. The paper compares wetlands adjacent lakes to
freestanding wetlands to determine if they are used or valued differently by the public and study
whether the functions of water quality, ecology, and wildlife habitat are different.
The students’ research found that based upon ecological, wildlife, and water quality aspects,
wetlands adjacent lakes should be regulated just as strictly as freestanding wetlands, as all the
positive benefits of having a healthy ecological and wildlife system and good water quality are
the same for both types of wetlands, even though their functions may differ. But based solely
on social and economic aspects, particularly recreational uses and value, less stringent buffer
requirements would be justified.
To view the UMUC Maplewood Wetland/Shoreland Capstone paper, visit the City’s wetland
webpage at www.ci.maplewood.mn.us/wetlands.
Minnesota Shoreland Rules
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) conducted a rulemaking process in
2009 to update the statewide shoreland rules. The draft rules were sent to state agencies for
final review and adoption in 2010. On August 11, 2010, Governor Tim Pawlenty returned the
draft shoreland rules to the DNR for further engagement and discussion. No action on the draft
rules has been taken by the Legislature or the state since that time.
ENR Commission Review
In the Fall of 2012 the ENR Commission reviewed the private properties that would be affected
by regulations for wetlands adjacent lakes. These included 40 residential properties located on
three lakes (Beaver Lake, Lake Oehrline, and Wakefield Lake). The wetlands adjacent these
lakes are classified as Manage A (Beaver Lake wetlands) and Manage B (Oehrline and
Wakefield Lake wetlands). There are no private properties that are located on Manage C
wetlands adjacent lakes.
The ENR Commission reviewed several scenarios for regulating wetlands adjacent lakes. One
scenario included having the buffers for wetlands adjacent lakes be the same as freestanding
wetlands, but allowing exemptions for encroachments of structures into a “non-naturalized”
buffer without a variance. Exemptions would be reviewed and approved by staff as part of the
building permit process. Mitigation for the exemptions would include the planting of a native
buffer. Ultimately the ENR Commission was convinced that wetlands adjacent lakes should
eventually be regulated as part of the shoreland ordinance. Until the City revises its shoreland
ordinance, these regulations should remain in the wetland ordinance with the reduced buffers as
originally approved.
Other Wetland Ordinance Changes
Since the adoption of the wetland ordinance in 2009, staff has found a few areas of the
ordinance that require modifications as follows:
Packet Page Number 94 of 221
3
1. Correct the stormwater pond definition.
2. Allow exemptions for the public maintenance of wetlands. This would include a project to
improve drainage into or out of a wetland or a project that improved public safety.
3. Remove the requirement that wetland map changes require MnRAM studies which are
approved by the watershed district. Incidental wetlands require a review by the watershed
district, but not a MnRAM study. Therefore, the language should be modified to include the
requirement that wetland changes require watershed district approval only.
4. For public or semipublic trails within a buffer the ordinance should not specify a minimum or
maximum width for boardwalks.
5. Modify variance regulations to meet new State statute.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the first reading of the attached ordinance (Attachment 2). This ordinance revises the
city’s wetland and stream regulations.
Attachment: Amended Wetland Ordinance
Packet Page Number 95 of 221
1
ORDINANCE NO. ______
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND
CRITICAL AREA ARTICLE OF THE CITY CODE
The Maplewood city council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of
Ordinances:
This amendment revises the City Code at Section 12-310 dealing with wetlands and streams.
Additions are shown underlined and deletions are shown as stricken.
Section 1. Findings.
a. Wetlands serve a variety of beneficial functions. Wetlands help maintain water quality
by filtering suspended solids and pollutants. They reduce flooding and erosion, provide
open space for human interaction, and are an integral part of the city’s environment.
Depending upon their type, size, and location within a watershed, they represent
important physical, educational, ecological, aesthetic, recreational, and economic assets
of the city. Properly managed wetlands are needed to support the city’s efforts to reduce
flooding and to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare.
b. Wetlands and buffers provide habitat for aquatic, semi-aquatic, and terrestrial wildlife,
including rare, threatened, or endangered species. They provide breeding, nesting and
feeding grounds for many forms of plant and animal life. Many species of wildlife require
both wetlands and their associated upland buffers for survival. Protecting wetlands and
buffers is essential for preserving the diversity of plant and animal species in the city.
c. Streams are also significant elements of the city’s hydrologic system. Streams flow into
wetlands and lakes, provide food and habitat for wildlife, provide open space, and are an
integral part of the city’s environment. Like wetlands, streams are an important physical,
educational, ecological, aesthetic, recreational, and economic asset.
d. Various existing state and federal laws restrict activities and development within
wetlands and streams. The city finds that development adjacent to and surrounding
wetlands may also degrade and pollute wetlands or accelerate the aging or elimination
of wetlands and that development next to streams may degrade, pollute, or damage
streams and, in turn, degrade other surface waters downstream. Regulating
development and land use around wetlands and streams is therefore in the public
interest.
e. As defined and used herein, buffers are land areas adjacent to wetlands and streams
that are deemed important for maintaining the health and valuable functions of such
wetlands and streams. Restricting development of and land use in buffers recognizes
that the surrounding upland impacts the quality and functions of wetlands and streams
and, therefore, is in the public interest.
f. Buffers planted with native or naturalized vegetation serve the following functions:
(1) Stabilize soil and prevent erosion.
Packet Page Number 96 of 221
2
(2) Preserve and enhance the quality of surface water by reducing the input of
suspended solids, nutrients, and harmful chemical substances that may
adversely impact public health or aquatic habitat.
(3) Filter suspended solids, nutrients, pollutants, and harmful substances so that
they do not enter the wetland or stream.
(4) Moderate water level fluctuations during storms.
(5) Protect beneficial plant life and provide habitat for wildlife.
(6) Provide shade to reduce the temperature of both stormwater runoff and the
wetland, thereby helping to maintain the conditions for healthy aquatic life.
(7) Reduce the adverse impacts of human activities on wetlands and streams and
thereby preserve them in a natural state.
g. In addition to regulating development and land use around wetlands, this ordinance is
intended to educate the public (including appraisers, owners, potential buyers, and
developers) about the importance of wetlands and streams and the functions of buffers
and to encourage property owners who live adjacent to and/or near wetlands and
streams to be responsible stewards by managing and enhancing the quality of buffers as
hereinafter described.
Section 2. Definitions.
The following words, terms, and phrases when used in this ordinance shall have the meanings
ascribed to them in this section, except where the context of the word, terms, and phrases
clearly indicates a different meaning.
Administrator means the director of the community development department or other person or
persons charged with the administration and enforcement of this ordinance.
Alteration means human action that adversely affects the vegetation, hydrology, wildlife or
wildlife habitat in a wetland, stream or buffer, including grading, filling, dumping, dredging,
draining, paving, construction, application of gravel, discharging pollutants (including herbicides
and pesticides), and compacting or disturbing soil through vehicle or equipment use. Alteration
also includes the mass removal or mass planting of vegetation by means of cutting, pruning,
topping, clearing, relocating, or applying herbicides or any hazardous or toxic substance
designed to kill plant life. Alteration does not include the following activities in a buffer:
a. Walking, passive recreation, fishing, or other similar low-impact activities.
b. The maintenance of pre-existing, nonconforming lawn area.
c. The removal of trees or vegetation that is dead, dying, diseased, noxious, or hazardous
in a manner that does not cause the compacting or disturbing of soil through vehicle or
equipment use.
Packet Page Number 97 of 221
3
d. The removal of noxious weeds by non-chemical methods, or by means of chemical
treatment in accordance with application methods that prevent the introduction of toxic
chemicals into wetlands and streams.
e. The removal of non-native shrubs, such as buckthorn, if:
1. there is little chance of erosion; and
2. site is flat or generally has slopes less than 6 percent grade; and
3. cut and treat method of removal is used on shrubs more than one-half (½) inches
in diameter (not pulling).
f. Selective management of vegetation as follows:
1. Selective pruning of trees or shrubs in order to enhance their health.
2. Selective removal of tree saplings (less than 2 inches in diameter) in order to
enhance wildlife value of the buffer.
3. Selective removal of non-native trees.
4. Selective removal of non-native weeds.
5. Selective seeding or planting of vegetation that is native to Minnesota.
g. Installation of temporary fencing without footings.
h. Projects within the buffer that are the subject of a wetland buffer management worksheet
approved by the administrator.
Best management practices (BMP’s) mean measures taken to minimize negative effects of
stormwater runoff on the environment including, but not limited to, installation of rain gardens,
infiltration basins, infiltration trenches, retention basins, filters, sediment traps, swales, reduction
of impervious surfaces, planting of deep-rooted native plants, landscape and pavement
maintenance.
Boathouse means a structure designed and used solely for the storage of boats or boating
equipment.
Buffers are land areas adjacent to wetlands and streams in which development and land use
are restricted as set forth herein and in which the growth of native and naturalized plants and
trees are to be preserved and encouraged in accordance with this ordinance.
Clearing means the cutting or removal of vegetation.
Enhancement means an action that increases the functions and values of a wetland, stream, or
buffer.
Erosion means the movement of soil or rock fragments, or the wearing away of the land surface
by water, wind, ice, and gravity.
Incidental wetland means a wetland which did not naturally occur, but was incidentally created
by humans.
Infiltration basin means a pond or basin that captures stormwater and allows it to soak into the
ground. An infiltration basin will typically drain within forty-eight (48) hours of a storm event.
Packet Page Number 98 of 221
4
Lake means an area of open, relatively deep water that is large enough to produce a wave-
swept shore. Lake shall also be defined as a “public water” as delineated and listed in the city’s
shoreland ordinance (Article IX).
Large-scale project means a vegetation maintenance, control, removal, mitigation or restoration
project that will affect more than fifty percent (50%) of a buffer located on a piece of property.
Lawn area means that area within a buffer with maintained landscape, including areas of
mowed turf grass, gardens, play areas, work areas, patios, play structures, and nonpermanent
structures. Lawn area does not include: (1) areas within a buffer consisting of native or
naturalized vegetation; and (2) the land area that is outside of a buffer.
Minnesota Routine Assessment Method (MnRAM) is a scientific methodology to assess the
quality of wetlands.
Mitigation means an action that reduces, rectifies, eliminates, or compensates for the alteration
of a buffer or wetland.
Mitigation plan means a plan submitted by an applicant and approved by the city that shows
strategies for reducing, rectifying, eliminating, or compensating for the alteration of a buffer or
wetland.
Native area means an area where native vegetation exists.
Native vegetation means tree, shrub, grass, or other plant species that are indigenous to the
Twin Cities metropolitan area and that could have been expected to naturally occur on the site.
Native vegetation does not include noxious weeds.
Naturalized area means an area where naturalized vegetation exists and does not include a
lawn area.
Naturalized vegetation means tree, shrub, grass, or other plant species that exists on a site
naturally without having been planted or maintained as a lawn area. It may be a native or non-
native species.
Nonconforming lawn area means that area within a buffer with maintained landscape (lawn
area) as of the date of adoption of this ordinance. Once a nonconforming lawn area is
converted to native or naturalized buffer, it loses its legal nonconforming status and may not
thereafter be treated as a nonconforming lawn area.
Noxious weed means plants listed as prohibited noxious weeds in the Minnesota Noxious Weed
Law. (See also weed.)
Ordinary high water mark (OHWM) means a mark delineating the highest water level
maintained for enough time to leave evidence upon the landscape. The ordinary high water
mark is commonly that point where the natural vegetation changes from predominantly aquatic
to predominantly terrestrial.
Public waters means water basins assigned a shoreline management classification by the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources commissioner under Minnesota Statutes, sections
Packet Page Number 99 of 221
5
103F.201 to 103F.221, except wetlands less than 80 acres in size that are classified as natural
environment lakes.
Rain garden means an infiltration basin that is planted as a garden that allows water to infiltrate
within forty-eight (48) hours of a storm event.
Restoration means restoring a wetland, stream, or buffer in whole or in part to a condition that is
similar to that before development of the surrounding area.
Selective means vegetation management done in a naturalized or native buffer, where a
minimal amount of vegetation is altered, with the goal of improving ecological quality of the
buffer and/or its ability to filter stormwater runoff.
Semipublic means land that is maintained by a private organization or citizen for use by a larger
group of people to include employees, neighbors, or the general public use.
Setback means the minimum horizontal distance between a structure and the nearest edge of
the wetland, stream, or buffer.
Slope means the inclination of the natural surface of the land from the horizontal; commonly
described as a ratio of the length to the height.
Stormwater pond means a pond that has been created to capture stormwater runoff. It is a
natural wetland. Stormwater is often piped into stormwater ponds but may also enter through
sheet runoff.
Stormwater pond edge means the normal high water level for a stormwater pond.
Straight-edge setback is a measurement to determine the allowable setback of an addition to an
existing house, garage, deck or driveway which is located closer to or within the required buffer.
Straight-edge setback additions are measured by using the existing edge of the house, garage,
deck, or driveway located nearest to the edge of a buffer, wetland, or stream and extending that
line in a parallel direction. No portion of the addition can encroach closer to the edge of a buffer,
wetland, or stream than the existing structure.
Stream means those areas where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed. A defined
channel or bed is land that clearly contains the constant passage of water under normal
summer conditions.
Structure means anything constructed or erected that requires location on the ground or
attached to something having location on the ground.
Sustainable design means a development design which minimizes impacts on the landscape.
Temporary erosion control means methods of keeping soil stable during construction or grading.
Temporary erosion control measures include, but are not limited to, silt fencing, erosion control
blankets, bale slope barriers, or other best management erosion control methods approved by
the city.
Variance means a deviation from the standards of this ordinance that is not specifically allowed.
Packet Page Number 100 of 221
6
Vegetation means any plant life growing at, below, or above the soil surface.
Water-oriented accessory structure means a small, aboveground building or other improvement
that the owner needs to locate closer to public waters than the normal structure setback. Such a
setback would be because of the relationship of its use to a surface water feature. Examples of
such structures and facilities include boathouses, gazebos, screen houses, fish houses, pump
houses or freestanding decks. The definition of water-oriented accessory structures or facilities
shall not include stairways, fences, docks or retaining walls.
Weed means a plant which causes damage in some way to native vegetation or ecosystems.
(See also noxious weed.)
Wetlands means those areas of the city inundated or saturated by groundwater or surface water
at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.
Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas as defined. Where a
person has removed or mostly changed the vegetation, one shall determine a wetland by the
presence or evidence of hydric or organic soil and other documentation of the previous
existence of wetland vegetation such as aerial photographs. This definition does not include
lakes or stormwater ponds as herein defined.
Wetlands adjacent to lakes means those areas of land or vegetation that have been classified
as wetlands by an applicable Watershed District in accordance with the Minnesota Routine
Assessment Method (MnRAM) system but which are attached to or part of the edge of a lake as
defined herein.
Wetland classes are defined as follows:
a. Manage A wetlands are based on the “Preserve” wetland classification as defined in
MnRAM. These wetlands are exceptional and the highest-functioning wetlands in
Maplewood.
b. Manage B wetlands are based on the “Manage 1” wetland classifications as defined in
MnRAM. These wetlands are high-quality wetlands.
c. Manage C wetlands are based on the “Manage 2” wetland classifications as defined in
MnRAM. These wetlands provide moderate quality.
d. Stormwater Pond – These are ponds created for stormwater treatment. A stormwater
pond shall not include wetlands created to mitigate the loss of other wetlands.
Wetland functions mean the natural processes performed by wetlands. These include providing
wildlife food and habitat, maintaining the availability of water, purifying water, acting as a
recharge and discharge area for groundwater aquifers, moderating the flow of surface water and
stormwater, and performing other functions including but not limited to those set out in U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers regulations.
Wetland buffer management worksheet is a printed form available through the community
development department which is required to be completed by a property owner who wishes to
undertake certain activities in a wetland or stream buffer. The activities proposed by the
Packet Page Number 101 of 221
7
property owner on the worksheet must be approved by the administrator prior to any work in the
buffer.
Wetland or stream edge means the line delineating the outer edge of a wetland or stream. The
wetland edge shall be established using the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating
Jurisdictional Wetlands dated January 10, 1989, and jointly published by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, or succeeding publication that is adopted by the Federal
Government. The applicable watershed district must verify this line.
Section 3. Applicability and Effective Date.
a. Applicability.
1. This ordinance shall take effect after the city publishes it in the official
newspaper.
2. Except as specified elsewhere in this ordinance, this ordinance shall apply to all
real property which is located in a wetland, stream, or buffer or any person or use
that would alter a wetland, stream, or buffer after adoption of this ordinance
(December 14, 2009) and revisions of this ordinance (ENTER DATE OF
APPROVED REVISIONS).
3. The city adopts the wetland classification map dated December 14, 2009, which
is based on wetland classifications from the MnRAM studies and assigned by the
applicable watershed district. Other wetland classification regulations are as
follows:
a. The city council will adopt changes to the wetland map which are based
on MnRAM studies conducted and approved by watershed districts.
a.b. Any wetland not currently assigned a classification based on MnRAM
studies as of the date of the adoption of this ordinance (December 14,
2009) shall carry over the city’s April 24, 1995, wetland classifications and
shall be assigned the following management classes:
1) Class 1 wetlands are defined as Manage A wetlands.
2) Class 2 wetlands are defined as Manage A wetlands.
3) Class 3 wetlands are defined as Manage B wetlands.
4) Class 4 wetlands are defined as Manage C wetlands.
5) Class 5 wetlands are defined as stormwater ponds.
c. Wetlands adjacent to lakes will be regulated by this ordinance until
December 31, 2012, or until the city adopts a new shoreland ordinance
that includes the regulation of these wetlands, whichever occurs first.
Packet Page Number 102 of 221
8
b.d. Appeals to the wetland classifications are within the jurisdiction of the
applicable watershed district and shall be filed and heard pursuant to the
administrative review process of that district. In the event that an appeal
is granted, the city will recognize the results of that appeal for purposes of
the classification of wetlands within the city.
4. The city council will adopt changes to the wetland map which are approved by
watershed districts.
5.4. When any provision of any ordinance conflicts with this ordinance, the provision
that provides more protection for buffers, wetlands, or streams shall apply unless
specifically provided otherwise in this ordinance. This also applies to the
applicable watershed district regulations.
b. Exemptions. This section does not apply to the following property located in the city
limits of Maplewood:
1. Property which is located within a buffer, but is separated from the wetland or
stream by an existing road.
2. Buildings and structures not in conformity with the regulations prescribed in this
ordinance as of its effective date shall be regarded as nonconforming and may
continue.
3. Lawn areas not in conformity with regulations prescribed in this ordinance as of
its effective date shall be regarded as nonconforming and may continue. A
nonconforming lawn area will lose its legal nonconforming status if it is converted
to native or naturalized buffer and may not thereafter be treated as a lawn area.
Section 4. Buffer Widths and Requirements.
a. Minimum buffers. The following are the minimum required buffer widths and structure
setbacks:
Buffer Wetland Classes
Manage A Stormwater
& Streams Manage B Manage C Pond
Minimum Buffer Width 100 ft. 75 ft. 50 ft. 10 ft.
Structure Setback from
Edge of Buffer 0 0 0 10 ft.
b. Buffer measurement. Buffers shall be measured from the wetland or stream edge.
c. Buffers containing slopes. For new development or construction on slopes greater than
eighteen percent (18%) that are within a buffer, the buffer width shall be increased to ten
(10) feet beyond the apex of the slope. Extension of the buffer for steep slopes shall
apply to all wetland classes.
Packet Page Number 103 of 221
9
d. Buffers for wetlands adjacent to lakes. In light of the fact that lakes perform different
functions than wetlands and streams and are used for different recreational purposes,
wetlands adjacent to lakes and their designated buffers shall have alternative buffers as
follows:. The following alternative buffers for wetlands adjacent to lakes will apply until
December 31, 2012, or until the city adopts a new shoreland ordinance that includes the
regulation of these wetlands, whichever comes first.
Buffer Wetland Classes (for Wetlands Adjacent to Lakes)
Manage A Manage B Manage C
Minimum Buffer Width 75 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft.
e. Average Buffers: Recognizing that there are instances where, because of the unique
physical characteristics of a specific parcel of land, the averaging of buffer width for the
entire parcel may be necessary to allow for the reasonable use of the land during a
development or construction project. In such cases decreasing the minimum buffer
width will be compensated for by increased buffer widths elsewhere in the same parcel
to achieve the required average buffer width.
1. The average buffer standards set forth below may be applied based on an
assessment of the following:
a) Undue hardship would arise from not allowing the average buffer, or
would otherwise not be in the public interest.
b) Size of parcel.
c) Configuration of existing roads and utilities.
d) Percentage of parcel covered by wetland.
e) Configuration of wetlands on the parcel.
f) Averaging will not cause degradation of the wetland or stream.
g) Averaging will ensure the protection or enhancement of portions of the
buffer which are found to be the most ecologically beneficial to the
wetland or stream.
2. The following are the average buffer widths for freestanding wetlands:
Buffer Wetland Classes (for Freestanding Wetlands)
Manage A
& Streams Manage B Manage C
Minimum Buffer Width 75 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft.
Average Buffer Width 100 ft. 75 ft. N/A
Packet Page Number 104 of 221
10
3. The following are the average buffer widths for wetlands adjacent lakes:
Buffer Wetland Classes (for Wetlands Adjacent to Lakes)
Manage A Manage B Manage C
Minimum Buffer Width 50 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft.
Average Buffer Width 75 ft. N/A. N/A
4.3. Average buffer measurement. Average buffer measurement shall be determined
by averaging the buffer along the wetland edge situated on the subject property,
not the entire wetland.
5.4. A mitigation plan is required for construction of development projects which meet
the requirements described in Section 5.d. (Mitigation).
6.5. The appropriateness of using average buffers will be evaluated as part of the
review of the contractor’s or owner’s development application. The average
buffer used must be within the spirit and intent of this ordinance and must meet
one or more of the requirements described in Section 7 (Best Management
Practices).
7.6. The administrator must approve the average buffer.
8.7. If an average buffer is denied by the administrator, an applicant may appeal the
denial by submitting a written appeal request to the administrator within fifteen
(15) days of the administrator’s written denial of the average buffer. The
administrator shall send appeals of average buffers to the environmental and
natural resources commission for review.
9.8. If an average buffer is denied by the environmental and natural resources
commission, an applicant may appeal the denial by submitting a written appeal
request to the administrator within fifteen (15) days of the commission’s denial of
the average buffer. The administrator shall send these appeals to the city council
for final review.
Section 5. Development and Construction.
a. Unless an exemption applies, the following development and construction activities are
not allowed in wetlands, streams, or buffers:
1. Alterations, including the filling of wetlands.
2. The construction of structures.
3. Projects which convert native or naturalized areas to lawn area.
4. The construction of stormwater drainage facilities, sedimentation ponds,
infiltration basins, and rain gardens within a buffer.
Packet Page Number 105 of 221
11
5. Discharge of stormwater to a wetland not in compliance with the city’s
stormwater management ordinance (Section 44-1245, or subsequent
ordinances).
b. Exemptions. This section does not apply to the following activities in a buffer:
1. Walking, passive recreation, fishing or other similar low-impact activities.
2. The maintenance of pre-existing, nonconforming lawn area.
3. The removal of trees or vegetation that is dead, dying, diseased, noxious, or
hazardous in a manner that does not cause the compacting or disturbing of soil
through vehicle or equipment use.
4. The removal of noxious weeds by non-chemical methods, or by means of
chemical treatment in accordance with application methods that prevent the
introduction of toxic chemicals into wetlands and streams.
5. The removal of non-native shrubs, such as buckthorn, if:
a) there is little chance of erosion; and
b) site is flat or generally has slopes less than 6 percent grade; and
c) cut and treat method of removal is used on shrubs more than one-half (½)
inches in diameter (not pulling).
6. Selective management of vegetation as follows:
a) Selective pruning of trees or shrubs in order to enhance their health.
b) Selective removal of tree saplings (less than 2 inches in diameter) in
order to enhance wildlife value of the buffer.
c) Selective removal of non-native trees.
d) Selective removal of non-native weeds.
e) Selective seeding or planting of vegetation that is native to Minnesota.
7. Installation of temporary fencing without footings.
8. Projects within the buffer that are the subject of a wetland buffer management
worksheet approved by the administrator.
9. Public maintenance of existing wetlands and buffers for purposes of drainage or
public safety. The city may waive the requirements of this ordinance for the
maintenance of wetlands and buffers for drainage or public safety purposes
where it determines that there is a greater public need for the project than to
meet the requirement of this ordinance. In waiving these requirements the city
shall apply the following standards:
a) The public entity performing the work shall replant all disturbed areas
within the buffer with native plantings.
b) All necessary erosion control measures must be in place before activities
begin.
Packet Page Number 106 of 221
12
c) The city may require additional mitigation actions as specified in Section
5.d. (Mitigation).
10.9. Public or semi-public streets and utilities. The city council may waive the
requirements of this ordinance for the construction or maintenance of public or
semipublic streets and utilities through buffers where it determines that there is a
greater public need for the project than to meet the requirement of this ordinance.
In waiving these requirements the city council shall apply the following standards:
a) The city may only allow the construction of public or semipublic utilities
and streets through buffers where there is no other practical alternative.
b) Before the city council acts on the waiver the environmental and natural
resources commission and the planning commission and the
environmental and natural resources commission shall make a
recommendation to the city council. The city planning commission shall
hold a public hearing for the waiver. The city shall notify the property
owners within five hundred (500) feet of the property for which the waiver
is being requested at least ten (10) days before the hearing.
c) Utility or street corridors shall not be allowed near when endangered or
threatened species are found in the buffer.
d) Utility or street corridors, including any allowed maintenance roads, shall
be as far from the wetland as possible.
e) Utility or street corridor construction and maintenance shall protect the
wetland and buffer and avoid large trees as much as possible.
f) The city shall not allow the use of pesticides or other hazardous or toxic
substances in buffers or wetlands; however, in some situations the use of
herbicides may be used if prior approval is obtained from the
administrator.
g) The owner or contractor shall replant utility or street corridors with
appropriate native vegetation, except trees, at preconstruction densities
or greater after construction ends. Trees shall be replaced as required by
city ordinance.
h) Any additional corridor access for maintenance shall be provided as much
as possible at specific points rather than to the road which is parallel to
the wetland edge. If parallel roads are necessary they shall be no greater
than fifteen (15) feet wide.
i) The city council, upon recommendation of the administrator, may require
additional mitigation actions as a condition of granting the waiver.
11.10. Public or semipublic trails. The city may waive the requirements of this
ordinance for the construction or maintenance of public or semipublic trails
through buffers, and boardwalks in wetlands, where it determines that there is a
Packet Page Number 107 of 221
13
greater public need for the project than to meet the requirement of this ordinance.
In waiving these requirements the city shall apply the following standards:
a) Trails shall not be allowed near when endangered or threatened species
are found to be present in the buffer.
b) Buffers shall be expanded, equal to the width of the trail corridor.
c) The owner or contractor shall replant all disturbed areas next to the trail in
a timeframe approved by the city.
d) All necessary erosion control measures must be in place before
constructing a trail. The erosion control measures must also be
maintained and inspected by the city to ensure that the wetland or stream
is not compromised by trail construction activities.
e) The trail must be designed and constructed with sustainable design
methods.
f) Boardwalks are allowed within the buffer and shall be a maximum of six
(6) feet in width for semipublic use and twelve (12) feet in width for public
or semipublic use.
g) The administrator may require additional mitigation actions as specified in
Section 5.d. (Mitigation).
c. Construction Practices. Special construction practices shall be required on projects or
developments adjacent to wetlands and adjacent to and in their buffers. Special
construction practices shall be approved by the administrator before issuance of a
grading or building permit. Such practices may include, but are not limited to, grading,
sequencing, vehicle tracking platforms, additional silt fences, and additional sediment
control. They may also include the following:
1. Wetland Buffer Sign Standards: The city may require that a property owner or
developer install wetland signs before grading or starting construction. The buffer
will be identified by installing wetland signs on the boundary between a buffer
and adjacent land. These signs shall mark the edge of the buffer and shall state
there shall be no building, mowing, cutting, filling, or dumping beyond this point.
These signs shall be installed at each lot line where it crosses a wetland or
stream buffer, and where needed to indicate the contour of the buffer, with a
maximum spacing of one-hundred (100) feet of wetland or stream edge.
2. Erosion Control Installation: Before grading or construction, the owner or
contractor shall put into place erosion control measures around the borders of
buffers. Such erosion control measures must remain in place until the owner and
contractor have finished all development activities that may affect the buffer.
3. Erosion Control Breaches: All erosion control measures must be maintained and
inspected to ensure compliance and protection of wetlands, streams, and buffers.
The owner or contractor shall be responsible for all erosion/sedimentation
Packet Page Number 108 of 221
14
breaches within the buffer and shall restore impacted areas to conditions present
prior to grading or construction activities.
4. Erosion Control Removal: After completion of grading or construction, the
contractor or owner may remove the erosion control measures only after
inspection and approval by the city and the applicable watershed district to
ensure the areas affected have been established per requirements.
5. Platting: When platting or subdividing property, the plat or subdivision must show
the wetland boundaries as approved by the applicable watershed district.
6. It is the responsibility of the owner to alleviate any erosion during and after
completion of grading or construction. The owner or contractor must remove
erosion control measures after final approved inspection by the city and the
applicable watershed district.
d. Mitigation. For large-scale projects or new development or construction, the city
requires mitigation when a property owner or contractor has altered or will alter a
wetland or buffer. The property owner or contractor shall submit a mitigation plan to the
administrator for approval. In reviewing the plan, the city may require one or more of the
following actions:
1. Reducing or avoiding the impact by limiting the degree or amount of the action,
such as by using appropriate technology.
2. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the buffer.
3. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by prevention and maintenance
operations during the life of the actions.
4. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute
buffer land at a two-to-one ratio.
5. Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures.
6. Where the city requires restoration or replacement of a buffer, the owner or
contractor shall replant the buffer with native vegetation. A restoration plan must
be approved by the city before planting.
7. Any additional conditions required by the applicable watershed district and/or the
soil and water conservation district shall apply.
8. A wetland or buffer mitigation surety, such as a cash deposit or letter of credit, of
one hundred and fifty percent (150%) of estimated cost for mitigation. The surety
will be required based on the size of the project as deemed necessary by the
administrator. Funds will be held by the city until successful completion of
restoration as determined by the city after a final inspection. Wetland or buffer
mitigation surety does not include other sureties required pursuant to any other
provision of city ordinance or city directive.
Packet Page Number 109 of 221
15
Section 6. Activities in Wetlands, Streams, and Buffers.
a. Unless an exemption applies, the following activities are not allowed in wetlands,
streams, or buffers:
1. Alterations, including the filling of wetlands.
2. The construction of structures.
3. Projects which convert native or naturalized areas to lawn area.
4. The construction of stormwater drainage facilities, sedimentation ponds,
infiltration basins, and rain gardens within a buffer.
5. The discharging of stormwater to a wetland must comply with the city’s
stormwater management ordinance (Section 44-1245, or subsequent stormwater
ordinances).
b. Wetland buffer management worksheet. A wetland buffer management worksheet is
required for certain activities within a wetland and stream buffer:
1. The administrator must approve wetland buffer management worksheets.
2. If a wetland buffer management worksheet is denied by the administrator, an
applicant may appeal the denial by submitting a written appeal request to the
administrator within fifteen (15) days of the administrator’s written denial of the
average buffer. The administrator shall send appeals of average buffers to the
environmental and natural resources commission for review.
3. If a wetland buffer management worksheet is denied by the environmental and
natural resources commission, an applicant may appeal the denial by submitting
a written appeal request to the administrator within fifteen (15) days of the
commission’s denial of the average buffer. The administrator shall send these
appeals to the city council for final review.
c. Exemptions. This section does not apply to the following activities in a buffer:
1. Walking, passive recreation, fishing or other similar low-impact activities.
2. The maintenance of pre-existing, nonconforming lawn area.
3. The removal of trees or vegetation that is dead, dying, diseased, noxious, or
hazardous in a manner that does not cause the compacting or disturbing of soil
through vehicle or equipment use.
4. The removal of noxious weeds by non-chemical methods, or by means of
chemical treatment in accordance with application methods that prevent the
introduction of toxic chemicals into wetlands and streams.
5. The removal of non-native shrubs, such as buckthorn, if:
a) there is little chance of erosion; and
Packet Page Number 110 of 221
16
b) site is flat or generally has slopes less than 6 percent grade; and
c) cut and treat method of removal is used on shrubs more than one-half (½)
inches in diameter (not pulling).
6. Selective management of vegetation as follows:
a) Selective pruning of trees or shrubs in order to enhance their health.
b) Selective removal of tree saplings (less than 2 inches in diameter) in
order to enhance wildlife value of the buffer.
c) Selective removal of non-native trees.
d) Selective removal of non-native weeds.
e) Selective seeding or planting of vegetation that is native to Minnesota.
7. Installation of temporary fencing without footings.
8. Projects within the buffer that are the subject of a wetland buffer management
worksheet approved by the administrator.
9. For properties that are zoned single or double-dwelling residential or are used as
a single or double-dwelling residential use:
a) The use, maintenance, and alteration of existing nonconforming lawn
area for the purpose of outdoor enjoyment which may include gardening,
nonpermanent structures (including such things as storage sheds under
120 square feet in area, swing sets and volleyball nets), impervious
patios, or fire pits.
b) Work within a wetland, stream, or buffer which was approved by the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources water permitting process
and access to those areas by a trail which is limited to the width of the
permit.
Section 7. Best Management Practices.
The city encourages and in some cases requires that best management practices be
implemented to minimize negative effects of stormwater runoff on the environment and the loss
of wildlife habitat when a property owner or contractor has altered or will alter a wetland, stream,
or buffer. Best management practices may include the following:
a. Restore buffer with native plantings. For large-scale projects or new development or
construction refer to Section 5.d. (Mitigation).
b. Manage weeds in buffer. Pursuant to state law, all weeds listed on the Minnesota
noxious weed list must be controlled by the property owner. Owners are encouraged to
control other weeds that are not on the noxious weed list but can threaten the health of a
wetland. Submittal of a wetland buffer management worksheet is required for
management of weeds within the native and naturalized areas of buffers, except for
selective treatment. In addition, a management plan drafted by a professional
experienced in wetland and stream restoration may be needed for large-scale projects or
new development including:
Packet Page Number 111 of 221
17
1. Target weeds.
2. Appropriate management techniques, including the use of chemical treatment if
approved by the administrator as part of the management plan.
3. Management schedule.
4. Erosion control and reseeding if management will create large areas of dead
vegetation.
5. Cash escrow or letter of credit to cover 150 percent of the required work.
c. Reduce stormwater runoff and/or improve the quality of stormwater runoff entering a
wetland or stream. This may be achieved through the following strategies or other
administrator approved best management practices for dealing with stormwater. These
practices are to be located outside of the wetland buffer.
1. Reduce amount of pavement on site (i.e. fewer parking stalls, narrower
driveways, shared parking with other businesses).
2. Use pervious pavement such as pavers or porous asphalt.
3. Use turf pavers or modified turf areas for overflow parking.
4. Install rain garden or infiltration basin.
5. Install rock trench or rock pit.
6. Install filter strip of grass or native vegetation.
7. Install surface sand filter or underground filter.
8. Install native plantings on site to reduce fertilizer use and improve infiltration.
9. Install a green roof on buildings.
10. Install grit chambers, sediment traps, or forebays.
Section 8. Variances.
a. Procedures. Procedures for granting variances from this ordinance are as follows:
1. The city council may approve variances to the requirements in this ordinance.
2. Before the city council acts on a wetland ordinance variance the environmental
and natural resources commission and will make a recommendation to the
planning commission, who will in turn make a recommendation to the city council.
The city planning commission shall hold a public hearing for the variance. The
city shall notify property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the property for
which the variance is being requested at least ten (10) days before the hearing.
Packet Page Number 112 of 221
18
3. The city may require the applicant to mitigate any wetland, stream, or buffer
alteration impacts with the approval of a variance, including but not limited to,
implementing one or more of the strategies listed in Section 5.d. (Mitigation).
4. To approve a variance, the city council shall apply must make the following
findings for variance approval as required as depicted in Minnesota Statutes.,
section 44-13:
a) Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of
circumstances unique to the property under consideration. The term
"undue hardship" as used in granting a variance means the owner of the
property in question cannot put it to a reasonable use if used under
conditions allowed by the official controls; the plight of the landowner is
due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the
landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential
character of the locality. Economic considerations alone are not an undue
hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this
ordinance.
b) The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this
ordinance.
5. The applicant for a variance shall submit, with the variance application and any
other required materials, a statement showing how the proposal would meet the
findings for variance approval.
b. Exemptions to Variances. Variances are not needed for the following:
1. A nonconforming single or double-dwelling residential structure which loses its
nonconforming status as described in Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357,
subdivision 1(e) is allowed to be rebuilt on its same footprint in its entirety
(including foundations and decks) in the buffer if the new single or double-
dwelling family residential structure meets the following conditions:
a) Best management practices are implemented to help protect the wetland
as described in Section 7 (Best Management Practices). The
administrator approves the location and best management practices
through the building permit process.
b) All other applicable building ordinance requirements are met.
2. A nonconforming manufactured home which is located within a wetland buffer
can be replaced with a new manufactured home without approval of a variance
as long as the replacement meets with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes,
section 462.357, subdivision 1(a).
3. Additions to a nonconforming single or double-dwelling family house, garage,
deck, or driveway using the existing straight-edge setbacks to a wetland or
stream if the following apply:
Packet Page Number 113 of 221
19
a) Property that is zoned single or double-dwelling residential or is being
used as a single or double-dwelling residence.
b) There is no other reasonable alternative than encroachment toward the
wetland or stream with the addition.
c) The new addition of the house, garage, deck, or driveway is a minimum of
twenty-five (25) feet from the wetland or stream edge.
d) The process of constructing the addition does not cause degradation of
the wetland, stream, or the existing buffer.
e) Mitigation actions must be met as specified in Section 5.d. (Mitigation).
4. Water-oriented accessory structure or boat house which is located within a
wetland buffer for a wetland adjacent a lake if the structure meets the city’s
Shoreland ordinance requirements.
5. Stairways, lifts and landings which are located within a wetland buffer for a
wetland adjacent a lake if the stairway, lift and landing meets the city’s Shoreland
ordinance requirements.
Section 9. Enforcement.
The city reserves the right to inspect the site or property during regular city business hours or
upon notice to the property owner or its designated representative one business day in advance
if the inspection is to occur at a different time for compliance with this ordinance during
development or construction or alteration pursuant to an approved wetland buffer management
worksheet or plan.
The city shall be responsible for the enforcement of this ordinance. Any person who fails to
comply with or violates any section of this ordinance may be charged with a misdemeanor and,
upon conviction, shall be subject to punishment in accordance with misdemeanor level
convictions as set by State Statute. The violator may be civilly fined and/or liable for restoration
costs as well. All land use building and grading permits shall be suspended until the developer
has corrected the violation. Each day that a separate violation exists shall constitute a separate
offense.
The city council approved the first reading of this ordinance on January 28, 2013.
The city council approved the second reading of this ordinance on ______________________
Signed:
_______________________________ _______________________________
Will Rossbach, Mayor Date
Attest:
________________________________
Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
Packet Page Number 114 of 221
Item I1
MEMORANDUM
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Karen Guilfoile, Director, Citizen Services
DATE: January 24, 2013
RE: Approval of 2013 Rules of Procedure for City Council and Council Meetings Manual
Introduction
The City Council Rules of Procedure for City Council and Council Meetings is reviewed annually
by the city council for any changes and or requested updates. The manual was reviewed and
changes were made at the January 14, 2013 meeting.
Council had requested additional clarification in Section 14 – Council Administrative Policies
Section D. Other Matters located on Page 11 regarding the Maplewood Monthly Schedule.
Following is the recommended language based on conversation that was held by the council at
the January 14th meeting.
The Maplewood Monthly schedule will be rotated so that the Mayor writes the first
article and councilmembers rotate by seniority. In the event that a councilmember
files for an office on the ballot they will be omitted from the rotation until the
election is held and they are no longer on the ballot or have been elected to the
office. divided so that the Mayor and each Councilmember have two “Council
Corner” articles to write a year. A councilmember may have the option to assign
his/her scheduled newsletter article month to any other councilmember or to the
Mayor if they so chose. The January and December issues shall also include be
recap articles submitted by the City Manager.
If a councilmember files for reelection or another office on the city ballot they will
not be writing in the city newsletter after the filing period through the election cycle.
In the event that this occurs, the section of the Maplewood Monthly reserved for
council articles will be used to report city business or activities.
Recommendation
Direct staff to make the appropriate changes to the City Council Rules of Procedure for City
Council and Council Meetings as decided by the council.
Packet Page Number 115 of 221
Agenda Item I 2
AGENDA REPORT
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Steve Lukin, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Approval of a Resolution Authorizing Submission of Request for State
Bonding Funds for the Regional East Metro Public Safety Training Facility
DATE: January 23, 2013
BACKGROUND
Back in 2009 when we started putting cost estimates together for the construction of the Regional
East Metro Public Safety Training Facility, they were prepared with the best information we had at
the time and it was determined that we needed approximately $3.5 to 4 million dollars. Once
construction started, additional costs have risen in the areas of the utilities, soil correction and the
need to upgrade the intersection; as well as overall inflation costs over the past 4-1/2 years.
In order to complete phase 1 of the project, which will includes the simulation building, burn tower
and the residential burn building, we will be requesting $1 million from the state of Minnesota in
the 2013 bonding bill. These dollars will assist us in completing phase 1 by allowing us to put the
necessary props in each of the buildings to provide live fire training.
We are required by the State to match dollar for dollar for the $1 million in bonding money we are
requesting. At this time, we have approximately $2.4 million available to be used as part of our
match which will come from the value of the land and other grants we have received. This request
for bonding money will have no impact and will require no financial assistance from the city of
Maplewood.
The utilities and groundwork have been completed and we will be going out for bids the first part
of February 2013 with construction to start as soon as the ground permits. If all goes well, our
plans are to have the center open and operating in October of 2013.
RECOMMENDATION
I am requesting the city council support the resolution authorizing submission of request for State
bonding funds in the amount of $1 million dollars for the completion of construction for phase 1 of
the Regional East Metro Public Safety Training Facility
Packet Page Number 116 of 221
Agenda Item I 2
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
RESOLUTION #1
AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF REQUEST FOR
STATE BONDING FUNDS FOR THE COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION FOR PHASE 1 OF
THE REGIONAL EAST METRO PUBLIC SAFETY TRAINING FACILITY
WHEREAS, the Minnesota State Legislature is accepting allocations for Capital Bonding Requests
for the 2013 Legislative Session; and
WHEREAS, the city of Maplewood has deemed the completion of construction of Phase I of the
regional East Metro Public Safety Training Facility a high priority project; and
WHEREAS, the city of Maplewood is in need of Capital Bond funding to provide gap financing to
supplement local and other funding for completion of construction of Phase I of the East Metro
Public Safety Training Facility.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Maplewood City Council authorizes the
submission of a request to the Minnesota State Legislature for 2013 bonding funds for the
completion of construction of Phase I of the East Metro Public Safety Training Facility in the
amount of 50% of the construction costs or $1,000,000.
Date Adopted: January 28, 2013
Maplewood City Council
___________________________________
Will Rossbach, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
Packet Page Number 117 of 221
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page Number 118 of 221
MEMORANDUM
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
Chuck Ahl, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Revision–Woodland Hills Church Food Shelf
Proposal (simple-majority vote required for approval)
LOCATION: 1740 Van Dyke Street
DATE: January 15, 2013
INTRODUCTION
Woodland Hills Church, located at 1740 Van Dyke Street, is requesting that the city council
revise their conditional use permit (CUP) so they may operate a food shelf. Refer to the
applicant’s letter of explanation.
BACKGROUND
January 10, 2000: The city council approved a CUP for Woodland Hills Church, a
comprehensive land use plan amendment from BC (business commercial) to C (church) and
amended the liquor license requirements to exempt the 100-foot spacing requirement for
churches from on-sale/off-sale liquor establishments in instances where the liquor store was in
operation before the church entered the neighborhood. (Note: at the time of the 2030
Comprehensive Land Use Plan adoption on January 25, 2010, the land use classification was
changed from C to MU, mixed use.)
The CUP was approved subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community
development may approve minor changes.
2. The proposed use must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the
permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
3. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
4. The applicant shall do the following immediately with the Phase 1 improvements: overlay
and restripe the parking lot on the west side of the building, patch pot holes in the parking lot
on the remainder of the site, remove all litter, damaged items and debris, remove the
wooden fence and restore the grass.
5. The landscape plan shall be submitted to the community design review board for approval
before any landscaping is added.
Agenda J1
Packet Page Number 119 of 221
6. Plans for any changes to the building exterior, other than painting or repairs, shall be
submitted to the community design review board for review and approval.
February 1, 2001: The city council approved a one-year extension of Woodland Hill’s CUP in
order to check the progress of the church’s construction.
April 8, 2002: The city council approved a one-year extension of Woodland Hill’s CUP in order
to check the progress of the church’s construction.
June 9, 2003: The city council moved to review the CUP for Woodland Hills Church again only
if there are changes proposed to the CUP, there is an expansion to the facility or if a problem
arises.
January 24, 2011: The city council approved an amendment to the CUP for Woodland Hills
Church to permit a temporary homeless shelter to operate twice a year. Each occasion would
be for up to a one month period—two months per year total. These most recent CUP conditions
are listed in the Recommendation below.
DISCUSSION
Neighbors’ Comments
Staff surveyed the owners of the 95 properties within 500 feet of the Woodland Hills Church
property for their opinions about this proposal. Of the 14 replies, nine were in favor, two were
opposed, two had no comment and one was in favor, but with a concern.
Those opposed or with concerns stated:
Would it only serve people that live in Maplewood and how would they prove where they
live? If this food shelf would be for Maplewood residents only I would have no problem with
the proposal.
This is an inappropriate location. The church already has overtaken parking for their
services, therefore, I am opposed.
There is already too much crime and vandalism to our property and this would bring more
poor people to the block and could bring more crimes.
Staff’s Replies to these concerns
Staff doesn’t see any relevance based on where customers are from.
There would be no conflict with, or addition to, Sunday-service traffic, since the proposed
food shelf would be open from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Mondays and from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00
p.m. Wednesdays.
Packet Page Number 120 of 221
Staff checked with Lieutenant Doblar of the Maplewood Police Department for his input
regarding neighborhood crime incidents and the potential for crime due to the proposed food
shelf. He stated that “there is no evidence that the additional traffic generated by a food
shelf at Woodland Hills Church is going to increase crime and vandalism in and around the
Woodland Hills area. The crimes that are experienced around this area are mostly confined
to vehicle break-ins at the Plaza movie theatre and Performance Transmission and
theft/burglaries at the car wash and other crimes of opportunity.”
CUP Findings for Approval
The zoning ordinance requires that the city council find that all nine “standards” for CUP
approval be met to allow a CUP. In summary, these state that the use would (refer to the
resolution for the complete wording):
Comply with the city’s comprehensive plan and zoning code.
Maintain the existing or planned character of the neighborhood.
Not depreciate property values.
Not cause any disturbance or nuisance.
Not cause excessive traffic.
Be served by adequate public facilities and police/fire protection.
Not create excessive additional costs for public services.
Maximize and preserve the site’s natural and scenic features.
Not cause adverse environmental effects.
The proposed temporary shelter meets these nine criteria.
Staff Comments
Assistant Fire Chief
The applicant must make sure not to store any materials that would block a fire sprinkler
system.
Police
No issues.
Building Official
Staff would like to do a walk-through in the building and perform an inspection before the food
shelf shelving and product is installed.
Health Officer
No Issues.
Packet Page Number 121 of 221
Conclusion
Staff does not see any problem with this proposal. The proposed hours of operation are only for
four hours on Mondays and four hours on Wednesdays. Deliveries are anticipated only once a
week during business hours. Staff suggests formalizing those hours of operation in the CUP
conditions, with the provision that staff may allow revisions to those hours. Staff would like to
avoid having to require a CUP revision should the applicant wish to make minor adjustments to
the days and times of the operation if the proposed food shelf.
COMMISSION ACTIONS
December 18, 2012: The planning commission recommended approval of this CUP revision
with the staff recommendation.
BUDGET IMPACTS
None.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution approving a conditional use permit revision for Woodland Hills Church,
located at 1740 Van Dyke Street, to operate a food shelf. Approval is based on the findings
required by ordinance and subject to the following conditions (additions are underlined):
1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. Staff may approve minor
changes.
2. The proposed use must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the
permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
3. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
4. The temporary homeless shelter shall be limited to a period of two months each year. The
number of residents sheltered shall not exceed 20 persons at a time as proposed.
5. Woodland Hills Church shall provide constant supervision when the temporary shelter is in
operation.
6. Woodland Hills Church shall comply with all requirements of the Maplewood Building
Official, Fire Marshal and Health Officer prior to beginning the operation of the temporary
shelter.
7. Any changes in use or the operation of the temporary shelter or expansion of the church
shall require review by the city council.
Packet Page Number 122 of 221
8. Any plans for changes to the building exterior, other than painting or repairs, shall be
submitted to the community design review board, for review and approval.
9. The applicant shall notify city staff prior to operating the temporary shelter so the city can
assure compliance with the allowed two months per year operation of the homeless shelter.
10. The food shelf shall be limited to the following days and times: from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Mondays and from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on Wednesdays. Staff may approve revisions to
when the food shelf is open to the public.
Packet Page Number 123 of 221
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Staff surveyed the owners of the 95 properties within 500 feet of the Woodland Hills Church
property. Of the 14 replies, nine were in favor, two were opposed, two had no comment and
one was in favor, but with a concern.
In Favor
1. I strongly support Woodland Hills efforts to provide a food shelf at their church. They are an
excellent partner to the community and this is the type of service that can truly help the
needy in the Maplewood area. Please allow this permit. (Gladstone Properties, 1246
Shryer Avenue)
2. I think it would be a great idea to have a food shelf at this location doing what we should be
doing for those who need our help. (Jeffrey and Kathleen Wittenberg, 1665 Darlene Street)
3. Yours is a worthy endeavor and I support it. God Bless. (Joan Prill, 1677 Hazel Street)
4. I am aware there is a need for this in Maplewood and have no objection. (Marlene Lallier,
1908 Ripley Avenue)
5. I feel a food shelf at the church would be a wonderful thing as Maplewood has none. I feel
this would be a blessing to those served and to the community. Thank you Woodland Hills.
(Anita Heinrichs Barton, 1657 Hazel Street)
6. I live in the neighborhood behind Woodland Hills Church. I DO support the Woodland Hills
Church food shelf proposal—a needed service in our area. (Cindy Romanik)
7. We received your letter today requesting feedback on the Woodland Hills Church Food
Shelf Proposal. We applaud the effort to reach out to the families in need in the area. We
would support the approval of a conditional use permit for this purpose. Thank you. (Rod
and Lil Johnson, 1935 Larpenteur Avenue)
8. Thank you for considering our opinion in this neighborhood. It would be a great idea to
operate a food shelf at Woodland Hills. They are an asset to our neighborhood. We all
know and realize how important it is to help needy families with their basic need of food.
Hope it is approved. (Joan Seckinger, 1657 Darlene Street)
9. Thanks for the letter informing us of the proposal for a food shelf at Woodland Hills. Our
family is 100% behind this proposal as we think it would meet a great need in our
neighborhood and surrounding community. To have help with basic needs like food,
families can put more of their income toward education supplies for their kids and other
expenses like heating and warm clothes during the cold winter season. I think it’s great that
Woodland Hills is standing in the gap for those with their basic needs unmet. Thanks for
your consideration. (Cory and Summer Wright, 1936 Price Avenue)
Packet Page Number 124 of 221
In Favor, but with a concern
1. My only question would be, would it only serve people that live in Maplewood and how
would they prove where they live? Reason I ask is because statement made that N. St.
Paul no longer serves Maplewood residents. I also ask because location is so near to St.
Paul. If this proposal is to serve only Maplewood residents I have no problem with the
proposal. (Peter and Patricia Frank, 1921 Price Avenue)
Opposed
1. I am replying to your letter on the proposal. I am against this proposal on several levels.
Although I do appreciate the intent of the church, I do not feel this is the appropriate
location. The church already has over taken parking for their services—cars are seen up &
down Van Dyke over to Perkins and south China Island. Therefore, my opinion is I’m
against any kind of permit. (Mary Engebretson, 1642 Van Dyke Street)
2. Opposed to this. We’ve had quite a bit of crime/vandalism to our property & feel bringing
more poor people to the block could bring more crimes. We also are struggling with the
economy and can’t handle the added expense of insurance deductibles, replacing stolen
items and fixing attempted break-in damages. (Jeffrey and Joan Knutson, 9235 Knollwood
Drive)
Packet Page Number 125 of 221
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 13.69 acres
Existing land use: Woodland Hills Church
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Ripley Avenue, South China Island Restaurant and Goodrich Golf Course
South: Plaza Theater, single dwellings and Larpenteur Avenue
East: Single dwellings
West: Van Dyke Street and commercial businesses
PLANNING
Land Use Plan designation: MU (mixed use)
Zoning: MU
CODE REQUIREMENTS
Section 44-1092(3) of the city ordinances requires a CUP for churches and institutions of any
educational, philanthropic and charitable nature.
Findings for CUP Approval
Section 44-1097(a) requires that the city council base approval of a CUP on nine findings. Refer to
the findings for approval in the resolution.
APPLICATION DATE
The application for this request was complete on November 15, 2012. State law requires that
the city council decide on land use applications within 60 days. State law also allows the city to
extend this review deadline an additional 60 days if more time is needed to complete the review.
Since the city council’s meeting schedule, because of the holidays, would not allow their review
until January 28, 2013, which is after the initial 60-day period, staff extended the deadline for
council action to March 15, 2013.
p:sec14\woodland hills church food shelf CUP CC Report 1 1 te
Attachments:
1. Zoning Map
2. Land Use Plan Map
3. Applicant’s Written Narrative (two pages)
4. Resolution
Packet Page Number 126 of 221
Packet Page Number 127 of 221
Packet Page Number 128 of 221
Packet Page Number 129 of 221
Packet Page Number 130 of 221
Attachment 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Woodland Hills Church applied for a conditional use permit revision to operate a
food shelf.
WHEREAS, Section 44-1092(3) of the city ordinances requires a conditional use permit for
churches and institutions of any educational, philanthropic and charitable nature.
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property located at 1740 Van Dyke Street. The legal
description is:
PID # 14 29 22 33 0001
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On December 18, 2012, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff
published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The
planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written
statements. The planning commission also considered the report and recommendation of
city staff. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve this
permit.
2. On January 28, 2013, the city council considered reports and recommendations of the city
staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council __________ the above-described
conditional use permit, because:
1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and this Code.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
3. The use would not depreciate property values.
4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation
that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any
person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air
pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or
other nuisances.
5. The use would not exceed the design standards of any affected street.
6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police
and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks.
Packet Page Number 131 of 221
7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic
features into the development design.
9. The use would cause no more than minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. Staff may approve minor
changes.
2. The proposed use must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the
permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
3. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
4. The temporary homeless shelter shall be limited to a period of two months each year. The
number of residents sheltered shall not exceed 20 persons at a time as proposed.
5. Woodland Hills Church shall provide constant supervision when the temporary shelter is in
operation.
6. Woodland Hills Church shall comply with all requirements of the Maplewood Building Official,
Fire Marshal and Health Officer prior to beginning the operation of the temporary shelter.
7. Any changes in use or the operation of the temporary shelter or expansion of the church shall
require review by the city council.
8. Any plans for changes to the building exterior, other than painting or repairs, shall be
submitted to the community design review board, for review and approval.
9. The applicant shall notify city staff prior to operating the temporary shelter so the city can assure
compliance with the allowed two months per year of the homeless shelter.
10. The food shelf shall be limited to the following days and times: from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Mondays and from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on Wednesdays. Staff may approve revisions to
when the food shelf is open to the public.
The Maplewood City Council __________ this resolution on January 28, 2013.
Packet Page Number 132 of 221
AGENDA REPORT
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Michael Thompson, Public Works Director / City Engineer
SUBJECT: Consider Resolution Adopting Living Streets Policy, City Project 11-11
DATE: January 23, 2013
INTRODUCTION
The council should provide feedback on the Living Street Policy, take public comment, and finally
consider adoption of the Living Street Policy.
BACKGROUND
A Living Streets Policy is similar to a Complete Streets Policy however it adds additional focus to
sustainability such as enhancing stormwater quality and urban forest.
The staff was directed by the council in 2009/2010 to explore various city services that could be
delivered in a more sustainable manner. A Living Street Sustainability Workgroup comprised of eight
city staff persons (see below) met on April 28, June 29, and September 30, of 2010 to further define the
importance of Living Streets as it relates to sustainable street construction and reconstruction.
Steve Love, Assistant City Engineer
Steve Kummer, Civil Engineer II
Jon Jarosch, Civil Engineer I
Troy Brink, Street Maintenance Crew Chief
Ann Hutchinson, Naturalist
Virginia Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
Mike Martin, City Planner
Michael Thompson, City Engineer
The City Council supported the efforts and subsequently an official Task Force was created comprised
of a team of ten individuals. The Task Force (see below) further refined goals and concepts for Living
Streets.
Kathy Juenemann, City Council
Jason Lamers, Community Design Review Board
Carol Mason-Sherrill, Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Tanya Nuss, Planning Commission
Jennifer Lewis, Business and Economic Development Authority
Virginia Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner
Bryan Nagel, Street and Storm Sewer Superintendent
Butch Gervais, Fire Marshal
Michael Thompson, City Engineer
To solicit feedback from citizens, the Living Streets idea was brought forward to the following Boards
and Commissions:
Agenda Item J2
Packet Page Number 133 of 221
Planning Commission on March 15, 2011 and November 20, 2012.
Community Design Review Board on March 22, 2011 and November 27, 2012.
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission on April 18, 2011 and October 15, 2012.
Additionally outreach was made to hundreds of residents from the Bartelmy-Meyer Neighborhood and
Western Hills Neighborhood. Living Streets concepts were presented and discussed at open houses
and during reconstruction activities in 2011 and 2012.
A notice was posted in the local newspaper on January 23, 2013 regarding the City Council meeting on
January 28, 2013 to provide an opportunity for comment from the general public. It is important to note
that if new suggestions or adjustments to the Policy are warranted it can be revised and brought back
for council adoption at a future date. The staff wants to treat this as a document that is updated and
changed as new best practices and technology arises (essentially a working document or guide).
DISCUSSION
The general nature of the Living Street Policy is to enhance biking and walking conditions, enhance
safety and security of streets, calm traffic, create livable neighborhoods, improve stormwater quality,
enhance the urban forest, reduce life cycle costs, and improve neighborhood aesthetics.
The Living Streets Policy is a guide for accomplishing these goals through: setting construction
guidelines for rebuilding streets, updating the city code, creating a city wide Tree Plan, and providing
additional incentives for participation in the raingarden program. The Policy was incorporated with
broad input. A copy of the proposed document is attached and includes detail and accompanying
street section guidelines for new and reconstruction projects based on the street functional
classification.
BUDGET
There are no budget implications. City staff drafted the majority of this policy and Bolton and Menk
provided assistance with the document and street section depictions. Those services were paid for out
of the Public Works operating budget in 2012.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the council approve the attached Resolution for Adopting the Living Streets
Policy, City Project 11-11, after providing feedback and taking public comment.
Attachments:
1. Resolution
2. Living Streets Policy
Agenda Item J2
Packet Page Number 134 of 221
RESOLUTION
ADOPTING LIVING STREETS POLICY
WHEREAS, the Maplewood City Council previously directed staff to identify various city
services or practices that could be delivered in a more sustainable manner, and
WHEREAS, the staff created a Living Streets Sustainability Work Group comprised of eight staff
members and met three times in 2010, and
WHEREAS, a Task Force was then created consisting of 10 members ranging from board and
commission members, one council member, and staff members, and met three times in 2011, and
WHEREAS, the Living Street Policy was presented twice to the Planning Commission, twice to
the Community Design Review Board, and twice to the Environmental and Natural Resources
Commission, and
WHEREAS, the Living Streets Policy seeks to: encourage people to travel by walking or
bicycling, enhance safety and security of streets, calm traffic, create livable neighborhoods, improve
stormwater quality, enhance the urban forest, improve community aesthetics, reduce life cycle costs,
and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
The Living Streets Policy is hereby adopted by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota on this
28th day of January 2013, and
It is further resolved that staff shall update the Living Streets Policy from time to time to ensure
its relevant and effectiveness in meeting the identified goals of the Policy.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 135 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 1 of 53
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
By: Michael Thompson, P.E.
Director of Public Works / City Engineer
Adopted by the Maplewood City Council on XX/XX/XXXX
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 136 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 2 of 53
ACKNOWLDGEMENTS
I would like to thank the Planning Commission, Community Design Review Board,
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission, and Business and Economic Development
Commission for providing input and direction to help shape this document.
I also want to specifically thank each member that participated on the City’s Living Streets Task
Force:
Kathy Juenemann, City Council
Jason Lamers, Community Design Review Board
Carol Mason-Sherrill, Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Tanya Nuss, Planning Commission
Jennifer Lewis, Business and Economic Development Authority
Virginia Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner
Bryan Nagel, Street and Storm Sewer Superintendent
Butch Gervais, Fire Marshal
Michael Thompson, City Engineer
I also want to acknowledge those people that served on the City’s Living Streets Sustainability
Work Group:
Steve Love, Assistant City Engineer
Steve Kummer, Civil Engineer II
Jon Jarosch, Civil Engineer I
Troy Brink, Streets Crew Chief
Ann Hutchinson, Naturalist
Virginia Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
Mike Martin, City Planner
Michael Thompson, City Engineer
I would like to also recognize the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD),
Barr Engineering Company, and the City of North Saint Paul, MN all of which collaborated to
create the North Saint Paul (NSP) Living Streets Plan. Materials and insight from that document
were used as a background in facilitating discussion and helping to form the Maplewood Living
Streets Policy document, with permission from the author(s).
I further wanted to acknowledge those persons that contributed to the Los Angeles County
Model Design Manual for Living Streets, which in instances was used to provide expertise and
guidance for this document. The specific names and contribution can be found as an appendix
to this document.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 137 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 3 of 53
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Policy Goals ............................................................................................................... 4
1.2 What is a Living Street? .............................................................................................. 4
1.3 Background ................................................................................................................ 5
1.4 Benefits of Living Streets ............................................................................................ 5
1.5 Vision for Maplewood ................................................................................................. 6
2.0 LIVINGS STREETS FOUNDATION .......................................................................... 9
2.1 Stakeholder Process .................................................................................................. 9
2.2 Stakeholder Consensus ........................................................................................... 10
2.2.1. Improve the Quality of Stormwater Runoff ................................................... 10
2.2.2. Implement Traffic Calming Techniques ........................................................ 12
2.2.3. Enhance Walking/Biking Conditions and Pedestrian Connections ............... 13
2.2.4. Enhance the Urban Forest ........................................................................... 14
2.2.5. Ensure Cost-Effective and Practical Solutions ............................................. 16
2.2.6. Improve the Aesthetics of Streets ................................................................ 17
2.3 Conformance with Comprehensive Plan ................................................................... 18
2.4 Regulatory Demands ................................................................................................ 20
2.5 Incorporation of Maplewood’s “Raingarden” Tradition .............................................. 21
2.6 Private Utility Considerations .................................................................................... 23
3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES ............................................................................................ 24
3.1 General Information .................................................................................................. 24
3.2 Local Street .............................................................................................................. 27
3.3 Local Connector Street ............................................................................................. 31
3.4 Collector ................................................................................................................... 34
3.5 Minor Arterial ............................................................................................................ 39
3.6 Miscellaneous .......................................................................................................... 43
4.0 IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................................ 46
4.1 Comprehensive Plan Amendments .......................................................................... 46
4.2 City Code Revisions ................................................................................................. 46
4.3 Engineering Specifications and Standards Revisions ............................................... 48
4.4 Environmental Utility Fee Policy Revisions ............................................................... 49
4.5 Tree Plan Development ............................................................................................ 50
4.6 Street Reconstruction and New Development .......................................................... 51
4.7 Outreach and Education ........................................................................................... 51
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 138 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 4 of 53
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Policy Goals
The high level goals of Maplewood’s Living Streets Policy are to:
1) Encourage people to travel by walking or bicycling.
2) Enhance the safety and security of streets.
3) Create livable neighborhoods.
4) Maximize the infiltration of stormwater.
5) Improve the quality of stormwater runoff.
6) Enhance the urban forest.
7) Improve the aesthetics of streets within the community.
8) Reduce life cycle costs.
Maplewood’s Living Streets Policy focuses on a handful of specific items further discussed
under Section 2.2 “Stakeholder Consensus” to meet these goals while understanding that each
project must be considered in a context sensitive manner.
1.2 What is a Living Street?
Terminology surrounding this topic can be confusing. Complete Streets typically refers to street
design that provides for multiple modes of transportation. Green Streets typically refers to street
design that reduces environmental impacts by reducing impervious surface, managing
stormwater, and providing shade. Living Streets for the purpose of this document is a
combination of the two. Living Streets combines the concepts of complete streets and green
streets, and also puts additional focus on quality of life aspects for City residents.
The State of Minnesota passed Complete Streets legislation in 2010. The Commissioner of
Transportation has committed Mn/DOT to implement a complete street vision for the trunk
highway system. Cities are encouraged to adopt policies to meet their unique needs; however it
is not a mandate.
According to Mn/DOT, Complete Streets does not mean “all modes on all roads”; rather, the
goal of Complete Streets should be to develop a balanced transportation system that integrates
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 139 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 5 of 53
all modes via planning inclusive of each mode of transportation (i.e., transit, freight, automobile,
bicycle and pedestrian) and include transportation users of all types, ages and abilities.
A few examples of Complete Streets goals and principles listed in the Mn/DOT report to the
legislature include:
1) Improve mobility and accessibility of all individuals including those with disabilities in
accordance with the legal requirements of the ADA.
2) Encourage mode shift to non-motorized transportation and transit.
3) Reduce air and water pollution and reduce noise impacts.
4) Increase transportation network connectivity.
The City of Maplewood finds the Complete Streets report used to guide Minnesota legislation in
2010 useful, however the City wants to go further in addressing the environment and active
living instead of focusing solely on a transportation vision. Thus this Living Streets Policy
document reflects Maplewood’s vision.
1.3 Background
The City of Maplewood was directed by the City Council in 2009/2010 to explore various city
services that could be delivered in a more sustainable manner. A Living Street Sustainability
Workgroup comprised of eight city staff persons met on April 28, June 29, and September 30, of
2010 to further define the importance of Living Streets as it relates to sustainable street
construction and reconstruction.
To solicit feedback from Maplewood citizens, the Living Streets idea was brought forward to the
Planning Commission, Community Design Review Board, and Environmental and Natural
Resources Commission. The Living Streets concepts were well received.
The City Council supported the efforts and subsequently an official Task Force was created
comprised of a team of ten individuals referred to in the Acknowledgements. The Task Force
further refined goals and concepts for Living Streets.
Input was taken from stakeholders to help facilitate this Living Streets Policy document. Further
details about stakeholder input can be found in Section 2.1.
1.4 Benefits of Living Streets
As quoted in the NSP Living Streets Plan:
“Most of us think of America as the land of choices. Yet, in just about any community built in the
last 50 years, there is pretty much one choice for transportation: the car. North St. Paul isn’t any
different than most American cities in this regard. Living Streets provide many transportation
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 140 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 6 of 53
choices to the diverse range of city residents and it balances those choices to provide
community, environmental and economic benefits as well.”
The NSP Living Streets Plan did an excellent job of identifying the numerous benefits resulting
from Living Streets. A summary of the benefits is provided below, while an excerpt from the
NSP Plan containing more detailed information on the benefits is provided in the Appendix.
Living Streets:
• Provide economic benefits: lower initial costs; lower maintenance costs; increased
property values; economic revitalization.
• Build community: improve public health; increase safety; enhance neighborhood beauty;
strengthen sense of community; provide positive impact upon children.
• Provide environmental benefits: improve water quality; improve air quality; reduce the
urban heat island affect; reduce materials and energy used in street construction;
promote the planting of trees.
1.5 Vision for Maplewood
The Living Streets Policy is really a vision of what Maplewood wants to look like in 50 years, 100
years, and well into the future. The Living Streets collaboration has helped shape a vision by
providing consensus when building new streets and reconstructing existing ones.
The City of Maplewood has been visionary when it comes to rainwater gardens and stormwater
treatment; however, Living Streets further balances the scale of traditional infrastructure versus
a sustainable “green” approach. As seen in the figure below this policy means to give additional
weight to non-traditional components.
Image Courtesy NSP Living Streets Plan
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 141 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 7 of 53
To provide a very high level summary vision of the streets in Maplewood the following figures
are provided. More detailed design standards are included in Section 3 of this document.
The vision for typical local Living Streets is shown below:
A rendering of a local “pre” Living Street versus a “post” Living Street is shown below:
Images Courtesy NSP Living Streets Plan
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 142 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 8 of 53
The general vision for higher volume collector type Living Streets is shown below:
A cross section view of a collector Living Street is shown below:
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 143 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 9 of 53
2.0 LIVING STREETS FOUNDATION
2.1 Stakeholder Process
As discussed in Section 1.3, an extensive stakeholder process was conducted in order to attain
buy-in and move forward with a consensus for the Living Streets vision.
A Living Street Sustainability Workgroup comprised of eight city staff persons met on April 28,
June 29, and September 30, of 2010 to further define the importance of Living Streets as it
relates to sustainable street construction and reconstruction. That following were part of the
Workgroup:
Steve Love, Assistant City Engineer
Steve Kummer, Civil Engineer II
Jon Jarosch, Civil Engineer I
Troy Brink, Streets Crew Chief
Ann Hutchinson, Lead Naturalist
Virginia Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
Mike Martin, City Planner
Michael Thompson, City Engineer
The Workgroup discussed that Living Streets should improve stormwater quality through
expansion of the rain garden program, reducing the impervious footprint of streets, and meeting
or exceeding the 1” infiltration standard. Also important was the implementation of traffic
calming measures through the use of techniques best suited for site conditions. Another key
area discussed was improved biking and walking conditions along natural connector routes and
collector streets through designation of bike lanes, sidewalks, or multi-purpose trails. Creating
boulevard tree standards that provide environmental benefits (stormwater management, shade
to reduce heating and cooling costs, filtering air pollutants, reduce urban heat island effect) was
discussed along with the overall importance that any Living Streets Policy should attempt to
minimize construction, replacement, and future maintenance costs in a manner that is equal to
or less than that of a standard street section.
To solicit feedback from citizens, the Living Streets idea was brought forward to the following
Boards and Commissions:
Planning Commission on March 15, 2011 and November 20, 2012.
Community Design Review Board on March 22, 2011 and November 27, 2012.
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission on April 18, 2011 and October 15,
2012.
The City Engineer presented the Living Streets overview at these meetings. In addition, the
Administrator of the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District, Clifton Aichinger, presented
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 144 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 10 of 53
his first hand experience in forming a Living Street Plan for the City of North Saint Paul to the
Planning Commission. The Living Streets concepts were well received at each meeting.
With the support from staff and citizens, the Living Streets ideas and concepts were presented
to the City Council. The City Council supported the efforts and subsequently authorized the
creation of an official Task Force on May 23, 2011. The Living Streets Task Force was
comprised of the following:
Kathleen Juenemann, City Council
Jason Lamers, Community Design Review Board
Carol Mason-Sherrill, Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Tanya Nuss, Planning Commission
Jennifer Lewis, Business and Economic Development Authority
Virginia Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner
Bryan Nagel, Street and Storm Sewer Superintendent
Butch Gervais, Fire Marshal
Michael Thompson, City Engineer
The purpose of the Task Force was to further refine goals and concepts for Living Streets with
the intent of proposing an official Living Streets Policy to the City Council for formal adoption.
The Task Force met July 27, August 10, and September 14, 2011.
2.2 Stakeholder Consensus
The Task Force was very productive in moving forward with focus items for the Living Streets
Policy. The six focus items are listed below and then discussed individually in Sections 2.2.1.
through 2.2.6.
Improve the Quality of Stormwater Runoff.
Implement Traffic Calming Techniques.
Enhance Walking/Biking Conditions and Pedestrian Connections.
Enhance the Urban Forest.
Ensure Cost-Effective and Practicable Solutions.
Improve the Aesthetics of Streets within the Community.
2.2.1 Improve the Quality of Stormwater Runoff
The City of Maplewood has always been proactive at managing stormwater runoff. Maplewood
is a leader in the design and implementation of rainwater gardens. Living Streets is the next
step for further improvements.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 145 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 11 of 53
Issues that occur from simply sending stormwater down the storm sewer include:
• Stormwater pollutes local waters. Most runoff is not treated. It goes directly into local
lakes and streams carrying pollutants like soil, fertilizers, pesticides, oil, soap, litter,
organic matter, and pet feces.
• Stormwater runoff in our lakes causes turbid water, sediment buildup, and can contribute
to algae blooms. It can impact health of aquatic plants and animals. Poor water quality
in lakes also affects aesthetics and recreation.
• Sending runoff out of the neighborhood contributes to flooding downstream.
• Rainwater needs to soak in where it falls so it can help recharge groundwater aquifers.
In order to improve water quality, the City of Maplewood must continue an aggressive rainwater
garden implementation program. Encourage and support the construction of rainwater gardens
as retrofits. Require all new construction and reconstruction projects to incorporate rainwater
gardens. Living Streets also encourage the construction of an appropriate width street for the
specific application, often resulting in a narrowing of the pavement compared to current
standards. This reduces the amount of impervious surface, producing a direct decrease in the
amount of stormwater runoff. Boulevard trees planted along Living Streets also provide a
positive Impact on stormwater quality.
The benefits of these components include the following:
• Rainwater Gardens
o Soak up 30% more runoff than lawns.
o Keep runoff on site.
o Filter polluted urban runoff (oil, grease, salts, fertilizers, pesticide residue).
o Recharge groundwater.
o Provide habitat and food for butterflies and birds.
o Beautify a low spot.
o Serve as a natural filter, removing sediment, phosphorous and nitrogen from runoff.
o Catch sediments prior to entering downstream water bodies.
• Street Narrowing
o Less pavement means less impervious surface.
o Reduces runoff volume.
o Reduces solar generated heat.
o Less pavement heat means cooler stormwater runoff temperature.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 146 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 12 of 53
• Boulevard Trees
o Intercept rain water with leaves and branches.
o Improve the ability of water to soak into the ground.
o Increase the volume of water that can enter the ground by absorption through their
root systems.
o Improve the resiliency and water holding capacity of the adjacent soil.
2.2.2 Implement Traffic Calming Techniques
The City of Maplewood desires to reduce the volume and speed of traffic on neighborhood
streets. While all public streets are designed for public use, different roadways are designed to
have different functions and serve different types of traffic. The volume of traffic that should be
on each street is directly related to how a street is used and its function for the overall
Maplewood community.
Traffic calming is an important element of the Living Streets Policy. It is designed to limit the
types of traffic that use a specific roadway while simultaneously promoting the use of other non-
motorized traffic modes. This involves using different measures or treatments to calm the traffic
and ensure each roadway serves its specified needs for the community. The methods for traffic
calming depend largely on the type of roadway, its function, and the modes of traffic that should
be on the roadway. A significant focus of calming is usually on limiting cut-through traffic,
decreasing the speed of vehicles, and providing safety for pedestrians and bicycles.
Traffic calming measures the City will consider implementing include the following:
• Reducing street width.
• Medians.
• Chicanes (artificial features to create extra turns in a road).
• Raised crosswalks.
• Dynamic Speed Display Signs.
• Roundabouts.
• Barriers/Diverters.
• Bump-outs.
• Differentiated pavement surfaces (including pervious pavement).
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 147 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 13 of 53
• Pavement markings.
• Signage.
• Additional Enforcement.
Each traffic calming measure has both positive and negative effects in terms of cost, time,
feasibility, emergency response, bike safety, pedestrian safety, parking, maintenance, and
aesthetics. City staff will evaluate which traffic calming measure(s) will be utilized for each
application based on the context of the specific project or street under consideration.
2.2.3 Enhance Walking and Biking Conditions and Pedestrian Connections
The City has a trail and sidewalk system dedicated to the use of non-vehicular transportation.
Users are primarily pedestrians and bicyclists, but also include other multimodal transportation
activities such as in-line skating and running. Components of the trail and sidewalk system
primarily include off-street facilities, but also include on-street striped lanes and paved
shoulders.
The purpose of a trail and sidewalk system is to provide safe routes for non-vehicular
transportation, exercise, relaxation or commuting for users of all ages and abilities. Some of the
most popular everyday activities include running, walking, bicycling and in-line skating for
exercise and pleasure.
The Living Streets Policy will accomplish enhanced walking and biking conditions through
providing safe and convenient pedestrian routes along streets that are:
• Adjacent to schools and on nearby streets within reasonable walking distance to the
school(s).
• Adjacent to parks and open space and on nearby streets within reasonable walking
distance to the park(s) and open space(s).
• In commercial and retail areas.
• Adjacent to high volume roadways.
• Near transit facilities.
• Included within the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 148 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 14 of 53
• Miscellaneous areas in the best interest of the City to improve its overall trail and
sidewalk system.
2.2.4 Enhance the Urban Forest
The urban forest is defined as the collection of trees and vegetation growing within the City.
Boulevard trees are part of the urban forest, and the urban forest can be enhanced and
expanded by the preservation of existing boulevard trees as well as the strategic planting of new
boulevard trees. The numerous environmental, stormwater, and community benefits of
boulevard trees were stated in the NSP Living Streets Plan, and a copy of those benefits is
provided in the Appendix for reference.
Maplewood has a firmly established position as a proponent of trees. It became a Minnesota
“GreenStep City” in 2010 and was first designated as a “Tree City” in 2008. The City has a
comprehensive tree ordinance, adopted in 2006, providing for the preservation, protection, and
replacement of trees. The ordinance established a Tree Fund, designated specifically for the
planting of trees on public property, which includes boulevards. The fund is financed by
developers/applicants who are unable to provide complete mitigation for impacts to existing
trees caused by work done under their approved permit.
In 2009 the Department of Forest Resources of the University of Minnesota performed a report
on boulevard trees for the City of Maplewood. The report discussed the benefits of boulevard
trees and guidance for developing a successful boulevard tree program, including elements
such as site criteria, planting specifications, and design criteria. The report contains many best
management practices (BMPs) that could be employed towards the goals of the Living Streets
Policy. The report was presented to the Community Design Review Board and the
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission in 2009 for consideration of future action,
and was received positively.
Maplewood offers a significant amount of education on the subject of trees, such as information
posted on its website, advertisement for area classes and curriculum, and through programs at
the Nature Center. The City also provides opportunity for public involvement with trees by
activities including its Tree Registry Program and Arbor Day plantings at community parks.
Maplewood promotes the planting of new trees on private property through its tree planting
rebate program.
The Living Streets Policy provides for the planting of new boulevard trees to enhance the urban
forest. Preservation of existing boulevard trees to the maximum extent possible is also
recognized, and will be accomplished under the existing tree ordinance. Components of street
projects such as sidewalks and rainwater gardens will be modified as necessary to
accommodate existing boulevard trees where appropriate.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 149 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 15 of 53
In implementing the Living Streets Policy, the following issues should be addressed:
• Species selection:
o Diversification is vital to the success of a boulevard tree population, due to the
following reasons:
A diverse tree population is more resistant to disease that affects any
individual species.
A diverse selection of boulevard trees allows for choosing the type most
suitable to the site conditions for the specific application.
A diverse tree population provides variety to the City, enhancing the
attractiveness and aesthetics of the urban forest.
o Only species suitable for the local climate should be specified.
o A list of approved species for boulevard trees should be developed. The tree
rebate program contains a list of recommended species that could be adopted for
this purpose or used as a basis to develop the list.
• Tree specifications:
o Minimum required caliper should be identified. It should also be indicated
whether the use of seedlings will be allowed as a cost-effective measure.
o Tree planting details should be developed.
o Locations for planting should be defined, such as not within a certain distance
from driveways, intersections, fire hydrants, etc.
o Recommendations should be made regarding when structured soils or special
construction or planting techniques are needed due to the amount of hardscape
near trees.
o Recommended spacing for planting should be identified.
• Maintenance:
o Boulevard trees requiring low maintenance should be chosen.
o The responsibility for maintenance of trees in the public right-of-way currently lies
with the City. This should be reviewed as the Living Streets Policy is adopted
and implemented to determine whether City responsibility for boulevard trees
remains the best course of action, or whether some or all of the responsibility
should be shifted to the adjacent property owners.
• Other considerations:
o Height: where utility lines or other overhead obstacles are present, species with
heights to avoid interference should be selected.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 150 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 16 of 53
o Root system: minimize disturbance to adjacent curbs and sidewalks; minimize
interference with buried obstacles such as underground utilities.
o Salt/chemical tolerance: the maintenance activities of the road should be
considered when selecting species of trees for the adjacent boulevard.
o Canopy: spread of the boulevard tree should be considered for the specific
application to avoid interference with driver sight lines and traffic signs.
o Parking accessibility: where parking is allowed, boulevard trees should be
located appropriately to avoid interference with the opening of vehicle doors.
Specific requirements for the above listed issues need to be determined and subsequently
applied in the implementation of Living Streets.
2.2.5 Ensure Cost-Effective and Practical Solutions
As stated previously in Section 2.1, it is important that the Living Streets Policy minimize
construction, replacement, and future maintenance costs in a manner that is equal to or less
than that of a standard street section.
The importance of being cost effective and practical is the following:
• Acceptance by the general public.
• Not increase current funding allocations.
• Not increase current assessment rates.
To assure the cost of a living street does not exceed the cost of a traditional street, a
comparison will be performed and included in the feasibility report for street improvement
projects. Cost savings realized by the narrowing of streets, and subsequent long term
maintenance savings, will be utilized for living street amenities. On new construction, living
streets guidelines will be followed.
The ways in which cost effectiveness and practicality will be accomplished is through the
following:
• Selection of the appropriate street section for each specific application (context
sensitive).
• Construction of sidewalks and trails where needed (sidewalks not needed on every
street).
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 151 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 17 of 53
• Rainwater gardens sited where they will be effective.
• Narrower streets.
• Proper tree and planting selections.
In addition, the City will realize savings in maintenance and repair costs for the following
programs:
• Seal coating.
• Crack filling.
• Mill and overlays.
• Reclamation.
2.2.6 Improve the Aesthetics of Streets
Aesthetics have an impact on the community experience. Creating an atmosphere that is
positive, pleasant, and enjoyable helps attract and retain residents in the community. Good
aesthetics provide a sense of well-being, belonging, and contentment, and contribute to an
overall increased quality of life.
Maplewood recognizes the importance of aesthetics. As part of the City-wide goals stated in its
adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan, Maplewood included an “Urban Design Goal” that stated in
part, “strive to improve the appearance of the City, maintain compatible land uses, and
encourage a sensitive integration among activities, man-made facilities, and the natural
environment.”
The City has worked toward implementation of aesthetics through such avenues as investment
in open space improvements, development of several planting plans for rainwater gardens, and
development of streetscapes, as in the Gladstone area. The Transportation Chapter of the
2030 Comprehensive Plan identified that, “Maplewood should design streetscapes and
operations in ways that alleviate the negative impact of major streets on their surroundings…”
and “…should incorporate streetscape guidelines that emphasize the enhancement of the
neighborhood environment.”
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 152 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 18 of 53
Streets, as well as utilities, within the public right-of-way perform a necessary function in
supporting the developed environment. They are an asset to the neighborhood in which they
are located, and to the City as a whole. Beyond their base functionality, they also provide
opportunities for complimenting and contributing to the aesthetic and to the identity of the
neighborhood and of Maplewood.
Living Streets incorporate aesthetic considerations into their design and construction. Some of
these elements result from the focus items discussed previously in this section:
• Landscaped rainwater gardens for storm water quality.
• Installation of boulevard trees.
• Increased green space due to more narrow street widths.
• Elimination of signal poles due to installation of roundabouts.
Examples of additional aesthetic elements that could be included in Living Streets include:
• Burying of existing overhead utility lines as part of street reconstruction.
• A specific streetscape theme for a street or neighborhood.
• Installation of public art for pure aesthetics and/or to create a desired identity.
• Other street / neighborhood / city specific elements identified by Maplewood.
The Maplewood Living Streets Policy requires aesthetics be considered and included
appropriately in the development and implementation of living street projects. Consideration
must be given to independent aesthetic elements as well as to the underlying aesthetic impacts
of other elements of Living Streets.
2.3 Conformance with Comprehensive Plan
The approved Comprehensive Plan is the overall guiding document for the City of Maplewood.
The Living Streets Policy is intended to compliment and build upon the information and goals
stated in the Comprehensive Plan, and not to create any contradiction or inconsistency.
The foundation and design guidelines of the Living Streets Policy have been reviewed against
the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Where issues between the documents are found, the
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 153 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 19 of 53
decision must be made whether to revise the Living Streets Policy or amend the
Comprehensive Plan to resolve the issue. Due to its role as the overall guiding document, as
well as the time and effort necessary to execute an amendment, it is recommended to avoid
amending the Comprehensive Plan when possible, and to revise the policy instead.
The sections of the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan against which the Living Streets Policy
was reviewed include: Chapter 3 – Sustainability; Chapter 6 – Parks, Trails, and Open Spaces;
Chapter 7 – Natural Resources; Chapter 8 – Transportation; and Chapter 10 – Surface Water.
A summary of the comparison with each chapter is given below. Section 4.1 of this document
identifies any recommended amendments to the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
• Chapter 3 – Sustainability
o The Living Streets Policy promotes the goals and helps move toward fulfilling
specific implementation strategies stated in the Sustainability Chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan.
• Chapter 6 – Parks, Trails, and Open Space
o The Living Streets Policy is in good accord with Chapter 6 of the Comprehensive
Plan. The Chapter expresses a desire to shift focus to trail development and
connections, which the Living Streets Policy will help accomplish.
o Chapter Goals that are aligned with the Living Streets Policy include:
Developing and maintaining an interconnected trail system.
Effectively tying parks together.
Encouraging residents to commute and access resources using non-
motorized means of transportation.
o Chapter 6 identifies tools for working towards the goals that are consistent with
elements of the Living Streets, including:
Use of connector trails within road right-of-way.
Use of on-street bike lanes.
o This Chapter recommends a process be developed to support the Parks
Commission review of all road improvement projects to identify potential trail
connections and opportunities to complete the system.
• Chapter 7 – Natural Resources
o The Living Streets Policy promotes the goals stated in the Natural Resources
Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan.
o Specific implementation strategies identified in the Chapter which are advanced
by the Living Streets Policy include:
Creating a program to deliver low impact retrofit ecosystem services,
including raingardens.
Developing guidelines for environmentally friendly street designs.
Developing pedestrian and bicycle friendly street designs.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 154 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 20 of 53
• Chapter 8 – Transportation
o The Living Streets Policy is in alignment with and supports the goals and policies
presented in the Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. However,
there is some specific information stated in the Chapter which will need to be
updated due to the adoption of the Living Streets Policy. These items are:
The Chapter states Minor Arterial roadways will contain at least two drive
lanes in each direction. The design templates contained in the Living
Streets Program will contain more options for Minor Arterials.
Figure 8.2 of the Comprehensive Plan presents typical street sections for
the various road types. The Chapter text states the City will design and
maintain its roads according to the design standards illustrated in Figure
8.2. The templates contained in the Living Streets Policy will become the
new guidelines for roadway design, and will supersede the sections
currently shown in Figure 8.2
• Chapter 10 – Surface Water
o The Living Streets Policy is consistent with the goals and strategies stated in the
Surface Water Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan.
2.4 Regulatory Demands
Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT)
Municipal State Aid (MSA) routes within the City will have to be designed and constructed to
meet MSA standards and rules. Design elements of the Living Streets Policy that may be
affected by the MSA requirements include:
• Sidewalk and trail width.
• Vehicle lane width.
• Parking lane width.
• Bike lane width.
• Clear zones.
• Median width.
Ramsey County
County State Aid Highways (CSAH) and County Roads within the City will have to be designed
and constructed to meet Ramsey County standards and rules. Design elements of the Living
Streets Policy that may be affected by these requirements include the same as those affected
by the MnDOT requirements.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 155 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 21 of 53
Watershed Districts
The City of Maplewood lies within the boundaries of three different watershed districts:
Rasmey-Washington Metro Watershed District, Valley Branch, and Capitol Region. Stormwater
regulations will apply to projects performed within the boundary of each district, and permits
from the districts will be required as necessary.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
The MPCA is the regulatory body that administers the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) in Minnesota. Under the NPDES, the City of Maplewood is required to
maintain a permit as a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4). All MS4 permit holders
are responsible to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program
(SWPPP). Maplewood was one of 30 MS4 permit holders in the State designated as a
“Selected MS4” and required to submit additional information to the MPCA. The City
accomplished this through preparation of a Loading Assessment and Non-Degradation Report
in 2007.
The Living Streets Policy is in alignment with the goals of the NPDES program as well as the
Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in the City’s SWPPP. The Living Streets Policy
is also in accordance with the conclusions reached in the Non-Degradation Report, which stated
“the City will play an active role in adopting specific policies aimed at enhancing the surface
water quality”.
The City will continue to comply with the requirements of its NPDES permit, including
implementation of the BMPs listed in the SWPPP. Maplewood will also obtain individual
NPDES Construction Permits as necessary for individual improvement projects within the City.
2.5 Incorporation of Maplewood’s “Raingarden” Tradition
The City of Maplewood made a conscious decision to be forward-thinking in regards to
stormwater and the environment, and to lead by example. A result of these decisions was the
implementation of rainwater gardens (also referred to as ‘raingardens’). Maplewood installed its
first rainwater garden in 1996 and since that time has developed an inventory approaching 700
rainwater gardens. The City has developed a reputation as a leader and innovator in
stormwater management and a rainwater garden proponent, and is well known outside the
community for these aspects.
Over the past 15 years Maplewood has developed a highly successful rainwater garden
program. The program provides for the planting of rainwater gardens as part of public street
reconstruction projects, and it also encourages the development of private rainwater gardens by
homeowners and businesses. The City offers education and guidance on the development of
rainwater gardens. The City has established 10 standard rainwater garden designs, which
provide varying appearance and accommodate varying site conditions.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 156 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 22 of 53
In 2003 the City established an Environmental Utility Fund (EUF) for the purpose of financing its
Storm Water Management Program. The EUF is funded by a fee collected quarterly from all
properties, including tax-exempt properties. The fee is based on impervious surface coverage
for commercial/industrial property and a flat fee for residential property. Fees range from lower
amounts for single family residential lots to higher amounts for commercial and industrial sites.
The EUF is used to maintain the existing overall storm drainage system, as well as to upgrade
and replace components as necessary. It is also used for enhancement of wetland areas and
improvements to water quality in our natural resources, providing environmental benefits for the
community and in turn the region.
In conjunction with the EUF, Maplewood also established a credit program to encourage
property owners to utilize BMPs with regard to stormwater. Property owners who establish and
maintain approved BMPs receive a credit towards their EUF fee. Rainwater gardens are
recognized as an approved BMP, and for the installation and maintenance of a rainwater garden
the property owner receives a credit of 30% off their EUF. The location, design, and installation
of the rainwater garden must meet Maplewood requirements and must be approved by the City.
The City inspects rainwater gardens annually, and as long as they remain in compliance with
the requirements and are being properly maintained, the EUF credit can be received in
perpetuity. The use of EUF fee credits for rainwater gardens is another means by which
Maplewood advances rainwater gardens, by recognizing and rewarding property owners for
being proactive and helping treat stormwater and reducing downstream impacts.
The rainwater garden program in Maplewood is voluntary. The majority of rainwater gardens in
the City are within the public right-of-way (ROW) in locations where the adjacent property owner
wanted the installation of the rainwater garden as part of an overall street reconstruction project.
This is provided at no cost to the property owner. The City’s contractor creates the depression
for the garden during the road project and typically plants and mulches the garden. The
property owner then maintains the garden. Other examples include property owners who
choose to install a rainwater garden on their private property or within the ROW when a street
reconstruction project is not being conducted. In these cases a 30% credit is also applied to
their EUF fee. However, these rainwater gardens are completely created, planted, and
maintained by the property owner. The City will work with the property owner to provide a curb
cut to help direct stormwater into the raingarden. The remaining rainwater gardens in the City
are City maintained gardens constructed on City-owned land such as park land.
The approach to rainwater gardens is part of Maplewood’s overall big-picture position as
promoting sustainability and protection of the environmental and natural resources. This is
summed up in the vision statement contained in the Sustainability chapter of the City’s 2030
Comprehensive Plan:
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 157 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 23 of 53
“The City of Maplewood, in order to ensure stewardship of its environment, will promote
sustainable development and practices for the preservation, design, and maintenance of
its natural and built environments. Developments and practices should maintain or
enhance economic opportunity and community well-being while protecting and restoring
the natural environment that people, economies, and ecological systems depend on.”
The Living Streets Policy will not replace nor diminish the rainwater garden program in
Maplewood. Rather, the Living Streets Policy compliments the rainwater garden program and
incorporates it as part of an integrated approach to street design. Maplewood will continue its
strong tradition and maintain its leading reputation with regard to rainwater gardens and
stormwater management.
Rainwater gardens are an essential component of living streets. In the context of the Living
Streets Policy, the rainwater gardens will have the role of boulevard features on both
construction of new streets and on street reconstruction projects. For street reconstruction
projects their design, application, installation, and maintenance will be very similar to the current
program for boulevard rainwater gardens.
It is recommended the Living Streets Policy expand the rainwater garden program to allow the
retrofitting of rainwater gardens. In other words, allow an individual property owner to install and
maintain a rainwater garden in the public ROW along a street that has already been
reconstructed or is not programmed for improvement. The retrofit program would include a
limited number of rainwater gardens annually, would allow them only in appropriate locations,
and would require application by the property owner and approval by the City. Additional
information on the proposed retrofit program for rainwater gardens is given in Section 4.4 of this
document.
2.6 Private Utility Considerations
The public road rights-of-way act also as the corridor for numerous private utilities, such as
electric, gas, telecommunications, and fiber optic. The need for the private utilities to utilize the
public right-of-way must be recognized, and application of the Living Streets design must be
compatible with the requirements of the private utilities.
Installation of private utilities in a joint trench should be required whenever possible to reduce
the area of the right-of-way impacted by the installation, as well as to allow greater area in which
to place elements of Living Streets.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 158 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 24 of 53
3.0 DESIGN GUIDELINES
3.1 General Information
The Task Force determined that design templates are needed to guide the implantation of the
Living Streets approach as projects are undertaken. The templates would be developed with
the focus items identified by the Task Force in mind. However, the templates are intended to be
flexible, recognizing that the application for each specific project, neighborhood, and street must
be context sensitive.
The Comprehensive Plan for the City identifies the following street classification hierarchy:
• Local Streets: Roadways designed to carry short trips at low speeds. Local streets are
traversed to reach collector streets or other higher classification roads.
• Collector Streets: These roadways are intended to carry traffic between the arterial
system and the local streets. Traffic volumes are moderate, while speeds are moderate
to high. Examples include Hazelwood Street and English Street.
• Minor Arterials: These roadways carry high volumes of traffic at moderate to high
speeds, and are the highest classification of roadway under the maintenance jurisdiction
of Maplewood. These roadways can be located in more rural or urban corridors.
Examples are Lower Afton Road (rural) and White Bear Avenue (urban).
• Principal Arterials: These types of roadways carry the highest volumes of traffic, at the
highest speeds. Examples of principal arterials include Trunk Highway 36 and Interstate
Highways 35E and 694. Principal arterials are not within the maintenance jurisdiction of
the City, and therefore will not be included within the Living Streets Policy.
The Living Streets Policy would apply to the Local Streets, Collectors, and Minor Arterials.
Design templates would be developed for each of those types.
In many cases Ramsey County has jurisdiction over Minor Arterials. The Living Streets Policy
recognizes this and considers Ramsey County an important partner. The application of the
policy on any roadway under their jurisdiction will require close coordination and cooperation
between the City and the County.
Additionally, all Minor Arterials as well as a majority of Collectors are designated routes on the
Municipal State Aid System. This does not preclude the application of the Living Streets Policy
on those roads, but in order to maintain State Aid funding for those roads and use it in their
reconstruction, the plans will require review and approval by the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT). State Aid design rules, such as for lane widths, clear zones, etc., will
need to be followed in the application of the Living Streets Policy on those designated State Aid
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 159 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 25 of 53
streets. In instances where the State Aid rules are not able to be complied with, an application
for variance from the rule may be submitted to MnDOT. If granted, the variance would allow the
street to be constructed as proposed while still utilizing State Aid funds.
Often times in neighborhoods there are local streets that, while not reaching the functional
classification of Collector, serve to connect the majority of trips from other local streets to the
collectors or minor arterials. These streets tend to experience volumes and usage in the upper
range of the typical values for local streets. An example would be Bartelmy Lane between
Minnehaha Avenue and Stillwater Road.
Although local, the Task Force felt it appropriate to recognize the increased volumes on such
streets, and to provide a design template that accommodated their context as a higher-usage
local street. The working term given to these streets by the Task Force was “Local Connector”.
A brief discussion of each type of roadway follows, including the design templates for each. For
each type, there are options for design elements such as the number of traffic lanes, whether or
not there are parking and/or bike lanes, whether or not sidewalks are provided, etc. The design
templates have been prepared to address the most common combination of options for each
type of roadway. In addition to the templates, the following matrix has been prepared to
summarize the options for each element that are available on each type of street.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 160 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 26 of 53
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 161 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 27 of 53
3.2 Local Street
For the Living Streets Policy, the Local Street will be those with a Local Street functional
classification.
The Task Force reached consensus on the following aspects regarding Local Streets:
• Parking should be provided along one side of the street. Studies have shown that for a
typical residential street, making provisions for parking along both sides is excessive,
and the parking capacity is underutilized.
• Sidewalks should be considered along one side of each local street. However the need
would be determined based on a context sensitive application. City Code requirements
shall be followed where they are more prescriptive than the Living Streets Policy (i.e.
requirements for sidewalks on both sides of the street in the Mixed-Use Zoning District).
• If a sidewalk is not provided, the street pavement width should be wider to accommodate
a shared purpose of bikes/pedestrians along the street edge.
• For streets where a sidewalk is deemed applicable, options could be provided to install
sidewalk along one or both sides of the street.
• Sidewalks would be required if the street abuts or is in the vicinity of a school or park, is
identified with a sidewalk in the Comprehensive Plan, or is part of a larger network of
pedestrian routes.
Design templates showing options 1 through 3 are provided for Local Streets.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 162 of 221
Local Street Option 1
Note: 24’ roadway width may be considered in appropriate context
BOULEVARDBOULEVARD
60’ TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
26’ ROADWAY WIDTH2.5’
8’8’
5’10.5’WALK
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Boulevard Trees
Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Garden
Sidewalk
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Gardens
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 163 of 221
Local Street Option 2
Note: 24’ roadway width may be considered in appropriate context
BOULEVARDBOULEVARD
60’ TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
26’ ROADWAY WIDTH
8’8’
5’5’4’4’WALKWALK
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Boulevard Trees
Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Garden
Sidewalk
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Gardens
Sidewalk
Local Street
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 164 of 221
Local Street Option 3
Note: Sidewalk required if street abuts or is in vacinity of a school or park
28’ - 30’ ROADWAY WIDTH
60’ TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
8’8’
7’7’
BOULEVARD BOULEVARD
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Boulevard Trees
Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Garden
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Gardens
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 165 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 31 of 53
3.3 Local Connector Street
A Local Connector Street will be considered those with a Local Street functional classification,
but that have a particular characteristic such as a higher than average volume of vehicular
and/or pedestrian traffic, or that connect natural elements. For example, a residential street that
funnels traffic between the interior of a neighborhood and the entrance/exit to the neighborhood,
or to a nearby street with a Collector or Minor Arterial functional classification. Or a residential
street that spans between two streets with sidewalks or trails along them, making it a natural link
in the network.
The Task Force reached consensus on the following aspects regarding Local Connector
Streets:
• Parking should be provided along one side of the street, for the same reasons cited as
the Local Street.
• Sidewalks need to be provided along this type of street, to provide neighborhood
connections and to pedestrian facilities along Collectors and Minor Arterials.
• Options could be provided to install sidewalk along one or both sides of the street.
Design templates showing options 1 and 2 are provided for Local Connector Streets.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 166 of 221
Local Connector Street Option 1
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Boulevard Trees
Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Sidewalk
Rainwater Garden
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Gardens
1.5’9.5’5’
8’8’
WALK
BOULEVARD
28’ ROADWAY WIDTH
BOULEVARD
60’ TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 167 of 221
Local Connector Street Option 2
3’5’
8’
5’3’
8’
WALKWALK
BOULEVARD
28’ ROADWAY WIDTH
BOULEVARD
60’ TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Rainwater Gardens
Boulevard Trees
Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Garden
Sidewalk
Right-of-Way
Sidewalk
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 168 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 34 of 53
3.4 Collector
A Collector Street will be considered those with a Collector Street functional classification.
Collectors convey intra-community traffic between neighborhoods, business centers, industries,
parks and the like, and direct access to abutting properties. Spacing of these roads typically
places them approximately one-half mile apart.
The Task Force reached consensus on the following aspects regarding Collector streets:
• Parking should be considered along one or both sides of the street, dependent upon
context. However, parking provided shall reflect the need and site conditions, with the
construction of unnecessary parking avoided.
• An option should be provided for a center opposing turn lane (3-lane design).
• On road bike lanes should be provided for both directions of traffic.
• Sidewalks need to be provided along this type of street, with options provided to install
sidewalk along one or both sides. (Trails could be installed in lieu of sidewalks.) City
Code requirements shall be followed where they are more prescriptive than the Living
Streets Policy (i.e. requirements for sidewalks on both sides of the street in the Mixed-
Use Zoning District).
Design templates showing options 1 through 4 are provided for Collector Streets.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 169 of 221
Collector Option 1
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Boulevard Trees
Parking Lane
Bike Lane
Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Sidewalk
Rainwater Garden
Bike Lane
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Gardens
Collector
12.5’5’
11’11’
4.5’
8’
WALK
BOULEVARD
42’ ROADWAY WIDTH
80’ TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
8’
8’
6’6’DRIVING LANEDRIVING LANEBIKELANEPARKING
BOULEVARD
BIKELANE
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 170 of 221
Collector Option 2
8’5’
11’
8.5’8.5’
11’
8’
TRAILWALK
BOULEVARD
34’ ROADWAY WIDTH
80’ TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
8’
6’6’DRIVING LANEDRIVING LANEBIKELANE
BOULEVARD
BIKELANE
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Rainwater Gardens
Boulevard Trees
Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Garden
Bike Lane
Bituminous Trail
Right-of-Way
Bike Lane
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 171 of 221
Collector Option 3 Collector
1.5’1.5’5’
11’14’11’
8’
WALK
BOULEVARD
56’ ROADWAY WIDTH
80’ TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
8’
6’8’6’DRIVING LANEDRIVING LANEPARKING
LANE
BIKELANE TURNING LANE
BOULEVARD
BIKELANE
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Rainwater Gardens
Boulevard Trees
Parking Lane Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Garden
Bike Lane
Sidewalk
Right-of-Way
Bike Lane
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 172 of 221
Collector Option 4
5’8’
11’14’11’
8’
WALKTRAIL
BOULEVARD
48’ ROADWAY WIDTH
80’ TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
8’
1.5’1.5’
6’6’DRIVING LANEDRIVING LANEBIKELANE TURNING LANE
BOULEVARD
BIKELANE
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Rainwater Gardens
Boulevard Trees
Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Garden
Bike Lane
Sidewalk
Right-of-Way
Bituminous Trail
Bike Lane
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 173 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 39 of 53
3.5 Minor Arterial
Minor Arterial streets will be those with that functional classification. These roads are the
closest routes running parallel to the Principal Arterial system. Minor Arterials supplement and
provide relief for traffic to the Principal Arterial system. Direct access from this type of roadway
to abutting properties may or may not be allowed, as determined in the Maplewood City Code.
Spacing of Minor Arterials is determined by MnDOT and Ramsey County standards, with site
specific exceptions. This roadway type serves inter- and intra-community needs for trips, as
well as medium to long distance suburb to suburb trips. They may also connect major trip
generators, and/or funnel traffic between collectors and restricted access arterials.
The Task Force felt many options could be provided for this type of roadway, due to many
different contexts in which they can exist. Following is a summary of some of the guidance
points determined by the Task Force regarding Minor Arterial streets:
• Parking may or may not be allowed along these streets, depending upon the context.
• Options should be provided for two, three, and four lane designs.
• On road bike lanes should be provided for both directions of traffic.
• Sidewalks need to be provided along both sides of this type of street. A Minor Arterial
with sidewalk along just one side should be considered only in a situation where it is not
feasible or practical to install sidewalk along both sides.
Design templates showing options 1 through 3 are provided for Minor Arterials.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 174 of 221
Minor Arterial Option 1 Minor Arterial
8’5’4.5’4.5’
11’11’
8’TRAILWALK
BOULEVARD
42’ ROADWAY WIDTH
80’ TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
8’
8’6’6’DRIVING LANE DRIVING LANE
BOULEVARD
BIKELANEBIKELANEPARKINGLANE
Rainwater Gardens
Sidewalk
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Parking Lane
Bike Lane
Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Garden
Bike Lane
Bituminous Trail
Right-of-Way
Boulevard Trees
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 175 of 221
Minor Arterial Option 2
11’11’14’6’6’BIKELANEBIKELANE
8’8’BOULEVARDBOULEVARD
DRIVE LANE TURNING LANE DRIVE LANE 5’5’3’3’WALKWALK
80’ TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
48’ ROADWAY WIDTH
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Rainwater Gardens
Sidewalk
Bike Lane
BoulevardTrees
Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Garden
Bike Lane
Sidewalk
Right-of-Way
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 176 of 221
Minor Arterial Option 3
BOULEVARD
BIKELANE BIKELANE7.5’7.5’5’8’TRAIL
100’ TYPICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY
4 DRIVE LANES @ 11’ EACH6’6’
8’
WALK
8’BOULEVARD
Cul-De-Sac
56’ ROADWAY WIDTH
Rainwater Gardens
Bituminous Trail
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Bike Lane
Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Garden
Bike Lane
Sidewalk
Right-of-Way
Boulevard Trees
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 177 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 43 of 53
3.6 Miscellaneous
Miscellaneous streets will be those that do not fit any of the types previously discussed. The
most common example of a Miscellaneous street is a cul-de-sac.
Following is a summary of the guidance for Miscellaneous streets:
• The “throat” of a cul-de-sac should be considered as a typical Local Street (see Section
3.2).
o Narrow street widths should be allowed only when a boulevard sidewalk is
provided.
• The “circle” of a cul-de-sac should be sized to meet access requirements of the current
version of the Minnesota State Fire Code.
• The “circle” of a cul-de-sac should be designed with green space in its center for
stormwater treatment and/or landscaping.
Design templates showing options 1 and 2 are provided for offset and standard cul-de-sacs.
Types of Miscellaneous streets besides cul-de-sacs could include special or unique roadways,
such as parkways, guided corridors, or alleys. For those situations, each would be considered
on a case-by-case basis.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 178 of 221
Cul-De-Sac Option 1
26’ ROADWAY WIDTH 26’ ROADWAY WIDTH12’12’
18’
13’13’
120’ RIGHT-OF-WAY
94’ CUL-DE-SAC
BOULEVARD BOULEVARD42’ ISLAND
Rainwater Gardens
Concrete Curb
and Gutter Bituminous Roadway
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Garden
Boulevard Trees
Right-of-Way
Boulevard Trees
Landscaping and/or
Stormwater Management
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 179 of 221
Cul-De-Sac Option 2
26’ ROADWAY WIDTH 26’ ROADWAY WIDTH12’12’
18’
13’13’
120’ RIGHT-OF-WAY
94’ CUL-DE-SAC
BOULEVARD BOULEVARD42’ ISLAND
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Landscaping and/or
Stormwater Management
Concrete Curb
and Gutter
Rainwater Gardens
Boulevard Trees
Bituminous Roadway
Boulevard Trees
Right-of-Way
Rainwater Garden
Right-of-Way
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 180 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 46 of 53
4.0 IMPLEMENTATION
4.1 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Based on the comparison of the Living Streets Policy to the City of Maplewood adopted 2030
Comprehensive Plan as discussed in Section 2.3, following is a summary list of the
recommended amendments that should be considered for the Comprehensive Plan:
• Chapter 8: Amend the definition of Minor Arterial to remove the statement that such a
road contains at least two drive lanes in each direction.
• Chapter 8: Amend the Comprehensive Plan to replace Figure 8.2 with the design
templates from the Living Streets Policy.
4.2 City Code Revisions
The Living Streets Policy has been reviewed against the current City Code to determine where
updates to the Code will be needed as part of the adoption and implementation of Living
Streets. Each section of the Code reviewed is listed below, along with recommended revisions:
• Community Design Review Board (Chapter 2, Sections 2-281 through 2-300):
o No revisions needed.
• Utilities and Streets (Chapter 12, Article VII, Division 4):
o No revisions needed.
• Environment (Chapter 18):
o No revisions needed.
• Streets, Sidewalks, and Other Public Places (Chapter 32):
o Section 32-11.(b). Recommend addition of item (16) to require joint trench
installation of underground utilities when possible.
o Section 32-92.(a)(5) states “A permanent relaxed urban street design may be
used with lots that are over one acre, when approved by the city council.”
Although Living Streets will become the new standard for street construction, the
option for the relaxed design can still be offered in those areas of the City that
meet the requirements. Therefore, no revision is needed.
o Section 32-92.(a)(6) should be expanded to incorporate sidewalk placement in
accordance with the Living Streets Policy as well.
o Section 32-92.(a)(7) currently states that Minor Arterials shall not be less than 52
feet in width. This needs to be revised, as the Living Streets Policy includes
options for Minor Arterials as narrow as 42 feet in width. It is recommended the
statement of specific width be removed from the Code, and that 32-92.(a)(7)
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 181 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 47 of 53
simply say, “Principal and minor arterial streets shall be of adequate width to
accommodate projected traffic volumes.”
o Section 32-92.(a)(8) currently states that Collector streets shall be 34 to 44 feet
in width. This needs to be revised, as the Living Streets Policy includes options
outside that range. It is recommended the statement of specific width be
removed from the Code, and that 32-92.(a)(7) simply say, “Collector streets shall
be constructed to widths in accordance with current City standards.”
o Section 32-92.(a)(9) currently states that Local streets shall be 32 feet in width.
This needs to be revised, as the Living Streets Policy provides for more narrow
streets. It is recommended the statement of specific width be removed from the
Code, and that 32-92.(a)(7) simply say, “Local streets shall be constructed to
widths in accordance with current City standards.”
• Subdivisions (Chapter 34):
o Section 34-8.(b)(1) currently states “No full-width street shall be less than 60 feet
wide.” This sentence is unclear, as the width referenced applies to the right-of-
way, not the actual improved street surface. The sentence should be revised to
say “No full-width street shall have right-of-way less than 60 feet wide.”
o Section 34-12.(a)(6) should be expanded to incorporate all boulevard elements of
Living Streets, beyond just turf.
o Section 34-16.(7) requires sidewalks on both sides of roads in the mixed-use MU
district. This can be compatible with the Living Streets policy, provided it is
clarified that City Code takes precedence where it is more prescriptive.
• Traffic and Vehicles (Chapter 36):
o Section 36-204.addresses riding a bicycle upon a roadway. Recommended that
36-204.(a)(4) be added to state: “A specified bicycle lane is provided and
marked upon the roadway.”
o Section 34-16.(7) requires sidewalks on both sides of roads in the mixed-use MU
district. This can be compatible with the Living Streets policy, provided it is
clarified that City Code takes precedence where it is more prescriptive.
• Trees (Chapter 38):
o Section 38-1 currently prohibits the planting of trees in the public right-of-way.
This section will need to be revised to allow tree planting in the right-of-way.
o The Task Force recommended the allowance of planting of trees in the public
right-of-way be limited to that done by the City or its agents as part of a public
improvement project; or that which is done in accordance with an approved City
planning or guidance document (such as an approved Tree Plan).
• Utilities (Chapter 40):
o No revisions needed.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 182 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 48 of 53
• Zoning (Chapter 44):
o No revisions needed.
4.3 Engineering Specifications and Standards Revisions
The Maplewood Engineering Department maintains a set of written Engineering Standards as
well as Standard Plates and Standard Specifications. The following revisions are recommended
to make those documents consistent with the Living Streets Policy:
Engineering Standards:
• Section 3.7 – Tree Plan
o No revisions necessary due to the Living Streets Policy, but this section should
be reviewed again for potential updating once the City has developed an overall
Tree Plan as recommended in Section 4.5 of the Living Streets Policy.
• Section 4.1 – References
o Add the Maplewood Living Streets Policy as a reference.
• Section 4.7 – Pavement Section
o The first paragraph specifies lane layouts and widths for local and collector
streets. This paragraph will need to be revised or replaced, as the Living Streets
policy contains the new standards for widths and configurations.
o The first sentence of the second paragraph states the local street section is
shown on Standard Plate 111. This reference will need to be updated.
Standard Plates
• The following standard plates will need to be updated:
o Plate 110 – Typical Intersection
o Plate 111 – Typical Residential Street Section – Urban
o Plate 116 – Rainwater Garden.
To accommodate boulevard sizes proposed on Living Streets.
To accommodate potential for planting trees within gardens.
o Plate 500 – Hydrant Installation
Typical dimension from right of way does not work with all options for
Living Streets. Notes need to be added to address.
o Plate 620 – Typical Boulevard Utilities
Typical dimension from right of way for utility trench does not work with all
options for Living Streets. Notes need to be added to address.
o Plates 650, 651, and 652 – Tree, Shrub, and Ground Cover Planting Details
These plates will continue to be acceptable for locations not in rainwater
gardens. Recommend the names for these plates be expanded to clarify.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 183 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 49 of 53
It may be appropriate to develop three new plates for planting of trees,
shrubs, and ground cover within rainwater gardens.
Standard Specifications:
• Section MW-2571A – Rainwater Garden Preparation
o 2571A.4.D.3 lists the dimensions for standard garden sizes. The garden sizes
are also listed on Standard Plate 116. As noted previously, the garden sizes will
need to be revised to accommodate the boulevards proposed on Living Streets.
It is recommended the garden sizes continue to be listed on Standard Plate 116
and be removed from the Standard Specification. It is recommended Section
2571A.4.D.3 simply reference the garden sizes shown on Standard Plate 116.
This will ensure the Standard Specification references the current and correct
garden sizes, and will eliminate the possibility of contradiction between the
Standard Specification and the Standard Plates.
• Section MW-2572 – Protection and Restoration Of Vegetation
o 2572.3.A.8 states the requirements for tree replacements if trees are damaged
during construction. No revisions to this section are necessary due to the Living
Streets Policy, but this section should be reviewed again for potential updating
once the City has developed an overall Tree Plan as recommended in Section
4.5 of the Living Streets Policy. It is likely that once a Tree Plan is adopted, it
would be most appropriate for Standard Specification section 2572.3.A.8 to just
reference the current requirements of the approved Tree Plan.
4.4 Environmental Utility Fee Policy Revisions
• Increase the EUF credit from 30% to 50% to maintain and increase the level of voluntary
participation in the rainwater garden program.
• Clarify that continuance of credits is not guaranteed for perpetuity. Credits are reviewed
periodically and can be terminated if the BMP is not being adequately maintained.
• Establish a program to allow for retrofitting of rainwater gardens.
o Designate an amount annually from the EUF to be used for retrofitted rainwater
gardens. Recommended initial amount is $10,000.
o Establish a procedure for interested property owners to apply for consideration of
having a retrofitted rainwater garden constructed.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 184 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 50 of 53
o Approve up to five applications for funding for retrofitted rainwater gardens per
year, with an award of $2,000 to be made to the property owner upon successful
establishment of the rainwater garden.
All applications for retrofit rainwater gardens within any given year would
be approved if appropriate, however only five applications would be
approved to receive funding support.
o Curb cut would be provided as necessary by the City at no cost to the property
owner for approved retrofit applications.
4.5 Tree Plan Development
• It is recommended Maplewood develop and implement an integrated Tree Plan.
o The Tree Plan should identify and establish a consistent, reliable, stable source
of revenue for the Tree Fund.
The need for a comprehensive tree plan for the City has been identified in several ways. The
Sustainability Chapter of the adopted 2030 Comprehensive Plan states a goal of the City is to
“Adopt an urban tree program that encourages a healthy and thriving urban tree canopy”; the
Natural Resources Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan states an implementation strategy
should be to “Develop and implement an Urban Tree Management Plan”; the Living Streets
Task Force in their discussions recognized the need for a tree policy/program, including funding
mechanism; and the Maplewood Public Works Department initiated a Forestry program in its
budget for 2013 to begin this process. Finally, this Living Streets Policy has established
enhancing the urban forest as a focal point of street projects going forward.
Maplewood has several programs that protect our urban forest: diseased tree inspection, tree
trimming, tree planting, tree purchase rebate for residents, big tree registry, tree ordinance, and
educational programs and materials. A comprehensive tree plan would integrate these existing
items cohesively, identify the requirements for the trees in the Living Streets Policy as discussed
in Section 2.2.4, and also identify and address any other gaps in the approach to the urban
forest.
Establishing a stable funding source needs to be an important component of an overall tree
plan. Currently, the sole revenue source for the Tree Fund is developer contributions, required
only when a developer is not able to preserve trees or provide adequate replacement trees as
part of a development. As a result, the revenue flow for the Tree Fund is inconsistent and
unpredictable. During a period of slow development activity or if developers meet their tree
requirements, the revenue into the Tree Fund is low. However, the City is experiencing
increasing and more consistent expenses related to trees and the urban forest, as exhibited by
the proposed forestry budget in 2013 and the commitment to the Living Streets approach.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 185 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 51 of 53
4.6 Street Reconstruction and New Development
Upon adoption, it should be clearly identified the Living Streets Policy is the new standard for all
street projects, both new and reconstruction, within the City of Maplewood.
4.7 Outreach and Education
Outreach and education is an important aspect of establishing an adopted Living Streets Policy
within the City of Maplewood. The success of Living Streets will be greatly increased if the
understanding and support of the community can be attained.
Maplewood already has an effective program for communication as part of street reconstruction
projects. That program should be maintained and incorporated as part of a larger overall
communication plan for Living Streets.
• The standards established by this Living Streets Policy should be presented and
communicated to property owners within project areas, and should be the starting point
for discussion of project elements.
The outreach and education for the Living Streets Policy can be broken down into elemental
components: who needs to be communicated with; where the communication should occur;
how the communication can be conveyed; what should be in the message. An outline of these
components is shown below:
Tools for communication:
• Create a specific image to represent the Living Streets Policy.
• Create a summary fact sheet or brochure, similar to as was done for raingardens.
Elements of Message:
• Benefits.
• Long-term thinking.
• Sustainability and environmental stewardship.
Target groups for communication:
• Parents.
• Children.
• Volunteer Organizations (i.e. Boy/Girl Scouts).
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 186 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 52 of 53
• Seniors.
• Cyclists.
• Pedestrians.
• Businesses.
• Environmentalists.
• Gardeners.
• Properties along proposed projects.
Ways to communicate:
• Coalitions.
• Special events.
• Existing outlets (newsletter, web page, cable tv).
• Project process (specific public meetings).
• Tours of Living Streets projects.
Aspects of communication:
• Early communication.
• Engage the audience / group.
• Promote two-way communication.
• Package the message appropriately for the context.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 187 of 221
City of Maplewood, MN
Living Streets Policy
Complete + Green = Living!
Page 53 of 53
APPENDICES
Benefits of Living Streets – excerpt from the North St. Paul Living Streets Plan
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 188 of 221
0
Section 1.0 Background
Living Streets have economic benefits because
they:
Make Fiscal Sense. Smaller streets, less pavement and fewer
underground storm sewer pipes cost less to build. These are
savings that residents will notice on special assessments associated
with their street reconstruction project.
Lower Long Term Maintenance Costs. Smaller streets also cost
less to plow and repair benefiting the city’s annual budget and
taxpayers.
Increase Property Values. Walkable communities with tree lined
streets and slowed traffic increases neighborhood desirability and
property value, an asset residents will realize at the time of sale.
Spark Economic Revitalization. By making local businesses
more accessible to bicyclists and walkers, residents are more likely
to shop locally and encouraging local business investment and job
growth. Research shows that shoppers are attracted to businesses
with tree lined streets.
Walkable streets raise
home values
Studies show that
homes in more walkable
neighborhoods have higher
values than similar homes
in less-walkable areas. The
report, “Walking the Walk:
How Walkability Raises
Housing Values in U.S.
Cities” by Joseph Cortright,
analyzed data from 94,000
real estate transactions in
15 major markets and found
that in 13 of 15 markets,
higher levels of walkability
were directly linked to higher
home values.
Benefits of Living Streets
Most of us think of America as the land of choices. Yet, in just about any community built in the last
50 years, there is pretty much one choice for transportation: the car. North St. Paul isn’t any different
than most American cities in this regard. Living Streets provide many transportation choices to the
diverse range of city residents and it balances those choices to provide community, environmental and
economic benefits as well.
Surveys indicate that shoppers spend
more time and money in commercial
districts with tree-lined streets.
Good bike and pedestrian access to downtown could help business.
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 189 of 221
Section 1.0 Background
Living Streets build community because they:
Help Children. Streets that provide room for safe walking and
biking help children get physical activity and gain independence.
More children walk to school where there are sidewalks, and
children who have safe walking and bicycling routes have a more
positive view of their neighborhood.
Improve Public Health. By offering easy opportunities for
walking and bicycling, living streets encourage a healthy life-style
for people of all ages, especially the elderly, and are an important
strategy to combat obesity.
Increase Safety. Traffic-calming elements like curb extensions,
bump-outs and narrowed streets improve safety by reducing
traffic speeds. Streets are safer for walkers, bicyclists, children, the
elderly, as well as for drivers.
Enhance Neighborhood Beauty and Strengthen a Sense
of Community. By making room for the planting of trees and
rainwater gardens, our neighborhoods become more beautiful and
attract young families that make communities thrive.
Living Streets improve environmental quality
because they:
Improve Water Quality of Lakes and Streams. Rainwater
gardens along roads intercept and filter stormwater runoff. Much of
it soaks into the ground to water street trees while over flow water
during big storms is filtered by plants before making its way to
the storm sewer pipe that takes it to Kohlman Lake and ultimately
further downstream to the Mississippi River.
Improve Air Quality. By providing space for walking and biking,
complete green streets reduce the emissions of C02 and other
pollutants harmful to the planet and human health. Trees also filter
the air, trapping dust.
Reduce the Urban Heat Island Affect. Less asphalt and more
street trees reduce heat build-up in pavement and in the ambient
air during hot summer days making outdoor activities more
comfortable and reducing air conditioning costs in our homes and
businesses.
Reduce Raw Material and Energy Used in Street
Construction. Smaller streets require less asphalt, gravel beneath
the street and other natural resources, and requires less energy
used for their construction than larger conventional streets. This
reduces the pollution and greenhouse gases emitted during the
manufacturing and transporting of these materials.
Safety for children is a primary
concern. Living Streets will provide
safe walking and bicycling routes.
Pedestrians’ chances of death if
hit by a motor vehicle at different
speeds.Source: Killing Speed and Saving Lives, UK Department of TransportationAgenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 190 of 221
Section 1.0 Background
Living Streets promote the planting of street trees. Trees provide many benefits to the
environment and community. The past few decades of tree research has focused on
documenting and quantifying the benefits of trees. Early on, researchers were quantifying
the amount of greenhouse gases trees remove from the atmosphere (about ½ ton of
carbon dioxide per tree per year) and pollutants (about 4.3 pounds of pollutants per
tree per year). Since then, researchers have begun to document an ever growing list of
benefits that may not be so obvious.
Environmental Benefits
In addition to the direct removal of
greenhouse gases and pollutants,
mentioned above, trees:
• Reduce temperatures by shading
streets, sidewalks and other
hardscapes, resulting in reduced use
of electricity.
• Increase the amount of water that
reaches the groundwater table by
helping water soak into the ground.
• Intercept rain with leaves and
branches, reducing the amount of
water that reaches the storm system.
• Add organic matter to the soil which
further improves the water-holding
capacity of the soil.
• Improve the resiliency of soil to
respond to rain events. One mature
tree can capture over 5,000 gallons of
water in a year.
• In whole, trees can reduce stormwater
by about 2% for each 5% increase in
the community’s tree canopy.
• Reduce soil erosion with dense root
systems. Less soil, contaminated or
clean, reaches the stormwater system,
creeks and rivers.
Community Benefits
Trees help promote pride in the
community and a sense of place, as well
as providing a long list of other direct and
indirect benefits.
• Street trees are an important factor in
reducing road maintenance costs, by
shading the pavement from the sun.
• Tree-filled neighborhoods show lower
levels of domestic violence.
• Street trees can calm traffic and lower
traffic speed by reducing the perceived
width of street.
• Trees help reduce noise levels.
• Trees are known to shorten hospital
stays and reduce workplace stress.
• Trees can be used to screen unsightly
views.
• Healthy trees in neighborhoods
enhance property values, increasing
sale prices by 1% for each large front-
yard tree and 10% for a specimen tree.
• Trees are also good for business.
Surveys of shoppers in commercial
districts with tree-lined streets
reported that they shop there more
frequently, shop longer, are willing to
pay for parking, and spend on average
12% more on goods.
What are the benefits of street trees?
Agenda Item J2
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 191 of 221
MEMORANDUM
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Michael Martin, AICP, Planner
Charles Ahl, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution Supporting the Findings of the
Gateway Corridor Alternatives Analysis Study
DATE: January 22, 2013
INTRODUCTION
The city council is being asked to consider adoption of a resolution supporting the
findings of the Gateway Corridor Alternatives Analysis Study.
In the fall of 2010, the Gateway Corridor Commission began leading an Alternatives
Analysis Study to determine the best mode of transit. Options included light-rail transit,
commuter rail and bus-rapid transit. In addition the Commission needed to determine
estimated ridership, potential routes and estimated costs for construction and operation
of the transit line.
The Gateway Corridor is a proposed transit line that would run mainly within the
Interstate 94 corridor from Woodbury to downtown St. Paul. The line would have a
potential walk up transit stop at or near the 3M Center. Originally, the corridor study
considered transit opportunities from St. Paul to Eau Claire, Wisconsin.
DISCUSSION
On January 28, 2013, at the city council meeting workshop, staff from Washington
County presented to council the Gateway Corridor Commission’s Alternatives Analysis
Study. This study was also presented to the city’s planning commission on January 15,
2013.
The Alternatives Analysis Study identifies a dedicated Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line or
Light Rail Transit (LRT) line along Hudson Road from St. Paul to Woodbury as the best
option to improve mass transit for this region. The Hudson Road decision was the best
option after extensive analysis and public involvement campaign spanning nearly two
years. More information on the decision making process and the preferred alternatives
can be found at the corridor’s website – www.thegatewaycorridor.com.
The Gateway Corridor Commission released the draft final report for the Alternatives
Analysis Study in early November 2012. Public comments are being sought on the
report and the recommendation by the Commission to advance the Hudson Road
alignment into the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). The draft final report
can also be found at the website given above.
Agenda J 3
Packet Page Number 192 of 221
2
The next phase of the study, preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(DEIS), is expected to start in early 2013. The Commission advanced the BRT and LRT
options along Hudson Road. Both options have the same route, station stops and similar
service plans.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached resolution supporting the findings of the Gateway Corridor
Alternatives Analysis Study.
Attachments:
1. Resolution Supporting the Findings of the Gateway Corridor Alternatives Analysis Study
Packet Page Number 193 of 221
Attachment 1
Resolution Supporting the Findings of the
Gateway Corridor Alternatives Analysis Study
WHEREAS, the Gateway Corridor Commission was established in March of 2009 to address
transportation needs in the Gateway (I-94) Corridor; and
WHEREAS, the Gateway Corridor is the principal east/west route for local, regional and
interregional traffic through Ramsey, Washington, and St. Croix Counties connecting St. Paul
and Minneapolis to the eastern metropolitan area and Wisconsin; and
WHEREAS, the Maplewood is an active member of the Gateway Corridor Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Commission initiated an alternatives analysis study to identity the transit
solution that best meets the needs of the Gateway Corridor; and
WHEREAS, these needs include the Commission’s established goals to improve mobility,
provide a cost-effective economically viable solution that promotes economic development,
protects the natural environment, and preserves community quality of life and overall safety; and
WHEREAS, the study concluded that the alignment along Hudson Road connecting the eastern
metropolitan area to the region's transit system via Union Depot best meets the needs of the
Gateway Corridor; and
WHEREAS, the study recommended that both Optimized Alternative 3 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
and Optimized Alternative 5 - Light Rail Transit (LRT) adjacent to Hudson Road advance into
the next phase in the transitway development process which is the preparation of a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS); and
WHEREAS, a locally preferred alternative (LPA) will be officially adopted as part of the DEIS
process were additional input will be garnered from the public and business sector; and
WHEREAS, the findings of the study are based on a rigorous technical analysis and reflective of
the input received by the community throughout the planning process; and
WHEREAS, Maplewood will continue to work with the Gateway Corridor Commission to plan for
future transit improvements in the Gateway Corridor and the surrounding land uses within the
station areas; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Maplewood city council supports the findings
of the Gateway Corridor Alternatives Analysis Study.
The Maplewood City Council ___________ this resolution of support on January 28, 2013.
Packet Page Number 194 of 221
AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD AREA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Monday, January 28, 2013
The Maplewood City Council Serves as the
Maplewood Area Economic Development Authority
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. ROLL CALL
C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Approval of December 10, 2012 Economic Development Authority Meeting
Minutes
E. PUBLIC HEARING
None
F. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Election of Officers
G. NEW BUSINESS
1. Approval of Resolution Authorizing Legislation Request for Tax Increment
Financing District for Research and Development Lab Facility on 3M Campus
H. ADJOURNMENT
Packet Page Number 195 of 221
Item D1
December 10, 2012
Maplewood Area Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes
1
MINUTES
MAPLEWOOD AREA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
December 10, 2012
Council Chambers, City Hall
A. CALL TO ORDER
A meeting of the City Council serving as the Economic Development Authority, (EDA), was held
in the City Hall Council Chambers and was called to order at 9:00 p.m. by EDA Vice-Chair
Rossbach.
B. ROLL CALL
Will Rossbach, Vice Chair Present
Rebecca Cave, Member Present
Robert Cardinal, Member Present
Kathleen Juenemann, Member Present
Marvin Koppen, Member Present
C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Member Juenemann moved to approve the Agenda as submitted.
Seconded by Member Koppen Ayes – All
The motion passed
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Approval of October 8, 2012 Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes
Member Koppen moved to approve the October 8, 2012 Economic Development Authority
Meeting Minutes as submitted.
Ayes –Chair Rossbach, Members
Cardinal, Juenemann and Koppen
Abstain –Member Cave
The motion passed.
E. PUBLIC HEARING
1. Public Hearing on 2013 Tax Levy
a. Resolution Certifying Taxes Payable in 2013
Finance Manager Bauman gave the staff report and answered questions of the Economic
Development Authority.
Vice Chair Rossbach opened the public hearing. The following people spoke:
Packet Page Number 196 of 221
Item D1
December 10, 2012
Maplewood Area Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes
2
1. Diana Longrie
2. Mark Bradley
Vice Chair Rossbach closed the public hearing.
Vice Chair Rossbach moved to approve the Resolution Certifying Taxes Payable in 2013.
RESOLUTION 12-12-831
CERTIFYING TAXES PAYABLE IN 2013
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAPLEWOOD AREA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that:
1. The following amounts of taxes be levied for 2012, payable in 2013, upon the net tax
capacity in said City of Maplewood, for the following purposes:
EDA $89,270
2. The 2013 Budget for the Maplewood Area Economic Development Authority is included in
the City Budget document and will be adopted along with all the other funds of the City. A
summary of the budget is as follows:
Revenues $92,400
Expenditures 65,500
Net change in fund balance 26,900
Seconded by Member Koppen Ayes – Vice Chair Rossbach,
Members Juenemann and
Koppen
Nays – Members Cardinal and
Cave
The motion passed.
F. ADJOURMENT
EDA Vice Chair Rossbach adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m.
Packet Page Number 197 of 221
EDA Agenda Item F1
AGENDA REPORT
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Election of Officers
DATE: January 22, 2013
INTRODUCTION
NOTE: It would be appropriate for current Vice Chair Rossbach to call the meeting to
order and chair the meeting through the election process.
The Economic Development Authority was created by the City Council in 2010 to prioritize and
operate according to statute in the development and redevelopment of properties within the City
of Maplewood.
It is appropriate that the EDA elect officers to conduct business and provide leadership to the
Economic Development Authority as well as to coordinate with the Housing and Economic
Development Commission [HEDC]. A history of the officers for the EDA is:
June 14, 2010:
John Nephew – Chair; James Llanas – Vice Chair
July 9, 2012:
James Llanas – Chair; Will Rossbach – Vice Chair
On January 14, 2013, the City Council appointed Bob Cardinal as the Liaison to the Housing and
Economic Development Commission.
An election of officers to the EDA, as well as re-appointment of the City Manager as Executive
Director, is recommended.
Recommended Action
It is recommended that the EDA members accept nominations and conduct elections for the
position of Chair and Vice Chair for the Maplewood Economic Development Authority and
should consider re-appointing the City Manager as EDA Executive Director.
Packet Page Number 198 of 221
EDA Agenda Item G1
AGENDA REPORT
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of Resolution Authorizing a Legislative Request for a Tax
Increment Financing District for a Research and Development Lab
Facility on the 3M Campus
DATE: January 22, 2013
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
The Economic Development Authority is charged with the responsibility for the Economic
Development of properties within the City of Maplewood. The 3M Company is proposing to
construct a 400,000-square foot Research and Development Laboratory on their campus in
Maplewood. The estimated cost for the R&D Facility provided by 3M could exceed $150 million
over the next 2 years. The proposed facility is expected to house over 700 employees. It has
been testified by 3M Officials that those 700 employees, plus support personnel, will remain on
the Maplewood campus, rather than be re-located to others states or elsewhere in the 3M
international properties. This job retention, plus the potential for continued upgrades and
expansion on the Maplewood campus are the basis for considering tax increment financing
support for this project.
3M has requested Tax Increment Financing for the purpose of reinvestment in their campus and
retention of these research positions in Maplewood/Minnesota. In addition, with this investment,
3M is considering future upgrades to other facilities on their campus. Current legislation is not
adequate to provide appropriate tax increment support for 3M to consider moving forward with
the facility. In addition, approval of the tax increment plan is proposing to use a portion of the
increased taxes from the new R&D Facility to support the bond payments for a new Maplewood
Fire Station to be constructed on the property immediately to the north of this new R&D
Laboratory.
The 3M position is that they need to upgrade their facilities to retain and attract the scientists and
technical employees that will serve the company for the next 15-20 years. They have indicated
that many of their current staff are nearing retirement and as they compete for the “brightest and
best”, they want their Maplewood campus to reflect an attractive and state of the art facility and
campus. The TIF will help make that a possibility.
The legislation is required for a number of areas. First and foremost, the current law allows for
only 9 years for an Economic Development TIF District. This legislation would allow, but not
require, the Council to establish a district term that would go for 25 years. Also, current statute
does not allow for the City to use TIF revenues for fire station construction. This new bill would
allow, but again not require, the City to use a portion of the taxes for that purpose. A few other
technical modifications to current TIF statutes, such as the ability to create multiple districts are
being authorized and would be part of a future TIF District plan that would be approved by the
EDA and City Council at a public hearing to be held later this spring.
Packet Page Number 199 of 221
EDA – 3M LEGISLATION
PAGE TWO
Recommended Action
It is recommended that the EDA members adopt the attached resolution indicating support for
the proposed legislation authorizing revisions to TIF Statutes for the 3M Research and
Development Laboratory Facility.
Attachments:
1. Resolution
2. Proposed Legislation
Packet Page Number 200 of 221
5135294v1
RESOLUTION NO. ____
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING SPECIAL LEGISLATION
IN CONNECTION WITH ONE OR MORE
PROPOSED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Maplewood,
Minnesota (the "City"), acting in their authority as the Economic Development Authority (the
“EDA”), as follows:
(i) Findings.
(a) It is proposed that 3M construct a new research and development facility in the
City and undertake certain renovation and renewal of its facilities (the “Project”) located within
the 3M campus in the City (the “Project Area”).
(b) It is proposed that the City will construct a fire station and a city emergency
operating center that will provide fire protection and emergency medical services (the
“Emergency Facilities”) in the Project Area.
(c) Existing tax increment financing statutes are inadequate to provide for tax
increment financing for the Project and the Emergency Facilities.
(d) The City, acting through the EDA, and 3M desire to propose special legislation to
be adopted by the Minnesota Legislature that will provide tax increment financing assistance to
the Project and the Emergency Facilities under the current tax increment financing laws. The
proposed special legislation has been presented to the City Council.
(e) 3M is important to the City and to the State of Minnesota as a major employer and
one of the largest taxpayers in the State and the City.
(f) 3M’s new research and development facility is part of a global strategy of
investing in innovation, which also includes a commitment to increase research and development
investment to six percent of sales by 2017.
(g) The 3M research and development facility will assist in maintaining the core of
3M's research and development in the City.
(h) With a large percentage of 3M's worldwide workforce likely to retire in the
upcoming years, the renovation of the office space at the headquarters is a necessary step to
remain competitve in today's workforce and attrack highly trained individuals.
(i) The City desires to support 3M in the construction of the Project.
(ii) Support Special Legislation. The City and the EDA hereby support the proposed special
legislation that will allow special rules under the tax increment financing statutes for the Project
and the Emergency Facilities.
EDA Agenda Item G1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 201 of 221
5135294v1
2
(iii) Effective Date. This resolution is effective upon the date of its approval.
Adopted this _____ day of ___________________, 2013.
__________________________________________
Mayor
__________________________________________
EDA Chair
ATTEST:
City Manager
EDA Agenda Item G1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 202 of 221
A bill for an act
relating to the city of Maplewood; authorizing a tax increment financing district.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
Section 1. CITY OF MAPLEWOOD; TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT;
SPECIAL RULES.
(a) If the city elects upon the adoption of a tax increment financing plan for a district, the
rules under this section apply to one or more redevelopment tax increment financing districts
established by the city of Maplewood or the economic development authority of the city. The
area within which the redevelopment tax increment districts may be created is parcel
362922240002 (the "Parcel") or any replatted parcels constituting a part of the Parcel and the
adjacent right of ways and shall be referred to as the 3M Renovation and Retention Project Area
or Project Area.
(b) The requirements for qualifying redevelopment tax increment districts under
Minnesota Statutes, section 469.174, subdivision 10, do not apply to the Parcel which is deemed
eligible for inclusion in a redevelopment tax increment district.
(c) The 90% rule under Minnesota Statutes, section 469.176, subdivision 4j does not
apply to the Parcel.
(d) The expenditures outside district rule under Minnesota Statutes, section
469.1763, subdivision 2, the five-year rule under Minnesota Statutes, section 469.1763,
subdivision 3 and the use of revenues for decertification in Minnesota Statutes, section
469.1763, subdivision 4 do not apply to the Parcel; however expenditures shall only be made
within the Project Area.
(e) If, after one year from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of
the tax increment district no demolition, rehabilitation, or renovation of property has been
EDA Agenda Item G1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 203 of 221
commenced on a parcel located within the tax increment district, no additional tax increment may
be taken from that parcel, and the original net tax capacity of the parcel shall be excluded from
the original net tax capacity of the tax increment district. If 3M subsequently commences
demolition, rehabilitation, or renovation the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the
activity has commenced, and the county auditor shall certify the net tax capacity thereof as most
recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original net tax capacity of the
tax increment district. The authority must submit to the county auditor evidence that the required
activity has taken place for each parcel in the district.
(f) The provisions of Minnesota Statutes, section 469.176, subdivision 4g(b) do not
apply to a municipal fire station facility to be constructed within the Project Area which facility
will be a city emergency operating center and will provide fire protection and emergency medical
services for the Project Area.
(g) The provisions of Minnesota Statutes, section 469.177, subdivision 1b do not
apply to the first 412,000 square feet of new building.
(h) The authority to approve a tax increment financing plan and to establish a tax
increment financing district under this section expires on December 31, 2018.
EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective upon approval by the governing body of the
city of Maplewood and upon compliance by the city with Minnesota Statutes, section 645.021,
subdivision 3.
MMB: 4821-2701-6466, v. 1
EDA Agenda Item G1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 204 of 221
AGENDA REPORT
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Michael Thompson, City Engineer/Public Works Director
SUBJECT: TH 36 / English Street Interchange Improvements, City Project 09-08
a. Resolution Receiving Bids and Awarding Construction Contract
b. Resolution Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll
c. Approval of RCRRA License Agreement
DATE: January 22, 2013
INTRODUCTION
The council will consider a resolution awarding a construction contract, ordering preparation of the
assessment roll, in addition to considering approval of a construction license agreement with Ramsey
County Regional Rail Authority to allow for construction within the regional rail corridor.
BACKGROUND
On August 23, 2010 the council authorized staff to proceed with tasks generally described as
preparation of a feasibility study, pursuing additional project funding, public involvement, design
surveys, preliminary layouts and approvals, environmental assessment documentation, and other
associated tasks to move this project forward in coordination with project stakeholders.
A number of public open-houses, one-on-one meetings, and citizen design committee meetings have
been held over the past two years to shape this into a successful project that balances impacts yet
accomplishes the goals of the project such as improved safety and mobility along TH 36, and providing
acceptable local access to Maplewood’s businesses and residents.
A Public Hearing for the environmental assessment portion of the project was held on February 27,
2012. A Public Hearing officially ordering the improvement as part of the Chapter 429 Statutes
occurred on April 9, 2012.
On September 24, 2012 the council approved the plans and specification and authorized advertisement
for bids.
Over the past year, the council has approved a number of agreements with partnering agencies
including MnDOT, Ramsey County, and Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District.
The city now has title and possession of all required easements/right-of-way. Right of way acquisition
negotiations are ongoing for unsettled parcel easements between the City Attorney and represented
parties.
AWARD OF BID
Six valid bids were received and tabulated. The Engineer’s Estimate for the construction contract was
$17,673,906.34. The Low Bid Contract Amount submitted by Forest Lake Contracting was
$16,577,185.42, about 6% under the Engineer’s Estimate.
Agenda Item K1
Packet Page Number 205 of 221
Note that the Table above shows a column for A + B + C for informational purposes only which was
used solely for determining the low bidder, not the contract amount. The A represents the contract
amount, and the B and C reflect a cost associated to Daily Road Users and Lane Rentals respectively.
Hence, if a contractor bid less days for the Highway 36 closure which ultimately reduces user costs
(reduces delay and cost to traveling public), then that contractor received credit in the bid award
determination. In this case Forest Lake Contracting was the Low A + B + C Bidder and their associated
contract bid amount was $16,577,185.42.
The City has worked with Forest Lake Contracting successfully in the past; such as on the large
Kenwood Area Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement in 2006.
PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL
A preliminary assessment roll was prepared as part of the feasibility study and presented to council
when the project was ordered. Since the City is using special assessments for this project with a
projected Assessment Hearing towards the end of the year, the council needs to adopt a resolution
ordering preparation of the roll. Once prepared, staff would bring the roll back to council for acceptance
of the roll and calling for an Assessment Hearing.
RAMSEY COUNTY REGIONAL RAIL (RCRRA)
A license agreement must be executed between the City and RCRRA in order for the construction to
commence within the Bruce Ventro Trail corridor which is owned by RCRRA. This license agreement
focuses on the construction and authorization to remove the existing rail bridge. RCRRA will be
entering into a separate agreement with MnDOT regarding the ownership of the new pedestrian bridge.
The City will have no part in ownership or maintenance of that pedestrian bridge facility.
The City understands that by RCRRA signing this agreement it does not obligate the City to provide for
a replacement rail bridge.
BUDGET
The construction contract came in just below what was expected. No budget adjustments are expected
at this time however we continue to monitor ROW Acquisition Costs which can be the most
unpredictable. To help with cash flow MnDOT’s State Aid Office authorized advance funds to the City
to help cash flow this project. The current approved budget is $22,997,000.00 with a majority of
Bidder Name Total Contract Bid
Amount
A + B + C Bidding
Selection Only
Forest Lake Contracting $16,577,185.42 $17,357,185.42
C.S. McCrossan Construction Inc. $16,849,262.25 $17,623,262.25
Ames Construction Inc. $17,196,992.65 $18,046,992.65
Restone Contruction $17,363,373.76 $18,153,373.76
Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. $17,721,818.07 $18,771,818.07
Max Steininger $18,951,200.91 $19,801,200.91
CITY PROJECT 09-08 BID TABULATION
Agenda Item K1
Packet Page Number 206 of 221
funding from Federal and State sources. The council approved the current budget back in April of 2012
when the project was ordered.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the city council approve the attached Resolutions; Receiving Bids and Awarding
Construction Contract and Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll. It is further recommended that
the council approve the License Agreement with Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority.
Attachments:
1. Resolution: Award of Bid
2. Resolution: Ordering Preparation of Roll
3. RCRRA License Agreement
4. Location Map
Agenda Item K1
Packet Page Number 207 of 221
RESOLUTION
RECEIVING BIDS AND AWARDING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA, that the contract bid of Forest Lake Contracting, Inc. in the amount of $16,577,185.42, is
the lowest responsible bid for the construction of the TH 36/English Street Interchange Improvement –
City Project 09-08 [State Project 6211-90 and Federal Project STP-TEAX 6212(278)], and the mayor
and clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with said bidder for and on behalf
of the city.
Adopted by the City Council on this 28th day of January, 2013.
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 1
Packet Page Number 208 of 221
RESOLUTION
ORDERING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL
WHEREAS, the city clerk and city engineer will receive bids for the TH 36/English Street
Interchange Improvement, City Project 09-08,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA that the city clerk and city engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be
specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land abutting
on the streets affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and they shall file a copy
of such proposed assessment in the city office for inspection.
FURTHER, the clerk shall, upon completion of such proposed assessment notify the council
thereof.
Adopted by the City Council on this 28th day of January, 2013.
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 209 of 221
LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR
ACCESS FOR CONSTRUCTION
This License Agreement (“License Agreement” or “License”) is entered into between the
Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority (“RCRRA” or “Licensor
”), a political subdivision
of the State of Minnesota, and the City of Maplewood a political subdivision of the State of
Minnesota, (“Licensee”), as of the _______ day of ___________________, 2013.
Recitals
WHEREAS, RCRRA is the fee owner of that certain parcel of land located in the City of
Maplewood, County of Ramsey, Minnesota, as more particularly described in the attached
Exhibit A, which may be a diagrammatic depiction (“Premises
”); and
WHEREAS, RCRRA wishes to license the Premises to Licensee, and Licensee desires to
license the Premises from the RCRRA according to the covenants and conditions stated herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, RCRRA and Licensee agree as follows:
1. Grant of License. RCRRA hereby grants to Licensee a license (the “License”) to
use the Premises for and only for the purposes described on attached Exhibit B, and subject to
the conditions and requirements stated herein and on Exhibit B
, which is incorporated herein and
made a part hereof as if explicitly set forth herein.
2. No Interest in the Premises
. The License is non-exclusive, and grants to Licensee
no right, title, or interest in the Premises, except as set forth herein, and Licensee’s rights do not
run with the land.
3. Duration. Subject to RCRRA’s right to terminate the License as set forth herein,
Licensee’s right to use the Premises shall commence on March 1, 2013 (“Commencement Date”)
and shall terminate upon on August 31, 2014 (“Termination Date
”).
4. Payment
. Licensee shall pay to the RCRRA the sum of One Dollar for the grant
of the License and use of the Premises. Payment shall be due prior to the Commencement Date
and prior to Licensee’s entry onto and use of the Premises.
5. As Is Where Is. Licensee has inspected the Premises on ________________
(“Inspection Date
”) and finds the Premises suitable for its purposes in the condition as of the
Inspection Date. RCRRA makes no promises or warranties regarding the condition or suitability
of the Premises for Licensee’s purposes. RCRRA is not obligated to undertake any
improvements or make any repairs to the Premises. Licensee accepts the Premises AS IS,
WHERE IS.
6. Alterations. Except as provided in Exhibit B, Licensee may not make any
alterations or changes to the Premises without the express written consent of RCRRA and any
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 210 of 221
improvements made to the Premises by Licensee shall, upon termination of this License and in
the sole option of RCRRA, become the property of RCRRA. If RCRRA determines that it does
not wish Licensee’s improvements to remain on the Premises, it shall so notify Licensee and
upon such notification Licensor may, at its sole expense, remove such improvements.
7. Ownership and Maintenance of the Improvements
. Licensor and Licensee agree
and acknowledge that neither Licensor or Licensee will be the owner of the improvements being
constructed in the Premises as provided in Exhibit B. Licensor and Licensee further agree and
acknowledge that neither party shall have any obligation to the other to maintain the pedestrian
bridge being constructed within the Premises as provided by this License.
8. Equipment/Licensee’s Property
. Any and all machinery or equipment used on or
about the Premises by Licensee, or its contractors shall at all times remain Licensee’s property
and, upon termination shall be removable by Licensee, and its contractors. In the event of
damage or destruction of any of Licensee’s property on the Premises, or the property of any
employee, agent, contractor or subcontractor of License, Licensee shall be solely responsible to
repair or replace such property in its discretion, and RCRRA shall have no liability or
responsibility for such repair or replacement.
9. Restoration of Premises. Upon termination of this License, and subject to the
provisions of Exhibit B
and Section 6 of this License, Licensee shall restore the Premises to their
condition immediately prior to the Commencement Date, reasonable wear and tear excepted.
10. Maintenance of Premises
. At all times during the term of the License, Licensee,
at its sole cost and expense, shall keep the Premises in a good, clean, and safe condition, and use
the Premises in such manner as to prevent waste, damage, or injury occurring thereon.
11. RCRRA’s Right to Enter and Inspect
. RCRRA, its employees, and its agents shall
have the right to enter the Premises at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting, or using
the Premises in such manner as does not interfere with Licensee’s use as provided in this License
Agreement or to exhibit the Premises to third parties as determined by RCRRA. Nothing in this
Section 11 shall be interpreted as requiring RCRRA to perform any such acts independent of the
requirements of the other provisions of this License. RCRRA shall also be permitted to enter the
Premises for the purpose of posting notices of non-responsibility for alterations, additions or
repairs.
12. Non-assignability. Licensee shall not assign, transfer, convey, or encumber its
interest in this Agreement or in the Premises, or allow any other person or entity (except
Licensee’s authorized representatives and contractors to complete the work as provided in
Exhibit B
) to occupy or use all or any part of the Premises, without first obtaining RCRRA’s
written consent, which may be withheld by RCRRA in its sole discretion.
13. Insurance. As a condition of this License, Licensee’s entry upon the Premises for
the purposes of this License, and Licensee’s use and occupancy of the Premises as provided in
this License Agreement, Licensee shall maintain, either through commercial insurance or a
program of self insurance, insurance as follows:
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 211 of 221
13.1 Licensee shall purchase and maintain such insurance as will protect RCRRA from
claims which may arise out of, or result from, Licensee’s operations under this
License, whether such operations are by Licensee or by any contractor,
subcontractor, or agent of Licensee, or any third party using the Premises, or by
anyone directly employed by them, or by anyone for whose acts or omissions any
one of them may be liable.
13.2 Licensee (or its contractor) shall secure the following coverages and comply with
all provisions noted. Certificates of Insurance shall be issued evidencing such
coverage to RCRRA throughout the term of this License.
13.2.1 Fire and All-Risk Property Insurance.
2.2.1.1 Coverage shall be written on a replacement cost basis for
any personal property and/or improvements or betterments of the Licensee
at the Premises.
2.2.1.2 Licensee, for itself, and any party claiming by or through
Licensee (“Licensee Parties
”) hereby waives and releases RCRRA, its
employees, agents, officials, and officers from all claims, liability and
causes of action for loss, damage to or destruction of any Licensee Party’s
property resulting from fire or other perils covered in standard property
insurance coverage. Licensee agrees that it will look to its own property
insurance for reimbursement for any loss and shall have no rights of
subrogation against RCRRA.
13.2.2 Commercial General Liability Insurance
13.2.2.1 $ 1,500,000 per occurrence
$ 2,000,000 aggregate per project
$ 2,000,000 products/completed operations total
limit
$ 1,500,000 personal injury and advertising liability
$ 5,000 per person medical payment
$ 100,000 fire legal
13.2.2.2 This policy is to be written as acceptable to RCRRA.
13.2.2.3 RCRRA, its officials, employees and agents, shall be added
to the policy as additional insured, using ISO form CG 20
11 or its equivalent.
13.2.3 Automobile Insurance.
2.2.2.1 Coverage shall be provided for hired, non-owned and owned auto.
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 212 of 221
2.2.2.2 Minimum limits: $1,000,000 combined single limit.
13.2.4 Workers’ Compensation as required by Minnesota Statutes
13.2.5 Employer’s Liability limits:
$500,000/$500,000/$500,000
13.3 All Certificates of Insurance shall provide that the insurance company gives
RCRRA thirty (30) days prior written notice of cancellation, non-renewal and/or
any material change in policy.
13.4 The above sub-paragraphs of this Section 13 establish minimum insurance
requirements, and it is the sole responsibility of Licensee to purchase and
maintain additional insurance that may be necessary in connection with this
License.
13.5 Certificates of Insurance must indicate if the policy is issued pursuant to these
requirements. Licensee shall not occupy or use the Premises until Licensee has
obtained the required insurance and filed an acceptable Certificate of Insurance
with RCRRA. Copies of insurance policies shall be submitted to the RCRRA
upon request.
13.6 Nothing in this License shall constitute a waiver of any statutory or common law
immunities, limits, or exceptions on liability.
13.7 Certificates shall specifically indicate if the policy is written with an admitted or
non-admitted carrier. Best’s Rating for the insurer shall be noted on the
Certificate, and shall not be less than an A-.
14. Indemnification
. Licensee shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend RCRRA,
its officials, agents, and employees against any and all liability, losses, costs, damages, expenses,
claims, or actions, including reasonable attorney’s fees, which RCRRA, its officials, agents, or
employees may hereafter sustain, incur, or be required to pay, arising out of or by reason of any
act or omission of Licensee, its officials, agents, employees, contractors, or subcontractors in the
execution, performance, or failure to adequately perform the Licensee’s obligations pursuant to
this License Agreement or its use or occupation of the Premises.
15. Damage or Destruction of Premises
. In the event the Premises are damaged or
destroyed by fire, the elements, or other casualty such as to make them impracticable or
unsuitable for Licensee’s use, this License Agreement may be terminated at the option of either
party upon written notice. In no case shall RCRRA be required to restore the Premises to a
condition suitable for Licensee’s continued used, though it may do so if it wishes.
16. Hazardous Substances. As used herein, the term “Hazardous Substances” means
any hazardous or toxic substance, material or waste which is or becomes regulated by any local,
state or federal governmental authority. The term Hazardous Substances includes but is not
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 213 of 221
limited to any material substance which is (i) designated as a hazardous substance pursuant to
Section 311 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. §1317); (ii) defined as a
hazardous substance pursuant to Section 1004 of the Federal Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. §6901, et seq. (42 U.S.C. §6903); or (iii) defined as a “hazardous
substance” pursuant to Section 101 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response
Compensation and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. §9601, et seq.). As used herein, the term,
“Environmental Requirements” means all laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, order, and other
requirements of any government or public authority now in force or which may hereafter be in
force relating to protection of human health or the environment, including all requirements
pertaining to reporting, licensing permitting, investigation and remediation of emissions,
discharges, storage, disposal or releases of Hazardous Substances and all requirements pertaining
to the protection of the health and safety of employees or the public. Licensee shall not permit or
conduct the generation, treatment, storage or disposal on, in or about the Premises of any
Hazardous Substances without prior written consent of RCRRA. Licensee shall indemnify and
defend RCRRA against and hold RCRRA harmless from all claims, demands, liabilities,
damages, fines, encumbrances, liens, losses, costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney’s
fees and disbursements, and costs and expenses of investigations, arising from or related to the
existence of Hazardous Substances in or on the Premises as a result of the acts or omissions of
Licensee, its contractors or any agent, employee or permittee of Licensee.
17. Signs
. Licensee shall not have the right to place, construct, or maintain any sign
on the Premises without RCRRA’s prior written consent.
18. Termination
.
a. Without Cause
. Either party may terminate the License without cause, for any
reason in its sole and absolute discretion, upon 30 days’ written notice to the
other party.
b. For Cause. RCRRA may terminate this License Agreement for cause, for any
one or more of the following reasons (each a “Default
”).
i. Any failure by Licensee to pay monthly license fee payments or any
other monetary sums required to be paid hereunder (where such failure
continues for ten (10) days after written notice thereof from the RCRRA
to Licensee).
ii. The abandonment or vacation of the Premises by Licensee for the
purposes as provided in Exhibit B
. In the event of such abandonment or
vacation of the Premises, RCRRA may serve the notice required by this
section by posting such notice for a period of ten days on the Premises.
iii. A failure by Licensee to observe and perform any other provision of this
License Agreement to be observed or performed by Licensee, where
such failure continues for ten (10) days after written notice thereof by
RCRRA to Licensee, provided, however, that if the nature of such
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 214 of 221
default is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within such ten (10)
day period, Licensee shall not be deemed to be in default if Licensee
shall within such period commence such cure and thereafter diligently
prosecute the same to completion.
iv. The making by Licensee of any general assignment or general
arrangement for the benefit of creditors; the filing by or against Licensee
of a petition to have Licensee adjudged a bankrupt or a petition for
reorganization or arrangement under any law relating to bankruptcy
(unless, in the case of a petition filed against Licensee, the same is
dismissed within ninety (90) days; the appointment of a trustee or
receiver to take possession of substantially all of Licensee’s assets
located at the Premises or of interest in this License Agreement, where
possession is not restored to Licensee within sixty (60) days; or the
attachment, execution or other judicial seizure of substantially all of
Licensee’s assets located at the Premises or of Licensee’s interest in this
License Agreement, where such seizure is not discharged within forty-
five (45) days.
In the event of any such Default or a breach of this License Agreement by Licensee,
RCRRA may at any time thereafter without limiting RCRRA in the exercise of any right
or remedy at law or in equity which RCRRA may have by reason of such default or
breach, terminate this License by written notice to Licensee.
19. Miscellaneous
.
a. Notices
. Unless otherwise provided herein, all notices required by the terms
of and conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed given when the notice is
prepared and deposited in the United States mail to the addressee as follows:
Licensee: City of Maplewood
1830 County Road B East
Maplewood, MN 55109
Attn: City Manager
RCRRA: Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authority
Union Depot, Suite 200
214 4th Street East
St. Paul, MN 55101
Attn: Director
b. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. Licensee shall obtain all licenses
and permits required by any governmental authority for its use of the
Premises, and shall, and shall comply with all terms of such licenses or
permits and any code, law, or regulation applicable to its use of the Premises.
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 215 of 221
c. Remedies Cumulative
. All remedies hereinbefore and hereafter conferred on
RCRRA and Licensee shall be deemed cumulative and not one exclusive of
the other, or of any other remedy conferred by law of in equity. The failure of
either the covenants of this License Agreement or of a party or to exercise any
option contained in this License Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver
or relinquishment for the future of such covenant or option.
d. Relationship of the Parties
. Nothing contained in this License shall be
deemed or construed by the parties hereto or by a third-party to create the
relationship of principal and agent or of a partnership or of a joint venture or
of any association whatsoever between RCRRA and Licensee, it being
expressly understood and agreed that neither any provision contained in this
License Agreement nor any act or acts of the parties hereto shall be deemed to
create any relationship between RCRRA and Licensee other than the
relationship of Licensor and Licensee.
e. Alteration
. Any alteration, variation or modification of this License
Agreement shall be valid only when reduced to writing and signed by both
parties.
f. Interpretation of Agreement; Venue
. This Agreement shall be interpreted and
construed according to the laws of the State of Minnesota. All litigation
regarding, arising from, or related to this agreement Licensee’s occupancy and
use of the Premises shall be venued in the District Court, Second Judicial
District, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
g. Entire Agreement
. This License Agreement shall constitute the entire
agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this
License Agreement and shall supersede all prior or written agreements of the
parties with respect to the subject matter of this License Agreement.
h. Successors
. The terms, covenants and conditions of this License Agreement
shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the permitted successors and
assigns of the parties.
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 216 of 221
RCRRA:
RAMSEY COUNTY REGIONAL
RAILROAD AUTHORITY
Date: __________________________ By: ______________________________
Timothy A. Mayasich
Its: Director
LICENSEE:
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Date: __________________________ By: ______________________________
Name:
Its: ________________________
Date: __________________________ By: ______________________________
Name:
Its: ________________________
Approved as to form:
By: ________________________________
Assistant Ramsey County Attorney
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 217 of 221
EXHIBIT A
Description of the Premises
Legal Description North of Hwy 36:
The 100 foot wide right of way of the Burlington Northern Railroad Company (formerly the Northern
Pacific Railroad Co.) as the same was located and established over the Northwest Quarter of the
Southwest Quarter and of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, both in Section 10, Township
29, Range 22 West, Ramsey County, Minnesota, prior to the abandonment of said right of way;
which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 100 feet northerly of the east and west quarter
line of said Section 10, and northerly of a line run parallel with and distant 112.5 feet northerly of Line 1
described below:
Line 1:
Beginning at a point on the West line of Section 10, distant 729.7 feet south of the west quarter corner
thereof; thence run easterly at an angle of 89 degrees 56 minutes 00 seconds from said west section line
(measured from north to east) for 1100 feet and there terminating.
Legal Description South of Hwy 36:
That part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota,
lying 50 feet on each side of the following described line:
Commencing at the southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 46 minutes 02
seconds East a distance of 550.34 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 9
degrees 30 minutes 09 seconds East a distance of 2663.50 feet to a point on the north line of said
Southwest Quarter distant 988.43 feet east of the northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter and said line
there terminating, according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situate in Ramsey
County, Minnesota.
Lying southerly and westerly of the following described line:
Beginning at the intersection of the west line of the above described parcel of land and a line parallel with
and 120 feet southerly of the hereinafter described line 1; thence easterly along said parallel line to the
above described centerline; thence southerly along said centerline to a line parallel with and 170 feet
southerly of the hereinafter described Line 1; thence easterly along said parallel line to the east line of the
above described parcel of land and said line there terminating.
Line 1 is described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the west line of Section 10, distant 729.7 feet south of the west quarter corner
thereof; thence run easterly at an angle of 89 degrees 56 minutes 00 seconds from said west section line
(measured from north to east) for 1100 feet and there terminating.
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 218 of 221
2. Preservation and Restoration. Licensee warrants, upon expiration of this License,
Licensee will take all reasonable steps to restore the Premises to the condition existing
immediately prior to the Commencement Date, subject to any items of work described in this
Exhibit which are improvements to the Premises.
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 219 of 221
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 4
Packet Page Number 220 of 221
EXHIBIT B
Permitted Use
1. Permitted Use. In order to efficiently conduct various construction activities on
RCRRA right of way, the Premises, and adjacent property in connection with the “Maplewood
Highway 36 Project” and also relating to the Bruce Vento Trail, Licensee, and its employees,
representatives, contractors, subcontractors and agents shall have the non-exclusive use of the
Premises for certain construction activities to accomplish and to complete on the Premises, on
RCRRA right-of-way and adjacent property the following:
a. Removal of the existing Bruce Vento Trail bridge over TH 36 as required for
the construction of the proposed TH 36 and English Street interchange.
b. Removal of the existing recreational trail approximately 200 feet south of the
existing bridge and between the existing bridge and Gervais Avenue.
c. Tree clearing/grubbing and earthwork for the proposed construction of a new
pedestrian bridge and connecting trails.
d. Construction of a new pedestrian bridge for the Bruce Vento Trail
approximately 40 feet east of the existing bridge location.
e. Construction of new 12 foot wide bituminous trail approximately 200 feet
south of the new bridge and between the new bridge and Gervais Avenue.
This includes the realignment of the Bruce Vento Trail north and south of the
bridge to match the new bridge alignment and the realignment of the trail at
Gervais Avenue to address site distance and safety concerns.
f. Reconstruction of Gervais Avenue to narrow the roadway at the Bruce Vento
Trail crossing and replace existing pavement that is in poor condition.
g. Restoration of all disturbed areas of the Premises and RCRRA Right-of-way
and property with seed and sod.
h. Miscellaneous work items necessary to facilitate the completion of the work
described above, such as, but not limited to, equipment staging, material
hauling, detours/traffic control, etc.
i. Work tasks necessary to accommodate unforeseen circumstances.
Licensee will be permitted both vehicular and pedestrian traffic on and across the
Premises and shall be allowed to park, store and otherwise use its equipment and
materials on the Premises.
Agenda Item K1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 221 of 221