Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2005 01-24 City Council Packet
AGENDA MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M. Monday, January 24, 2005 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. OS-02 A. CALL TO ORDER B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Acknowledgement of Maplewood Residents Serving the Country C. ROLL CALL Mayor's Address on Protocol: "Welcome to the meeting of the Maplewood City Council. It is our desire to keep all discussions civil as we work through d~ult issues tonight. If you are here for a Public Hearing or to address the City Council, please familiarize yourself with the Policies and Procedures and Rules of Civility, which are located near the entrance. When you address the council, please state your name and address clearly for the record. All comments/questions shall be posed to the Mayor and Council. I then will direct staff ~ as appropriate, to answer questions or respond to comments. " D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Minutes from the City Council/Manager Workshop- January 10, 2005 2. Minutes from the City Council Meeting- January 10, 2005 E. APPROVAL OF AGENDA F. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS 1. Police Civil Service Commission Reappointment 2. LEAP Awards Presentation G. CONSENT AGENDA All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. If a member of the City Council wishes to discuss an item, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and will be considered separately. 1. Approval of Claims 2. Temporary Liquor -Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary Church 3. Carver Elementary -Miscellaneous Permits -Carnival and Temporary Food 4. Annual Renewal of Intoxicating Liquor Licenses - On Sale 5. Annual Renewal of Intoxicating Liquor Licenses -Off Sale 6. Annual Renewal of Charitable Gambling Licenses 7. Planning Commission Rules of Procedure 8. Planning Commission's 2004 Annual Report 9. Liability Insurance Coverage 10. Budget Changes for State Fire Aid 11. Budget Changes for Park Development Fund 12. Budget Changes for Tax Increment District #1-5 13. Transfers from Tax Increment Funds 14. Transfer to Close Hazmat Fund 15. Budget Changes for 2004 Bond Issues 16. Budget Adjustment for Audit Fees 17. Donation from Applebee's -Fire Department 18. Purchase of Police Vehicles 19. Donation from Schmelz Countryside Volkswagen H. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:00 p.m. Troutland Development (Highway 61 and new County Road D) Right-of--Way and Easement Vacations Final Plat Revision 2. 7:15 p.m. Conditional Use Permit Review -Maplewood Business Center (1616 Gervais Avenue) I. AWARD OF BIDS J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS K. NEW BUSINESS 1. Intoxicating Liquor License -Moose Lodge -Alan Hartman 2. Tobacco Free Parks 3. Maplewood Imports Auto Center (2450 Maplewood Drive) a. Land Use Plan Change (CO to M-1) b. Zoning Map Change (CO to M-1) c. Conditional Use Permit d. Design Approval 4. Trunk Highway 36 Comprehensive Transportation Plan Update -Authorize Consultant Contract 5. Resolution Authorizing City Engineer to pursue Speed Limit Change on Holloway Avenue-Item Pulled 6. County Road D Realignment (West), Project 02-08 -Resolution Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids, (Re-Bid of Street Construction) 7. Time Extension for the Larpenteur Property Purchase Agreement L. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS O. ADJOURNMENT Sign language interpreters for hearing impaired persons are available for public hearings upon request. The request for this service must be made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk's Office at (651) 249-2001 to make arrangements. Assisted Listening Devices are also available. Please check with the City Clerk for availability. RULES OF CIVILITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY Following are some r ales of civility the City of Maplewood expects of everyone appearing at Council Meetings - elected offzcials, staff and citizens. It is hoped that by following these simple r ales, everyone's opinions can be heard and understood in a reasonable manner. We appreciate the fact that when appearzng 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. MINUTES CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP Monday, January 10, 2005 Council Chambers, City Hall 6:00 p.m. A. CALL TO ORDER B. ROLL CALL C. D. Robert Cardinal, Mayor Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Marvin Koppen, Councilmember Jackie Monahan-Junek, Councilmember Will Rossbach, Councilmember Present Present Present Present Present Others Present: City Manager Fursman Assistant City Manager Coleman Police Chief Thomalla Agenda Item D1 Fire Chief Lukin City Clerk Guilfoile David Twa, Ramsey County Manager APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to a~rove the a,~enda as submitted. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen NEW BUSINESS 1. 6:00 p.m. 800 MHz Update a. City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. Police Chief Thomalla and Fire Chief Lukin presented specifics from the report. c. David Twa, Manager of Ramsey County was present to answer council questions and to give a progress report. 2. 6:45 p.m. Advisory Board Appointment Policy-No Report a. City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. Assistant City Manager Coleman presented specifics from the report. Discussion was held regarding the Advisory Board Appointment Policy. E. F. FUTURE TOPICS ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to adjourn the metin,~ at 7:00 p.m. City Council/Manager Warkshop 01-10-OS Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All City Council/Manager Warkshop 01-10-OS A. B. C. D E. F. DRAFT-- MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:05 P.M. Monday, January 10, 2005 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. OS-O1 CALL TO ORDER: Agenda Item D2 A meeting of the City Council was held in the Council Chambers, at the City Hall, and was called to order at 7:05 P.M. by Mayor Cardinal. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Robert Cardinal, Mayor Present Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present Marvin Koppen, Councilmember Present Jackie Monahan-Junek, Councilmember Present Will Rossbach, Councilmember Present APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Minutes from the CounciUManager Workshop, December 13, 2004- Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the minutes from the December 13, 2004 City CounciUManager workshop as presented. Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All 2. Minutes from City Council Meeting-December 13, 2004 Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to presented. the minutes from the December 13.2004 as Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ml. South Leg Meeting M2. Municipal Legislative Commission Ayes-All Councilmember Koppen moved to approve the agenda as amended. Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS 1. Gladstone Redevelopment Study Task Force Appointments a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. City Counci101-10-OS b. Assistant City Manager Coleman presented specifics from the report. c. The following persons were heard: Adeline Benjamin, Co-Owner of the Maplewood Bowl, Maplewood Al Olson, Owner of Al's Auto Service, Maplewood Kim Schmidt, 1800 Phalen Place, Maplewood Councilmember Koppen moved to appoint the following individuals to the Gladstone Redevelopment Task Force: Business Appointments: Dan Fisher (Moose Lodge) Larry Johnson (Maplewood Marine) Rich Horwath (Rich's Market) Charlie Godbout (Metro Funeral Home) Al Olson (Al's Auto) David Gageby (Old Oak Furniture Store) Alternates: Betty Schultz (Maplewood Bakery) Del Benjamin (Maplewood Bowl) Residential Appointments: Jan Steiner-McGovern (1876 East Shore Dr.) Al Galbraith (1770 Edward Street) Joy Tkacheck (1088 Gordon) Wayne Sachi (1100 Frost Avenue) Erica Donner (1115 Gordon Avenue) Alternates: Kim Schmidt (1800 Phalen Place) Christopher Hampl (1120 Gordon Avenue) Roxanne Opse (1217 Frisbee Avenue) Sue Broin (1221 Ripley) Darlene Benedict (1754 Frank Street) Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All 2. St. Paul Regional Water Services -Report on Stillwater Tank Contamination and Update on Notification Procedures a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report. c. The following persons were heard: Dave Schuler, Chief Engineer, St. Paul Water Utility Steve Schneider, General Manager, St. Paul Water Utility No Action Required G. CONSENT AGENDA City Counci101-10-OS Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt consent agenda items 1-13 as presented. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All 1. Approval of Claims ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: $ 125,000.00 Checks # 65646 dated 12/08/04 $ 637,440.70 Checks # 65647 thru # 65767 dated 12/14/04 $ 260,818.61 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 12-03-04 thru 12-09-04 $ 22,900.00 Checks # 65768 dated 12/15/04 $ 685,038.99 Checks # 65769 thru #65835 dated 12/21 /04 $ 126,825.95 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 12/10/04 thru 12/16/04 $ 164,365.62 Checks # 65836 thru # 65881 dated 12/28/04 $ 280,088.74 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 12/17/04 thru 12/22/04 $ 128,132.43 Checks # 2029 and # 65882 dated 12/28/04 thru 12/30/04 $ 647,636.55 Checks # 65883 thru # 65925 dated O l /04/05 $ 43,189.20 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 12/23/04 thru 12/29/04 $ 3,121,436.79 Total Accounts Payable Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 12- $ 122,080.00 10-04 City Counci101-10-OS 3 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 425,673.63 12/17/04 4,088.87 Payroll Deduction check # 99901 thru # 99904 dated 12/17/04 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 415,752.40 12/30/04 Payroll Deduction check # 150.00 100044 dated 12/30/04 967,744.90 Total Payroll $ 4,089,181.69 GRAND TOTAL 2. Final Plat -Olivia Gardens (Olivia Court and Stillwater Road) Approved the final plat for Olivia Gardens date-stamped December 23, 2004. This approval is subject to the county recording the deeds, deed restrictions and covenants required by the city and the developer meeting all the conditions of the city engineer. 3. Conditional Use Permit Review -Carefree Cottages Villas (Phase N) (Gervais Avenue) Approved to review the Conditional Use Permit for Carefree Cottages Villas again in one year or sooner if the owner proposes a major change to the site. 4. Increase in Building Inspection Fees (Second Reading) Approved the following second reading of the ordinance increasing building, mechanical, plumbing and electrical fees: ORDINANCE 855 BUILDING CONSTRUCTION Permit Fees Article II Building Code Sections 12-37, 12-38 & 12-39 of the Building Code of the City of Maplewood is hereby amended as follows: Building Permit Fee: Permit fee to be based on job cost valuation. The determination of value or valuation shall be made by the building official. The value to be used in computing the building permit and building plan review fees shall be the total of all construction work for which the permit is issued, as well as all finish work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning, elevators, fire-extinguishing systems and any other permanent equipment. TOTAL VALUATION FEE City Counci101-10-OS $1.00 to $501.00 to $2,001.00 to $25,001.00 to $500.00 $2,000.00 $25,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 $100,001.00 to $500,000.00 $500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 $1,000,001.00 and up $25.00 $25.00 for the first $500.00 plus $3.25 for each additional $100.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00 $73.75 for the first $2,000.00 plus $14.75 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00 $413.00 for the first $25,000.00 plus $10.75 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00 $681.75 for the first $50,000.00 plus $7.50 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 $1056.75 for the first $100,000.00 plus $6.00 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00 $3,456.75 for the first $500,000.00 plus $5.00 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00 $5,956.75 for the first $1,000,000.00 plus $4.00 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof Other Inspections and Fees: Per Hour 1. Inspections outside of normal business hours (minimum charge) $75.00 2. Reinspection fees assessed under provisions of the MN State Building Codes $50.00 3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated (minimum charge -one-half hour) $50.00 4. For use of outside consultants for plan checking, inspections and similar costs Actual costsi iActual costs include administrative and overhead costs. Investigation Fee: Work without a Permit: Whenever any work for which a permit is required from the city has been commenced without first obtaining said permit, a special investigation shall be made before a permit maybe issued for such work. An investigation fee, in addition to the permit fee, shall be collected whether or not a permit is then or subsequently issued. The investigation fee shall be equal to the amount of the permit fee required by this code. The payment of such investigation fee shall not exempt any person from compliance with all other provisions of this code nor from any penalty prescribed by law. Plan Review Fee: When a building permit is required and a plan is required to be submitted, a plan review fee shall be paid. Plan review fees for all buildings shall be sixty five percent (65%) of the building permit fee, except as modified in M.S.B.C. Section 1300. :~ The plan review fees specified are separate fees from the permit fees specified and are in addition to the permit fees. :~ When submittal documents are incomplete or changed so as to require additional plan review or when the project involves deferred submittal items an additional plan review fee shall be charged at the above rate. Expiration of plan review. Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data submitted for review may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the building official. The building official may extend the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days on request by the applicant showing that circumstances beyond the control of the applicant have prevented action from being taken. No application shall be extended more than once. In order to renew action on an application after expiration, the applicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan review fee. City Counci101-10-OS Refund Fee: The building official may authorize refunding of any fee paid hereunder which was erroneously paid or collected. The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with this code. The building official may authorize refunding of not more than 80 percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee has paid is withdrawn or canceled before any plan review is done. The building official shall not authorize refunding of any fee paid except on written application filed by the original permittee not later than 180 days after the date of fee payment. 5. Purchase of Single-Axle Plow Trucks Approved to enter into a contract with Boyer Ford, under State Contract #433621, for the purchase of two 2005 Sterling L-8500 truck chassis for $120,978.00 and disposal of the 1991 Ford trucks at state auction. 6. TH 61 Improvements, City Project 03-07 -Resolution Approving Joint Powers Agreement with MnDOT and Ramsey County for Signal Maintenance Adopted the following resolution approving the Signal Maintenance Agreement for the Trunk Highway 61 Improvement Project at County Road D, City Project 03-07 and authorized the Mayor and City Manager to execute said agreement. RESOLUTION OS-O1-003 BE IT RESOLVED that the County of Ramsey enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes, to wit: To provide Maintenance and Electrical Energy for the new Traffic Control Signal with Street Lights, Emergency Vehicle Per-emption, and Signing at the intersection of T.H. 61 at County Road D, in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth and contained in Agreement No. 87408M, a copy of which was before the Board. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proper County officers be and hereby are authorized to execute such agreement and any amendments, and thereby assume for and on behalf of the County all of the contractual obligations contained therein. 7. Item Pulled 8. Carver Elementary PTO-Fee Waiver for Carnival, Food and Gambling Permits Adopted the following resolution approving a temporary Gambling Resolution and permit fee waivers for Caver Elementary PTO. City Counci101-10-OS RESOLUTION OS-O1-001 BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, that the temporary permit for lawful gambling is approved for Carver Elementary PTO, 2680 Upper Afton Road. Maplewood, Minnesota. FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council waives any objection to the timeliness of application for said permit as governed by Minnesota Statute §349.213. FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council requests that the Gambling Control Division of the Minnesota Department of Gaming approve said permit application as being in compliance with Minnesota Statute §349.213. NOW, THEREFORE, be it further resolved that this Resolution by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, be forwarded to the Gambling Control Division for their approval. 9. 2005 Animal Control Contract Accepted the 2005 contract from Animal Control Services, Inc. 10. Legacy Village Park Change Order 2 Approved change order 2 in the amount of $505 with the understanding that the monies be allocated and charged to the Legacy Village Park availability fund. 11. Protective Rooftop Netting System Awarded the low bid of $28,980 to Protective Sports Concepts to construct the protective rooftop netting system at Afton Heights Park with the monies to be allocated from the Afton Heights Park development fund. 12. 2004 IT Budget Increase Approved the appropriate budget adjustment for 2004 by moving $129,900 from the IT Fund reserves. 13. Temporary Seasonal Resolution Approved the 2005 Pay Rates for Temporary/Seasonal, Causal Part-time and Paid-Per-Call Employees. City Counci101-10-OS H. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 7:00 p.m. Trout Land Final Plat Item pulled due to incorrect notice published. I. AWARD OF BIDS 1. Bid for City Publication a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. Parks and Recreation Director Anderson presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to accept the bid of $45,999.00 from Nystrom Publishing Company, Inc. for the printin og f Maplewood News and various Parks and Recreation Publications. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Edward Kivel Sewer Backup Claim at 1880 Maryknoll -Consider Settlement Offer a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. City Engineer Ah presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Koppen moved to approve the settlement offer of $5,500 to Edward Kivel located at 1880 Maryknoll Drive with the settlement to be paid from the Sanitary Sewer Fund. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All K. NEW BUSINESS 1. 2005 Council Appointments Mayor Cardinal read the "Rules of Civility". a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. City Clerk Guilfoile presented specifics from the report. Mayor Cardinal moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: Appointment 2005 Appointment City Attorney Patrick J. Kelly Kelly & Fawcett Current Rates: $80/hr -civil $95/hr -litigation City Counci101-10-OS 8 Prosecuting Attorney Patrick J. Kelly Kelly & Fawcett Current Rates: $9,825/monthly retainer $ 500/month cap on expenses Official Newspaper Maplewood Review Data Compliance Officers: City Compliance Officer Karen Guilfoile City Personnel Officer Sherrie Le Law Enforcement Officer David Thomalla Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All Mayor Koppen moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: Municipal Legislative Commission Kathleen Juenemann (Quarterly, Wed - p.m.) City Manager Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All Mayor Cardinal moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: Ramsey County League Kathleen Juenemann of Local Governments Will Rossbach Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All Mayor Cardinal moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: Ramsey/Washington Kim Facile Suburban Cable Commission Robert Cardinal (alt) Marvin Koppen (alt) Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-Mayor Cardinal Nays-Councilmembers Juenemann, Koppen, Monahan-Junek and Rossbach Motion Failed. Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: Ramsey/Washington Suburban Cable Commission Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Marvin Koppen Robert Cardinal (alt) Kim Facile (alt) Ayes-Councilmembers Koppen, Monahan-Junek and Rossbach Nays-Mayor Cardinal and Councilmember Juenemann City Counci101-10-OS 9 Mayor Cardinal moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: N.E.S.T Marvin Koppen (First Thursday @ 7:30 p.m.) Will Rossbach Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All Mayor Cardinal moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: Suburban Rate Authority Marvin Koppen (First month of quarter) Melinda Coleman (alt.) Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All Mayor Cardinal moved to adopt the followin,~ council appointments for 2005: St. Paul Water Utility Robert Cardinal Board of Commissioners Jackie Monahan-Junek (alt) (Second Monday @ 5:00 p.m.) Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: Suburban Area Chamber Robert Cardinal of Commerce Melinda Coleman (alt) Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All Mayor Cardinal moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: The Partnership David Kvam (Tuesday a.m.) John Banick Staff Liaison-Jackie Monahan-Junek Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: Joint Ice Arena Board Staff Liaison-Bruce Anderson Jackie Monahan-Junek Marvin Koppen (alt) Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All Mayor Cardinal moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: City Counci101-10-OS 10 Rush Line Corridor Will Rossbach Chuck Ahl Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All Mayor Cardinal moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: 800 MHz Representative Kathleen Juenemann Will Rossbach (alt) Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All Mayor Cardinal moved to adopt the following council appointments for 2005: Acting Mayor Will Rossbach Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All 2. Conditional Use Permit -Walking in Faith Church (2835 Ariel Street) City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. Assistant City Manager Coleman presented specifics from the report. Commissioner Grover presented the Planning Commission Report. d. Paul Strong, the applicant answered council questions. Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution approving the conditional use permit for Walking in Faith Ministries to operate a church ion the building at 2385 Aerial Street: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION OS-O1-002 WHEREAS, Mr. Paul Strong, representing Walking in Faith Christian Ministries, is requesting that Maplewood approve a conditional use permit for a church to operate in an existing office building. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property at 2385 Ariel Street. The legal description is: Maplewood Retail Addition, subject to street, Outlot A. (PIN 11-29-22-31-0063) WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: On December 20, 2004, 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 commission also considered reports and recommendations of City Counci101-10-OS 11 the city staff. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. 2. On January 10, 2005, the city council discussed this request. The council gave everyone at the meeting a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the council approve the above-described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approves this permit because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with Maplewood's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. 4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. 10. The city council may waive any of the above requirements provided the council determines that the balancing of public interest between governmental units would be best served by such a waiver. Approval is subject to the following conditions: All construction shall follow the plans dated November 22, 2004, as approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The proposed church must be started in this location within one year after council approval or the permit City Counci101-10-OS 12 shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The owner and the church operators shall ensure that the church space meets all the requirements of the building code as determined by the building official and the fire marshal In addition, city staff shall determine the maximum capacity of the church upon review of the final floor and building plans. 4. The city council shall review this permit in one year. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All 3. Legacy Village Master Streetlight Plan -City Project 04-23: a. Presentation on Master Lighting Plan and Maintenance Options b. Consider Joint Powers Agreement with City of St. Paul for Street Light Maintenance a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report. c. Jon Horn, Consultant for the Project answered council questions. Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the joint powers agreement wit the City of St. Paul for street light maintenance and authorized the Mayor and City Mana erg to si,~n said a,~reement. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All 4. Sump Pump UI Reduction Program (Sanitary Sewer) -City Project 04-22 -Approve Ordinance Amendment Banning Clear Water Discharges to Sanitary Sewer a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report. c. Alvin, Metropolitan Council Services answered council questions. Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to accept the draft Ordinance Amending the Maplewood City code Re ug lating Discharge of Surface Waters in to Municipal Sewer System and a~roved the first reading of the ordinance to establish the sump pump inspection pro rg am: ORDINANCE NO. 856 AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE DISCHARGE OF CLEAR WATER INTO THE MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM Section 1. Findings and purposes. The purpose of this ordinance is far the efficient, economic and safe operation of the municipal sanitary sewer system for the protection of the health, safety and general welfare of the public within the City. 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 clearly indicates a different meaning. Clear Water Drainage means any storm water, natural precipitation, ground water, or flow from roof runoff, surface runoff, subsurface drainage, down spouts, eave troughs, rain spouts, yard drains, sump pumps, foundation drains, yard fountains, ponds, swimming 13 City Counci101-10-OS pools, cistern overflows or water discharged from any air conditioning unit or system. Permanently Installed Discharge Line means a rigid discharge line that does not, at any time, discharge water into the municipal sanitary sewer system and does not have any connections for altering the path of discharge. This line must provide for year round discharge to either: 1) the outside of the structure; 2) the City's storm sewer line by a connection; or 3) the curb and gutter to the street. If the line is connected to the City's storm sewer line, it shall include a check valve. Section 3. Prohibited Discharges. No property owner shall discharge or cause to be discharged any Clear Water Drainage directly or indirectly into the municipal sanitary sewer system. No property owner shall make or maintain a connection between any conductor used to carry Clear Water drainage to the municipal sanitary sewer system. Structures on properties that have a sump pump system to discharge excess water due to the infiltration into foundations shall have a Permanently Installed Discharge Line. Any disconnects or openings in the sanitary sewer system shall be closed or repaired by the property owner in an effective, workmanlike manner in accordance with local, state and federal law. Section 4. Inspections. Every property owner that owns improved real estate in the City shall allow arepresentative of the City to inspect both the inside and outside of buildings located on the property to confirm that there is no Clear Water Drainage or other prohibited discharge into the municipal sanitary sewer system. Any property owner that refuses to allow his or her property to be inspected within fourteen (14) days of the date of a request by the City representative shall immediately become subject to the surcharge provided for in this ordinance until the property is inspected andlor compliance is met and any penalties and remedies of the City as provided in its policies and codes, including, but not limited to, assessments, administrative expenses in achieving compliance. Any property owner whose property is found in violation of this Ordinance shall make the necessary changes to comply with this Ordinance and shall furnish proof of these changes to the designated City representative within ninety (90) days upon receiving notice of the violation. Section 5. City Installation. Where the property owner has been notified in writing to comply with this ordinance fails, refuses or neglects to comply within ninety (90) days of receipt of the notice, the council may, by resolution, direct the installation of the required pipes, plumbing fixtures and appliances. The cost of installation shall be paid by the City and the actual cost assessed against the property benefitted. After the installation and connections are completed, there shall be served upon the owner of the property, a written notice of the assessment and an order directing the owner to pay the assessment within ten (10) days after the service of the written notice. Upon proof of service of the notice and order, and proof that the assessment has not been paid within the ten (10) days allowed, an assessment hearing shall be held by the City and the benefitted property shall be assessed for the costs and administrative expenses incurred by the City in achieving compliance. Section 6. Surcharge. A surcharge of $100.00 for single family properties and $500.00 for all other properties per month shall be imposed and added to every utility billing for properties refusing or failing compliance or inspection as herein provided. The surcharge shall be added to every monthly billing until the property is brought into compliance as determined by the City or the inspection has been permitted and compliance has been determined. The City Council may grant waivers from the surcharges where strict enforcement may cause undue hardship unique to the property or where the property owner was scheduled for disconnection but cannot do so due to the circumstances, such as inclement weather. Section 7. Penalties. Any person violating any provision of this Ordinance is guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be subject to the penalties set forth in Minnesota Statute Section 609.02, subdivision 3. Section 8. Severability. Should any section, subdivision, clause or other provision of this ordinance be held to be invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the ordinance as a whole, or any part thereof, other than the part held to be invalid. Section 9. Effective Date. 14 City Counci101-10-OS This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All 5. 2005-2006 AFSCME Labor Agreement 2005-2006 Police Officer Labor Agreement 2005-2006 MSA Labor Agreement 2005-2006 Sergeants Labor Agreement 2005-2006 Non-Union Wages a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. Human Resources Director Le presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the 2005-2006 labor agreements for ADSCME Local 2725, LELS Local 153, MSA and LELS Local 173 and the Non-Union Wades for 2005 and 2006. Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All L. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Richard Currie, 1937 West Kenwood, Maplewood, asked Councilmember Koppen to explain the public access channel outreach program and recent changes. M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS 1. South Leg Meeting-The next South Leg meeting will be on January 20~' at Fire Station #4 at 7:00 p.m. 2. Municipal Legislative Committee-The regional breakfast meeting will be held at the Maplewood Community Center on Friday, February 4~', 7:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS Then annual counciUstaff retreat will be held on Friday, February 25~ at the Minnesota Humanities Center in Phalen Park. O. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Koppen moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:33 p.m. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -All 15 City Counci101-10-OS Agenda No. F-1 AGENDA REPORT DATE: January 13, 2005 TO: Richard Fursman City Manager FROM: Sherrie Le Human Resource Director SUBJECT: Police Civil Service Commission Reappointment As you know, the Police Civil Service Commission is athree-member commission. At this time, two of the three members of the Police Civil Service Commission are fairly new appointments having just been appointed in April and October of 2004. Because this Commission meets only as needed, the newest Commissioner has been to only one meeting and the other to just a few meetings. The only Commissioner that has any significant longevity is Commissioner Steve Gunn whose term was due to expire December 31, 2004. While I recognize that you have decided to consider other applicants, along with any Commissioners who wish to be considered for reappointment, I would recommend that you make an exception in this situation and reappoint Commissioner Gunn so we have at least one Commissioner who is knowledgeable about the rules and process involved in this Commission's work. If you should decide not to make an exception and wish to consider other applicants, we have applications on file from our October process. Please let me know your wishes. RECOMMENDATION I recommend that the City Council reappoint Steven Gunn as Commissioner of the Police Civil Service Commission for athree-year term to expire December 31, 2007. Agenda F2 MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Director of Parks and Recreation DATE: January 18, 2005 for the January 24 City Council Meeting SUBJECT: RamseyM/ashington Watershed District Award The Maplewood Nature Center has been recognized by the RamseyM/ashington Metro Watershed District as the recipient of the 2004 L.E.A. P. Award. L.E.A.P. is an acronym for Landscape Ecology Awards Program and is sponsored by the Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District. The nature center was recognized for the construction and installation of an outdoor garden at the Maplewood Community Center. The planting includes a butterfly garden along the south end of the pond near the walking trail. The planting was recognized for use of native plants, helping reduce turf and absorbing excess storm water. The garden was initially planted by Maplewood volunteers Mark and Carole Gernes with help from the Maplewood Jaycees. In 2003-04, the Maplewood Community Center staff and day camp participants coordinated expansion of the garden with the assistance of nature center naturalist Oakley Biesanz and recreation supervisor Audra Robbins. The L.E.A.P. award includes a sign that will be placed at the site, a $15 gift certificate to Landscape Alternatives, and a framed Honor the Landowner award certificate that will be placed at the Maplewood Community Center. Mr. Jack Frost, representing the Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District, will attend the meeting to present the award to the mayor and city council. kh\leap award.naturecenter AGENDA NO. G-1 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council FROM: Finance Director RE: APPROVAL OF CLAIMS DATE: January 24, 2005 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: $ 186,416.16 Checks # 65926 thru # 65997 dated 01/07/05 thru Ol/ll/OS $ 815,549.97 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 12/30/04 thru 01/06/05 $ 275,596.50 Checks # 65998 thru # 66051 dated 01/18/05 $ 152,242.68 $ 1,429,805.31 PAYROLL $ 450,977.24 $ 5,746.25 $ 456,723.49 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 01/07/05 thru 01/13/05 Total Accounts Payable Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 01/14/05 Payroll Deduction check # 100145 thru # 100150 dated 01/14/05 Total Payroll $ 1,886,528.80 GRAND TOTAL Attached is a detailed listing of these claims. Please call me at 651-249-2902 if you have any question on the attached listing. This will allow me to check the supporting documentation on file if necessary. ds attachments c:\My Documents\Excel\Miscellaneous\05-AprClms 01-07, 01-14 1 Check Register City of Maplewood vchlist 01/07/2005 12:17:47 PM Check Date Vendor 65926 1/7/2005 02923 65927 1/11/2005 00014 65928 1/11/2005 01908 65929 1/11/2005 00049 65930 1/11/2005 00111 65931 1/11/2005 00134 65932 1/11/2005 01811 65933 1/11/2005 00198 65934 1/11/2005 02606 65935 1/11/2005 02746 65936 1/11/2005 03313 65937 1/11/2005 00384 65938 1/11/2005 00384 65939 1/11/2005 00384 65940 1/11/2005 00358 65941 1/11/2005 02921 OAKDALE FIRE DEPARTMENT AT&T ADMINISTRATION. DEPT OF ADT SECURITY SERVICES ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES INC ASSN OF METRO MUNICIPALITIES BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS BRUCE MOGREN INC CLOVER SUPER FOODS INC DAMARCO SOLUTIONS LLC DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SRVS DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SRVS DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SRVS DGM INC. DUGAS, MICHAEL J 65942 1/11/2005 03299 DUREN, GARY 65943 1/11/2005 01401 FIRST STUDENT INC 65944 1/11/2005 02071 FISHER, DAVID 65945 1/11/2005 02113 FURSMAN, RICHARD 65946 1/11/2005 00555 GAYNOR, VIRGINIA 65947 1/11/2005 03314 65948 1/11/2005 00718 65949 1/11/2005 00748 65950 1/11/2005 00792 65951 1/11/2005 02728 65952 1/11/2005 03298 65953 1/11/2005 02996 65954 1/11/2005 00857 65955 1/11/2005 00908 65956 1/11/2005 00932 65957 1/11/2005 00901 65958 1/11/2005 01051 65959 1/11/2005 01052 65960 1/11/2005 01088 65961 1/11/2005 01028 65962 1/11/2005 01115 65963 1/11/2005 01149 65964 1/11/2005 01156 65965 1/11/2005 01168 65966 1/11/2005 01202 65967 1/11/2005 03300 HILL, CHRISTANA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #622 JAGOE,CAROL KEMPER & ASSOCIATES INC KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC KOPPEN, CHRIS LAND OF LAKES PROPERTIES LLC LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES MRPA MAPLEWOOD BAKERY MGFOA MN OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH MN PARK SUPERVISORS ASSN MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY MN STATE TREASURER STAR MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMM NATURAL RESOURCES RESTORING NELSON, JEAN NORDQUIST, RICK NYSTROM PUBLISHING CO INC OASIS POOLS Description/Account 1995 TAHOE MANAGED INTERNET SRV-DEC NETWORK DATA - NOV WIDE AREA NETWORK USAGE - NOV ANNUAL SRV CHARGE THRU 8/31/05 PATROL & BOARDING FEES 12/22 - 12/31 2005 MEMBERSHIP DUES MERCH FOR RESALE MONTHLY & QUARTERLY WATER UTIL REF ESCROW CAREFREE COTTAGES MERCH FOR RESALE HAZARD COMM/RIGHT TO KNOW SRV COPIER LEASE COPIER LEASE COPIER LEASE TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE TOW STOLEN VEHICLE TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE TOW STOLEN VEHICLE TOW STOLEN VEHICLE TOW FORFEITURE VEHICLE REIMB FOR TUITION REIMB FOR TUITION REF GRADING ESC - 1045 MARY ST N BUS FEE TO SCIENCE MUSEUM REIMB FOR RECERTIFICATION FEE REIMB FOR BOOKS & TUITION REIMB FOR MILEAGE 5/6 TO 5/18 REIMB FOR MILEAGE 6/1 TO 11/12 REIMB FOR MILEAGE 11/15 TO 12/29 BABYSITTERTRAINING INSTRUCTOR GYM SUPERVISION GYM SUPERVISION REIMB FOR MILEAGE - 1/6 LAND SURVEYING SERVICE PROJ 02-07 PROF SRVS THRU 11/30 PROJ 03-26 PROF SRVS THRU 11/30 PROJ 02-21 PROF SRVS THRU 11/30 REF GRADING ESC - 2363 CASE AVE REF GRADING ESC - 1259 GERVAIS AVE CONF REGISTRATION FEES 2005 MEMBERSHIPS - 11 BIRTHDAY CAKES 2005 MEMBERSHIPS - 3 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS 2005 MEMBERSHIP STORMWATER TRAINING SEMINAR MONTHLY SURTAX -DEC 2005 ANNUAL DUES BUCKTHORN BURN -JOY PARK REIMB FOR MILEAGE 11/2 TO 12/30 REIMB FOR SAFETY BOOTS CITY NEWS -JAN REF GRADING ESC - 2423 POND AVE E Amount 5,500.00 1, 013.60 1,867.17 392.00 6,648.88 1,146.20 8,542.00 324.00 793.76 551.75 214.60 750.00 511.20 342.36 161.88 90.53 90.53 90.53 215.53 122.48 90.53 90.53 90.53 90.53 90.53 579.49 579.49 522.88 216.15 20.00 3, 699.15 12.07 136.50 34.09 96.00 164.00 16.00 5.67 1, 000.00 5,992.41 35,544.53 7,891.75 1,071.51 3,188.08 350.00 1, 545.00 33.50 120.00 1, 534.00 35.00 210.00 2,547.50 8,941.00 1, 038.38 66.15 144.95 2,281.00 1, 500.00 2 Check Date Vendor Description/Account Amount 65968 1/11/2005 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF JODY CUSHMAN - PROJ 04-15 SEWER 195.00 65969 1/11/2005 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF JUSTINA HENDRICKSON -MCC PROG 75.00 65970 1/11/2005 02304 PACOLT, MARSHA REIMB LODGING, AIRFARE & CONF 1,684.83 65971 1/11/2005 01253 PEOPLES ELECTRICAL-COMMUNICATI CHECK FOR CABLE IN GROUND 401.20 65972 1/11/2005 01254 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY MERCH FOR RESALE 545.00 65973 1/11/2005 02563 PHILLIPS MEDICAL SYSTEMS DEFIBRILLATOR/MONITOR 16,512.00 65974 1/11/2005 01284 POSTMASTER RENEWAL FEE PERMIT #625000 150.00 65975 1/11/2005 03287 PRO-WALL INC REF GRADING ESC - 1060 DENNIS STS 1,500.00 65976 1/11/2005 01678 OWEST BURIED CABLE DAMAGE 785.95 65977 1/11/2005 01360 REINHART FOODSERVICE MERCH FOR RESALE 511.30 MERCH FOR RESALE 21.93 65978 1/11/2005 01329 RLS SPORTSWEAR INC EXPLORER JACKETS 691.35 65979 1/11/2005 01375 ROBERTS, KEN REIMB FOR TUITION 1,532.36 65980 1/11/2005 01393 RUMPCA COMPANIES INC GRIND & HAUL BRUSH 2,000.00 65981 1/11/2005 01418 SAM'S CLUB DIRECT MERCH FOR RESALE 184.71 PROGRAM SUPPLIES 304.67 MERCH FOR RESALE 142.56 COFFEE & SUPPLIES 279.04 PROGRAM SUPPLIES 293.00 MERCH FOR RESALE 207.27 PROGRAM SUPPLIES 336.56 65982 1/11/2005 03215 SHAPER CONTRACTING CO INC PROJ 02-07 CTY RD D PYMT #4 29,431.00 65983 1/11/2005 03312 SHESHUNOFF INFORMATION SRVS PERF MGMT FOR GOVERNMENT 384.95 65984 1/11/2005 01455 SHORTREED,MICHAEL REIMB FOR COP VOLUNTEER SHIRT 30.00 65985 1/11/2005 01463 SISTER ROSALIND GEFRE MCC MASSAGES -DEC 2,262.00 65986 1/11/2005 02086 ST PAUL AREA CHAMBER OF COMM 2005 MEMBERSHIP DUES 380.00 65987 1/11/2005 01504 ST PAUL, CITY OF MONTHLY WIRELESS REPORTING -JAN 3,798.00 WATER AND HYDRANT USAGE 1,477.41 WATER & HYDRANT USE 1,351.99 65988 1/11/2005 01537 STREAMLINE DESIGN INC. YOUTH PROGRAM TSHIRTS 1,101.50 YOUTH BASKETBALL TSHIRTS 765.00 65989 1/11/2005 01550 SUMMIT INSPECTIONS ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS 2,177.20 65990 1/11/2005 03301 SUSSEL CORP REF GRADING ESC - 1011 BARTELMY LN 500.00 65991 1/11/2005 01572 SYSTEMS SUPPLY, INC. INK CARTRIDGES 961.21 65992 1/11/2005 00150 TALLEN & BAERTSCHI MN POLICE BRIEFS -2005 100.00 65993 1/11/2005 03074 TOTAL REFRIGERATION SYS INC ANNUAL COOLER MAINTENANCE 120.50 65994 1/11/2005 01674 USPCA 2005 MEMBERSHIP DUES - 2 80.00 65995 1/11/2005 01722 VISIONARY SYSTEMS, LTD. FIREHOUSE SOFTWARE SUPPORT 1,490.00 65996 1/11/2005 01734 WALSH, WILLIAM P. PLUMBING INSPECTIONS 64.51 65997 1/11/2005 01805 ZIEGLER INC. REPAIR BELT CONVEYOR 649.26 72 Checks in this report Total checks : 186,416.16 3 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Disbursements via Debits to Checking account Transmitted Settlement Date Date Payee 12/29/04 12/30/04 12/30/04 12/24/04 12/30/04 12/30/04 12/30/04 12/30/04 12/30/04 01 /03/05 12/30/04 12/30/04 01 /04/05 01 /05/05 12/30/04 12/30/04 12/30/04 12/30/04 12/31 /04 12/31 /04 01 /03/05 01 /03/05 01 /03/05 01 /04/05 01 /04/05 01 /04/05 01 /05/05 01 /06/05 MN State Treasurer ICMA (Vantagepointe) Citigroup Elan Financial Services* MN State Treasurer MN Dept of Natural Resources U.S. Treasurer P.E.R.A. Orchard Trust MN State Treasurer MN State Treasurer ARC Administration MN State Treasurer MN State Treasurer TOTAL Description Drivers License/Deputy Registrar Deferred Compensation Investment Purchase Purchasing card items Drivers License/Deputy Registrar DNR electronic licenses Federal Payroll Tax P.E.R.A. Deferred Compensation Drivers License/Deputy Registrar State Payroll Tax DCRP & Flex plan payments Drivers License/Deputy Registrar Drivers License/Deputy Registrar *Detailed listings of Elan purchasing card items are attached. Omni int 13,507.11 7,728.59 498,977.78 60,938.71 11,187.25 1, 615.00 86,267.46 48,478.26 22,182.00 10,608.81 17,160.79 64.74 22,345.79 14,487.68 815.549.97 4 Transaction Review 12 i 2~ i 2 0 0 4 For Transactions posted between 12/11/2004 to 12/24/2004 ~ Tran Date Post Date Vendor Name 1 12/20/2004 2 12/ 10/2004 3 12/10/2004 4 12/ 10/2004 5 12/13/2004 6 12/ 15/2004 7 12/ 10/2004 8 12/13/2004 9 12/ 14/2004 10 12/ 15/2004 11 12/ 12/2004 12 12/ 16/2004 13 12/21/2004 14 12/22/2004 15 12/09/2004 16 12/ 15/2004 17 12/ 17/2004 18 12/09/2004 19 12/11/2004 20 12/ 15/2004 21 12/ 17/2004 22 12/21/2004 23 12/21/2004 24 12/21/2004 25 12/11/2004 26 12/13/2004 27 12/14/2004 28 12/20/2004 29 12/13/2004 30 12/14/2004 31 12/21/2004 32 12/21/2004 33 12/22/2004 34 12/13/2004 3 5 12/22/2004 36 12/15/2004 3 7 12/09/2004 38 12/16/2004 39 12/17/2004 40 12/ 10/2004 41 12/ 18/2004 42 12/ 18/2004 43 12/22/2004 44 12/11/2004 45 12/17/2004 46 12/22/2004 47 12/10/2004 48 12/10/2004 49 12/11/2004 50 12/13/2004 51 12/13/2004 52 12/16/2004 12/22/2004 12/13/2004 12/13/2004 12/13/2004 12/ 14/2004 12/ 17/2004 12/13/2004 12/ 15/2004 12/ 16/2004 12/ 17/2004 12/ 14/2004 12/ 17/2004 12/22/2004 12/24/2004 12/13/2004 12/ 17/2004 12/20/2004 12/13/2004 12/13/2004 12/ 16/2004 12/20/2004 12/22/2004 12/22/2004 12/23/2004 12/13/2004 12/ 15/2004 12/ 16/2004 12/22/2004 12/ 14/2004 12/ 16/2004 12/23/2004 12/23/2004 12/24/2004 12/ 15/2004 12/24/2004 12/ 16/2004 12/13/2004 12/ 17/2004 12/20/2004 12/13/2004 12/20/2004 12/20/2004 12/24/2004 12/13/2004 12/20/2004 12/24/2004 12/13/2004 12/13/2004 12/13/2004 12/ 14/2004 12/ 14/2004 12/20/2004 NSPE WEBPAGE UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC G & K SERVICES 006 G & K SERVICES 006 STREICHER'S POLICE EQP DENT WIZARD CENTURY COMM & TECH THE UPS STORE #2171 GRAFIX SHOPPE SHRED-IT VERIZON WRLS I2KW RE3 TRI-DIM FILTER CORP NUCO2 O1 OF O1 MUSKA LIGHTING CENTER UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC MINUTEMAN PRESS CALIF ACADEMY OF SCIEN RADIO SHACK 00161133 MENARDS 3022 INTL ASSOC OF FIRE CHIEFS PIONEER PRESS SUBSCRIPTI MENARDS 3059 BATTERIES PLUS SEARS ROEBUCK 1122 EPSON STORE OFFICE MAX 00002204 KINKO'S #0617 JOANN ETC #1970 CORNERSTONE COPY CENTER OFFICE MAX 00002204 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE SEARS ROEBUCK 1122 PROFESSIONAL INSPECTION VERIZON WRLS I2KW RE3 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC FESTIVAL FOODS #1 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC EZGOV STATE OF MN S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC MARSHALL FLDS 00020172 MARSHALL FLDS 00020172 MILLS FLEET FARM #27 VRZN WRLS VZSRVE W RE3 SPARTAN PROMOTIONAL GRP STREAMLINE DESIGN G & K SERVICES 006 G & K SERVICES 006 WAL-MART STORES, INC WASTE MANAGEMENT WASTE MANAGEMENT GLENWOOD-INGLEWOOD Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 260.00 R CHARLES AHL 155.60 MARK ALDRIDGE 224.68 BRUCE K ANDERSON 704.59 BRUCE K ANDERSON 494.27 SCOTT ANDREWS 150.00 SCOTT ANDREWS 1,770.00 JOHN BANICK 14.10 JOHN BANICK 559.13 JOHN BANICK 109.89 JOHN BANICK 45.01 JIM BEHAN 556.04 JIM BEHAN 805.10 JIM BEHAN 1,966.79 JIM BEHAN 22.90 BRIAN BIERDEMAN 317.47 OAKLEY BIESANZ 35.00 OAKLEY BIESANZ 26.30 RON BOURQUIN 33.14 RON BOURQUIN 195.00 RON BOURQUIN 8.30 ROGER BREHEIM 25.13 ROGER BREHEIM 18.09 ROGER BREHEIM 109.62 ROGER BREHEIM 134.70 HEIDI CAREY 266.25 HEIDI CAREY 82.01 HEIDI CAREY 18.31 HEIDI CAREY 17.31 STEVE CARLSON 12.77 STEVE CARLSON 28.80 STEVE CARLSON 336.01 STEVE CARLSON 965.45 STEVE CARLSON 29.68 CHRISTOPHER CAVETT 22.90 KEVIN COFFEY 116.54 MELINDA COLEMAN 199.58 KERRY GROTTY 43.00 ROBERTA DARST 38.64 ROBERTA DARST 128.97 MICHAEL DUGAS 6.54 ALICE DUNN 12.99 ALICE DUNN 104.99 DOUG EDGE 72.47 DANIEL F FAUST 2,680.00 GREG FINN 456.00 GREG FINN 279.48 DAVID FISHER 691.78 DAVID FISHER 57.86 DAVID FISHER 332.82 DAVID FISHER 332.82 DAVID FISHER 106.34 DAVID FISHER 5 # Tran Date Post Date Vendor Name Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 53 12/15/2004 12/16/2004 SYX TIGERDIRECT.COM 164.40 MYCHAL FOWLDS 54 12/20/2004 12/21/2004 CDW GOVERNMENT INC 1,983.80 MYCHAL FOWLDS 55 12/14/2004 12/15/2004 SYX TIGERDIRECT.COM -627.49 NICK FRANZEN 56 12/22/2004 12/23/2004 BEST BUY 00000109 335.40 NICK FRANZEN 57 12/20/2004 12/23/2004 LOEFFLERS SAFETY SHOES 142.95 RONALD FREBERG 58 12/15/2004 12/16/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 304.66 PATRICIA FRY 59 12/15/2004 12/16/2004 PAKOR INC 425.72 PATRICIA FRY 60 12/13/2004 12/14/2004 CDW GOVERNMENT INC 497.76 CLARENCE GERVAIS 61 12/11/2004 12/13/2004 CUB FOODS, INC. 21.26 MIKE GRAF 62 12/14/2004 12/16/2004 ORIENTAL TRADING CO 131.10 MIKE GRAF 63 12/14/2004 12/17/2004 SUPERAMERICA 4089 12.98 MIKE GRAF 64 12/15/2004 12/17/2004 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 14.06 MIKE GRAF 65 12/17/2004 12/20/2004 SUPERAMERICA 4089 15.98 MIKE GRAF 66 12/21/2004 12/23/2004 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE 15.21 MIKE GRAF 67 12/14/2004 12/16/2004 THE HOME DEPOT 2810 6.86 JANET M GREW HAYMAN 68 12/16/2004 12/17/2004 BLUE RIBBON BAIT & TACKL 7.50 JANET M GREW HAYMAN 69 12/20/2004 12/22/2004 OFFICE MAX 00005272 15.74 JANET M GREW HAYMAN 70 12/21/2004 12/22/2004 PETLAND 32.09 JANET M GREW HAYMAN 71 12/09/2004 12/13/2004 WOOD WORKERS TOY O1 OF O1 148.95 KAREN E GUILFOILE 72 12/10/2004 12/13/2004 DEAN LLOYD ENTERPRISES 54.50 KAREN E GUILFOILE 73 12/10/2004 12/13/2004 PROPERTYKEY.COM, INC. 50.00 KAREN E GUILFOILE 74 12/12/2004 12/14/2004 VERIZON WRLS I2KW RE3 104.37 KAREN E GUILFOILE 75 12/13/2004 12/15/2004 METRO SALES INC -509.00 LORI HANSEN 76 12/10/2004 12/13/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 10.20 LORI HANSON 77 12/14/2004 12/15/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 532.66 LORI HANSON 78 12/14/2004 12/15/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 42.66 LORI HANSON 79 12/16/2004 12/17/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 2.60 LORI HANSON 80 12/16/2004 12/17/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 76.42 LORI HANSON 81 12/21/2004 12/22/2004 REED BUS INFO ACCT REC 131.79 LORI HANSON 82 12/23/2004 12/24/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 24.43 LORI HANSON 83 12/14/2004 12/16/2004 AMERICAN RED CROSOI OF O1 250.00 RON HORWATH 84 12/13/2004 12/13/2004 NEXTEL WIRELESS SVCS 52.03 STEVE HURLEY 85 12/13/2004 12/15/2004 CIRCUIT CITY SS #3137 63.88 STEVE HURLEY 86 12/17/2004 12/20/2004 OFFICE MAX 00002204 9.56 STEVE HURLEY 87 12/21/2004 12/22/2004 NEXTEL WIRELESS SVCS 180.97 STEVE HURLEY 88 12/13/2004 12/13/2004 NEXTEL WIRELESS SVCS 40.16 ANN E HUTCHINSON 89 12/20/2004 12/22/2004 CUB FOODS-SUN RAY 6.97 ANN E HUTCHINSON 90 12/14/2004 12/20/2004 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 799.14 DAVID JAHN 91 12/17/2004 12/20/2004 TRUCK UTILITES INC 55.65 DAVID JAHN 92 12/20/2004 12/22/2004 CUB FOODS, INC. 110.93 DAVID JAHN 93 12/10/2004 12/13/2004 TARGET 00006940 77.18 KEVIN JOHNSON 94 12/14/2004 12/17/2004 AMERICAN FASTENER00 OF 00 59.00 MICHAEL KANE 95 12/15/2004 12/20/2004 AMERICAN FASTENER & SUPPL -59.00 MICHAEL KANE 96 12/20/2004 12/23/2004 AMERICAN FASTENER00 OF 00 366.92 MICHAEL KANE 97 12/18/2004 12/20/2004 NAPA AUTO PARTS # 28438 29.33 FLINT KARIS 98 12/22/2004 12/24/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 95.50 TOMMY KONG 99 12/13/2004 12/14/2004 GRACE INDUSTRIES 68.54 DAVID KVAM 100 12/16/2004 12/20/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 21.25 DAVID KVAM 101 12/16/2004 12/20/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 568.20 DAVID KVAM 102 12/17/2004 12/20/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 150.74 DAVID KVAM 103 12/17/2004 12/20/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 438.00 DAVID KVAM 104 12/22/2004 12/23/2004 BEST BUY 00000109 95.83 DAVID KVAM 105 12/22/2004 12/24/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 320.50 DAVID KVAM 106 12/16/2004 12/17/2004 MENARDS 3022 76.54 DENNIS LINDORFF 107 12/22/2004 12/23/2004 MENARDS 3022 34.57 DENNIS LINDORFF 108 12/10/2004 12/13/2004 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT 1,563.55 STEVE LUKIN 6 # Tran Date Post Date Vendor Name 109 12/13/2004 110 12/13/2004 111 12/13/2004 112 12/ 15/2004 113 12/20/2004 114 12/21/2004 115 12/23/2004 116 12/21/2004 117 12/ 10/2004 118 12/13/2004 119 12/13/2004 120 12/ 17/2004 121 12/20/2004 122 12/ 10/2004 123 12/14/2004 124 12/23/2004 125 12/10/2004 126 12/17/2004 127 12/17/2004 128 12/17/2004 129 12/ 17/2004 130 12/17/2004 131 12/17/2004 132 12/17/2004 133 12/10/2004 134 12/10/2004 135 12/12/2004 136 12/13/2004 137 12/15/2004 138 12/16/2004 139 12/16/2004 140 12/ 17/2004 141 12/22/2004 142 12/13/2004 143 12/14/2004 144 12/09/2004 145 12/13/2004 146 12/13/2004 147 12/14/2004 148 12/14/2004 149 12/ 15/2004 150 12/15/2004 151 12/ 15/2004 152 12/16/2004 153 12/16/2004 154 12/16/2004 155 12/17/2004 156 12/20/2004 157 12/20/2004 158 12/21/2004 159 12/21/2004 160 12/21/2004 161 12/22/2004 162 12/ 18/2004 163 12/21/2004 164 12/21/2004 12/13/2004 12/ 14/2004 12/ 15/2004 12/ 17/2004 12/21/2004 12/23/2004 12/24/2004 12/23/2004 12/13/2004 12/ 15/2004 12/ 15/2004 12/ 17/2004 12/21/2004 12/13/2004 12/ 16/2004 12/24/2004 12/13/2004 12/20/2004 12/20/2004 12/20/2004 12/20/2004 12/20/2004 12/20/2004 12/20/2004 12/13/2004 12/13/2004 12/ 14/2004 12/ 15/2004 12/ 17/2004 12/20/2004 12/20/2004 12/20/2004 12/24/2004 12/ 14/2004 12/ 15/2004 12/13/2004 12/ 15/2004 12/ 15/2004 12/ 16/2004 12/ 16/2004 12/ 16/2004 12/ 16/2004 12/20/2004 12/20/2004 12/20/2004 12/20/2004 12/23/2004 12/22/2004 12/22/2004 12/22/2004 12/22/2004 12/22/2004 12/24/2004 12/20/2004 12/22/2004 12/23/2004 NEXTEL WIRELESS SVCS WASTE MANAGEMENT VERIZON WRLS I2KW RE3 HEJNY RENTALS INC ADVANCED GRAPHIX INC FIREHOUSE SUBSCRI01 OF O1 NORMS TIRE SALES, UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC G & K SERVICES 006 VERIZON WRLS I2KW RE3 VERIZON WRLS I2KW RE3 SPRINTPCS AUTOPYMT RC1 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE MAX 00002204 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS QWEST COMMUNICATION MILLS FLEET FARM #27 CUSTOM HEADSETS INC UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC EMERGENCY MEDICAL PROD MOTRE MEDICAL PROPERTYKEY.COM, INC. NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE DIGITAL LIQUIDATORS RADIO SHACK 00199133 RADIO SHACK 00161455 MILLS FLEET FARM #27 RADIO SHACK 00161133 NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE B & H PHOTO-VIDEO.COM TARGET 00011858 CINTAS FIRST AID #0431 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS CARLSON TRACTOR & EQUIP SUNRAY BTB TOUSLEY FORD I27200039 CATCO PARTS & SERV #1 PAM OIL INC BAUER BULT TRE33200023 AMERICAN FASTENER00 OF 00 AMERICAN FASTENER & SUPPL AMERICAN FASTENER00 OF 00 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS TRI STATE BOBCAT TRUCK UTILITES INC ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY SUNRAY BTB KATH AUTO PARTS POLAR CHEVROLET SUNRAY BTB EGI U S DIARY NEXTEL WIRELESS SVCS AIRTRANAIR 9990037796337 Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 762.37 STEVE LUKIN 254.54 STEVE LUKIN 71.58 STEVE LUKIN 32.34 STEVE LUKIN 89.23 STEVE LUKIN 52.00 STEVE LUKIN 42.50 STEVE LUKIN 34.42 JASON MARINO 498.24 MARK MARUSKA 109.05 MARK MARUSKA 60.67 ED NADEAU 61.19 BRYAN NAGEL 34.58 JEAN NELSON 30.50 AMY NIVEN 48.12 AMY NIVEN 12.12 AMY NIVEN 673.00 MARSHA PACOLT 81.64 MARSHA PACOLT 121.41 MARSHA PACOLT -94.49 STEVEN PALMA 84.54 STEVEN PALMA 94.49 STEVEN PALMA 94.62 KURT PARSONS 320.70 KURT PARSONS 50.00 DENNIS PECK 244.81 PHILIP F POWELL 1,058.38 PHILIP F POWELL 53.21 PHILIP F POWELL 39.23 PHILIP F POWELL 223.62 PHILIP F POWELL 20.82 PHILIP F POWELL 202.28 PHILIP F POWELL 451.75 PHILIP F POWELL 5.31 WILLIAM J PRIEFER 19.44 WILLIAM J PRIEFER 249.16 STEVEN PRIEM 274.93 STEVEN PRIEM 29.36 STEVEN PRIEM 195.94 STEVEN PRIEM 72.16 STEVEN PRIEM 59.40 STEVEN PRIEM 85.20 STEVEN PRIEM 0.59 STEVEN PRIEM -0.59 STEVEN PRIEM 59.00 STEVEN PRIEM 181.10 STEVEN PRIEM 603.01 STEVEN PRIEM 111.63 STEVEN PRIEM -70.00 STEVEN PRIEM 96.08 STEVEN PRIEM 193.08 STEVEN PRIEM 8.33 STEVEN PRIEM 152.28 STEVEN PRIEM 204.48 KEVIN RABBETT 2,231.54 KEVIN RABBETT 283.40 KEVIN RABBETT 7 # Tran Date Post Date Vendor Name Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 165 12/21/2004 12/23/2004 THE TAPE COMPANY 296.97 KEVIN RABBETT 166 12/23/2004 12/24/2004 TI TASER INTL 67.00 KEVIN RABBETT 167 12/14/2004 12/15/2004 EZGOV STATE OF MN 43.00 TERRIE RAMEAUX 168 12/22/2004 12/24/2004 WONDERLIC 234.25 TERRIE RAMEAUX 169 12/16/2004 12/20/2004 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 1,394.79 MICHAEL REILLY 170 12/17/2004 12/20/2004 TARGET 00012351 81.31 AUDRA ROBBINS 171 12/19/2004 12/20/2004 ACME COMEDY STICKS RESTAU 175.00 AUDRA ROBBINS 172 12/20/2004 12/22/2004 TARGET 00006197 9.59 AUDRA ROBBINS 173 12/21/2004 12/22/2004 WALGREEN 00029363 16.29 AUDRA ROBBINS 174 12/21/2004 12/22/2004 MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY CNTR 2.50 AUDRA ROBBINS 175 12/23/2004 12/24/2004 WOODDALE REC CENTER 78.50 AUDRA ROBBINS 176 12/23/2004 12/24/2004 MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY CNTR 9.25 AUDRA ROBBINS 177 12/09/2004 12/13/2004 MILLS FLEET FARM #27 99.41 JAMES SCHINDELDECKER 178 12/20/2004 12/21/2004 LESCO SC 0530 335.48 JAMES SCHINDELDECKER 179 12/15/2004 12/16/2004 DATA BUSINESS SYSTEMS 1,011.00 DEB SCHMIDT 180 12/16/2004 12/17/2004 CURTIS 1000 750.72 DEB SCHMIDT 181 12/22/2004 12/24/2004 SHRED-IT 66.60 DEB SCHMIDT 182 12/23/2004 12/24/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 311.75 DEB SCHMIDT 183 12/20/2004 12/22/2004 ARAMARK REF SVS #6013- 396.95 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT 184 12/22/2004 12/24/2004 ELDREDGE TRADING INC 478.80 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT 185 12/23/2004 12/24/2004 CONTINENTAL SAFETY 278.90 SCOTT SCHULTZ 186 12/10/2004 12/13/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS -13.15 ANDREA SINDT 187 12/13/2004 12/15/2004 VERIZON WRLS I2KW RE3 46.59 ANDREA SINDT 188 12/23/2004 12/24/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 149.59 ANDREA SINDT 189 12/14/2004 12/16/2004 RED'S SAVOY PIZZA 236.04 PAULINE STAPLES 190 12/14/2004 12/16/2004 THE UPS STORE #2171 7.40 SCOTT STEFFEN 191 12/21/2004 12/23/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 15.92 SCOTT STEFFEN 192 12/15/2004 12/16/2004 EZGOV STATE OF MN 43.00 JOANNE M SVENDSEN 193 12/17/2004 12/20/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 5.79 JOANNE M SVENDSEN 194 12/10/2004 12/13/2004 FOREST PRODUCTS SUPPLY 1,491.00 RONALD SVENDSEN 195 12/10/2004 12/13/2004 NATIONAL SAFETY COMPLIANC 899.75 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 196 12/14/2004 12/15/2004 METRO FIRE 230.90 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 197 12/14/2004 12/15/2004 MSCTC DETROIT LAKES 20.00 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 198 12/14/2004 12/15/2004 BROOKLYN PARK TUITION OFF 342.39 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 199 12/14/2004 12/15/2004 THE CAD ZONE, INC. 1,984.00 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 200 12/14/2004 12/16/2004 FIREFIGHTERS BOOKSTORE 185.90 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 201 12/17/2004 12/20/2004 METRO FIRE 3,817.00 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 202 12/18/2004 12/20/2004 BARNES & NOBLE.COM 56.76 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 203 12/18/2004 12/20/2004 LABSAFE 191.68 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 204 12/20/2004 12/21/2004 CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPM 4,400.00 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 205 12/20/2004 12/22/2004 EAT INC 69.00 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 206 12/21/2004 12/22/2004 METRO FIRE 789.70 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 207 12/22/2004 12/23/2004 METRO FIRE 447.35 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 208 12/22/2004 12/23/2004 MBS DIRECT TEXTBOOKS 71.04 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 209 12/22/2004 12/23/2004 MSCTC MOORHEAD 527.34 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 210 12/09/2004 12/13/2004 HIRSHFIELD'S MAPLEWOOD 25.93 LYLE SWANSON 211 12/09/2004 12/20/2004 VIKING ELEC-CREDI01 OF O1 205.44 LYLE SWANSON 212 12/14/2004 12/16/2004 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 63.84 LYLE SWANSON 213 12/14/2004 12/16/2004 WW GRAINGER 497 32.85 LYLE SWANSON 214 12/15/2004 12/17/2004 SEARS ROEBUCK 1122 114.94 LYLE SWANSON 215 12/15/2004 12/17/2004 HIRSHFIELD'S MAPLEWOOD 26.29 LYLE SWANSON 216 12/20/2004 12/22/2004 TRUCK UTILITES INC 11.18 LYLE SWANSON 217 12/21/2004 12/22/2004 ENGRAPHICS INC 41.27 LYLE SWANSON 218 12/22/2004 12/24/2004 MUSKA LIGHTING CENTER 168.62 LYLE SWANSON 219 12/20/2004 12/21/2004 QWESTCOMM TN651 338.01 JUDY TETZLAFF 220 12/21/2004 12/23/2004 LOEFFLERS SAFETY SHOES 165.00 TODD TEVLIN 8 # Tran Date Post Date Vendor Name 221 12/14/2004 12/16/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 222 12/16/2004 12/20/2004 MARRIOTT LE MERIGOT 223 12/14/2004 12/15/2004 EZGOV STATE OF MN 224 12/21/2004 12/23/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 225 12/11/2004 12/13/2004 WALGREEN 00071886 226 12/13/2004 12/15/2004 PIZZA MAN 227 12/14/2004 12/15/2004 LARPENTEUR SUBWAY #633 228 12/14/2004 12/16/2004 VIKING #1090 229 12/14/2004 12/16/2004 OFFICE MAX 00002204 230 12/16/2004 12/20/2004 LA CASITA 231 12/22/2004 12/24/2004 VIKING #1090 Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 60.40 DAVID J THOMALLA -26.64 DAVID J THOMALLA 43.00 JUDY WEGWERTH 388.00 KAO XIONG 9.23 SUSAN ZWIEG 41.40 SUSAN ZWIEG 102.51 SUSAN ZWIEG 84.75 SUSAN ZWIEG 29.81 SUSAN ZWIEG 9.68 SUSAN ZWIEG 65.20 SUSAN ZWIEG 60,938.71 9 Check Register City of Maplewood vchlist 01/14/2005 11:21:42 AM Check Date Vendor Description/Account Amount 65998 1/18/2005 03320 ANDERSON, RONALD REF GRADING ESC - 676 FERNDALE 2,000.00 65999 1/18/2005 03315 BAKKE, LONN REIMB FOR PDA 250.00 66000 1/18/2005 00163 BAUER BUILT TIRES 2,633.28 66001 1/18/2005 00198 BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS ANNUAL AUTO FIRE SUPPLY 700.00 66002 1/18/2005 00202 BOHL, JOHN REIMB FOR UNIFORM 12/30 46.84 66003 1/18/2005 00210 BRAUER & ASSOCIATES, LTD PLANNING SRVS - APPLEWOOD PK 7,188.34 PROF SERVICES -LEGACY PARK DESIGN 1,708.75 66004 1/18/2005 01922 BREHEIM, ROGER PERSONAL CELL PHONE -JAN 15.00 66005 1/18/2005 00216 BRIGGS & MORGAN, P.A. LEGAL FEES ON BOND ISSUE 3,500.00 66006 1/18/2005 00240 C.S.C. CREDIT SERVICES APPLICANT BACKGROUND CHECK 50.00 66007 1/18/2005 00262 CARLE, JEANETTE REIMB FOR MILEAGE 9/8 - 12/30 13.50 66008 1/18/2005 03302 CGAA BASKETBALL BASKETBALL LEAGUE REFEREES 120.00 66009 1/18/2005 03322 GROTTY, KERRY REIMB FOR PDA 244.28 66010 1/18/2005 00464 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECH, INC NEW VEHICLE EQUIPMENT INSTALL 3,730.73 66011 1/18/2005 00487 F.M. FRATTALONE EXC INC REF GRADING ESC - 2215 VAN DYKE ST 18,188.62 66012 1/18/2005 00532 FRANK MADDEN & ASSOCIATES LABOR RELATIONS SRVS THRU 12/31 21.00 66013 1/18/2005 01949 GARY L FISCHLER & ASSOC PA CANDIDATE SCREEN 250.00 CANDIDATE SCREENING 250.00 66014 1/18/2005 00555 GAYNOR, VIRGINIA REIMB FOR MILEAGE 4/19 TO 12/30 141.19 66015 1/18/2005 03323 IDENTI-KIT SOLUTIONS IDENTI-KIT SOFTWARE LEASE 408.00 66016 1/18/2005 00718 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #622 GYM SUPERVISION 56.00 GYM SUPERVISION 52.80 BUS TRIP TO HOLIDAZZLE PARADE 12/9 116.81 66017 1/18/2005 02995 INTEGRATED LOSS CONTROL INC HEALTH & SAFETY SRVS - 1ST QTR 1,743.00 66018 1/18/2005 03087 JACOBSON, SCOTT A REIMB FOR MILEAGE 12/13 TO 12/30 9.00 66019 1/18/2005 03321 JTM ENTERPRISES INC REF GRADING ESC - 2335 STILLWATER 8,016.30 66020 1/18/2005 00789 KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE CO UNL MID-GRADE GAS (89 OCTANE) 9,770.89 66021 1/18/2005 01894 KELLY & FAWCETT PA PROSECUTION SRVS -DEC 9,825.00 LEGAL SERVICES -DEC 13,577.87 66022 1/18/2005 00393 LABOR & INDUSTRY, DEPT OF FIRE STATION 1 10.00 66023 1/18/2005 02336 M A TAYLOR INC FITNESS CONSULTANT - 4TH QTR 1,550.00 66024 1/18/2005 00904 M L E E A 2005 ASSOCIATION DUES 60.00 66025 1/18/2005 00908 M R P A ANNUAL MEETING 1-13 27.50 66026 1/18/2005 00910 M S S A 2005 MEMBERSHIP - 3 105.00 66027 1/18/2005 03316 METRO FIRE CHIEFS ASSN 2005 MEMBERSHIP 100.00 66028 1/18/2005 00986 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MONTHLY SAC - OCT 90,882.00 66029 1/18/2005 01020 MINNEAPOLIS RAG STOCK CO RAGS 74.90 66030 1/18/2005 01079 MN CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSN DATA PRACTICES TRNG 50.00 66031 1/18/2005 01149 NATURAL RESOURCES RESTOR INC BUCKTHORN REMOVAL 11/16 2,365.00 66032 1/18/2005 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA -DEPOSIT 1,000.00 66033 1/18/2005 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF RONALD WHITE - AMB 04007241 148.49 66034 1/18/2005 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF RON COCKRIEL - NC PROGRAM 30.00 66035 1/18/2005 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF CHRIS SMITH -REC PROGRAM 29.00 66036 1/18/2005 02563 PHILLIPS MEDICAL SYSTEMS HEARTSTART DEFIBRILLATOR/MONITOR 33,024.00 66037 1/18/2005 01290 PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC XEROX 765 FAX MACHINE, PHONE HANDSET, 1,926.59 66038 1/18/2005 01337 RAMSEY COUNTY-PROP REC & REV FILING FEE 32.00 66039 1/18/2005 01341 RAMSEY CTY FIRE CHIEFS ASSN 2005 MEMBERSHIP 60.00 66040 1/18/2005 02118 SCHMIDT, RUSSELL REIMB FOR TUITION 888.75 66041 1/18/2005 01455 SHORTREED, MICHAEL REIMB FOR TUITION 1,668.66 66042 1/18/2005 01504 ST PAUL, CITY OF RADIO SERVICE & MAINT -DEC 1,921.37 66043 1/18/2005 01580 TSE, INC. CUSTODIAL SRVS 11/29 - 12/24 795.71 66044 1/18/2005 01669 TWIN CITIES TRANSPORT & TOW VEHICLE #544 159.75 66045 1/18/2005 03288 UNIVERSITY AUTO SALES&SERV LLC REF GRADING ESC - 1145 VIKING DR 1,000.00 66046 1/18/2005 01734 WALSH, WILLIAM P. COMMERCIAL PLUMBING INSP 200.00 66047 1/18/2005 01757 WELCHLIN, CABOT REIMB FOR BOOKS & TUITION 648.03 66048 1/18/2005 02462 WEMYSS, SCOTT D NAMETAGS 55.00 66049 1/18/2005 01770 WHITE BEAR LAKE RESERVE UNIT POLICE RESERVE ACADEMY - 6 210.00 66050 1/18/2005 03317 WOODLUND HOMES REF GRADING ESC - 1693 JESSIE ST N 1,802.67 66051 1/18/2005 01190 XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY UTIL -STMT DATE 1/5/2005 50,144.88 54 Checks in this report Total checks : 275,596.50 10 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Disbursements via Debits to Checking account Transmitted Settlement Date Date Payee 01/06/05 01/07/05 MN State Treasurer 12/30/04 01/07/05 WI Dept of Revenue 01/04/05 01/07/05 ARC Administration 01/06/05 01/07/05 MN Dept of Natural Resources 01/07/05 01/10/05 MN State Treasurer 01/07/05 01/10/05 Pitney Bowes 01/10/05 01/11/05 MN State Treasurer 01/11/05 01/12/05 MN State Treasurer 01/12/05 01/13/05 MN State Treasurer 01/07/05 01/13/05 Elan Financial Services* TOTAL Description Drivers License/Deputy Registrar State Payroll Tax DCRP & Flex plan payments DNR electronic licenses Drivers License/Deputy Registrar Postage Drivers License/Deputy Registrar Drivers License/Deputy Registrar Drivers License/Deputy Registrar Purchasing card items *Detailed listings of Elan purchasing card items are attached. Amount 15,724.70 2,208.91 517.19 2,295.24 10,850.78 2,985.00 13,258.40 32,198.87 11,169.74 61,033.85 I JG,GYG. V V 11 Transaction Review For Transactions posted between 12/25/2004 to 01/07/2005 Post Date Vendor Name 12/27/2004 01/03/2005 O 1/07/2005 O 1/07/2005 O 1/07/2005 O 1/07/2005 12/27/2004 01/03/2005 12/27/2004 12/29/2004 12/29/2004 12/29/2004 12/29/2004 12/29/2004 12/29/2004 01/04/2005 01/05/2005 01/06/2005 12/31/2004 01/03/2005 01/05/2005 O 1/07/2005 12/30/2004 12/30/2004 12/31/2004 01/05/2005 01/05/2005 01/03/2005 01/03/2005 12/30/2004 01/05/2005 01/06/2005 12/29/2004 12/29/2004 O 1/07/2005 01/03/2005 O 1/07/2005 12/28/2004 01/03/2005 O 1/07/2005 01/03/2005 12/30/2004 01/05/2005 01/06/2005 01/06/2005 O 1/07/2005 O 1/07/2005 12/27/2004 12/29/2004 12/29/2004 12/31/2004 01/06/2005 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC VERIZON WRLS I2KW RE3 G & K SERVICES 006 G & K SERVICES 006 GAL GALLS INC CUB FOODS, INC. SNYDER DRUG #5073 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC ARROWHEAD EMERGENCY MEDIC ARROWHEAD EMERGENCY MEDIC ARROWHEAD EMERGENCY MEDIC ARROWHEAD EMERGENCY MEDIC ARROWHEAD EMERGENCY MEDIC SHRED-IT MN PHOTO ARROWHEAD EMERGENCY MEDIC STREICHER'S POLICE EQP CRAMER BLDG SERVICES INC WEBER & TROSETH INC POOLSIDE MINNESOTA ELEVATOR INC UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC KNOWLANS #2 AUTOZONE #3082 AUTOZONE #3082 NORTHERN TOOL EQUIP-MN MILLS FLEET FARM #27 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC DEX EAST - WEBSITE DISPLAYS 2 GO CAMELBACK DISPLAYS INC OFFICE MAX 00002204 SEARS ROEBUCK 1122 WW GRAINGER 938 NEXTEL WIRELESS SVGS U OF M CCE ON LINE TIME WARNER CABLE GE CAPITAL BOEHM'S INC UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS SENSIBLE LAND USE COAL PIONEER PRESS SUBSCRIPTI USPS 2663650015 VIDEO SERVICES OF AMERICA ICMA THE HOME DEPOT 2801 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFIC NEXTEL WIRELESS SVGS LABSAFE BENMEDS 1/10/2005 Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 62.63 GLINT ABEL 438.00 GLINT ABEL 61.70 R CHARLES AHL 284.98 BRUCE K ANDERSON 880.07 BRUCE K ANDERSON 129.56 SCOTT ANDREWS 7.62 MANDY ANZALDI 2.53 MANDY ANZALDI 470.50 LONN BAKKE 320.00 JOHN BANICK 320.00 JOHN BANICK 320.00 JOHN BANICK 320.00 JOHN BANICK 320.00 JOHN BANICK 123.21 JOHN BANICK 33.57 JOHN BANICK -20.00 JOHN BANICK 3,566.69 JOHN BANICK 206.70 JIM BEHAN 68.16 JIM BEHAN 8.31 JIM BEHAN 1,322.07 JIM BEHAN 598.87 JOSEPH BERGERON 3.46 OAKLEY BIESANZ 63.86 RON BOURQUIN 5.31 RON BOURQUIN 111.05 RON BOURQUIN 134.99 ROGER BREHEIM 438.00 DANIEL BUSACK 90.30 HEIDI CAREY 358.60 HEIDI CAREY 358.97 HEIDI CAREY 26.07 STEVE CARLSON 154.36 STEVE CARLSON 353.27 STEVE CARLSON 216.33 CHRISTOPHER CAVETT 240.00 CHRISTOPHER CAVETT 109.79 LINDA CROSSON 149.10 LINDA CROSSON 815.37 LINDA CROSSON -149.05 KERRY GROTTY 155.84 ROBERTA DARST 30.00 ROBERTA DARST 25.03 ROBERTA DARST 74.00 ROBERTA DARST 67.40 ROBERTA DARST 914.20 ROBERTA DARST 65.65 DOUG EDGE 310.00 DANIEL F FAUST 127.78 DAVID FISHER 142.21 DAVID FISHER 80.82 DAVID FISHER 12 Post Date Vendor Name Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 01/07/2005 G & K SERVICES 006 794.54 DAVID FISHER 01/07/2005 G & K SERVICES 006 279.48 DAVID FISHER 12/27/2004 ADT SECURITY SERVICES 42.00 MYCHAL FOWLDS 12/30/2004 UPS 1Z9866T21392276224 27.75 NICK FRANZEN 12/31/2004 OFFICE MAX 00002204 170.39 NICK FRANZEN 01/03/2005 OFFICE MAX 00002204 121.39 NICK FRANZEN 01/06/2005 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 55.26 RONALD FREBERG 01/07/2005 PAKOR INC 636.77 PATRICIA FRY 01/04/2005 SPRINTPCS AUTOPYMT RC1 114.33 RICHARD FURSMAN 01/06/2005 OFFICE MAX 00002204 84.41 JEAN GLASS 01/03/2005 CUB FOODS, INC. 21.40 MIKE GRAF 01/03/2005 MILLS FLEET FARM #27 13.56 MIKE GRAF 01/03/2005 TARGET 00011858 13.46 MIKE GRAF 01/06/2005 SUPERAMERICA 4089 15.98 MIKE GRAF 01/06/2005 STREAMLINE DESIGN 1,479.00 MIKE GRAF 12/31/2004 MINNESOTA NURSERY & LANDS 99.00 JANET M GREW HAYMAN 12/30/2004 BEST BUY 00000109 439.99 KAREN E GUILFOILE 12/31/2004 TARGET 00011858 63.89 KAREN E GUILFOILE 01/06/2005 ADVANCED BAR CODE SOLUTIO 537.18 KAREN E GUILFOILE 12/31/2004 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 13.33 MARK HAAG 01/07/2005 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE 9.51 MARK HAAG 12/30/2004 XPEDX 2,732.35 LORI HANSEN 12/29/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 12.34 LORI HANSON 01/05/2005 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 146.03 LORI HANSON 01/06/2005 DRUGSTORE COM 123.60 LORI HANSON 01/07/2005 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 26.84 LORI HANSON 12/30/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 311.23 STEPHEN HEINZ 12/31/2004 SUNGLASS HUT 60023074 63.88 STEPHEN HEINZ 01/03/2005 WAL-MART STORES, INC 63.90 MICHAEL HEMQUIST 01/07/2005 LESCO SC 0530 335.48 GARY HINNENKAMP 01/05/2005 PSW FRONTIER PRO SHOP 79.84 RON HORWATH 12/31/2004 MIDWEST LOCK & SAFE INC 393.10 STEVE HURLEY 01/03/2005 ADT SECURITY SERVICES 157.28 STEVE HURLEY 01/03/2005 ADT SECURITY SERVICES 1,405.54 STEVE HURLEY 01/04/2005 CABLING SERVICES CORPORAT 65.00 STEVE HURLEY 01/06/2005 OFFICE MAX 00002204 7.22 STEVE HURLEY 01/06/2005 INTEREUM INC 890.34 STEVE HURLEY 01/05/2005 KNOWLANS #2 18.45 ANN E HUTCHINSON 12/27/2004 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 1,459.05 DAVID JAHN 12/29/2004 NORTHERN TOOL EQUIPMNT 1,080.93 DAVID JAHN 12/31/2004 SEARS AUTO CNTR 6122 31.92 DAVID JAHN 01/07/2005 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 862.12 DAVID JAHN 12/29/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 26.52 KEVIN JOHNSON 12/30/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 31.95 KEVIN JOHNSON 01/07/2005 SIRCHIE FINGERPRINT LABS 162.67 KEVIN JOHNSON 01/06/2005 SPRI PRODUCTS 156.00 MARY B KOEHNEN 12/31/2004 VERIZON WRLS I2KW RE3 45.01 SHERYL L LE 12/31/2004 NPELRA 450.00 SHERYL L LE 01/07/2005 MENARDS 3022 241.37 DENNIS LINDORFF 12/30/2004 MENARDS 3059 566.25 STEVE LUKIN 12/31/2004 LIGHTNING DISPOSAL 420.00 STEVE LUKIN 01/05/2005 WEBER ELECTRIC 3,960.18 STEVE LUKIN 01/05/2005 SBC PAGING 17.61 STEVE LUKIN 12/27/2004 ORDERTREE OPE PARTS 20.84 DAVID LUTZ 01/05/2005 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE 279.40 MARK MARUSKA 01/05/2005 HUNT ELECTRIC CORPORATION 169.75 MARK MARUSKA 13 Post Date Vendor Name Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 01/07/2005 G & K SERVICES 006 666.89 MARK MARUSKA 12/27/2004 7 CORNERS ACE HARDWARE 45.96 JON A MELANDER 12/31/2004 STREICHER'S POLICE EQP 53.45 ALESIA METRY 01/03/2005 KOHL'S #0054 44.99 ALESIA METRY 12/28/2004 ARCH WIRELESS 37.46 ED NADEAU 12/31/2004 BEST BUY 00000109 54.30 BRYAN NAGEL 01/07/2005 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 165.00 JEAN NELSON 12/29/2004 OXYGEN SERVICE CO 14.04 RICHARD NORDQUIST 12/30/2004 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 18.38 RICHARD NORDQUIST 01/07/2005 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 9.95 STEVEN PALMA 01/05/2005 SUPERAMERICA 4371 7.01 KURT PARSONS 01/03/2005 WALGREEN 00016873 179.98 KURT PARSONS 01/06/2005 MOTRE MEDICAL 345.00 KURT PARSONS 01/07/2005 TARGET 00011858 23.40 KURT PARSONS 01/04/2005 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 443.56 KATHLEEN PECK HALL 01/03/2005 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 8.54 ROBERT PETERSON 12/29/2004 BATTERIES PLUS 25.05 PHILIP F POWELL 12/30/2004 HANCOCK FABRICS 6195 126.75 PHILIP F POWELL 01/03/2005 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE 15.24 PHILIP F POWELL 01/03/2005 OFFICE MAX 00002204 76.38 PHILIP F POWELL 12/29/2004 TRI STATE BOBCAT 111.54 STEVEN PRIEM 12/27/2004 BAUER BULT TRE33200023 457.95 STEVEN PRIEM 12/28/2004 POLAR CHEVROLET 34.68 STEVEN PRIEM 12/29/2004 TOUSLEY FORD I27200039 62.69 STEVEN PRIEM 12/29/2004 SUNRAY BTB 69.44 STEVEN PRIEM 12/29/2004 KATH AUTO PARTS 16.52 STEVEN PRIEM 12/30/2004 TOUSLEY FORD I27200039 41.28 STEVEN PRIEM 12/30/2004 POLAR CHEVROLET 12.59 STEVEN PRIEM 01/03/2005 TRI STATE BOBCAT 103.97 STEVEN PRIEM 01/03/2005 GENERATOR SPECIALTY CO 439.80 STEVEN PRIEM 01/04/2005 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS 117.44 STEVEN PRIEM 01/04/2005 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS 126.22 STEVEN PRIEM 01/03/2005 JOHN FRYE DISTRIBUTING 37.28 STEVEN PRIEM 01/05/2005 SUNRAY BTB 75.91 STEVEN PRIEM 01/05/2005 SUNRAY BTB -51.57 STEVEN PRIEM 01/05/2005 SKARNES INC 386.60 STEVEN PRIEM 01/06/2005 BAUER BULT TRE33200023 1,316.64 STEVEN PRIEM 01/06/2005 BAUER BULT TRE33200023 1,316.64 STEVEN PRIEM 01/06/2005 KATH AUTO PARTS 50.98 STEVEN PRIEM 01/07/2005 UNITED SUPPLY CORP 165.18 STEVEN PRIEM 01/07/2005 KATH AUTO PARTS 47.36 STEVEN PRIEM 01/06/2005 BATTERIES PLUS 157.60 KEVIN RABBETT 12/28/2004 THE STAR TRIBUNE-ADVERTIS 934.95 TERRIE RAMEAUX 12/31/2004 HUBCO INCORP SERVICES 26.95 TERRIE RAMEAUX 01/05/2005 PIONEER PRESS ADVERTISIN 603.00 TERRIE RAMEAUX 01/05/2005 CUSTOM HEADSETS INC 63.98 TERRIE RAMEAUX 01/03/2005 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 85.00 MICHAEL REILLY 01/07/2005 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 1,052.19 MICHAEL REILLY 01/07/2005 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 461.00 MICHAEL REILLY 12/27/2004 LARKSPUR MARKET 1.82 AUDRA ROBBINS 12/27/2004 LARKSPUR MARKET LIMITED 13.90 AUDRA ROBBINS 12/27/2004 TARGET 00006197 47.46 AUDRA ROBBINS 12/31/2004 SCIENCE MUSEUM BOX OFFICE 168.00 AUDRA ROBBINS 12/29/2004 CUB FOODS, INC. 40.52 AUDRA ROBBINS 12/31/2004 GRAND SLAM SPORTS 248.25 AUDRA ROBBINS 12/31/2004 WONDER/HOSTESS #63 10.76 AUDRA ROBBINS 14 Post Date Vendor Name Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 01/03/2005 MARCUS OAKD.CIN #488 Q25 51.50 AUDRA ROBBINS 01/03/2005 CUB FOODS, INC. 27.37 AUDRA ROBBINS 01/03/2005 MICHAELS #2744 29.70 AUDRA ROBBINS 01/03/2005 ARBY'S #5396 Q52 11.58 AUDRA ROBBINS 01/03/2005 MN TWOLVES LYNX 910.00 AUDRA ROBBINS 01/03/2005 VILLA PIZZA #3301 7.44 AUDRA ROBBINS 01/03/2005 BURGER KING 5978 16.46 AUDRA ROBBINS 01/03/2005 SUBWAY #7370 14.22 AUDRA ROBBINS 01/06/2005 MENARDS 3022 30.27 JAMES SCHINDELDECKER 01/04/2005 BARTLEY SALES COMPANY,INC 89.01 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT 01/06/2005 WRISTBANDS MEDTECH USA IN 1,725.00 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT 12/30/2004 CONTINENTAL SAFETY 440.05 SCOTT SCHULTZ 12/31/2004 RED WING SHOE STORE 118.15 SCOTT SCHULTZ 12/31/2004 TARGET 00011858 22.32 SCOTT SCHULTZ 01/03/2005 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 324.79 SCOTT SCHULTZ 01/03/2005 T-MOBILE 45.96 SCOTT SCHULTZ 01/03/2005 VOLCO EQUIPMENT 107.40 SCOTT SCHULTZ 12/28/2004 NEXTEL WIRELESS SVCS 406.18 ANDREA SINDT 01/05/2005 OFFICE MAX 00002204 41.11 PAULINE STAPLES 12/28/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 136.12 JOANNE M SVENDSEN 12/28/2004 ZEP MANUFACTURING 389.63 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 12/29/2004 ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER IN 199.59 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 12/30/2004 ZEP MANUFACTURING 137.53 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 12/31/2004 METRO FIRE 28.90 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 12/31/2004 METRO FIRE 81.48 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 01/03/2005 ASPEN MILLS 8005717343 71.90 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 01/03/2005 ASPEN MILLS 8005717343 63.90 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 01/03/2005 ASPEN MILLS 8005717343 305.35 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 01/03/2005 ASPEN MILLS 8005717343 44.95 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 01/03/2005 ASPEN MILLS 8005717343 115.75 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 01/06/2005 MENARDS 3059 85.14 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 01/07/2005 METRO FIRE 2,361.65 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 12/29/2004 ENGRAPHICS INC 74.02 LYLE SWANSON 12/29/2004 GLASS & MIRROR INC 485.14 LYLE SWANSON 12/30/2004 SEARS ROEBUCK 1122 145.87 LYLE SWANSON 12/30/2004 HIRSHFIELD'S MAPLEWOOD 25.65 LYLE SWANSON 12/30/2004 NSC NORTHERN SAFETY CO 79.81 LYLE SWANSON 12/31/2004 FOREST PRODUCTS SUPPLY 63.90 LYLE SWANSON 12/31/2004 WW GRAINGER 500 152.88 LYLE SWANSON 12/31/2004 MINVALCO INC 580.47 LYLE SWANSON 12/31/2004 HIRSHFIELD'S MAPLEWOOD 337.27 LYLE SWANSON 12/31/2004 TWIN CITY FILTER SERV. 155.96 LYLE SWANSON 12/31/2004 MUSKA LIGHTING CENTER 53.90 LYLE SWANSON 01/05/2005 ALL MAIN STREET ELEC 221.65 LYLE SWANSON 01/06/2005 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE 171.41 LYLE SWANSON 01/06/2005 HIRSHFIELD'S MAPLEWOOD 21.50 LYLE SWANSON 01/03/2005 KOHL'S #0052 49.99 THOMAS SZCZEPANSKI 01/06/2005 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 259.00 THOMAS SZCZEPANSKI 01/03/2005 T-MOBILE 104.50 DOUGLAS J TAUBMAN 01/05/2005 QWESTCOMM TN651 60.31 JUDY TETZLAFF 01/07/2005 THE STAR TRIBUNE-CIRCULAT 111.80 JUDY TETZLAFF 12/29/2004 LTG POWER EQUIPMENT 3.44 TODD TEVLIN 01/06/2005 EZGOV STATE OF MN 43.00 DAVID J THOMALLA 01/07/2005 WHITE BEAR DODGE 50.06 DAVID J THOMALLA 12/27/2004 CENTURY COLLEGE CONTINUIN 318.00 CHARLES J VERMEERSCH 12/27/2004 CENTURY COLLEGE CONTINUIN 318.00 CHARLES J VERMEERSCH 15 Post Date Vendor Name 12/28/2004 PIONEER PRESS SUBSCRIPTI 12/31/2004 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS 01/05/2005 FREDPRYOR/CAREERTRACK 01/05/2005 AFFORDABLE ENGRAVING Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 8.30 SUSAN ZWIEG 325.59 SUSAN ZWIEG 37.22 SUSAN ZWIEG -45.53 SUSAN ZWIEG 61,033.85 16 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 01/14/05 CARDINAL, ROBERT 422.42 dd 01/14/05 JUENEMANN, KATHLEEN 371.77 dd 01/14/05 KOPPEN, MARVIN 371.77 dd 01/14/05 MONAHAN-JUNEK, JACQUELINE 371.77 dd 01/14/05 ROSSBACH, WILLIAM 371.77 dd 01/14/05 COLEMAN, MELINDA 4,104.40 dd 01/14/05 DARST, ROBERTA 1,589.14 dd 01/14/05 FURSMAN, RICHARD 4,638.25 dd 01/14/05 SWANSON, LYLE 1,688.15 dd 01/14/05 LE, SHERYL 3,957.90 dd 01/14/05 RAMEAUX, THERESE 2,275.58 dd 01/14/05 FAUST, DANIEL 4,122.04 dd 01/14/05 SCHMIDT, DEBORAH 1,428.95 dd 01/14/05 ANDERSON, CAROLE 992.22 dd 01/14/05 BAUMAN, GAYLE 3,183.36 dd 01/14/05 KELSEY, CONNIE 1,778.22 dd 01/14/05 TETZLAFF, JUDY 1,785.75 dd 01/14/05 FRY, PATRICIA 1,657.36 dd 01/14/05 GUILFOILE, KAREN 2,905.78 dd 01/14/05 OSTER, ANDREA 1,731.26 dd 01/14/05 CARLE, JEANETTE 1,609.26 dd 01/14/05 FIGG, SHERRIE 1,038.43 dd 01/14/05 JAGOE, CAROL 1,630.52 dd 01/14/05 JOHNSON, BONNIE 1,065.37 dd 01/14/05 MOY, PAMELA 807.94 dd 01/14/05 OLSON, SANDRA 879.36 dd 01/14/05 WEAVER, KRISTINE 1,728.08 dd 01/14/05 BANICK, JOHN 3,570.20 dd 01/14/05 CORCORAN, THERESA 1,846.16 dd 01/14/05 POWELL, PHILIP 2,202.62 dd 01/14/05 SPANGLER, EDNA 473.00 dd 01/14/05 THOMALLA, DAVID 4,542.12 dd 01/14/05 ABEL, GLINT 2,359.00 dd 01/14/05 ALDRIDGE, MARK 2,471.17 dd 01/14/05 ANDREWS, SCOTT 3,065.82 dd 01/14/05 BAKKE, LONN 2,507.32 dd 01/14/05 BELDE, STANLEY 2,353.31 dd 01/14/05 BIERDEMAN, BRIAN 2,109.16 dd 01/14/05 BOHL, JOHN 2,915.20 dd 01/14/05 BUSACK, DANIEL 2,460.19 dd 01/14/05 COFFEY, KEVIN 2,270.08 dd 01/14/05 GROTTY, KERRY 2,971.80 dd 01/14/05 DOBLAR, RICHARD 3,093.81 dd 01/14/05 GABRIEL, ANTHONY 1,694.10 dd 01/14/05 HALWEG, KEVIN 14,596.00 dd 01/14/05 HEINZ, STEPHEN 2,531.02 dd 01/14/05 HIEBERT, STEVEN 2,719.91 dd 01/14/05 JOHNSON, KEVIN 2,940.77 dd 01/14/05 KARIS, FLINT 2,749.92 dd 01/14/05 KONG, TOMMY 2,470.80 17 CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 01/14/05 KROLL, BRETT 2,369.30 dd 01/14/05 KVAM, DAVID 3,163.27 dd 01/14/05 CARSON, DANIEL 2,265.84 dd 01/14/05 LU, JOHNNIE 2,280.02 dd 01/14/05 MARINO, JASON 2,304.19 dd 01/14/05 MARTIN, JERROLD 2,353.31 dd 01/14/05 MCCARTY, GLEN 2,423.68 dd 01/14/05 METRY, ALESIA 2,174.05 dd 01/14/05 NYE, MICHAEL 1,569.20 dd 01/14/05 OLSON, JULIE 2,576.89 dd 01/14/05 RABBETT, KEVIN 3,352.89 dd 01/14/05 STEFFEN, SCOTT 3,014.88 dd 01/14/05 STOCKTON, DERRELL 5,869.76 dd 01/14/05 SZCZEPANSKI, THOMAS 1,415.69 dd 01/14/05 TRAN, JOSEPH 2,241.20 dd 01/14/05 WENZEL, JAY 2,461.28 dd 01/14/05 XIONG, KAO 2,338.39 dd 01/14/05 BARTZ, PAUL 2,806.66 dd 01/14/05 BERGERON, JOSEPH 3,120.09 dd 01/14/05 DUGAS, MICHAEL 2,311.81 dd 01/14/05 DUNN, ALICE 2,574.46 dd 01/14/05 ERICKSON, VIRGINIA 2,524.44 dd 01/14/05 EVERSON, PAUL 2,158.17 dd 01/14/05 FLOR, TIMOTHY 3,071.59 dd 01/14/05 FRASER, JOHN 2,725.83 dd 01/14/05 HALWEG, JODI 2,260.81 dd 01/14/05 L'ALLIER, DANIEL 1,867.74 dd 01/14/05 LANGNER, SCOTT 1,895.60 dd 01/14/05 PALMA, STEVEN 3,002.66 dd 01/14/05 PARSONS, KURT 3,005.67 dd 01/14/05 THIENES, PAUL 2,527.90 dd 01/14/05 DAWSON, RICHARD 1,792.15 dd 01/14/05 DUELLMAN, KIRK 1,798.70 dd 01/14/05 GJERTSON, MARK 795.25 dd 01/14/05 JOHNSON, DOUGLAS 1,792.15 dd 01/14/05 NOVAK, JEROME 1,798.70 dd 01/14/05 PETERSON, ROBERT 1,869.15 dd 01/14/05 SVENDSEN, RONALD 1,869.15 dd 01/14/05 GERVAIS-JR, CLARENCE 2,654.71 dd 01/14/05 BAUER, MICHELLE 2,374.39 dd 01/14/05 COUNIHAN, WILLIAM 68.00 dd 01/14/05 FLAUGHER, JAYME 2,657.01 dd 01/14/05 HERMANSON, CHAD 1,010.75 dd 01/14/05 HUBIN, KENNARD 1,569.35 dd 01/14/05 LAFFERTY, WALTER 3,078.08 dd 01/14/05 LINK, BRYAN 2,307.53 dd 01/14/05 PACOLT, MARSHA 2,290.54 dd 01/14/05 RABINE, JANET 2,934.80 dd 01/14/05 SCHAULS, ADAM 204.00 dd 01/14/05 STAHNKE, JULIE 2,405.53 dd 01/14/05 LUKIN, STEVEN 3,613.50 dd 01/14/05 SVENDSEN, RUSTIN 2,897.94 dd 01/14/05 ZWIEG, SUSAN 1,792.67 dd 01/14/05 DOLLERSCHELL, ROBERT 282.07 dd 01/14/05 AHL, R. CHARLES 4,191.70 dd 01/14/05 NNEN, AMY 1,153.92 18 CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 01/14/05 PRIEFER, WILLIAM 2,535.86 dd 01/14/05 WEGWERTH, JUDITH 1,751.81 dd 01/14/05 BRINK, TROY 1,889.19 dd 01/14/05 DEBILZAN, THOMAS 1,812.95 dd 01/14/05 EDGE, DOUGLAS 1,812.95 dd 01/14/05 JONES, DONALD 2,079.35 dd 01/14/05 KANE, MICHAEL 2,848.08 dd 01/14/05 LUTZ, DAVID 2,081.98 dd 01/14/05 MEYER, GERALD 1,877.79 dd 01/14/05 NAGEL, BRYAN 2,283.90 dd 01/14/05 OSWALD, ERICK 2,100.75 dd 01/14/05 TEVLIN, TODD 1,647.75 dd 01/14/05 CAVETT, CHRISTOPHER 3,166.46 dd 01/14/05 DUCHARME, JOHN 2,301.26 dd 01/14/05 ENGSTROM, ANDREW 1,678.83 dd 01/14/05 JACOBSON, SCOTT 1,576.71 dd 01/14/05 KNUTSON, LOIS 946.02 dd 01/14/05 LABEREE, ERIN 2,188.95 dd 01/14/05 LINDBLOM, RANDAL 2,301.26 dd 01/14/05 MURRA, AARON 548.71 dd 01/14/05 PECK, DENNIS 2,562.47 dd 01/14/05 PRIEBE, WILLIAM 2,303.57 dd 01/14/05 VERMEERSCH, CHARLES 2,466.25 dd 01/14/05 ANDERSON, BRUCE 4,073.02 dd 01/14/05 CAREY, HEIDI 1,972.95 dd 01/14/05 HALL, KATHLEEN 1,733.57 dd 01/14/05 MARUSKA, MARK 2,583.16 dd 01/14/05 NAUGHTON, JOHN 1,639.75 dd 01/14/05 SCHINDELDECKER, JAMES 1,807.26 dd 01/14/05 BIESANZ, OAKI,EY 1,302.74 dd 01/14/05 HAYMAN, JANET 1,259.58 dd 01/14/05 HUTCHINSON, ANN 2,158.70 dd 01/14/05 NELSON, JEAN 1,020.20 dd 01/14/05 SEEGER, GERALD 499.11 dd 01/14/05 GAYNOR, VIRGINIA 1,938.55 dd 01/14/05 EKSTRAND, THOMAS 2,821.61 dd 01/14/05 KROLL, LISA 1,149.31 dd 01/14/05 LIVINGSTON, JOYCE 1,037.64 dd 01/14/05 SINDT, ANDREA 1,269.03 dd 01/14/05 THOMPSON, DEBRA 543.48 dd 01/14/05 YOUNG, TAMELA 1,476.95 dd 01/14/05 FINWALL, SHANN 462.47 dd 01/14/05 ROBERTS, KENNETH 2,368.87 dd 01/14/05 CARVER, NICHOLAS 2,647.46 dd 01/14/05 FISHER, DAVID 3,131.40 dd 01/14/05 RICE, MICHAEL 1,829.35 dd 01/14/05 SWAN, DAVID 1,918.15 dd 01/14/05 KONEWKO, DUWAYNE 2,575.35 dd 01/14/05 ANZALDI, KALI 334.88 dd 01/14/05 BJORK, ALICIA 433.50 dd 01/14/05 BJORK, BRANDON 446.00 dd 01/14/05 DAMSON, LINCOLN 528.25 dd 01/14/05 FINN, GREGORY 2,074.22 dd 01/14/05 GOODRICH, CHAD 453.50 dd 01/14/05 GRAF, MICHAEL 1,852.99 dd 01/14/05 KELLY, LISA 1,286.66 19 CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 01/14/05 KYRK, ASHLEY 150.00 dd 01/14/05 NIEMAN, JAMES 224.50 dd 01/14/05 OHLHAUSER, MEGHAN 247.88 dd 01/14/05 ROBBINS, AUDRA 1,936.58 dd 01/14/05 SHERRILL, CAITLIN 200.25 dd 01/14/05 TAUBMAN, DOUGLAS 2,720.69 dd 01/14/05 WERNER, KATIE 280.51 dd 01/14/05 BREHEIM, ROGER 1,809.57 dd 01/14/05 GERMAIN, DAVID 1,814.19 dd 01/14/05 NORDQUIST, RICHARD 1,870.26 dd 01/14/05 SCHULTZ, SCOTT 2,331.45 dd 01/14/05 ANZALDI, MANDY 1,085.43 dd 01/14/05 COLEMAN, PHILIP 102.50 dd 01/14/05 COLLINS, ASHLEY 107.80 dd 01/14/05 CRAWFORD - JR, RAYMOND 506.80 dd 01/14/05 CROSSON, LINDA 2,414.83 dd 01/14/05 EVANS, CHRISTINE 718.94 dd 01/14/05 PELOQUIN, PENNYE 524.30 dd 01/14/05 SCHMIDT, RUSSELL 1,945.66 dd 01/14/05 SCHULZE, BRIAN 636.04 dd 01/14/05 STAPLES, PAULINE 2,812.01 dd 01/14/05 BENDTSEN, LISA 14.93 dd 01/14/05 BRENEMAN, NEIL 488.08 dd 01/14/05 CRAWFORD, RAYMOND 112.00 dd 01/14/05 DEL ROSARIO, THERESA 19.50 dd 01/14/05 EDSON, JAMIE 163.69 dd 01/14/05 ERICKSON-CLARK, CAROL 89.00 dd 01/14/05 ESTRADA, KIEL 32.00 dd 01/14/05 FONTAINE, KIM 665.75 dd 01/14/05 GREDVIG, ANDERS 142.99 dd 01/14/05 GUZIK, JENNIFER 195.00 dd 01/14/05 HALEY, BROOKE 72.68 dd 01/14/05 HORWATH, RONALD 1,835.29 dd 01/14/05 IRISH, GRACE 38.55 dd 01/14/05 KOEHNEN, AMY 98.60 dd 01/14/05 KOEHNEN, MARY 961.85 dd 01/14/05 KRONHOLM, KATHRYN 524.57 dd 01/14/05 MATHEWS, LEAH 9.75 dd 01/14/05 NELSON, SIERRA 52.00 dd 01/14/05 OVERBY, ANNA 38.60 dd 01/14/05 POTTRATZ, DIANE 35.14 dd 01/14/05 SCHMIDT, LINDSEY 13.00 dd 01/14/05 SHAW, KRISTINA 30.75 dd 01/14/05 SMITH, ANN 198.00 dd 01/14/05 TUPY, HEIDE 97.00 dd 01/14/05 TUPY, MARCUS 231.45 dd 01/14/05 WHITE, NICOLE 571.30 dd 01/14/05 GROPPOLI, LINDA 342.75 dd 01/14/05 KURKOSKI, STEPHANIE 55.13 dd 01/14/05 LONETTI, MARGARET 141.53 dd 01/14/05 BEHAN, JAMES 1,686.65 dd 01/14/05 LONETTI, JAMES 998.22 dd 01/14/05 MILES, LAURA 74.00 dd 01/14/05 PATTERSON, ALBERT 1,127.64 dd 01/14/05 PRINS, KELLY 925.62 dd 01/14/05 REILLY, MICHAEL 1,565.75 20 CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 01/14/05 JACKSON, MARY 1,785.75 dd 01/14/05 AICHELE, CRAIG 1,901.40 dd 01/14/05 PRIEM, STEVEN 2,123.65 dd 01/14/05 BERGO, CHAD 2,249.30 dd 01/14/05 FOWLDS, MYCHAL 1,915.58 dd 01/14/05 FRANZEN, NICHOLAS 1,498.46 dd 01/14/05 HURLEY, STEPHEN 3,275.54 wf 100050 01/14/05 INGVOLDSTAD, CURTIS 50.00 wf 100051 01/14/05 CARLSON, STEVEN 1,821.14 wf 100052 01/14/05 JAHN, DAVID 1,576.80 wf 100053 01/14/05 MORIN, TROY 195.50 wf 100054 01/14/05 MATHEYS, ALANA 1,912.28 wf 100055 01/14/05 EDSON, KAREN 446.88 wf 100056 01/14/05 GENNOW, PAMELA 836.88 wf 100057 01/14/05 HANSEN, LORI 1,663.76 wf 100058 01/14/05 PALANK, MARY 1,609.26 wf 100059 01/14/05 RICHIE, CAROLE 1,721.17 wf 100060 01/14/05 SVENDSEN, JOANNE 1,785.30 wf 100061 01/14/05 SHORTREED, MICHAEL 3,209.41 wf 100062 01/14/05 STEINER, JOSEPH 588.00 wf 100063 01/14/05 WELCHLIN, CABOT 2,746.79 wf 100064 01/14/05 FREBERG, RONALD 1,849.88 wf 100065 01/14/05 JAROSCH, JONATHAN 580.13 wf 100066 01/14/05 EDSON, DAVID 2,095.71 wf 100067 01/14/05 HELEY, ROLAND 1,841.88 wf 100068 01/14/05 HINNENKAMP, GARY 1,822.23 wf 100069 01/14/05 LINDORFF, DENNIS 1,809.57 wf 100070 01/14/05 NOVAK, MICHAEL 1,958.10 wf 100071 01/14/05 GERNES, CAROLE 19.88 wf 100072 01/14/05 BROZAK, KATHERINE 316.00 wf 100073 01/14/05 FREYBERGER, RACHEL 192.00 wf 100074 01/14/05 MUELLNER, CHRISTOPHER 213.75 wf 100075 01/14/05 SHOBERG, KARI 41.25 wf 100076 01/14/05 HAAG, MARK 1,737.15 wf 100077 01/14/05 NADEAU, EDWARD 2,842.14 wf 100078 01/14/05 GLASS, JEAN 1,733.63 wf 100079 01/14/05 SARPONG, SEAN 745.50 wf 100080 01/14/05 TOLBERT, FRANCINE 398.00 wf 100081 01/14/05 LINGER, MARGARET 615.64 wf 100082 01/14/05 WEISMANN, JENNIFER 177.75 wf 100083 01/14/05 ANDERSON, CALEB 25.03 wf 100084 01/14/05 ANDERSON, JOSHUA 52.00 wf 100085 01/14/05 ANDERSON, JUSTIN 52.00 wf 100086 01/14/05 BOTHWELL, KRISTIN 146.58 wf 100087 01/14/05 BRENEMAN, SEAN 46.55 wf 100088 01/14/05 BRIN, LAUREN 36.00 wf 100089 01/14/05 COSTA, JOSEPH 156.90 wf 100090 01/14/05 DEMPSEY, BETH 136.40 wf 100091 01/14/05 DUNN, RYAN 721.90 wf 100092 01/14/05 FIERRO WESTBERG, MELINDA 41.65 wf 100093 01/14/05 FLICKINGER, JUANITA 39.00 wf 100094 01/14/05 GRANT, MELISSA 66.50 wf 100095 01/14/05 GRUENHAGEN, LINDA 494.55 wf 100096 01/14/05 HOLMGREN, LEAH 75.86 wf 100097 01/14/05 HOULE, DENISE 133.80 wf 100098 01/14/05 JOHNSON, STETSON 135.00 21 CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT wf 100099 01/14/05 KERSCHNER, JOLENE 565.10 wf 100100 01/14/05 KROLL, MARK 111.38 wf 100101 01/14/05 MCCANN, NATALIE 24.75 wf 100102 01/14/05 MCMAHON, MELISSA 156.21 wf 100103 01/14/05 MILLS, ANNE 90.95 wf 100104 01/14/05 OLSON, MARGRET 92.50 wf 100105 01/14/05 PEHOSKI, JOEL 80.53 wf 100106 01/14/05 PETERSON, ANNA 19.50 wf 100107 01/14/05 PROESCH, ANDY 453.87 wf 100108 01/14/05 SCHMIDT, EMILY 13.00 wf 100109 01/14/05 SCHOENECKER, SAMANTHA 79.63 wf 100110 01/14/05 SCHREINER, MICHELLE 142.85 wf 100111 01/14/05 SMITLEY, SHARON 324.00 wf 100112 01/14/05 STAHNKE, AMY 71.50 wf 100113 01/14/05 TRUE, ANDREW 142.80 wf 100114 01/14/05 WARNER, CAROLYN 234.80 wf 100115 01/14/05 WEDES, CARYL 134.70 wf 100116 01/14/05 WELTER, ELIZABETH 13.05 wf 100117 01/14/05 WOODMAN, ALICE 189.86 wf 100118 01/14/05 ZIEMER, NICOLE 215.30 wf 100119 01/14/05 BOSLEY, CAROL 277.75 wf 100120 01/14/05 DOBBS, SYDNEY 12.00 wf 100121 01/14/05 HAGSTROM, EMILY 30.88 wf 100122 01/14/05 HANSEN, ANNA 12.75 wf 100123 01/14/05 LEWIS, AMY 48.75 wf 100124 01/14/05 ODDEN, JESSICA 56.51 wf 100125 01/14/05 OIE, REBECCA 13.70 wf 100126 01/14/05 PARAYNO, GUAI 92.50 wf 100127 01/14/05 QUINN, KELLY 48.75 wf 100128 01/14/05 VAN HALE, PAULA 234.00 wf 100129 01/14/05 WALKER, DAPHINE 52.10 wf 100130 01/14/05 BALDWIN, JANA 58.19 wf 100131 01/14/05 DOUGLASS, TOM 1,137.32 wf 100132 01/14/05 FLEISCHHACKER, JACOB 26.60 wf 100133 01/14/05 HER, CHONG 340.79 wf 100134 01/14/05 HER, PHENG 96.84 wf 100135 01/14/05 LEACH, TWYLA 168.28 wf 100136 01/14/05 NAGEL, BROOKE 31.28 wf 100137 01/14/05 O'GRADY, VICTORIA 29.93 wf 100138 01/14/05 O'GRADY, ZACHARY 59.08 wf 100139 01/14/05 RYDEEN, ARIEL 29.93 wf 100140 01/14/05 SIMPSON, JOSEPH 104.78 wf 100141 01/14/05 SIMPSON, KIMBERLYN 131.34 wf 100142 01/14/05 VANG, KAY 129.70 wf 100143 01/14/05 VANG, TIM 175.10 wf 100144 01/14/05 ZIMMERMAN, STEPHEN 28.58 450,977.24 22 Agenda # G2 MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk DATE: March 24, 2003 RE: Temporary 3.2 Beer Introduction An application has been submitted for temporary 3.2 beer license by Stephen Klein, on behalf of the Church of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, 1725 Kennard Street. The parish is having a marriage enrichment evening that will be held on February 12, 2005, from 5:00 p.m. to midnight. Funds raised during the event will be used to pay for the event. Chief Thomalla will meet with event organizers regarding alcohol compliance. Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council approve the temporary intoxicating liquor permit. Agenda G3 MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk RE: Permit Fee Waiver DATE: January 4, 2005 At the January 10, 2005, council meeting approval was given to Catherine Boehm, representing Carver Elementary PTO for a temporary gambling license to be used on April 16, 2005 from 10:00 noon to 2:00 p.m. to conduct a raffle. The council waived the fee for the annual event. Ms. Boehm has also completed miscellaneous permits for a carnival and for temporary food. The annual carnival and raffle will be conducted at the school located at 2680 Upper Afton Road on the aforementioned date. Proceeds from the raffle will be used for programs for educational purposes. The school is requesting waiver of the fee for the miscellaneous permit fees. MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk DATE: January 17, 2005 RE: Intoxicating Liquor License Annual Renewals - On Sale Agenda # G4 RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA, that the following On-Sale Liquor Licenses, having been previously duly issued by this Council, are hereby approved for renewal for one year, effective January 2005, with approval granted herein subject to satisfactory results of required Police, Fire and Health Inspections: 5-8 Tavern & Grill Bret Shogren Pao Thao Yang James Emison Chipotle Mexican Grill Smiley's D.G. Burger 2289 Minnehaha Avenue 2303 White Bear Avenue 2425 Highway 61 Jose Leon Paul J. Mateylca, Jr. Amanda Kranz Acapulco Mexican Restaurant Deans, Inc. Stargate Bar & Danceclub 3069 White Bear Avenue 1986 Rice Street 1700 Rice Street James Gartner Raymond R. Emerfoll Suzanne Schilling AMF Maplewood Lanes Garrity's Suzanne's Cuisine 1955 English Street 1696 White Bear Avenue 2100 White Bear Avenue Dorothy Helen Piotrowski Bernard Diebel Brian Meyer Applebee's Neighborhood Grill Goodrich Golf Course The Bird 3001 White Bear Avenue 1820 North Van Dyke 3035 White Bear Avenue Bernard Klarkowslci Michael Gengler Thomas Hecker Bennigan's Gulden's The Olive Garden 1749 Beam Avenue. 2999 N. Highway 61 1749 Beam Avenue Stephen Yantes Patricia Belde Brain Baumani Bleechers Keller Clubhouse The Rock 2220 White Bear Avenue 2166 Maplewood Drive 2029 Woodlyn Avenue Scott Uttley Noah Castle Club On-Sale Best Western-Maplewood Inn Myth 1730 E. County Road D 3090 Southlawn Avenue Don Standley Loyal Order of Moose 963 Matthew Kielas Cori Blodgett 1946 English Street The Chalet Lounge Noodles & Company 1820 Rice Street 2865 White Bear Avenue Wine On-Sale Judith Landreville Stephen Parr Balbir Shoker Champp's Outback Steakhouse Taste of India 1734 Adolphus 1770 Beam Avenue 1745 Cope Avenue Martin Mongoven Kin Phing Lee Chili's Restaurants Ehrick Holland Singapore Chinese Cuisine Southlawn & Beam Red Lobster 1715-A Beam Avenue 2925 White Bear Avenue Agenda # GS MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk DATE: January 18, 2005 RE: Intoxicating Liquor License Annual Renewals -Off Sale RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA, that the following Off-Sale Liquor Licenses, having been previously duly issued by this Council, are hereby approved for renewal for one year, effective January 1, 2005, with approvals granted herein subject to satisfactory results of required Police, Fire and health inspections: Todd Norman A-1 Liquor, Inc. 19 North Century Avenue Blong Lee Princess Liquor `n Tobacco 2728 Stillwater Road Laber's Liquors Arthur Mark Stein 1700 D Rice Street Lor's Liquor Store Charly Lor 1347 Fost Avenue Wendy Lauber Maplewood Wine Cellar 1281 Frost Avenue Joseph Hurdy M.G.M. Liquor Warehouse 2950 White Bear Avenue Christopher Sarrack Sarrack's International Wine & Spirits 2305 Stillwater Road Edwin Koenen Sid's Discount Liquor 2515 White Bear Avenue Marvin C. Koppen Party Time Liquor 1835 E. Larpenteur Ave. Agenda Item # G6 MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk RE: Annual Gambling Renewals DATE: January 18, 2005 The following organizations and their gambling manager's are submitted to council for approval for the 2005 license period. Approval of the resolution that follows is required for the premise permit. Marvin Koppen White Bear Avenue Business Association 1955 English Street (AMF Lanes) Jacqueline Jansen Pioneer Booster Club 2220 White Bear Avenue (Bleecher's) Marvin Koppen White Bear Avenue Business Association 3035 White Bear Avenue (The Bird) Thomas Nikolas Maplewood Athletic Association 2999N. Highway 61 (Gulden's) Peggy Lang Church of St. Jerome 1986 Rice Street (Dean's) Brain Halgrimson TSE, Inc. 1820 Rice Street (The Chalet) Wendy Busch Merrick, Inc. 1696 White Bear Avenue (Garrity's) Wendy Busch Merrick, Inc. 2029 Woodlyn Avenue (The Rock) Barbara Petersen Hill-Murray Mother's Club 2289 Minnehaha Avenue (5-8 Tavern) Gerald Jansen Hill-Murray Father's Club 1734 Adolphus Street (Champps) RESOLUTION BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, that the premises permit for lawful gambling is approved for the aforementioned business, at the addresses indicated in Maplewood, Minnesota. FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council waives any objection to the timeliness of application for said permit as governed by Minnesota Statute §349.213. FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council requests that the Gambling Control Division of the Minnesota Department of Gaming approve said permit application as being in compliance with Minnesota Statute §349.213. NOW, THEREFORE, be it further resolved that this Resolution by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, be forwarded to the Gambling Control Division for their approval. Agenda #G7 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner SUBJECT: Planning Commission Rules of Procedure DATE: January 4, 2005 INTRODUCTION The planning commission should review their rules of procedure. Section L of the rules says that the commission is to review the rules at the first meeting each year. BACKGROUND The planning commission first approved the rules of procedure on February 21, 1983. The commission has reviewed and changed their rules several times since then. On February 17, 1999, the commission reviewed the rules and made revisions to them. On January 5, 2004, the commission reviewed the rules and did not make any changes to them. DISCUSSION I am proposing changes to Section J, Appointments, to reflect the current city council policies. If the commission wants to make other changes, they may propose them. COMMISSION ACTION On January 3, 2005, the planning commission approved their proposed revised rules of procedure. RECOMMENDATION Approve the planning commission rules of procedure starting on page 2. p:\com mdvpt\pc\pcrules.2005 Attachments: 1. PC Rules of Procedure 2. Maplewood Appointment Policy RULES OF PROCEDURE Attachment 1 Approved by the Planning Commission on February 21, 1983 Last Revision on February 17, 1999 Proposed Revision January 3, 2005 We, the members of the Planning Commission of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, created pursuant to Chapter 25, as amended, of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances, do hereby accept the following Rules of Procedure, subject to the provisions of said ordinances, which are hereby made a part of these rules: A. MEETINGS 1. All meetings shall be held in City Hall unless otherwise directed by the chairperson, in which case at least 24 hours notice will be given to all members. 2. Regular meetings shall be held at 7 p.m. on the first and third Mondays of each month. If a regular meeting falls on a legal holiday, such meeting shall be rescheduled as a special meeting, if needed. 3. Special meetings shall be held upon call by the chairperson, or in their absence, by the vice chairperson, or by any other member with the concurrence of five other members of the Commission. At least 48 hours notice shall be given to all members for special meetings. B. QUORUM 1. A simple majority of the current membership of the Commission shall constitute a quorum. 2. Any member having a conflict of interest shall declare the same before discussion of the item in which he or she has a conflict. Any member who abstains from voting on a question because of possible conflict of interest shall not be considered a member of the Commission for determining a quorum for the consideration of that issue. 3. Approval of any motion shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of the members present. C. DUTIES OF CHAIRPERSON In addition to the duties prescribed in Section 25-20 of the Code of Ordinances, the chairperson shall appoint such standing committees and temporary committees as are required, and such committees will be charged with the duties, examinations, investigations, and inquiries about the subjects assigned by the chairperson. No standing or temporary committee shall have the power to commit the Commission to the endorsement of any plan or program without its submission to the full Commission. 55 2 D. ELECTION OF OFFICERS 1. A chairperson and vice chairperson shall be elected at the second meeting of each calendar year and will serve until their successors have been elected. 2. In the absence of the chairperson, the vice chairperson shall perform all duties required of the chairperson. When both the chairperson and the vice chairperson are absent, the attending members shall elect a chairperson pro tem. 3. If the chairperson resigns from or is otherwise no longer on the planning commission, the vice chairperson shall become the acting chairperson until the planning commission can hold an election for new officers. If the vice chairperson resigns or is otherwise no longer on the planning commission, the planning commission will elect a new vice chairperson at the next possible planning commission meeting. E. REPRESENTATION AT COUNCIL MEETINGS A representative from the Commission shall appear at each Council meeting, where a planning item is on the agenda, to present the Commission's recommendation and to answer questions from the City Council regarding the decision. The Commission shall adopt a rotating schedule of its members at the first meeting of each year to attend these meetings. F. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT In addition to carrying out the duties prescribed in Section 25-25 of the Code of Ordinances, the director shall: 1. Prepare the agenda and minutes for each meeting of the Commission. 2. Act as technical advisor to the Commission. 3. Present written alternatives and make recommendations on matters referred to the Commission. 4. Maintain a record of all agenda items from application to final action by the City Council. G. AGENDA 1. Copies of the agenda, together with pertinent planning office reports and copies of the minutes of the previous meeting, shall be distributed so that the members of the Commission shall have a copy at least three days prior to the meeting concerned. 2. The agenda shall consist of the following order of business: a. Call to Order b. Roll Call c. Approval of Minutes 3 d. Approval of Agenda e. Public Hearings f. Unfinished Business g. New Business h. Visitor Presentations I. Commission Presentations j. Staff Presentations k. Adjournment 3. No item that is not on the agenda shall be considered by the Commission. H. Except as herein provided, Robert's Rules of Order, Revised and Robert's Parliamentary Law shall be accepted as the authority on parliamentary practice. I. Amendments to the comprehensive plan shall require that the Planning Commission follow the same procedure for hearings and notices as required by State law for zoning ordinances. J. APPOINTMENTS The city council shall make all appointments to the planning commission by following the current city appointment policy. K. AMENDMENT 1. Any of these rules may be temporarily suspended by the vote of two-thirds majority of the members present. 2. These Rules of Procedure may be amended at any regular meeting of the Commission by a majority vote of the entire membership and submitted to the City Council for approval. L. These "Rules of Procedure" shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at the first meeting of each year. p:\com mdvpt\pc\pcrules.2005 4 Attachment 2 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD ADVISORY BOARD/COMMISSION APPOINTMENT POLICY The City Council will hold interviews for the commission vacancies and will make appointments. The City Council will accept prepared questions from the advisory boards to use during the interview process if provided by the appropriate board. The chair or designee of each commission will attend the interview session and should provide input to the City Council. The chair or designee will not have a vote in the process. The City Council will not impose term limits. However, they will make appointments or re-appointments through an open or community wide process. When a term ends every commissioner seeking re- appointmentwill re-apply and possibly interview again with the City Council and any other candidates (if there are others). The Council will then have 3 options: re-appoint the existing commissioner, appoint a new person to a new term or leave the position open to fill at a later date. The City Council will establish a contact with each advisory board or commission. The Council will make the appointments among themselves at a city council meeting (generally, the first or second meeting of the year). The term of the contact appointment will be for one year or another mutually agreed upon timeframe. The City Council may remove any commissioner from their board for un-ethical behavior or other misconduct. Excessive absences from meetings during a year will result in an automatic resignation. Each commission will have the chair or other member attend city council meetings to present reports on topics/actions taken at commission meetings. This is currently done by CDRB and PC and will now be extended to other commissions. S: Com_dvpt.advisory.policy.04 55 Adopted May.04 5 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, JANUARY 3, 2005 a. Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Mr. Roberts said the planning commission should review the rules of procedure. Section L of the rules says that the commission is to review the rules at the first meeting each year. Mr. Roberts proposes changes to Section J, under Appointments, to reflect the current city council policies. If the commission wants to make other changes, they may propose them. Commissioner Ahlness asked staff if this would be the appropriate place to insert a recommendation for Rules of Procedure for Public Hearings? Mr. Roberts said yes. Commissioner Ahlness recommended that the planning commission adopt the 2004 Maplewood Public Hearing Policy and Procedures as the public hearing policy with the change of limiting comments to 10 minutes in lieu of the 5 minutes as written. Commissioner Ahlness thinks it serves the public interest and the applicants case to help focus on their comments and come to the point. The Chairperson may extend the allocated time for the applicant to speak. The ten minute time frame is not to cut them off; it is merely to help them stay focused on the subject. The ten minutes would begin after their presentation is over and would include the applicants comments and questions from the city staff or planning commission. This would provide for good order. Mr. Roberts said he believed the five minute time limit shown on the public hearing handout was intended for the public testimony to comment on the subject matter and not for the applicant or developer. Mr. Roberts said hers never heard of limiting time for an applicant to state their case. Chairperson Fischer said she is not comfortable limiting the applicants time. Commissioner Trippler said the chairperson has the power to limit time for the public to speak regarding the project but an applicant comes in to give a presentation to sell their project to the commission and should not be limited to a specific timeframe. If the discussion were to get too lengthy the chair can set a time limit. Chairperson Fischer asked for a second motion. The motion failed for a lack of a second motion. Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure with the changes staff proposed on page 4 item J. Commissioner Grover seconded. Ayes Bartol, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Pearson Trippler Nay Ahlness Commissioner Ahlness said he voted nay because the planning commission should look at rules to help govern behavior and expectations for the applicant. This would assist the speaker to be aware what the planning commission expects from the applicant. Commissioner Trippler suggested that city staff let the applicant know before the meeting what is expected of them from the planning commission and to limit their comments to the subject matter. The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on January 24, 2005. MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner SUBJECT: Planning Commission's 2004 Annual Report DATE: January 4, 2005 INTRODUCTION Agenda #G8 The city code requires that the planning commission prepare an annual report to the city council by their second meeting in February. This report should include the planning commission°s activities from the past year and the major projects for the upcoming year. 2004 ACTIVITIES The commission considered the following requests as noted: 2004 2003 2002 2001 changes to the comprehensive plan 10 8 3 3 changes to the zoning map 7 4 2 2 preliminary plats 12 5 6 3 ordinance changes 1 3 3 5 conditional use permits and revisions 21 18 18 25 vacations 5 5 5 7 variances 2 4 1 2 miscellaneous requests and presentations 11 14 17 7 Total 69 61 55 54 In 2004, the commission, in addition to the items listed above, took a tour of development sites. In addition, the planning commission had a training session with the city attorney and Ms. Coleman and had a session to review and discuss the Gladstone redevelopment process. NOTE: For all the items listed below, the planning commission recommended approval ayes all, unless I have noted otherwise. 2004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGES The commission considered ten changes to the comprehensive plan in 2004. Changes PC Action Council Action Proposed Mixed-Use District Approved Approved This change was to add the mixed-use language and designation to the comprehensive plan. Hillcrest Area Land Use Plan Change Approved Approved From BC and R-1 to Mixed Use (MU) This change was to put in place the mixed-use designation for the Hillcrest area. DQ Grill and Chill (Beam Avenue) Denied Denied From BC-M to BC This change was for a proposed restaurant on the south side of Beam Avenue, west of Southlawn. Mounds Park Academy (2051 Larpenteur Avenue) Approved Approved From R-1 to S (School) This change was for two residential properties in front of the school to allow for the redesign of the school entrances and parking area. Olivia Gardens (Stillwater Road) Approved Approved From R-1 to R-2 This change was for a development with 7 twin homes (14 units) on the west side of Stillwater Road. Trout Land (west of Hwy 61 at new County Road D~ Denied Approved From R-1 and M-1 to R-3(H) Note: The commission recommended a change to R-3(M) for this site. Heritage Square Second Addition (Legacy Village) Approved Approved From BC to R-3(H) This change was for the part of Legacy Village on the southwest corner of County Road D and Kennard Street that the developer originally thought would have an executive office building. Summerhill Senior Housing (935 Ferndale Street) Denied Approved From S (School) to R-3(H) (5-3) This change was for the Transfiguration School site to allow for the redevelopment of the property into a senior housing complex. Cottages at Legacy Village (Hazelwood Street) Approved Approved From BC to R-3(H) This change was fora 33-unit townhouse development on the east side of Hazelwood, south of County Road D. Maplewood Imports (2450 Maplewood Drivel Approved Pending From CO (commercial office) to M-1 This change was for a proposal to build four new automobile dealerships on the Miggler property on the west side of Highway 61. 2004 ZONING MAP CHANGES The commission considered seven changes to the zoning map in 2004. Change Hillcrest Area Land Zoning Map Change From BC and R-1 to Mixed Use (MU) PC Action Council Action Approved Approved Woodhill Development (Linwood Avenue) From F to R-1 Approved Approved 2 DQ Grill and Chill (Beam Avenue) Denied Denied From BC-M to BC This change was for a proposed restaurant on the south side of Beam Avenue, west of Southlawn. Olivia Gardens (Stillwater Road) Approved Approved From R-1 to R-2 This change was for a development with 7 twin homes (14 units) on the west side of Stillwater Road. Summerhill Senior Housing (935 Ferndale Street) Denied Approved From R-1 (Single dwellings) to R-3(multiple-family residential) This change was for the Transfiguration School site to allow for the redevelopment of the property into a senior housing complex. Hillside Estates ~Springside Drive) Approved Approved From F to R-1 This change was for athree-lot preliminary plat. Maplewood Imports (2450 Maplewood Drivel Approved Pending From CO (commercial office) to M-1 This change was for a proposal to build four new automobile dealerships on the Miggler property on the west side of Highway 61. 2004 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS AND REVISIONS The commission considered the following conditional use permits and permit revisions in 2004: PC Action Council Action Ohlson Landscaping Metal Building Approved Approved (1949 Atlantic Street) (6-1) Woodhill PUD (Linwood Avenue) Approved Approved This request was fora 15-lot residential PUD. (3-1) Venberg Tire (Highway 61 North) Approved Approved This request was so Venberg could build a new tire store across Highway 61 from their previous location. Peltier (1236 Kohlman Avenue) Approved Approved This request was to allow the expansion of anon-conforming residential use and to build an over- sized accessory structure. Mounds Park Academy (2051 Larpenteur Avenue) Approved Approved (4-3) This request was to allow the school to redesign and expand their entrances and parking area along Larpenteur Avenue. Chesapeake Companies Retail Center Approved Approved (3091 White Bear Avenue) This request was for the redevelopment of the Maplewood Movies I site into amultiple-building retail center. Olivia Gardens PUD (Stillwater Road) Approved Approved This request was for a development with 7 twin homes (14 units) on a private driveway on the west side of Stillwater Road. Trout Land PUD (west of Hwy 61 at County Road D~ Approved No Action This request was for a multiple lot, multiple use development along both sides of new County Road D, west of Highway 61. Rygwalski (Ron°sZ(2086 Edgerton Street) Approved Approved This request was for the expansion of anon-conforming residence on a property zoned NC. As an alternative to a CUP, city staff recommended that the city approve a land use plan change and a zoning map change (NC to R-2) for the property. These changes made the residential uses on the property conforming with the new land use and zoning designations. Heritage Square Second Addition (Legacy Village) Approved Approved PUD Revision -This revision included the part of Legacy Village on the southwest corner of County Road D and Kennard Street that the developer originally thought would have an executive office building. Commercial Equipment Parking (65 LarpenteurAve.) Approved Approved This request was for the property owner to keep up to three commercial vehicles on the residential property. Summerhill Senior Housing (935 Ferndale Street) Denied Approved This request was for the Transfiguration School site to allow for the redevelopment of the property into a senior housing complex. Cottages at Legacy Village PUD (Hazelwood Street) Approved Approved This request was fora 33-unit townhouse development on the east side of Hazelwood, south of County Road D. Ramsey County Courthouse (2050 White Bear Ave.) Approved Approved This request was for the new courthouse the county is building south of the Maplewood Community Center. Avis Rent-a-Car (Sears at Maplewood Mall) Approved Approved This request was for Avis to establish arent-a-car office in the Sears Store at Maplewood. Maplewood Imports (2450 Maplewood Drivel Approved Pending This request was for a proposal to build four new automobile dealerships on the Miggler property on the west side of Highway 61. Phoenix Group Home (1936 Craig Place) Denied Denied This request was for a proposal to expand an existing group home from 6 residents to a maximum of 8 residents. University Auto Sales (1145 Highway 36) Approved Approved This request was for a proposal to expand an existing used car sales lot. Mapletree Group Home (2831 Southlawn Drive) Denied Approved This request was for a proposal to expand an existing group home from 6 residents to a maximum of 12 residents. Walking in Faith Church (2385 Ariel Street) Approved This request was to establish a church in an existing office building. Pending MEMBERS WHO RESIGNED IN 2004 Jackie-Monahan Junek, Will Rossbach, Paul Mueller MEMBERS WHO WERE APPOINTED IN 2004 Michael Grover, Daniel Lee, Eric Ahlness 2004 ATTENDANCE Name Lorraine Fischer Gary Pearson Tushar Desai Jeff Bartol Dale Trippler Paul Mueller Mary Dierich Michael Grover Daniel Lee Eric Ahlness Appointed 1970 12-10-90 7-22-02 12-8-03 6-08-98 7-13-98 12-11-00 5-24-04 5-24-04 9-27-04 Term Expires 12-04 12-05 12-04 12-04 12-06 9-04 (Resigned) 12-06 12-05 12-05 12-06 2004 Attendance 17 out of 18 16 out of 18 15 out of 18 16 out of 18 16 out of 18 10 out of 13 16 out of 18 9 out of 10 9 out of 10 4outof5 As a point of comparison, the planning commission had 18 meetings in 2000, 18 meetings in 2001, 17 meetings in 2002 and 20 meetings in 2003. 2005 ACTIVITIES The following are the possible activities of the planning commission for 2005: 1. Have an annual tour of development and other sites of interest. 2. Have quarterly in-service training sessions or provide educational materials for the planning commission. This might include training or information to help prepare the commission for the upcoming redevelopment topics or have a session about conditional use permits, septic systems and/or wells. 3. Work with the consultants and city staff on any code or land use plan changes that result from the Gladstone Area studies. 4. Review the PUD ordinance for possible changes. 5. Provide input to the HRA on housing redevelopment and program issues. 6. Study the area west of Hazelwood (along the future County Road D extension) for land use and transportation issues. 7. Have a tour of the Legacy Village development as construction progresses and of the Gladstone neighborhood as part of the redevelopment study. COMMISSION ACTION On January 3, 2005, the planning commission recommended approval of their 2004 Annual Report. RECOMMENDATION Accept the Planning Commission°s 2004 Annual Report. P:\...\miscell\PC\ pc2004annrep.doc 6 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, JANUARY 3, 2005 a. Planning CommissionJs 2004 Annual Report Mr. Roberts said the city code requires that the planning commission prepare an annual report to the city council by their second meeting in February. This report should include the planning commissions activities from the past year and the major projects for the upcoming year. Mr. Roberts said terms are due for renewal for Commissioners Bartol, Desai, and Fischer and they should let Mr. Roberts know if they are interested in serving on the planning commission for another term. Commissioners noticed corrections to term expirations and an inconsistency in the report regarding the Summerhill Development which staff will correct. Commissioner Grover moved to approve the Planning Commissions 2004 Report with the noted corrections. Commissioner Bartol seconded. Ayes - Ahlness, Bartol, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Pearson, Trippler The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on January 24, 2005. AGENDA NO. G-9 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager FROM: Finance Director and City Attorney RE: Liability Insurance Coverage DATE: January 18, 2005 Several years ago the City Council considered liability insurance options and decided not to waive the statutory limits. The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust requires that city councils periodically consider this option. Attached is additional information along with a recommendation that the City Council should not waive the statutory liability limit. Also, it is recommended that the City Council should accept liability coverage limits of $300,000 per claimant and $1,000,000 per occurrence. P\agn\LIasILITY LIMITS 1 Ke11 & Fawcett P.A. A T "I" O R N E Y 5 A T L A W ?350 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA X44 CEDAR STREET SA[NT PAUL, MN 551] St7NG I.O f~:11VCGTT Ck G1E] 17. I_L•\•11EONS " ROE31iK'1' 1, 1'C)SVL1SIz s:\R:111I. SC3N5Al_1.:1 13AVIL) 1.. N:\1.41 11'la!_Ii:1U {['ON?~Ili) 11r:1~G JanuaLy s, Zoos Mr. Dan Faust, Finance Director Crt}f of Maplewood 1830 East Cou~~ty Road B Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 RE: Liability C©verage Dear Mr. Faust: or CullrscE: G:1E.LAG€IER LAlV t~1R~4 (6i I) Z2"t-37R 1 t':SC5ki3n14' (6~ E) ~ ~3-E3n l s) E-Nlail: admin cc,ltellyandfaweett.eom We reviewed the information thatyou sent us regarding liability coverage. it is our recommendation that die City of Maplewood does• j7ot waive tl~e statutory liability limits. This recon~n~endation is based on the analysis that the liability limits minimize the expenditure of the City's taxpayers' funds by talcinl; full advantage of the protections established for the City by the State Legislature, instead of speixling additional a);~zounts that would be needed to purchase additin~~al liability coverage. if you l~avc~ a)~y questio~~s ar need any additional inforn-~ation, please contact me or 5aralz Sonsalla. T11aE~1: yott. Respectfully yours, KELLY & FAWCETT, P.A. ~~~ /t Patrick T. Ke11y Enclosure: LMC1T Liability Coverage -Waiver Form 1 I +1 Its ]Ip, 5,r,.. i l~. u.. 1 .....,t 1 n~..i.; I'•u.t In 3„bdnt lu+~~t. itlt~l+lt.t~ * Afro A~o3ittcd in Wiseortsin "~ Real Pn3pcrty I.a~ti~ Specialist, CcrtiGcd by the Rea] Property Section of the Minrnsola SEatc Liar Association 2 LMCIT L)IABTLTIY COVERAGE -WAIVER FORM Cities obtaining liability coverage from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust must decide whether or net to waive the statutory tort liability limits to the extent of the coverage purchased. The decision to waive or not to waive the statutory limits ]zas the following effects. > If the city does not ti+>aive the statutory tort limits, an individual claimant would be able to recover no more than $300,000 on any claim to which the statutory tart limits apply. The total which all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would be limited to $1,000,000. These statutory tort limits would apply regardless of whether or not the city purchases the optional excess liability coverage. ~ If the cit3~ waives the statutory tort limits acrd does rrat purchase excess liability coverage, a single claimant could potentially recover up to $1,000,000 on a single occurrence. The total which all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would also be limited to $1,000,000, regardless of the number of claimants. > If the city tivaives the statzztozy tort limits acrd purchases excess liabilit~~ coverage, a single claimant could potentially recover an amount up to the limit of the coverage purchased. The total wl~ieh all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would also be limited to the amount of coverage purchased, regardless of the number of claimants. Claims to which the statutory municipal tort limits do not apply are not affected by this decision. The decision roust be made by the city council. Cities purchasing coverage nr~ust complete and return this form io the LMCIT before the effective date Qf tFre coverage. Ear further information, contact LMCIT. Yau tray also wish to discuss these issues with your city attorney. The City of Maplewood accepts liability coverage limits of $ 300,000/1.000.000 from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT). Check one: XX The city DOES NOT WAIVE the rttonetary limits on municipal tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04. The city WAIVER the monetary limits on tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04, to the extent of the Iimits of the liability coverage obtained from LMCIT. Date of city council meetin6 Sib afore ~~y~~`"~•~^^'~- Position ~~'`~'"`~r"' .G2~.~,~"`~' Return this cazzrpletedfr•nztz to LMCIT, 1=15 University ~Ive. T3'., St. Paul tLW 55103-2014 LMCIT { 1 [ lD0}{12ev.11/Q3 ) Page l of I 3 ~cogue njttiJierrresofa ~itia~ t'ifirs pmmuthrg ecce~jm:ce LMCIT Risk. Management Information ~4~ Uniiversity Avenue West, St. Paul, MN 55103-2,044 Phone: {651} z8x-x~oo • (Soo} g25W11z2 Fax: (b51} 281-1zg8 + TDD (G5;} 281-a29o ~r<vw.lmeit.lmnc.©~rg LMCIT LIABILITY COVERAGE OPTIONS LIABILITY LIIVIITS, COVERAGE LIIVIITS, AND WAIVERS LMCIT gives cities several options far structuring their liability coverage. The city can clYOOSe either to waive nr not to waive the monetary limits that the statutes provide; and the city can select fro~x~ among several liability coverage limits. This merr~o discusses these options and identifies some issues to consider in deciding which of the options best meets the city's needs. What are the statutory limits an municipal tort liability? The statutes limit a city's tort liability to a tx~aximum of $300,000 per claimant and $1,000,000 per occurrence. These limits apply whether the claim is against the city, against the individual officer or employee, or against both. What are the coverage limits far LMCIT's basic primary liability eaverabe? LMCIT's liability coverage provides a limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence, matching the per- occurrence part oftlle statutory ~xtunicipal tort liability limit. Under the basic coverage form the $300,000 per claimant part of the statutory liability limit is not waived, so if t11e statutory limit applies to the particular claim, LMCIT and the city would be able to use that limit as a defense. Beside the overall coverage limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence, there are also annual aggregate limits (that is, limits on the total amount of coverage for the year regardless of the number of claims), for certain specific risks. Aggregate limits apply to the following: Products /com feted o erations $1,000,000 annually Failure to su 1 util~tzes $1,000,000 annuall EMF $1,500,000 annually Limited ollutinn* $1,000,000 annuall Lead and asbestos* $200,000 annuall Mold $1,500,000 annuall Land use litigation** $1,000,000 annuall Em to ers liabili (work com $1,000,000 annuall * The limit applies to both damages and defense costs. ** Coverage is on a sliding scale percentage basis, and applies to both damages and litigation costs. 4 ff the statute limits our liability to $1,000,000 per occurrence, ~vhy would the city purchase higher coverage limits than that? There are several different reasons why cities should strongly consider carrying higher limits of liability coverage. ] _ The statutory tort limits either do not or may not apply to several types of claims. Some examples include: • Claitszs under federal civil rights laws. These include Section 1383, the Americans wit11 Disabilities Act, etc. • Claitrzs for tart liability that the cit}~ has assumed by corztz•act. Tllis occurs when a city agrees in a contract to defend and indemnify a private party. Claims for actiozzs itz azzotlzer state. This might occur in border cities that have mutual aid agreements with adjoining states, or when a city oflzcial attends a national conference or goes to Washington to lobby, etc. • Claitzzs based orz liquor sales. This mostly affects cities with municipal liquor stores, but it could also arise in eannection with beer sales at a fire relief association fund-raiser, for example. • Claims based ozz a "taking" tlieoty. Suits challenging land use regulations frequently include an "inverse condemnation" claim, alleging that the regulation amounts to a "taking" of the property. 2. LMCIT's primary liability coverage has annual limits on coverage .for a few specific risks. The table on page 1 lists the liability risks to which aggregate coverage limits apply. If the city has a lass or claim in one of these areas, there might not be enough limits remaining to cover the city's full exposure if there is a second loss of the same sort during the year. Excess liability coverage gives tl~e city additional protection against this risk as well. However there are a couple of important restrictions on how the excess coverage applies to risks that are subject to aggregate limits: • The excess coverage does tzot apply to three risks: lead a~zd asbestos; failztre to supply utilities; azzd ztzold,• and • The excess coverage does ~zot azttotttatically apply to liquor liability unless the city specifically requests it. 3. The city may he required by contract to carry higher coverage limits. Occasionally, a contract might include a requirement that the city carry more than $ I,OQQ,D00 of coverage limits. Carrying excess coverage is a way to meet these requirements. (There's 2 5 also another option far cities in this situation. LMCIT can issue an endorsement to increase tl~e city's coverage limit only for claims relating to that particular contract. There's a small charge for these "laser" endorsemerns.} 4. There may be more than one political subdivision covered under the city's coverage. An HItA, EDA, or port authority is itself a separate political subdivision. If the city EDA, for example, is named as a covered party on the city's coverage and a claim were made that involved bath the city and the EDA, theoretically the claimant might be able to recover ug to $1,000,000 from the city and another $I,000,000 from the EDA, since there are two political subdivisions involved. Excess coverage is one way to provide enough coverage limits to address this situation. Another solution is for the HRA, EDA, or port authority to carry separate liability coverage in its own name. This issue of multiple covered parties can also arise is if the city has agreed by contract to name another entity as a covered party, or to defend and indemnify another entity. 5. Cities sometimes choose to carry higher coverage limits because of a concern that the courts might overturn the statutory liability limits. However, those limits have now been tested and upheld several times in Minnesota_ While it's always possible that a Future court might decide to throw out the statutory limits, this is now less of a concern. What excess liability coverage limits are available? Excess coverage is available in $1 million increments, up to a maximum of $5 million. We're just a small city. Isn't excess liability coverage really just something that big cities might aced? Absolutely not. If anything, excess liability coverage is even more important to a small city. If a city ends up with more liability than it has coverage, the city will have to either draw on existing funds or go to its taxpayers to pay that judgrr~ent. A large city faced with, say, a million dollars of liability over and above what its LMCIT coverage pays might be able to spread that $1 million cost over several thousand taxpayers. The small city by contrast might be dividing that same $1 million cost among only a couple hundred taxpayers. $1 million divided among 5000 taxpayers is $240 apiece -annoying but probably at least ma~~ageable far mast taxpayers. $1 million divided among 200 taxpayers is $5000 apiece -enough to be a real problem far many. How does excess coverage apply to uninsuredlunderinsured motorist coverage? If t11e city carries excess liability coverage, the city has the option to have the excess coverage also apply to uninsured or underinsured motorist (UM/UIM} claims. To do so, the city must first increase its primary UMJUIM limit from tl~e basic $50,000 to $1,040,000. There are additional premium charges bath to increase the primary UMIUIM limit and to apply the excess coverage to the UM/UIM exposure. The city needs to consider whether the benefit from having higher UM/UIM limits is worth that cost. 3 6 The UM/UIM coverages are intended to assure that an injured driver will be compensated ifs/he is injured in an accident caused by an uninsured or underinsured driver. The UM/UIM coverage steps into the place of the Iiability insurance that the driver should Dave had. Keep in mind that in the case of city vehicles, an injury to the driver while operating a city vehicle would in most cases be covered by workers' compensation. The amounts the individual would be able to recover from UM/UIM would be in addition to tl~e medical, indemnity, and other benefits paid under work comp. In many cases, it would amount to a double recovery for the individual's injuries. A city might decide to carry a higher limit for a couple reasons: if they believe the workers' compensation benefits are insufficient to compensate their injured employees; or if they want to make sure that non-employees riding in city vehicles are fully compensated in the event of an accident with an uninsured or underinsured vehicle. (Note that in most cases il~e passenger's own UM/UIM would also respond.) LMCIT now gives the cities who participate in the primary liability coverage the option t© waive the $300,000 per claimant state#ory liability limit. What's the effect if we da this? If the city chooses t1~e "waiver" option, t1~e city and LMCIT no longer can use the statutory limit of $300,000 per elai~~nant as a defense. Because the waiver increases the exposure, the premium is roughly 3% higher for coverage under the waiver option. If the city waives the statutory limit, an individual claimant could therefor recover up to $1,000,000 in damages on a claim. Of course, the individual would still have to prove to the court or jury that slhe really does Dave that amount of damages. Also, the statutory limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence would still apply; that would limit the individual's recovery to a lesser amount if there were multiple claimants. Why would the city choose to pay more in order to get the waiver-option coverage? Dues it give the city better protection? No. Buying coverage under the '`waiver'' option doesn't protect the city any better. T13e benefit is to the injured party. Tl~e statutory liability limit only comes into play in a case where l} the city is in fact liable; and 2) the injured party's actual proven danr~ages are greater than the statutory limit. Very Iiterally, applying the statutory liability limit means tE~at an injured party won't be fully compensated for hisll~er actual, proven damages that were caused by city negligence. Same cities as a matter of public policy may wa~~t to have more assets available to compensate their citizens far injuries caused by t3~e city's negligence. Waiving tl~e statutory liability limits is a way to do that. 7 Other cities may feel that the appropriate policy is to minimize the expenditure of the taxpayers' funds by taking full advantage of every protection the legislature has decided to provide. There's no right or wrap; answer on this point. It's a discretionary question of city policy that each city council needs to decide for itself How would the waiver affect our city's coverage or risk on those claims that the statutory tort Iiability limits don't apply ta? It doesn't. Waiving the statutory tort limits has no effect an claims that the statutory limits don't apply to. What's the effect of waiving the statu#ory limits if we have excess coverage? If the city has $1 million of excess coverage and chooses to waive the statutory tort limits, the claimants (whether it's one claimant or several} could then potentially recover up to $2 million in damages in a single occurrence. If the city carries higher excess coverage limits, the potential maximum recovery per occurrence is correspondingly higher. Carrying excess coverage under tl7e waiver option is a way to address an issue that some cities fnd troubling: the case where many people are injured in a single occurrence caused by city negligence. Suppose, for example, that a city vehicle negligently runs into a school bus full of kids, causing multiple serious injuries. $1,400,400 divided 50 ways rrtay not go far toward compensatin ;for those injuries. Excess coverage under the waiver option makes more funds available to compensate the victims in that kind of situation. The cost oftl~e excess liability coverage is about 25% greater if tl~e city waives the statutory tort limits. The cast difference is proportionally greater than the cast difference at the primary level because for a city that carries excess coverage, waiving the statutory tart limits increases both the per-claimant exposure and the per-occurrence exposure. If we waive the statutory tort liability limits, does it increase the risk that the city ~+vill end up with liability that LMCIT doesn't cover? Na. Tlae waiver form specifically says that the city is waiving tl~e statutory tart liability limits only to tl~e extent of the city's coverage. Of course, that's not to say that there is no risk that the city's liability could exceed its coverage limits. We listed earlier a number ofways that could happen to any city. Sut the waiver doesn't increase that risk. Can eve waive the statutory tort limits for the primary coverage but not far the excess coverage? No. If the city decides to waive the statutory tort limits, that waiver applies to the full extent of the coverage limits the city loos. TI1e city cannot partially waive tlye statutory limits. 8 I'm confused. Is there a simple way t© snmmari~e the options? it's not necessarily simple, but the table on tl3e following page is a shorthand summary of what the effect would be of tl-te various coverage structure options in different circumstances. I'm still confused. Who can I talk to? Give us a call at the League office. Pete Tritz, Tom Grundlloefer, Ann Gergen, Doug Gronli, or any of LMC1T's property/casualty underwriters will be glad to talk with you. 5 9 .~ ~~ i..i fl U `E., N r^^y a+~~ r.w U ~ U [~., ~ O ~• R, 3 ~ ~. ° ~ c~ .~ ` tw 4. r O ~ ~ c d "~ ~ ~ u-, ~ j~ ~ C7 O O C3 ~ ~ C'1 + -~ ~ v ~ O o C? CJ `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o c~ c "'~' ',^ " c ~ 0 0 o c7 ~ a ~ ~ ~ ri ni '~ © f1, U .nr r ~ . i--~ .+ ~+ ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ ~ 4. D ~w C/} N U ;~ T U ~~-+ O ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~"" ~ ~ yr U L ~ ~ ^ d U ~ r a7 ~ Q C~ O O ~ ~ ~k ~ 'a U O ~ G7 D .t." ~ ~ ~ 'J O p ~ O Q C7 ~ C7 C7 O + U[ U N o C] d O w ~ ~ ~ ~ , C ~ 64 f,~.} c~3 Ff~3 ~~ ~ ~ . ~ . •~' ..r _ ~, ~ E"' ~ U O ~ } . ' r ., y,,, ~ ~ _ ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r, cJ O C? . + ~~ Vj r V ~x U O ~ ~ ~ ~ C7 l~ Ci ~ ~ ~ ~ Q O r~~ ~"+ " rn ~ U ~ O ~ Q Q w + O O N ~ [C U U M f73 ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v~ O ~ U .C ~ O c ) E-- r~ V o W ~ °~ ,'.r = °d N r~ Gr D ~ N b f1 .~.~ v r v...W w ~ r' r.., w...~ ~ ~ ~' + . ~ .. ~ o a, a ° ~ ~ ~ ~ U~ ° ~ U~ a ~ U u a ^ U ;~ cj ~ ~ ~ ,~~, ° o ~ a ~ ~ .~ 3 .~ ~ ..~ c~ ~ o o ~ c~ ~ [ c ~ ~ ~ ~ 10 AGENDA NO. G-10 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager FROM: Fire Chief and Finance Director RE: BUDGET CHANGES FOR STATE FIRE AID DATE: January 18, 2005 Required December payments to the Maplewood Fire Fighters Relief Association exceed the 2004 budget by $52,678. Most of the difference was due to state fire aid of $229,291 which exceeded the estimate by $51,496. All state fire aid must be paid to the association. When the aid revenue exceeds the budget, there is a corresponding amount of expense that exceeds the budget. The remaining budget overage was due to a revised certification from the association which required a payment that was $1,182 higher than the budget. It is anticipated that the 2005 state fire aid will be the same as 2004. Therefore, the 2005 budget should also be increased by $51,541. It is recommended that the City Council approve the appropriate budget changes for 2004 and 2005. P\agn\FIRE PENSION AGENDA NO. G-11 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager FROM: Finance Director RE: Budget Changes for Park Development Fund DATE: January 18, 2005 The 2005 Budget for the Park Development Fund includes $450,000 for construction of the Legacy Village sculpture park. When tax abatement bonds were sold in 2004, $600,000 of the bond proceeds were required to be put in a fund titled Legacy Village Park Development Fund. Also in 2004, a $600,000 budget was approved for the Legacy Village Park Development Fund to finance the sculpture park and tot lot park. Therefore, the 2005 budget in the Park Development Fund is a duplication and needs to be eliminated. It is recommended that the City Council authorize budget changes to eliminate the sculpture park project from the 2005 budget for the Park Development Fund. p~agn~park development OS budget AGENDA NO. G-12 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager FROM: Finance Director RE: Budget Changes for Tax Increment District #1-5 DATE: January 18, 2005 Tax Increment District #1-5 was established to provide financing for the expansion of the Schroeder Milk Company. After a project is completed, there is a one or two year time period until tax increment revenues are received and then disbursed to the developer. When the 2004 budget was prepared, the estimated expenditures for this district were anticipated to be minimal. However, the tax increment revenues were received and disbursed earlier than anticipated which requires an adjustment of the budget. Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council approve an increase of $7,385 in the 2004 budget for this district. P\agn\suDGET aDJ TIF s AGENDA NO. G-13 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager FROM: Finance Director RE: TRANSFERS FROM TAX INCREMENT FUNDS DATE: January 18, 2005 PROPOSAL It is proposed that the Council authorize the appropriate 2004 budget adjustments and 2004 transfers totaling $329,890 from the Tax Increment Funds to the Debt Service Fund. BACKGROUND Annually transfers are made from the Tax Increment Funds to finance expenditures in other funds. The 2004 transfers from the Tax Increment Funds will finance debt service costs on tax increment bonds. A breakdown by fund and comparison with the original budget is listed on the attachment. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Council authorize the appropriate 2004 budget adjustments and 2004 transfers totaling $329,890 from the Tax Increment Funds to the Debt Service Fund. P:\FINANCE\WORDWGN\TIFTRAN.DOC 1 FILE NAME: TIFTRAN LOCATION: C:IEXCELIMISC GATE: 12-Jan-05 PREPARED BY: DF TRANSFERS FROM TAX fNCREMENT FUNDS TO DEBT SERVICE FUNDS {To eliminate cash deficits} 2004 2(704 2004 BUDGET CHANGES BUDGET RE-EST. ACTUAL" AMOUNT ACCT. NO. OPERATING TRANSFERS IN TO DEBT SERVICE FUNDS; Fund #343 2002 Tax Increment Bonds ': 31 T,480 - 329,890 '329,8911 ' 18,410 343 -999 -3999 Total transfers 311,480 329,890 329,890 18,470 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT FROM TIF FUNDS: Fund #413 Housing District 1-1 96,260 104,850 - ::104,850. 8,590 413 -999 -4999 Fund #414 Housing ©istrict 1-2 171,910 158,990 ': 158,99.0 {12,920) 414 -999 -4999 Fund #415 Housing District 1-3 43,31fl 66,050 '> ' 66,050.' 22,740 415 -999 -4999 Total transfers 311,4$17 329,890 329,890 18,410 'Actual iransfers same as re-esiirEtaies iF sufficient cash is avaifabie. 2 FILE NAMF: TIFTRAN L~CATI©N: CaEXCELIMISC DATI=: 12-Jan-D5 PREPARED BY: DF TAX INCREMENT TRANSFERS 4N 12-31-02 Fund Name Cash Balance Fund No. 12-31-D4 Fund 4'13 Fund 414 Fund 415 Adjusted Balance 2002 Tax lnerement Brands 343 (215,730.45) 104,$50.0() 158,990.x0 66,D5D.00 '[14,159.55 Housing District 1-1 413 107,821.90 (104,850.00} 2,971.90 Housing District 1-2 414 164,938.69 (158,990.00) 5,948.69 Housing District 1-3 415 66,984.63 (66,050.D0~ ___ _934.63 Total 124,014.77 0.00 D.DD 0.00 124,014.77 2002 Tax Increment Bonds-financed by Housing District 1-1 ends 9 213 1 120 9 2 Housing District 1-2 ends 12131/2011 Housing District 1-3 ends 12131/2016 Transfers in From - -- 3 AGENDA NO. G-14 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager FROM: Finance Director RE: Transfer to Close Hazmat Fund DATE: January 18, 2005 On 1-28-91 the 3M Company donated $252,000 to the city for the training and equipping of a Hazardous Materials Response Team. The donation was deposited into a special revenue fund which is referred to as the Hazmat Fund. On 12-31-04 the balance in the fund was $2,704.93 which represents the balance of investment interest earned on donation. It is recommended that the City Council authorize the appropriate budget changes and the transfer of the remaining balance in the Hazmat Fund to the General Fund in order to close the fund. P\agn\xazMaT Fu1vD 1 AGENDA NO. G-15 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager FROM: Finance Director RE: Budget Changes for 2004 Bond Issues DATE: January 18, 2005 Budget changes are needed for the 2004 and 2005 financial transactions for the 2004 bond issues. Attached is a detailed listing of the changes that are needed. It is recommended that the City Council authorize staff to make the appropriate 2004 and 2005 budget adjustments. P\PERM\04BONDS6 1 File Name: 2DD4 band issue budget changes Location: caexcelldsbudget Date: Prepared by: G8 Total al! debt service funds Revenue: Property taxes Tax abatement -Maplewood Matl Special assessments State Street Construction Aid State Street Maintenance Aid Interest on investments Total revenue Expenditures: Fees for Service Cent service: Principal: Regular Calted bonds Interest Paying agent fees Other: Interest - interfund loan Investment management fee Total expenditures Excess {deficit} of revenue aver expenditures Other financing sources: Operating transfers frnm- Cebt 5erviee Funds Tax Increment Fund 5ewerl=und dater Fund PremiurrES/Discounts on bonds issued Bond Proceeds Excess (de€iclt} of revenue and other financing sources over expenditures Fund Balance -January 1 Residual equity transfers (to close funds} Fund Balance - Cecemter 31 13-Jan-D5 2©04 Zoos budget Budget St11JGET CHANGI=S 2DD4 BON13 [SSUBS REV1SBb TOTALS 2DD4 zoos 2DD4 zoos 2,474,20D 2,789,840 2,474,2DD 2,789,840 0 D 0 D 696,630 682,62D 3,324,690 980,000 3,921,320 9,672,620 D o 27D,oDD n 27D,DDD 0 242,420 0 242,420 81,61D 137,66D 64,7D4 117,82D 146,310 255,480 3,152,44D 3,620,12D 3,389,390 1,61D,240 6,541,$3D 5,23D,36D D D 10,240 10,240 D 2,285,DOD 3,04D,DOD 1,270,DOD 2,285,DD0 4,310,DD0 0 495,DOD 635,000 0 1,13D,ODD i,117,61D 1,284,780 35,130 946,420 1,152,740 2,211,20D 4,040 5,33D 2,540 1,75D 6,58D 7,D80 42,440 45,870 1D {6,230) 42,45D 39,640 6,530 11,020 1,250 9,410 7,78D 2D,430 3,455,62D 4,862,DD0 49,170 2,856,35D 3,504,790 7,718,35D {303,180} {1,241,880} 3,340,220 (1,246,110} 3,437,D40 (2,487,99D} D D 0 0 311,480 264,130 311,480 264,130 o D a D 33,460 33,46D 33,460 33,460 0 D {46,D00) {46,000} D 0 D 1,312,000 1,312,DD0 D 41,76D (844,290} 2,617,664 6,645,207 D 0 2,659,424 5,700,917 4,606,22D {1,246,110} 7,265,644 9,D61,027 4,606,220 (1,246,110) 4,647,980 {2,19D,400} 2,617,664 11,251,427 0 D 2 AGENDA NO. G-16 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager FROM: Finance Director RE: BUDGET ADJUSTMENT FOR AUDIT FEES DATE: January 19, 2005 I have been advised by the city~s auditors, (KPMG), that the fee for the annual audit will be $30,000 which is $5,000 more than budgeted. The additional amount is due to the unusually large number of bond issues and large amount of additions to capital assets in 2004. Since the audit will be starting early in March, there is not enough time to go through a request for proposal process to consider a possible change in auditors. The city has afive-year contract with KPMG that will end in 2006 so this would be a better time to do the RFP process. It is recommended that the City Council approve a 2005 budget adjustment of $5,000 to finance the annual audit. p\agn\audit budget 1 Agenda G-17 MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Steve Lukin, Fire Chief DATE: January 18, 2005 SUBJECT: Applebee's Donation Introduction We have received a donation from Applebee's in the amount of $1,125.00. Applebee's had a fund-raiser by selling CD's of new and upcoming artists and graciously donated a portion of the proceeds to the Maplewood Fire Department. Also, Firefighter Jeff Schadt was present for part of the event with his dog and added the extra incentive to purchase these CD's. Recommendation I recommend that the Maplewood City Council accept the donation from Applebee's in the amount of $1,125.00 and thank them for the gracious donation. Also, please thank Firefighter Jeff Schadt for his time and effort in making this event a success. This money will be used to purchase some equipment to be determined at a later time. C: City Clerk Agenda #G-18 AGENDA REPORT To: City Manager Richard Fursman From: Chief of Police David J. Thomalla Subject: Purchase of Police Vehicles Date: January 18, 2005 Introduction Money was allocated in the 2005 budget to purchase police vehicles, and we are requesting authorization to order six 2005 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor squad cars. Background Police departments are only able to place orders for squad cars one time during the year, and we purchase them in conjunction with the State of Minnesota and many other municipal departments. The vehicles must be ordered now for delivery later this year. The State contract price for the squad cars is $20,174 each. Recommendation It is recommended that authorization be given to purchase six 2005 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor squad cars. Action Reauired Submit to the City Council for review and approval. DJT:js Agenda #G-19 AGENDA REPORT To: City Manager Richard Fursman From: Chief of Police David J. Thomalla Subject: Donation From Schmelz Countryside Volkswagen Date: January 18, 2005 Introduction The Police Department has received a donation from Schmelz Countryside Volkswagen, and City Council approval is required before the donation may be accepted. Background For the past several years, Schmelz Countryside Volkswagen has made an annual donation to the Maplewood Police Department to be used for various programs or equipment. This year we received a check for $2,000, and John Schmelz has asked that the money be used toward youth or senior citizen programs. It is our plan to use the money for the D.A.R.E. program and to defray the costs of providing weekly blood pressure checks to senior citizens at the Maplewood Mall. 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. Action Required Submit to the City Council for review and approval. DJT:js Agenda #H1 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Trout Land Final Plat Revision and Right-of-Way Vacations LOCATION: West Side of Highway 61-North and West of Venburg Tire DATE: January 14, 2005 INTRODUCTION Project Description The Trout Land property is a proposed 23.3-acre development consisting of one existing single family home, 91 potential townhomes and an eight-acre commercial piece. The potential development being considered for the commercial site would include a new automotive dealership, apre-owned auto sales lot and a convenience store/gas station. Refer to the attachments. Requests On November 22, 2004, the city council approved the final plat for Trout Land. There are now two matters that have developed that must be resolved. One is the vacation of excess public right-of-way that was held for the widening of Highway 61. The other is a revision to the plat to show the inclusion of a lot line the applicant, James Kellison of Kelco Real Estate Development Services, had intended to show previously on the final plat. Right-of-Way Vacation During the Trout Land subdivision review, it was not evident that there was a need to vacate the unneeded excess right-of-way that was held for the widening of Highway 61. It was the intention of the city to relinquish this right-of-way and deed it to the applicant as part of the plat in exchange for the dedication of the County Road D extension. This vacation, though, was not brought up during that review. The city council must still vacate this right-of-way to enable the city staff to turn over this land to the applicant as intended. Final Plat Revision-Additional Property Line The original Trout Land development plan showed three commercial building sites between Highway 61 and the County Road D extension as shown on Attachment 2. On November 22, when the city council approved the final plat, the applicant was proposing only two building sites. Now, he would like to revise the final plat to again include the third lot as shown on Attachment 4. BAC KG RO U N D July 12, 2004: The city council approved: ~ A rezoning to R3 (multiple dwelling residential) and a land use plan change to R3M (multiple dwelling medium density) for the townhouse portion of this plat. Aland use plan change to show a collector street on the plan for the County Road D extension. The preliminary plat. The preliminary plat was conditioned on meeting all requirements in the city engineer's report and changing "Outlot B" to a lot number. That portion of the property between the County Road D extension and Highway 61 is zoned M1 (light manufacturing) and was not changed during this review. November 22, 2004: The city council approved the final plat, subject to the applicant meeting the following conditions before the city signs the plat documents: Revise the plat, relabeling Outlot B with a lot number. ~ Provide all required easements, agreements and dedications or provide escrow subject to the requirements of the city engineer. DISCUSSION Right-of-Way Vacation As part of the County Road D extension improvements, an exchange agreement was approved by the city council on February 23, 2004 with Trout Land, LLC. This authorized the exchange of the excess Highway 61 easement area for the right-of-way needed for the realignment of County Road D. On February 23, 2004, the city council authorized a proceeding subsequent in Ramsey County District Court to allow Trout Land to acquire title of the excess Highway 61 property. The proceeding subsequent process was completed on July 21, 2004. Trout Land, LLC, now has title to this property. On August 9, 2004, a final agreement with Trout Land was approved by the city council providing for all the access, permanent easement and fee title acquisitions with Trout Land. In order for Trout Land to complete the final plat, the subject excess highway right-of-way must be vacated. 2 Final Plat Revision Staff finds no problem with the inclusion of the proposed lot line on the final plat. The original development plan by the applicant had shown three commercial-development sites in this area. Any proposal for the development of these lots must be submitted to the city for evaluation through the normal review process. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Adopt the resolution on Attachment 5 of the staff report vacating the excess Highway 61 right-of-way as shown on the Trout Land Final Plat. Vacation is because it is in the public interest since this right-of-way is not needed for highway purposes. B. Approve the revised Trout Land Final Plat showing the inclusion of a third commercial lot fronting on Highway 61. Approval is subject to the November 22, 2004 city council conditions of final plat approval. p:sec 4\Trout Land Final Plat 3 Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Original Trout Land Concept Development Plan 3. Previously-Approved November 22, 2004 Final Plat 4. Revised Final Plat date-stamped December 21, 2004 5. Right-of-Way Vacation Resolution 3 LOCATION MAP COUNTY ROAD D -=_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~. ~ ~ .... a. .. .. .._ •: ~ w. ~~ ~ ~t. "~ ~. a ~.If~ I, f ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ I. ~ I ~ ~ a ti` ~ ~~ i------- ----------. ---... ~ ...i F~~. ~~1 ~ , ~ -. ~-- ~ ~_ ~" ~ ~r ~ ~ ~:~ ~ l ~ ~ I I~~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1 0 ~" e I .I r ~ 6~ I { ~' / ~ { _ t ?t ~ ~ ~ a ~. ~, E - -- ----... _ _~ ---- ..~..~ '~ r ~ '~ y I ;~rt~~-- ~ J. ~ "~ 11 1 1 T. I ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ e 1 ~ j~.~ 'a ~ ~ r 1 i ~ FIN PLAT Attachment 4 ~~q~ , ROAD D OURT - - - - - - - - S89°57'18'E 430.]1- - ~_- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' 9~.E9i w - e=10°]9'01' - {{ TLOT C ~~ R-ii500 ~~ ~ is i i ~ ~ °'~ Q, ~ ~~ -- ~~I ~> va4 / Am ti, w = a b ~~ i ~~ ~ - - - - ,36.6- -- ~.~`~ ---- -- m I ~'o ~~ f I ~o ~' ~'p~'~ ~W I ° do ~_ ~n I / 0.2 r-----1 ~~ sz ~~L. ~ C ~ ~ ~~ i ~~ ~ ~ -- -~ a° o ~ °I "' d~ ~ - J oz V I v< ~ ~--- 4 H ~~" ~~ V ~ - ~~- ~ Nss<35, ioae3-~ ~~ ~A~~~ ~ ~ ~~ u ~~ < ~ , A ~ t ~ ~ -- aF° ~ ~ /~ ~~ r -~ °- ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~-- m ~ __ -- _ _ _ -80 ip ~ 589°57'28 Ei~~~o'~ ~Il 1 ~~ T m~ ~ -~~i-~N1------~1~'o,"_?P,~ u!- 217.89 '~'~~ /m~ l / ~ ~ ~ m i as im ~ o l m v ~~ r``~NB9'S879 E '215.50 ! 1 ~ I - ~ ~,,, / _.. ' III - - _, _o ~ / _- -- i ~- o ~, ~~ o / a / -. ~ i N /,~ O „ /~ O ~ ~„ ~. - ~~ C~ ° ~ ~ "; e_ °Q~ I / ~' r E__ ~ _, ~ ~ l ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ •: ~ ~ / ~' _ ~ _ __ u- ~ ~, - ~ I ~ ~ ---- ~ li ! _ N i ~ i~ i ' ~ ' __ ,I ~ i ~ ~ I I ~~ ~ ~ N .~1 I Q m ;~ a ~I ~ ~g .. ~ ~ °~ I w~ p ~ ~~ I U ~ s~ 7 ,g' ~, ~~ / ~ N ~. ~ lam ~ 1 ~ / ~A o, a i - . I ° g' ~ ~~ ~ ~ / .__ _ _ ,. -- ~ '-----'" ~ a ~ o _ ~ I m ~ eq, ~ ,. a `" ~ II °m ~ ~ i °I ~, '~ y~a i i i ` ~~ ~ OUTLOT 1. '"~ ~ SEE DETAB. B='• ~ ~ // ' ~~+' ~ 569°ac45W 22330 -~ ~ r95fo -~ ~ ' X35 1 _/ L T - - - ~ - - wh Tw ----- sa9•a5'a5°w +BB.a3 ~ C ---:~ ~" ~ s -. ~ ~i 0.19 I `~~ I - I ~~ I ,I ~~~ 1 ~ ---------- ,z I I a 1 ~' ~~' ~ m~ ~~. a o ' 4 4 I :: q ^t =ArCN UNE~ ~ ___~i-___2z3>o-- III m I I V ,. oa i ., _, w -~y ._,~ i ~I e ~ ~ - ;, :;; s u ., --- I~ - -- - - - ~zioo- ~ 1 - - ~ I i I ~ am ,' -- SB 615W - ~ o~ ~ ~ I I ~ kE ~~^ o. _~ 93, ~~~ ~ ~ ,I ~ o-,a~ , ~ ~ T ~I ~1 ~/ ~~~~~~ --------- o ~na~ . iNim ~ za o~ o~ mz / I m A !~n ~u ~ :_ ~~ ~ o ~ ~ ~tia~ I an ~ ~ mti _ ~ zo°m I 'o i ~ ~ ~o ~ `~'~~o° m/ v ~m I ~~m~ I ~a ~ o~ ~ ~;A~ _ _ ~ _ oo 7p2~ Zy I / ~~ ~ T ~/ ~ ~ I ion L-_~--_ _ ° i~ i ~,~~a mi n e v i=o Ir " ~a ~ ~ I °~ i nsgm n n ~ n ~ ., i azn ~ MArc uNE o ¢ ~~~z m ~ x 0°08 i~~ ~ moo o" 7 Q'am m g ~~ m ~ ,~,.~ ~ z a r Attachment 5 RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION RESOLUTION WHEREAS, James Kellison, of Kelco Real Estate Development Services, applied for the vacation of the following: Vacate that part of State Trunk Highway No. 61, as dedicated on the recorded plat of FRATTALONE'S HIGHPOINT RIDGE, Ramsey County, Minnesota. All that part of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 3, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota, which lies westerly of a line drawn parallel and concentric with and distant 135.00 feet westerly from the following described line: From a point on the east and west quarter line of Section 4, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, distant 156.3 feet west of the east quarter corner thereof, run southwesterly at an angle of 77 degrees 13 minutes 30 seconds from said east and west quarter line (measured from west to south) for 53.6 feet; thence deflect to the right at an angle of 9 degrees 52 minutes 00 seconds for 529.44 feet to a point of beginning of Line "A" to be described; thence run northeasterly along the last described course for 100 feet to tangent spiral point; thence deflect to the left on a spiral curve of decreasing radius (spiral angle 1 degree 30 minutes 00 seconds) for 200 feet to spiral curve point; thence deflect to the left on a 1 degree 30 minute 00 second circular curve (delta angle 6 degrees 2 minutes 00 seconds) for 457.77 feet to curve spiral point; thence deflect to the left on a spiral curve of increasing radius (spiral angle 1 degree 30 minutes 00 seconds) for 200 feet; thence on a tangent to said curve for 1638.33 feet to tangent spiral point; thence deflect to the right on a spiral curve of decreasing radius (spiral angle 2 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds) for 200 feet to a spiral curve point; thence deflect to the right on a 2 degree 00 minute 00 second circular curve (delta angle 15 degrees 15 minutes 30 seconds) for 762.92 feet to curve spiral point and there terminating And which lies northerly of the westerly extension of the southerly line of TRACT G, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 525, files of the Ramsey County Registrar of Titles, said westerly extension and said southerly line also being the southerly line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter. And which lies southerly of the easterly extension of the southerly line of TRACT B, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO 322, files of the Ramsey County Registrar of Titles. Except TRACT A, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO 322. Subject to the rights of the City of Maplewood as assignee of the limited highway easement created by that document filed for record on August 5, 1935 in the Office of the Ramsey County Registrar of Titles as Document Number 152625. 8 WHEREAS, on January 24, 2005, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent a notice to the abutting property owners. The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff. WHEREAS, after the city approves this vacation, the public interest in the property will go to the adjoining property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above- described vacation because it is in the public interest since this right-of-way is not needed for highway purposes. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on January 24, 2005. 9 Agenda #H2 MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Fursman FROM: Melinda Coleman SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Review- Maplewood Business Center 1616 Gervais Ave DATE: January 18, 2005 INTRODUCTION Staff is requesting a review of the conditional use permit for the Maplewood Business Center at 1616 Gervais Ave. Staff has received a complaint from a nearby resident regarding excessive late night/early morning noise from activities with the St. Paul Pioneer Press located in this center. According to the residents (the Halls) at 1596 Grandview Avenue, the newspaper distribution use is very noisy and most of the activity takes place between the hours of 2 am to 6 am. The Halls have asked that the City Council review this permit to see if there are measures that can be required to abate the excessive noise levels. BACKGROUND The Maplewood City Council approved the original CUP back in 1981. The permit was issued to allow an industrial warehouse project within 200 feet of a residential district. At the time of the approval, several conditions were placed on the property. A copy of the council conditions appears on attachment 4. Three of the conditions would relate to noise and outside activity concerns: 1-that the applicant have noise testing completed to make sure the use met Minnesota Pollution Control Agency noise regulations, 2- that there be no outside storage of materials without the approval of the Community Development Director and 3- that a landscape buffer be provided. Staff has found no evidence in the file that any sound testing was ever done and as the tenants have changed over the years, any data collected at the time of construction would likely not remain relevant today. As far as outside storage, there is not any at this time. There is some berming and landscaping at the facility but it does form a screen for the adjacent residential properties to the west. DISCUSSION The neighbor who is filing the complaint, the Halls, indicated in their letter to the City Manager their various concerns with excessive noise. The letter states that they hear noises such as car doors slamming, loud radios, people talking, metal carts and truck horns. The letter states that the activities are associated with the Pioneer Press distribution process and that this typically occurs between the hours of 2 am and 6 am. They state that these activities have affected their sleep and have been going on for several years. Staff from planning and the police department have been evaluating these complaints and have met with representatives of the leasing company that manage the building as well as the Pioneer Press. An email sent to staff from Patrick Lensing is attached for your review. This memo outlines the measures that have been taken to date by the Pioneer Press in response to the Halls9 concerns. In summary, the Pioneer Press has met with their staff to discuss appropriate behavior while picking up papers in the parking lot. Automatic doors with electronic eyes have been installed so that doors open for the cart and they are evaluating the cost and availability of installing bumpers on the bottom of the carts to soften the noise of carts when set on the pavement. Also, they have asked the police department to evaluate the noise levels at different times to get their perception of excessive levels at this location. According to Lt. Rabbett, three police officers have gone out at different times between the hours of 2 am and 6 am to evaluate the noise levels. They all indicated that while they were present, the noise from Highway 36 was more prevalent than the noise from the newspaper distribution activities. Staff sent out a hearing notice for the review of this CUP to 70 residents within 500 feet of the warehouse. As of Monday, January18, staff has not received any calls from these residents. In addition, staff could find no written evidence of any complaints regarding the Maplewood Business Center from surrounding residents over the years. RECOMMENDATION In deciding the course of action for this CUP, the City Council should listen to the testimony from neighbors and the Pioneer Press and see if there are additional measures that can be taken to address the noise issues. In addition, the Council should consider the nine standards for approving or amending the permit. The nine standards and other provisions relating to the CUP process are shown on attachment 7. If the Council believes there is sufficient testimony and findings, the CUP could be amended to require additional improvements or studies to help mitigate the noise from the paper distribution activity. ComdevAsec10\business center cup review OS Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Address Map 3. Site Plan 4. City Council minutes from 1981 5. Letter from Halls dated 10/1/2004 6. Email from Patrick Lensing dated 1/11/2005 7. Council CUP conditions Attachment 1 it ~^ ~ it ~ ~ ~t`J~ i ~-.~~- --- ~l~Vr~---- ---tip ~I ~ ~ r T--1 II ~ ~ ii ~~~ ~~~ ~ ,I Il ~ I t I 14 ! ~ I i * ~ I I~ I I I i ~~ ~ ~ I I ~ I I~~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ (r Ii I ~~ ~~ ~~y~ II ~ -_ _- ~I ~ I I~ ~I r ~ ^ , _ ~ I i ~ ~ ~ QI ~ I ~ _ I I~ I I I, I I ~ ~ ~ ~ --------_~ ~ I-fE'RbA1~At~E-----~_,...~------~~------- ^ I I _ -- _ ,. = pF = ~R/?cNDVtEW ~41tE- _ ~ I N~ ~ tI QI ' * I I ~-. I I ~ ~~ ~~ I 1 - ___~~ ~ - ~~ I ----------------HiOH1N/kY~B-------------~ -------- -- ti ,r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - II II }I 1~ ~ ~ Ir - iI ~` i - .J - r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '~ - ~. ------------- COPE7IVE - _~ o..- fF . .i f a ~kd ~ al I, ~~ >a~i ~~ ;, , i .~ is ~ ~ d f fl ~ Attachment 3 ., ~ _ 4. ~ P © 7~~~ ~~~ W®1 111~' u ~'g .wwp.~.r..n~.+~+ J ~M ~y.~wglM \ _ `. ~ ~ w r F ! - { MIy.M ~ Ir , 4Mr ,~~ !k ,. K . ~~. ,, - ' \ +, . f ~~ .~~ li _ ~. {.M-/w ~D~lO'A' .~ s•«s • ~.~ _ -- ~i a•,nlc OIA~aMI~'d' .IM ` r ~ ~ . i t~Y ~. ,, ,. 9, „ ~ ~~~~ ~~ a., ~ ~ ~ .. .. , ~ i. ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ , w. i ., ... i r ~ ~ :4. ,, t' a 1 d i .,k i P. .... L l .~.. !V r „ _ Attachment 4 al-s-174 WHEREAS, the Council. of the City of Maplewood, acting on its own initiative as provided under Section 911.O11~ bf~the Municipal. Code of the City of Maplewood, for the property described as follows: That portion of Lots 11 and 12, E.G. Roger's Garden Lots, according to the recorded plat thereof,. lying north~of the Center line of trunk Highway 36, subject to a highway easement alnd restricted access for T.H. 36 over the south 135.00 feet of said tract, also subject to a street easement for Germain Street over the west 30 feet of said Lots 11. which has been proposed for Special Use Permit. WHEREAS, a public hearing, was held on August 20, 1981 at 7:15 P.M. in the City Hall, notice thereof having been duly published in the official City news- paper, and notices of said hearing having been mailed to all property owners of record within 200 feet of the area proposed for special use permit to operate an office-warehouse facility on property zoned M-1 Light Manufacutring; WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission has made its recommendations; and WHEREAS, it appears for the best interest of the public that said Special Use Permit be granted; NOW, .THEREFORE, $E IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, that the petition for the above described Special Use Permit to operate an office-warehouse facility on praperty zoned M-1 Light Ma»ufacturing be granted, subject to the following conditions: I. Approval of a special use permit for the of#ice/warehouse-.development as proposed by Airport Partnership. Approval is based on the finding that an office/warehouse complex is co~atible with the inte~-ded use of this land as specified in the Coaq~rshensive Plan and Comprehensive .Plan Update. Approval of the special use permit is subject to the following conditions: 1. All uses must meet the following requirements: a. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency noise regulations shall apply. Tests to verify thin shall be made by an indepandent testing firm. The initial cost shall be paid by the owner. If the test shows a violation, the cost of the test shad be paid for by the. property owner. b. Outdoor storage of materials will not be pensitted without agproval from Maplewood's Director of Community Devel~tpment. 2. Occupancy permits a~u t be obtained from the City Building Official as required by the State $uilding Code. 3. Those businesses involved with exterior vehicle storage, such as vehicle rentals or moving coaropa~ies, sail have one parking space for each such vehicle, in addition to those required bl- City Code, on the sate. 4. Adequate signing-for vehicle and pedestrian traffic shall be provided, .subject to the approval of the IIfrettor e+f Public Safety. _ . _ 1... f.ur~ .... m~ i ~ ~ ~ , ~~ .,~e ar ' .. ~:,.i i , i ~. '.6 ~_ w ,. ~. 5. Approval of landscaping, building,. and site design plans are required _ by the Community Design Review Board. 6. As part of the required design review process, the applicant shall provide a detailed drainage and grading plan which provides for the five acre-feet of pondng required by the Maplewood Drainage Plan. 7. The applicant shall obtain a building permit within ane year of Council approval. Truck Traffic - right turn only - post sign "No Left Turn". Seconded by Councilman Bastian. Ayes - all. h. Councilman Anderson moved to approve the special exception for Airport Partnership as followss Approval of a special exception to allow the structures to be constructed 164 2 feet from the residence district to the west. Approval is on the basis that a substantial landscaped area is to be provided as a buffer to provide a site screen for the neighbors. Approval of the special exception is conditioned upon approval of the landscaping plan by the Community Design Review Board. Seconded by Councilman Bastian. Ayes - all. 3. Liquo License.-Chalet Lounge - 0 P.M. a. Mayo Greavu stated this hearing was continued from t e July 2nd meeting. b. Manager ~ns presented the staff report. c. Mr. Mark W. nge, one of the applicants, sp eon .behalf of his application. d. Councilman Anderso .moved to dela` this h rin for 30 da s to allow the applicants to seek other inancing and pres,_t.proof o.f same. Seconded by Councilman Bastia Aye -Mayor Greavu, Councilmen Anderson, Bastian and Nelson. ays - Councilperson Juker. 4. Special Use Permit: Pizza Time Th~itr2•,`1870 Beam Avenue - 7:4S P.M. a. Mayor Greavu convened the sting for public hearing regarding the request of Royal Development to oper e a restaurant 8ving electronic games on property coned BC (M) Business C cial (Modified). so approval is requested for a variance to operate a e~taurant having fewer rking spaces than are required by Code. The Clerk sta d the hearing notice was order and noted the dates of publication. b. Manager Evans resented the staff report. c. Commfssio r Dorothy Hejny presented the following Plan ng Commission recommendat n: "Commis over Pellish :saved the Planning Comn+ission recommend to the City Council appro a1 of a speicai use permit #or the Pizza Time Theaer, based on the find- . ing that the use would aot be any less desirable to this HC(M) area than a :retail use. Approval is contingent upon: o :t J'ln /O / a.. o., ~ ~ i. r _; _. ie ~ t.Ye `1 ~ ' ' ~ ~ ~; ~ ~,,_ 4 f~ ~~' ", Attachment 5 ...~=' ~: ~ .. ,. s~ , _, .. E f •} _ ~ _ _ '_ ~~~ ,, _ ~ ~ rat ~. ' ,. } _ . 1 ~. '= ~ ._ :: ,. ' h:.~ f~. kt (t ` ~_ ~~ 'ti. yf. . ~ Y.r.x ,~ iyk ~ ~ ;.~ q ~ ~~ "'~t~ yF~ * ~ j +' ~ ,y; ._ ~.3 , ~3~.''y. Y ..t _ .'.rr ~:: ~~ j - i'.' F - r i; . Vii" ~ f R ~ . 1~1 '~ A' ~~ ~ h 4 ~ ~t5~ I ~; y.r - 1 }~ ° ~? l ~ }b ' ~ _ rY ~iY A"~ ~ ~ y '~L ;YZ ihi t E` qtr 4 it .~ jiy TAT ~~f _ _ <t ~` ~ ~ c - ~ i~ ter. t- , ~ ' ~ ,. ,~_`4~ " +~`~kF3,1~ s~.~ y~`y _ 3 .rr L= 1~' ~`;,~, ' r ~~` ` ~ ~ ~ ~ wJ t' ~'' ,,,, ~ a , r ~ ~~ r~ ~ ~ ,sa~,. - xr -'~' Y ' ~ ~ _ ,x ~~@~ 1' # 'F ~. - - _ y, ,. - .. ~ J~. ,'~ . u ... ~ V r j k S' tk- ~. . . - ~ n 4 ., . , xr . ,. ~~ ,' ~ ~ r:, ~ : s ' ~ . .'t t ^ ~ '6 ~rt • f~ :ti ' BLS . } ' ~ ~ ~ Y{ L~ ~.LZ ',` '~ ~ 4 ~ ~'~ I'+T1.. ~5 ti.. 3.~ r ~K' ~14 _, tbPr,uw , yY.T +C C f} t' •t ' / - -Kt, - _ _ ~ h f -. ~ , ~ ~, .:.', ,~. :.tom _ .. ... ~_ _ ~ /. { 3 i ~ Dean 14erlnda, Thank you again for your conversatob oar the phone this afternoon regarding the Pioneer Press noise concssrhs and the forthcoming public A~arinq. I hope that thin hearing is sufficient to 're~iolve the concerns `and. the frustrations that` Cndi Hall azadlor tsthers nRay' have regarding noise. Xou had regtteste¢ a brief history or log of discussion regarding this aituntion. Following is Tony brief log: Aug 2004; I first spoke with'Cindi Mall regarding her concerns. She mentioned frustration over loud radios in vehicles, .shouting in the parking lot, and perhaps tires from vehicles spitting out rocks in the vicinity of her house. She also mentioned she has on previous occasions spoken with the manager of`the I~oneer Press facility. She made myself aware that ache has call+ad the Maplewood Police on a few occasions regarding the situation... Aug 2004: I sent notification of -the neghbors' issues to Frank Peak of the Pioneer Press. He followed up bar requesting the a-anagers of 'the: facility to remind staff s,f keseping quiet in the parking lots. Rug. 2404 - I3ecember 2009: Z had convezsationa on a few occasions with Lt. Rabbett afthe Maplewood PD, where he notified m4a that his officers have been called'.: regarding the noise at the Pione~r'Preaa.- He said that he has asked officers to "stake out" the area to monitor the noise, and they have found on those few occasions that there was no extraordinary noise froxs the area, especially'when cos~ared to that of Highway 3G E. October 19, 2004; New automatic doer. with electronic eye installed by Landlord'n order to accommodate eaeier access inlout of apace,by'Pioneer Pream without carts hittfng door and n-aking loud noise. Total cost. was over '$5,040.00 (door, glares, and electric). Atovember 11, 200;4: Myself, FraAk Peak {Pioneer Preasy, and Ed Pawlenty (Pioneer Preslr) met. at site with. Shann Finwall (City of Maplewood) to :discuss ongoing noise concerns. At that time Pfgneer Press agreed to look into possibility of installing "bua~ers" on bottom of paper carts to soften noise from carte being set on pavement/asphalt. in addition, they agreed to aek their waste removal con~any to not cams until noon. They also re- coa~cai.tted to having staff reminded to keep noise down in the parking lot. I agreed to research options far fencing along the property line facing Germain ~traet, though the feasi~ili'ty of fencing being able to address the noise was in question,. In addition, Shann read us a letter from Cindi Hall which we agreed had several exaggerations or was based an mis-information. chile I do not have a copy of that letter, I would like to know ire of its contents so I Cain best provide correct information regarding the property... December 6, 2004: I emailed Cindi Iiall~with an update to our ft~llow-up ae a result of our meeting with Shann. At that tiuK I had not yet received the bid.fraan Heller Fence for 392 linear feet of fence on the property. I did inform her that Pioabeer Preset' waste is not picked up until ll am. In addition, I informed her that they ware still in the process of r®isearching "cart, quieter" optiana, though there was a man in charge of that issue {Greg schendei). 1 ~, ,. That is a brief log of .major converse-tions regarding these matters. I do not have notes or docuu~enta rcgrlyding t3se few times I spoke directly overthe phone with Dave McGregor regarding the noise. Those cgnversaticrns took place on two oGCasions over the last 4 months, and I have been reassured that the Pioneer Press staff is attesting to be ..cognizant of theiz neighbors, In addition, we have some area residents (likely minors} who 'have frequently vandalized thin property. It is my belief that this activity map also be ccntributinq to the noises that Cindi Hall end/or others may be hearing. I have installed additional lighting on the property, and bcyinning next week we will likely have a marked patrol car "hitting" the property 3 times ger night. I have not: yet sigazed a contract with the company yet,. as i am awaiting one additional bid. Eioneer Press has been a tenant in that faciity since-March of 1993. In that time they have maintained the same facility, and not expanded or grown smaller. In addition, their operation has been .consistent over the past 11 (a].aaost 1Z) years. It is my understanding that Cindi Hall purchased her home in December of 1992. In the aroeant3:me~we will continue to seek re~asanablt solutions to these noise concerns, and: T trust the comauinity will understand the unique aspects of this situation. Please .feel free.,to contact via email or phone if you have additional questions or comments, I thank you in advance fat keeping "~.xt the 1©og." Patrick Lensing Patrick Lensing Property Manager Steiner Development, Inc.. (9S2) 475-5121. fax:. (952) 473-7058 MMfrNNAe wrN NNM.y.Y.MIV Mif.N Attachment 7 ~ 44-.1096 lM'AZ'LE'W'OOD CODE at leant ten days: before tt~e homing. The director shalt also cazaee a notice to be mailed ~ each of the tavrnets of property wittain DSO t of the boundaary lines of the praperCy agora which such use has been r~uested, ~-hich notices are to be maa~i to the Last kam<avvu atldreea of such owners at least ten days befirre the date txfthe herring, Such`aotice shall i~3ude the date, time and-plaeae of the hearing' earl ehsli describe the esnuditional use request. Fafiure of p~Pe~3' owners to receive notice shall ~t invalidate of`t~ Praaeediage in this. section. (c) The council ~y refer tl>a application back to the planning camoa when the vuuncil finds that specific gttestio®s or information that may. affect the final deczsian were not considered,. by the planning commission. This pro~wdure shall only be used Dace f~ each application. (d) The: city council may agprwe, amend or deny sn application ia~ a conditional age permit by a majority vale. (e) All decssiong by the city cauncfi shall be dal, escept that any person aggrieved by a decision-may. within 30 days of the dedaion, appeal to the county district scurf. (Code 2982, ~ 36-441) Sec. d4-1097. Staandstds. (a) A conditional use permit may be approved, amended ar denied,based oaa the fallowing standards far approval, is addition to any etaader~C for a conditional nee found in this .chapter: (1) The use would be located, d~ig~oned, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with tbs cdty's c~p~eheneve plan and this Code. (2) 'The use would not change films or glauned charactm' of the surronading area. (3) The use would not depreciate ~+operty values. (4) The: was would not involve any ectavity, process, materials, .equipment- qr methods of operation that weu~ld be daasgerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturhing sat e~ltuse a nuisance to any peatson or pat+rty, because Of noise, $IiRB, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water' car air lutiaa-- de~aiuag+a avatar ruao$°vibration, nnsighthneaa, eleal ititeer~ or other auissnoee. (6) The was would generate ~ minimal vebi~tlsr tataffLC on local streets and waald net create tzaffe coaag~ation or uasa~e access on ' or purposed Streets. (6) Tlae use would be served-by aEdequa'be pcmlc facilities axid,services including streets, pol»r and fire Pratectio>a+ daraise ,water and nearer systea~na, echca and Parks. (7) The use would not create coats ~r public fa~itiee or servu~s. (8) The use would use the of seal 1~e site's aatuxal sad scenic !e8txtres into the d t d8sig~. (9) T~ use would eausa aaai~i>aedi a eaztal effeab~a. CDe4r186 :~ 7~0 ~ 44.18 (b) atY council ~ waive any' of the regteate is st~bseetion (a) of this section for a public or utility structure, }~+ovi~Cl the ~l shall' first malts a de~ermia~ation that the ba3anc3t~g of public in4sreet between goverameatal units of the state would be beet served by each waiver. (c) The applicant shall have the burden of prcr+-ng t~ttat the use would meet all of the eEtandartis rimed for approwl.af a cxu~ditzonal use permit. The city may r~}uire the applicant previile, at his cost, any iteration, studies or ;expert teetimoay to e~ablsh a these etecc~darde d be met or to establish conditions 1nr appr~ival. (Code 1882, ~¢ 38-442) 8eo. 41-ISY& t~osditione. (a) The city council, in gran~ng a ebnditionai nee permit,- may impoaae such c~aditions and guaranteee~ that it considears and ae ~d by the reor~rd of tope proceed~nge to protect t and flee public interest and to achieve the goals and vbjed~vee of the comprehensive plan. (b) Conditions and guarantees may include but-are not limited to the following:. (1) Controlling the number, eras, bulk, height, ~lumisxation sad location of such trees. (2) Regulating acce~ to the Prpperty, with particular referents:. to vehicle :and plan ea4sty and convenience, traffic control and e~megency vehicle acceeis. (S) Regulating ~-e~treet par]dnRg and ceding areas, including the nwonber and width of Pffi'~S (4) The lot~tias and design of utilities, including drainage. (5) S, fieacing, anal lsadarcetlua~ including uadergrouad, sprinkling. (6) C`bi3ii.3 +~f a~earanas with surroandmg land new. 1 (?) Freserv~ataon of t~ site's t~-atural, historic and scenic features .in the developmnent design. (8) Limiting the cumber, sise~ location cr lighting of , aotwithataading article -III of flue. chapta~r which pertadne to sign. (8) The la~catiou, dimsnsianas aevd upkesp of open apsce- (10) Increes~B required ~ ~ ~ or setback requirements. (111 Compliance with ~ plane presented. (12) A tiffie limit for rat-iea'af tl~e permit. f i3) Awiatt~en +~ash a lal o£+aredit or otter gua~to ~eai~e that the will be built as aPpsovad• (14} e CT)44107 _ ~~.1 ~ 44-1099 I~AP'~'ii-t7K3IJ Ct3DE } ' .,y'. ~ . ~i: ~' (18) Control of the interior and axtarior components of a building, provided. that such tt3UII does not dick with tbs mode. Such e~npoments may inclexde but ` not be limited to the finished emEterior materials and installation of elevators. (16? Control of potential noise generatosa (Code 1982,: ~) Sec. 4l-1~. 9 of ao~ar~ti~an ~r vise. 'Thar pruptyeed 'udii~rt must be substantially s~srted or the proposed use utilised within one ~ ~ ~pivvai os the cow use permit shall become nail and void. The council may grsr~t up to ane ~e-year est~o~n of the permit if just cause is el~owa. This. requr~tes~t shall. not apply to YtJDe vri~ as s~pr'aved Pig P~• ~~ ezteasian s13all be regwest+sd its writing and filed sritlz-the director of commsusity developmextt at 341 days beTcre the ezpiration of the original oorxiiticmal use permit. There shall be no cltsrg+e £or filing such petitatan. The request far shall stabs ii~ets showing a good thfth attempt to . cxm3plete racc utilize the ass parmstDadd in the conditional. use permit, (Code 198, $' 86-4s;4) See. -11fiA. {a) Ali vonditianal use permits shall be reviewe~t lay tlte' aoun~tal witbiin ane yam' of the date ~ iait~l approval, unless such review i$ waived by council decision or ;ordinance. At the one-fur rseav, the council may an inde8~tite term or specific tea, not to ezceed five ysard, £~ anent reviews. She ©ouncil may impose new or a~itaoaal oonditiaas upon tl~e permit at the time of the initial or enbsegneat reviews. (b) Acoaditionsl use permit shall remain is effect as long as the canditi~ egz'eed upon are t~epaevrad, but nothing in this aectiaan shall prevent the city firm enacting ar amending adfid$t to change the status of cosditicmal pees. Any oonditioraal use that meets the u~ iticans ~md is later allaared because of ttre city enadarl$ or 8 adlgcatal cos~.trarl8r ahaIl be r~aaosidm^ati a ito~oa~forming use. ~ ice, ~ 3s-~st~-) Bee. ~t4.1101. 'l~le~anina. ~~ (~ ~ ~ suspend. or i the permit if the approved exmditioss have been Violated ar tli~se are is no lougst in . Wh~ers tls+e a~ of a builldi~g or st~^ncbur8 a Mary v~ae in es~ of ~It00,~Q0.0i1 >ms lam peirmitted, the council sAall P for a pew of gmzthtiae-tion of not less five yearn. iNhere public health, end 9velfare are threatened, the $~e-ywdr d is not required, sad the counsel may dine the amortization peti,ad. if a~pR, br--bs s~dsred. Tfte +o~w~r o£the patty upon which tl~ aunttltional use permit was ise~d ~ d is 9vritie~g at lee~st teen ds-ys bare fk-e meting. If the pavposgd matt ~ based;caon a of was, the prt~- ®rovners wl~i,o: 3811 iedt shell also ba a0ti~d. Tye dirsctcar' of community deveti0pn'~nt m$Y isstiae a otcier ~ w+ort is progress until the ooumcil heaze the matbez Cfl1#;2t19 Agenda # Kl MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk DATE: January 18, 2005 RE: Intoxicating Liquor License Introduction Alan Hartman has submitted an application for an intoxicating liquor license for the Maplewood Moose Lodge located at 1946 English Street. Background Mr. Hartman was born and raised in Jordan, Minnesota. He currently is retired a$er spending thirty-six years employed as Labor Foreman for Kraus Anderson. He has been residing at this current St. Paul address for many years. Mr. Hartman has also been a member of the Moose Lodge since 1982. Standley resides in Inver Grove Heights and was atwenty-year employee of Eco Lab. He has been a member of the Maplewood Moose Lodge since 1986 and is currently the district president. He has had no previous experience in the liquor or restaurant business. Chief Thomalla has met personally with the applicant to discuss measures to eliminate sale of alcohol to underage persons, general security, retail crime related issues, and Maplewood liquor ordinances. As required by city ordinances, the necessary background investigation was completed by the Police Department on Mr. Hartman. The following checks were completed: State and Federal criminal history files, State motor vehicle and driver's license file, contacts and warrants in Ramsey, Hennepin and Scott Counties and the Saint Paul Police Department. There was nothing found that would prohibit Mr. Hartman from holding a liquor license in the City. Recommendation The on-sale intoxicating liquor license is submitted for council approval. ~~ ~r~~ri~.~s=~ii~, TO: Richard Ftn~smart, City Manager FROM: Bnx~ K. Andsrsort, Dir+eclor of Parks and Ran DATE; January 98, 2005 for the January 24 City Counal Meeting SUB.lECT: Tobacco-Frae Policy Request lntraductiort Stud~ts from North Hutt School aubmjl~d a ptflpc~l th ~ panics arni nscx+eation corrsaission on [~cembe~r 20 regar+ctirrtg the tm~rtf of ~ ~o-lri[~as policy Ibr tfie t~s outdoor parks and roecx~eatiort areas. The parks and r+e~t dewed thek proposal, which in their words i$ designed "to prafiec~ the health and r~relfare ct# tam' tens and park vlsitars:' The partcs and recreation txtmrnission ~roted six tti vrte th ~ the'-. use d tobatx~a produt~s on Pte. Park facilities and open space prvpers when youth are present Badc®round The C.os~itiort of a Tob~acmo-F~+ee Stems ties been a~t e~ for a rnrmber of tears. Their organi~atiort, aktr-g with -the d - oa~salor at North High Sctwol, has heart YwrkKtg with sttxiertts at North. tiigtt ~ttaol th prohibit totiacc~r usze w~rrthe N~iewood Park system. Our departrrtent cumenlly prohit~s tebe~co use of any kind wit park bogs anti the Maplewood Community Center. The of outta~r'@abaoct~ use has been distx~sed by-.the panics and racxeatiat cornnnissior~ on threes ttr iivtK ~ . For a rxurther of r trte connmission ~d rtot take arty forntsd action in the peal. SlaPt supports the cumertt pnopos~ tram ete l schpOi students arx# the Coalition of a Tobacx~-FFr®e State to essh a td~cca-free pt> ar~q p Std believes ttta~t there ~ Logic th the argtsrtent ~ at~tt rota rno€l artd seoortd-hand smoke impact on other park ttaers. Tttis issue beoar~es'peraartat and o!'t~ ooitld argue, be~ts'to irttr on First Antertdntertt Enclosed is a copy of the studenrts' proposal the was adopted by the parks and rocxeakort c~rt~mission. The proposal harts ~ use vt yet era prratt with two excapt~ns. The two exceptions ors: The Maplevwod Commur~ty Centel wtxtld have taro areas, one fof employees and orte fur guests that would permit ~rtottirrg. Smoking would tie perrttitxed during our adc~ sot~N league gaut~tes between 5;3t~10:30 p.m. The issue of ertfortoerrtent artd implsn~erttt~ion is ~rl~rMi~reht straw, -The tdaaaa>•~rae polccy will hatre ~- ~rtoe. Tits try w~ y for srxi ~ ~ c~ rrrerrtbers of >fte tobeaCa-fi~ss paiic~r, lllie wouM iq~~rrd~ th ~~ rro~ ar~iraerrrent of tt~ pttitq ~ w~: ti ~ my ttti~#t ~ ~ w~ also ttral~e Pa~t~c obaervadorts, ~ stall tw ~t~' ~r ear. The batbm ~ is i an ~, could make a ~ ~ rtak mss,' l9 ~ ~ t#ttr~ th oQrr~tue th they wtx~l ha~re the right >Q do sa. There wig be na P rte. Recomme~aor~ Staff r®oommends that the city p+E t ~ ~ecr+eatian commission's ~ weN es ~d a~ his !M ~i' ~ ~ ~ oboe-tree policy w~~n ]row ~e t The poMcy ~ : ~..:.` : ` ~ Ali~iawaod C~mnumity ~' Patios a~ dwing ss s_ lQ~ltob~oco-ira Po~~cY~-~-~ Endo.u~* Tobacco-~ c3' r~_r~_ay S^b~~ Pmin' of .use in the city of McPlewood's pa~ ~ purprac: In order tv ~ health and welfare of o~ and lv~aitflrs, the Maplearoad Parks & R~ D ~thc use of ~s on cit}' awnzd Pfd, park facilities aad ~ . Pdic' Wit: The Maplewood: Parks and Ration Departme~rt l~ the uae of any tobacco p~od~ct on all City-owed par~md, park ~Ci, and a+p~- e',cu' ~Y/schoai district prfrpe~ies ~ IG'8~,, ~g/b~p~ha, and swam arms: T~,epavk~p~a~ng.tabarcxao rr.~e wronJdinc~hrde tha fal~wn~: Fay r~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ c car e Wald JayPa~c K~rrvod S+obinm t . ~ ~~ ~ via wx~ ~~= At A,a~tt so~at~ saw des ~ (s:~c~,m-~o:~c~am} Dod patio :rea {1 frx & I f~~gu~ts} at the ~ap~ood Cat3- Genta~ ~ cra#,~ a fiobacoo ~ t ~ Ci~* Yarb, tba Po~- • T 1~ u~ jm t~ ~ity of y~rth aid adds in o~ w~c~g reareaal activities is ~ aid d m the ~ of a~a's. n Tobacco products, o~tx d in Public', ace o~em diced ~ ~ grand, thus p~8 a risk crf~ totod~s and pets ~d c~usi~ a l'~. • Pararrts, leaders cosc~s aad o~aials are ~ #a be rod modals. a~ the use of tobacco pradrids has a taive c~ youth lfaatylo dioiccs. Tmpleme~istatiog: F.gfvrcieg the TobaFree Park Fnlicy in Maplewood will- be hough volu~- campliaucc. ~: signs wi11 ~ paced at au c:ity~wn~a , recce ~~, and a~ p ~ ~ ~ ~y Viers of the Tob~c~co-Eras Pcnc~y. 2. ~ ~ f ut~ize City-o~od ~ commit-tic ~ tlria 3. S aad1~ City staffwill nooks periodic of racr~an pfd to ~oaitor ~ aa~liaa~e. F~'e~live dam: ,- ~.p~cy ~ is cS`ective y tL~c date of n, December x3~ ~~4 Maplevrmocl Park-& Rec Connmissioner Attn: Bruce Anderson 1Rgv'Com-ty Rid B'Eas~t ~~~ `5~~9 Dear Mr. Anderson: This letter is in support of the Proposed policy in Maplewood for tobacco free parrs. The Ramsey Medical So- strongly fa~rns eliminating seond smoke. is pt~l% areaa, Orly those where +cn and youth are used to it; Uur youug:peogle benefit fmm the e~amgle of adults not smote. -LT~orh~na, ~ Minnesota about cme-fourth of high _ :____ _~_ . school seniors are r~~ ev ~ is illl _ , t,, D~R'~ ~oR`~ . The Ramsey Medical Society is the proi~essional organization of physicians in Washington, Ramsey,-and Eastern D~alo~ta Counties. As the local affiliate of the Minnesota Medical Association, our membars support clear and stroxwg policies to elx~an~inate secondhand smoke in public areas such as those devvfied to recreation. We are.therefbnr strongly in favor of the adoption-af .:p~vpa~sed Tobacco 1?'ree.~ohe~;f~~ Maplewaad's entire park syste~'~~We:fa'd that this is the right thug to do because perk and tiona~ ~ar~s ~aie intended to proiriotethe health atthe community and enviietital car~ogens in secondhand should be eliminated from them. lhis policy will also help parents, and otba~ role IRO(lelS set expectations-and reinforce that tobaccao 'is cat compatible with. healthy recreation. Such a policy helps counter dents targeted to youth that insxli~sly connect tobacco and sports and motion. By creating tobaocx!-free spaces fvr its people, the immunity wi71 send the message that tobacco. use is incompatible with health. Besiod~es tlxe l~al#h o~ratior~, on a piety economic b~ the litter canned bydiscardednon-bible cigarette filters and packt-ging materials is an nuisance and envim~uaental detriment-that costs Maplewood tazgayets money, Agenda #K3 SUMMARY MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner SUBJECT: Land Use Plan and Zoning Map Changes, Conditional Use Permit and Design Approval PROJECT: Maplewood Imports Auto Center LOCATION: 2450 Maplewood Drive DATE: January 13, 2005 INTRODUCTION Project Description Jon Hansen, of LeJeune Investments and Maplewood Imports, is proposing to build four new automobile dealerships and a support services building on the 32-acre property at 2450 Maplewood Drive. This complex would include 4 separate dealership buildings (each with sales and service facilities), a support services building and up to 1,945 parking spaces for inventory, customers and employees. Requests To proceed with this proposal, Mr. Hansen is requesting that the city approve: 1. Aland use plan change for part of the site. This change would be from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing). 2. A zoning map change for part of the site. This change would be from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing). 3. A conditional use permit (CUP) for the motor vehicle maintenance garages. 4. The design plans (architectural, site, landscape, and lighting plans) for the Audi dealership site and building. In addition to the applicant's requests, city staff is requesting city council approval to update the Transportation Section of the Comprehensive Plan. DISCUSSION Land Use Plan and Zoning Map Changes As I noted above, the applicant is requesting that the city change the land use plan and zoning maps for part of the site. The requested change is from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing). The proposal to change the land use plan from CO to M-1 for the site would meet the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan and also would meet the criteria in the city code for zoning map changes. Conditional Use Permit Automobile sales are a permitted use and the city requires a CUP for automobile repair and maintenance garages for property in an M-1 zoning district. The proposal meets the city criteria for conditional use permits. Traffic Impacts and Study The applicant, in response to city staff concerns, had a traffic study done for the proposed development. This study shows that the proposed development will generate less traffic than an office complex that the current zoning would allow. City staff also had our traffic consultant at SEH review the applicant's traffic study. I have included Tom Sohrweide's comments about the study in the project review memo. MnDOT also provided city staff with comments about the proposal and about traffic operations in the area, including the intersections of Highway 61 and Connor Avenue and Highway 36 and English Street. In response to this, ChuckAhl, Maplewood Director of Public Works, prepared a memo dated December 30, 2004. In this memo he includes the position of the city engineering staff about the intersections in the area and a recommendation that the city hire a consultant to do an update of the transportation section of the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff is recommending approval of the proposed land use and zoning map changes, the conditional use permit and the project design plans for the Maplewood Imports Auto Center at 2450 Maplewood Drive. In addition, city staff is requesting council approval to hire a consultant to do a traffic study for a large part of Maplewood, including this site. Agenda #K3 MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner SUBJECT: Land Use Plan and Zoning Map Changes, Conditional Use Permit and Design Approval PROJECT: Maplewood Imports Auto Center LOCATION: 2450 Maplewood Drive DATE: January 18, 2005 INTRODUCTION Project Description Jon Hansen, of LeJeune Investments and Maplewood Imports, is proposing to build four new automobile dealerships and a support services building on the 32-acre property at 2450 Maplewood Drive. This complex would include 4 separate dealership buildings (each with sales and service facilities), a support services building and up to 1,945 parking spaces for inventory, customers and employees. The city has planned and zoned this site CO (commercial office) and M-1 (light manufacturing.) (Refer to the applicant's statements on pages 15 and 16 and the maps on pages 17 through 36.) Requests To proceed with this proposal, Mr. Hansen is requesting that the city approve: 1. Aland use plan change for part of the site. This change would be from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing). (See the land use plan map on page 19.) 2. A zoning map change for part of the site. This change would be from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing). (See the property line/zoning map on page 21.) 3. A conditional use permit (CUP) for the motor vehicle maintenance garages. 4. The design plans (architectural, site, landscape, and lighting plans) for the Audi dealership site and building. (See the project plans on pages 24 - 36 and the separate enclosures.) BAC KG RO U N D Miggler Addition On September 22, 1986, the city approved the Miggler Addition preliminary plat for this site. On April 27, 1987, the city council dropped a lot from the proposed Miggler plat and also changed the zoning for the Miggler property. The city made this change so the zoning line between the M- 1and CO zoning districts lined up on a lot line in the plat. (This is the zoning that is now in place for the area.) (See the map on page 20.) This zoning change means that the city has zoned about 21.3 acres of the site CO and has zoned about 11 acres of the site M-1. On September 26, 1988, the city council extended the preliminary plat approval for one year and revised the conditions for final plat approval. On January 24, 1994, the city council terminated the approval of the Miggler Addition preliminary plat because: 1. Government regulations and policies have changed significantly since the city first approved the preliminary plat in 1986. 2. Over seven years have passed since the city held a public hearing on this plat. There may be new neighbors near the plat site and they should have a chance to comment on the plans to develop this property. 3. There had been no physical activity to develop this plat. DISCUSSION Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) City staff has been researching the need or possibility of having the developer prepare an EAW for the proposed project. An EAW is a preliminary environmental review of a proposal to look at how the development could potentially affect the environment. The state has designed the EAW to gather and disclose information about potential environmental effects from a proposed project. The EAW also reviews ways or methods to avoid or minimize any environmental effects. An EAW has a list of standardized questions that cover issues such as land use and habitat, storm water, wetlands, air emissions and pollution and traffic. As proposed, the project does not meet the minimum size thresholds set by state rules to mandate an EAW. However, the city can require the developer to prepare an EAW if the city decides that the project "has a potential for significant environmental effects." In their review of the original proposal, Chris Cavett and Chuck Vermeersch of the city engineering department noted several concerns with the proposed plans. The applicant, in response to the concerns expressed by staff, agreed to revise the project plans. These are now the plans under review. The city engineering department is no longer recommending that the applicant prepare an EAW since they have made significant changes to the plans -especially in regard to storm water management and wetland protection. Land Use Plan and Zoning Map Changes Land Use Plan Change As I noted above, the applicant is requesting that the city change the land use plan map for part of the site. The requested change is from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing). The city does not have any specific criteria for land use plan changes. Any changes to the plan, however, should be consistent with the goals and policies in the comprehensive plan. In this case, there are six land use goals and eight development policies in the comprehensive plan that the city should consider when reviewing this request. The applicable land use goals include: Provide for orderly development. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods. 2 Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase jobs and provide desirable services. Minimize the land planned for streets. Minimize conflicts between land uses. Prevent premature use, overcrowding or overuse of land, especially when supportive services and facilities such as utilities, drainage systems or streets are not available. The applicable development policies (to implement the plan goals) include: The city will not approve new development without providing for adequate facilities and services, such as street, utilities, drainage, parks and open space. Safe and adequate access will be provided for all properties. Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses should not create a negative economic, social or physical impact on adjoining developments. Whenever possible, changes in types of land use should occur so that similar uses front on the same street or at borders of areas separated by major man-made or natural barriers. The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each neighborhood. Group compatible businesses in suitable areas. Promote the joint use of parking areas, drives and trash containers. Avoid disruption of adjacent or nearby residential areas. The proposal to change the land use plan from CO to M-1 for the site would meet these goals and policies. Commercial Office (CO) Zoning Section 44-471 of the city code notes that the city established the CO zoning district to "provide areas for the development of professional and administrative offices with related commercial uses in areas in close proximity to residential areas." The code also states that the city intended the commercial office (CO) zoning district (when the city added it to the city code in 1975) "to be primarily on heavily traveled streets or adjacent to commercial or industrial districts." The city also designed the CO zoning district to lessen the impact of these uses (the commercial and industrial uses) on residential areas. (See the CO code section starting on page 37). Maplewood does not allow automobile sales or service in the CO zoning district. There currently is one area in the city with the CO zoning -the eastern 1070 feet of the site of this proposal. I have calculated that the city has zoned about 21 acres of the 32 acres of the site CO and the city has zoned the western 11 acres (along the frontage road) M-1. (Please see the maps on pages 20 and 21.) While the CO zoning district may have been a good idea in 1975, it has never caught on nor has a developer or property owner ever implemented a plan using the 3 CO zoning. The Miggler plat, as I outlined on page one of this report, would have been a development plan that would have used the CO zoning, but the owner never chose to build the plat. For comparison purposes, I have included the BC and M-1 zoning codes starting on page 39 and the CO zoning code starting on page 37. Land Use and Zoning Map Changes In this case, the site is adjacent to Highway 61 (to the west), next to light industrial and office buildings to the south and is next to city-owned wetland and park property. The applicant has asked the city to change the land use and zoning map designations from M-1 and CO to M-1 for the entire site. This is because the city does not allow automobile sales or service in the CO zoning district. Additionally, this property is not immediately adjacent to land that the city has planned for residential uses. Therefore, the changing of the CO designations on the land use plan and zoning map on this property to the higher-intensity M-1 land use and zoning classification will complement the existing land uses in the area and should not negatively affect any of the existing area land uses. The land area of the entire project site is about 32 acres. Of the 32 acres, about 30 acres of the property is now vacant and most of that area should be developable. However, the actual number of buildings and the parking lot and driveway layout that could be constructed on the site will be limited by city standards and variables such as site access, grading and drainage, storm water facilities, wetland delineation, and setbacks. It is important to note that any new development will be subject to all city-required development standards, including setbacks from the wetlands and storm water management requirements. Conditional Use Permit Automobile sales are a permitted use and the city requires a CUP for automobile repair and maintenance garages for property in an M-1 zoning district. As I noted above, the city does not allow automobile sales and service in the CO zoning district. The code further states that both of these types of uses must be located at least 350 feet from residential property. The proposed development meets this requirement as the north property line of the proposed development is about 355 feet from the nearest point on the south property line of the closest lot on Edgehill Court (1294 Edgehill Court). In addition, the north property line of the project site is about 424 feet from the south edge of the structure at 1294 Edgehill Court. Lastly, the northern-most dealership building (Number 2) would be about 146 feet south of the north property line of the site. Traffic Impacts and Study The applicant, in response to city staff concerns, had a traffic study done for the proposed development. (See the study on pages 50-63.) This study shows that the proposed development will generate less traffic than an office complex that the current zoning would allow. City staff also had our traffic consultant at SEH review the applicant's traffic study. Tom Sohrweide's comments about the study are on page 64. MnDOT also provide city staff with comments about the proposal and about traffic operations in the area, including the intersections of Highway 61 and Connor Avenue and Highway 36 and English Street. In response to this, ChuckAhl, the Maplewood Director of Public Works, prepared a memo dated December 30, 2004. (Please see the memo starting on page 65.) In this memo he 4 includes the position of the city engineering staff about the intersections in the area and a recommendation that the city hire a consultant to do an update of the transportation section of the Comprehensive Plan. Site Improvements Lot Combination The project site now consists of five separate lots with abandoned greenhouses on them. Before the city issues a building permit, the applicant should combine all the properties into one property (for tax and identification purposes) with Ramsey County. Wetlands The wetland on the north and east sides of the proposed site, a Class 1 wetland, has characteristics and functions that are most susceptible to human impacts; they are the most unique type of wetland and have the highest community resource significance. The city requires a 100-foot-wide wetland buffer along the wetland to help protect the wetland from human impact. Because the Class 1 wetland is susceptible to human impacts and has the highest community resource significance, staff recommends keeping as much of the buffer as possible next to the wetland undisturbed. The latest project plans meet this requirement as they show the 100-foot wetland buffer with no disturbance. Watershed District Review On December 8, 2004, the Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District reviewed the proposal and approved a permit for the project. In addition, Tina Carstens of the Watershed District staff provided me with five project review comments. They are listed in the a-mail on page 45. Parking The city's parking ordinance does not clearly define the special parking requirements for an automobile dealership, i.e., parking spaces for automobile inventory. However, using the ratio of 1 space for each 200 square feet of office/showroom, 1 space for every 1,000 square feet of parts storage, 3 spaces for each service bay, and 1 space per employee, the Audi site is required to have 300 parking spaces. The applicant is proposing 436 parking spaces for the Audi building and up to 1,945 parking and storage spaces on the entire site. Maintenance Garage(s) The proposed 21-bay maintenance garage within the Audi building and the four other proposed dealerships/maintenance buildings should meet the findings for CUP approval. (Refer to the applicant's narratives on pages 15 and 16.) Audi Building Design The applicant is proposing to build first a 36,520-square-foot Audi showroom/sales/service building. The proposed Audi building will have a front exterior (north side) of insulated windows 5 in aluminum frames, painted pre-cast concrete panels, metal composite panels and a standing seam metal roof. The sides and rear exteriors of the Audi building will primarily be painted pre- cast concrete panels. (See the proposed building elevations on page 36 and the enclosed project plans.) The proposed building is attractive and should set a design standard for the future buildings in the development. Tree Preservation The city's tree preservation ordinance requires that all "large" trees removed from a site be replaced one-for-one, up to 10 trees per acre. The ordinance defines a large tree as a tree with a diameter of 8 inches at a 4-foot trunk height, excluding boxelder, cottonwood, and poplar. The applicant proposes removing 135 "large" trees with the proposed grading and construction of the project site. These include 79 elms, 18 oak and smaller numbers of maple, ash, birch, linden and pine. Therefore, the applicant must plant at least 270 replacement trees on the site. The proposed project plans show the applicant planting a total of 268 trees as part of their overall landscape plan, including 213 deciduous trees and 55 coniferous trees. The proposed number and size of the replacement trees meet the city's requirements. Landscaping The overall project landscape plan calls for the planting of a variety of trees around the perimeter of the site and around the driveways, parking areas and the ponding areas. For the Audi building, the plans show the planting of trees around the edges of the parking and drive areas, the planting of ornamental trees and shrubs in some of the parking lot islands and along the north side of the building. In addition, the plans note that all turf areas are to have sod and that entire site is to be irrigated with an underground irrigation system. Any landscaping and turf establishment within the highway right-of-way should be subject to MnDOT's approval. It is important for this site to have an attractive appearance from the frontage road and from Highway 61. As such, staff would prefer that the applicant add more overstory trees (maple or oak) on the west side of the site, along the frontage road. In addition, Chris Cavett, assistant city engineer, is recommending in his engineering plan review starting on page 46 that the applicant submit detailed landscape plans for the ponds and for the infiltration basins or vegetative filter strips. The contractor should plant the ponds with native vegetation including grasses with Forbes, native shrubbery and trees should be planted on the upland portion of the ponds. All landscaped areas, excluding landscaping within the ponds, must have an underground irrigation system. Trash Storage The code requires that all trash containers be kept in screening enclosures with a closeable gate. The applicant proposes to keep their trash inside an enclosure on the south side of the building. This contractor would construct this enclosure with the building and it would be of materials compatible with the building. The plans also show the gates for the enclosure being made of chain link fencing with privacy slats. However, the city code requires a 100 percent opaque gate for the enclosure. Staff would prefer that the contractor build the gates with solid wood or metal for better screening and longevity. Lighting 6 The city's lighting ordinance requires that all new freestanding lights be a maximum of 25 feet in height. In addition, the maximum light illumination from any outdoor light cannot exceed .4 foot candles at all property lines. The applicant's proposal includes installing several new 24-foot-tall freestanding lights around the site, 3.5-foot-tall bollard lights near the sidewalk around the building and new wall pack lights on each building (see attached outdoor lighting plan on page 33). The plan shows that the maximum light intensity at the property line will be .4 foot candles. Site-Plan Concerns Vehicle-Transport Unloading Unloading on public right-of-way has been a recurring problem with auto dealerships in Maplewood. Unloading on Highway 61 or on Duluth Street (the frontage road) is not allowed and should be prohibited by a condition of the CUP. Police Concerns Lieutenant Rabbett of the Maplewood Police Department expressed concerns about traffic and property issues. He noted that this type of dealership may have less traffic flow than other dealers and this type of development may not generate rush hour traffic as an office complex or an industrial park would. However, the size of the project and limited direct access to the site is cause for some concern. The Highway 61/Connor Avenue access is marginal for even the existing traffic. Complicating the problem is the easily ignored prohibition against turns from westbound Connor Avenue to southbound Highway 61. He wanted to see a detailed traffic analysis and some type of improvement to the intersection. Lt. Rabbett also noted that the east side of the development will be particularly accessible to anyone interested in theft or damage to vehicles. There does not appear to be any security fencing to restrict unauthorized access and officers will have a difficult time approaching the area undetected. He recommended that the owner include security fencing and appropriate lighting and video surveillance equipment on the site. Automobile Sales/Storage Lot The applicant is proposing to use the eastern part of the site for the storage of about 340 vehicles. The applicant is proposing to construct the surface of this storage area with a permeable pavement surface to help control storm-water run off. The sales/storage lot will not be striped, but will hold about 340 vehicles. City code does not require that an automobile sales/storage lot have striped parking stalls unless there are parking stalls for employees or customers. There are no employee or customer parking stalls proposed, but in order to ensure adequate drive aisles, a striping plan must be submitted that shows drive aisles of at least 24 feet in width. Retaining Walls The applicant is proposing to install a retaining wall along the south and north edges of the proposed parking lots and driveways. (See site and grading plan and retaining wall elevation on page 27.) The retaining walls will start at ground grade and extend upward to five feet at their highest point. Other Comments 7 Engineering: See attached memo from the city engineering department on pages 46-49. David Fisher, the Maplewood Building Official, noted the following requirements: 1. Handicap accessible parking stalls and bathrooms are required for each building. 2. All the buildings must be fully fire sprinklered. 3. The city requires a separate building permit for each building and the city will require a complete building code analysis when the contractor applies for a building permit. 4. The city will do a full plan review when the contractor submits the plans to the city for a building permit. 5. Provide information about the location and number of customer parking spaces for each building. 6. Provide adequate emergency vehicle access. 7. Any retaining walls over four feet tall require an engineer design and a separate building permit. 8. I would recommend apre-construction meeting with the city building department. Butch Gervais, Fire Marshal, states that the city will require the following fire protection items: a monitored fire protection system (NFPA 13), a monitored fire alarm system (NFPA 72) and a fire department lock box must be installed with each building; a minimum of 20-foot-wide access road or driveways must be provided for emergency vehicles; horn/strobes in service garage area and any normally occupied space in the showroom/office area. The contractors installing any tanks must get the proper permits. COMMISSION ACTIONS On December 20, 2004, the planning commission recommended approval of the proposed land use and zoning map changes and the conditional use permit for this proposal. On January 11, 2005, the community design review board recommended approval of the design plans for the Audi building and its parking lot within the project site. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Adopt the land use plan change resolution on page 68. This resolution changes the comprehensive land use plan map for the vacant property on the east side of Maplewood Drive, north of Gervais Avenue. This change is from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing). The city is making this change because it will: 1. Provide for orderly development. 2. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods. 3. Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase jobs and provide desirable services. 4. Minimize the land planned for streets. 5. Minimize conflicts between land uses. 6. Prevent premature use, overcrowding or overuse of land especially when supportive services and facilities, such as utilities, drainage systems or streets are not available. 7. Help to implement the goals of the comprehensive plan including: 8 a. The city will not approve new development without providing for adequate facilities and services, such as street, utilities, drainage, parks and open space. b. Safe and adequate access will be provided for all properties. c. Whenever possible, changes in types of land use should occur so that similar uses front on the same street or at borders of areas separated by major man- made or natural barriers. d. The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each neighborhood. e. Group compatible businesses in suitable areas. f. Promote the joint use of parking areas, drives and trash containers. g. Avoid disruption of adjacent or nearby residential areas. 8. The previous property owner never constructed the office park on the property that the CO land use designation was for, that the city had implemented for the site. B. Adopt the zoning map change resolution on page 69. This resolution changes the zoning map for the vacant property on the east side of Maplewood Drive, north of Gervais Avenue. This change is from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing). The city is making this change because: 1. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. 2. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood and the use of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. 3. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. 4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. 5. The previous property owner never constructed the office park on the property that the CO zoning designation was for, that the city had implemented for the site. C. Adopt the resolution on pages 70 and 71. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for Maplewood Import's plan to construct up to four automobile dealerships/maintenance garages for the property at 2450 Maplewood Drive. The city is approving this permit based on the findings required by the code and is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The construction of the proposed Audi building must be started within one year of city council approval or the approval for this addition shall end. The city council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The loading or unloading of automobiles on the public right-of-way is prohibited. 4. The operators of the dealerships shall park the automobiles and motor vehicles on designated paved or engineered porous or permeable surfaces. 9 5. The owners and operators of the dealerships shall not store damaged vehicles on the site for more than 48 hours, except in the buildings or in fully-screened storage areas. 6. The owners and operators of the dealerships shall store all garbage, trash, waste materials, tires, vehicles parts and obsolete parts in the buildings or in fully-enclosed trash containers or enclosures. 7. The owners and operators of the dealerships shall not store any tires, vehicle parts, garbage, trash, waste materials or other debris outside. All such storage must be inside the buildings or in approved enclosures. 8. The owners and operators shall ensure that all vehicle repair, assembly, disassembly and maintenance is done within enclosed buildings. 9. The owner and operator shall ensure that the noise from the business operations, including all external speakers, shall not exceed the state noise standards. 10. The city council shall review this permit in one year. D. Approve the plans date-stamped November 17, 2004, for the proposed Audi automobile dealership building and related sales/storage lot at 2450 Maplewood Drive. Approval is subject to the property owner doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Signs shown on the site plan and building elevations are not part of this approval and will require separate sign permits. 3. Submit the following for staff approval before the city issues a grading or building permit: (a) Final grading, paving, drainage, utility, traffic/street improvement and erosion control plans. These plans shall meet the requirements of the city code and the city engineer. (b) A striping plan for the new automobile sales/storage lot. The plan must include drive aisles that are at least 24 feet in width. (c) A revised landscape plan to include: (1) The ponds should be vegetated with native grasses with Forbes. Native shrubbery and trees should be planted on the upland portion of the perimeter of the pond. (2) All landscaped areas, excluding landscaping within the ponds, must have an underground irrigation system. (3) Showing additional overstory trees on the west side of the site (near the frontage road). (d) A revised outdoor lighting and photometric plan. The revised plan shall show the height and style of all outdoor lights and that the light illumination from all outdoor lights does not exceed .4 foot candles at all property lines. 10 (e) A 100-foot-wide wetland protection buffer easement. This easement shall be prepared by a land surveyor, shall describe the boundary of the buffer and shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, grading, filling or dumping within the buffer. The applicant shall record the deed for this easement before the city will issue a grading or building permit. (f) Verification that all watershed district special provisions, as indicated on the watershed district permit, are met before the city issues a building or grading permit for the site. (g) A revised south building elevation showing the final design elements and materials for the gates of the trash enclosure. The gates are to be 100 percent opaque and shall be constructed of wood or metal instead of chain-link fencing with slats. (h) Combine the five existing parcels into one parcel for tax and identification purposes with Ramsey County. The owner or contractor must submit proof of lot combination to city staff before the city will issue a grading or building permit. (i) A cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. 4. The applicant or the contractor shall complete the following before occupying the Audi building or before using the storage lot: a. Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. b. Install a reflectorized stop sign at the exit and ahandicap-parking sign for each handicap accessible parking space. c. Construct a trash dumpster enclosure to meet code requirements, unless trash dumpsters are stored indoors. d. Install an in-ground lawn irrigation system for the parking lot islands and for all landscape areas (except the ponding areas). Lawn irrigation in the right-of-way may be waived if MnDOT will not allow it. It is also waived in the wetland buffer area. e. Post signs identifying the customer and employee parking spaces. f. Install city-approved wetland buffer signs at the edge of the wetland buffer easement that notifies that no building, mowing, cutting, grading, filling or dumping is allowed within the buffer. g. Install all the required exterior improvements, including landscaping and signs. h. Install all bituminous and the engineered porous or permeable surface and the curb and gutter. i. Stripe all drive aisles. j. Install all required landscaping by June 1 if the dealership or if the sales/storage lot is finished in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of completion of the sales/storage lot if it is finished in the spring or summer. 11 k. Install all exterior lighting. I. Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from public streets. 5. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City of Maplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished exterior improvements by June 1 if occupancy of the building is in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy of the building if occupancy is in the spring or summer. 6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 7. This approval does not include the signs. The signage for the development will be reviewed by staff through the sign permit process. 8. This approval does not include any of the other buildings on the site (except the Audi dealership). The owner shall apply to the city for design approval for each of these buildings (including the architectural, landscaping and drainage plans). The community design review board (CDRB) must approve the project plans for each of these buildings before the city can issue a building permit for each building. 9. This approval sets the design standard for the future buildings on this campus. The city expects high quality design, materials consistent with this building, a unified theme with similar features and design elements for the other buildings on this site. CITIZEN COMMENTS I surveyed the owners of the 32 properties within 500 feet of the project site. I received one response. GV Properties (2557 Highway 61) said, in part, "we have had Maplewood Imports for our neighbor for many years and welcome them to their new location. The proposal is quite exciting." 12 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site Size: 32 acres Existing Land Use: Former houses and greenhouses SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Undeveloped property and homes north of wetlands South: SP Richards Warehouse, vacant property and Imprint Enterprises West: Commercial property across Highway 61 East: Wetlands PLANNING Existing Land Use Plan: CO (commercial office) and M-1 (Light Manufacturing) Existing Zoning: CO (commercial office) and M-1 (Light Manufacturing) CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL 1. Land Use Plan Change: There are no specific criteria for land use plan changes. Any change, however, should be consistent with the goals and policies in the comprehensive plan. 2. Rezoning: Section 44-1165 of the city code requires that the city council make the following findings to rezone property: a. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. b. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood and the use of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. c. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. d. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. 3. Conditional Use Permits Section 44-512(8) requires a CUP for maintenance garages. Section 44-1097(a) states that the city council shall base approval of a CUP on the findings listed in the resolution on pages 70 and 71. 4. Design Review Section 2-290(b) of the city code requires that the community design review board make the following findings to approve plans: That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to 13 neighboring, existing or proposed developments and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. 2. That the design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan. 3. That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. Application Date The city received the complete applications and the revised project plans for this request on November 17, 2004. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a land use proposal. As such, city action is required on this proposal by January 16, 2005, unless the applicant agrees to a time extension. In this case, the applicant has agreed to a time extension for city action until January 24, 2005. p:sec9\Maplewood Imports (1-12) - 2005 Attachments: 1. Project Narrative 2. Project Narrative Update 3. Location Map 4. Area Map 5. Land Use Plan Map 6. 1987 MigglerAddition Plat and Zoning Map 7. Property Line/Zoning Map 8. Existing Conditions Map 9. Tree Removal Plan 10. Site Plan 11. Project Parking Summary 12. Phase One Grading Plan 13. Proposed Overall Grading Plan 14. Preliminary Utility Plan 15. Landscape Plan 16. Landscape Plan Details 17. Enlarged Site Plan -Audi 18. Enlarged Landscape Plan -Audi 19. Audi Photometric Plan 20. Audi First Floor Plan 21. Audi Second Floor Plan 22. Audi Building Elevations 23. CO, BC and M-1 zoning code sections (8 pages) 24. 12-3-04 a-mail comments from Tina Carstens 25. 12-10-04 City Engineering Department Review (4 pages) 26. Traffic Impact Report Summary (14 pages) 27. 12-10-04 letter from Tom Sohrweide (SEH) 28. 12-30-04 memo from ChuckAhl (City Engineer) 29. Land Use Plan Change Resolution 30. Zoning Map Change Resolution 31. Conditional Use Permit Resolution 32. Project Plans date-stamped November 17, 2004 (Separate Attachments) 14 - ,x~cdz Ek 4 Attachment 1 I~J~ua~ Irrv~a~rrr, Ixc. 9[~Q ~iP~~~~rw Ht7[JI~~ , ~~ 6~ August 27, 2004 ~ AU6 2.72044 Narrative ~ hlewood Irr~orts project R E G E f V E D In 1993, t.sleune Invest purchased A~etropolitan Imports represeri#ing A~eroedes-~Bs~tz, Audi and P'or'sche and tad it mod knports. Although we ~afied growtfi, it would have been idle ~ pr+adic# the unp~ grcwrth ire-the industry and our brands in fir. From 1993 to now our vehit~e sales are up 26T96, senrioe atte~r~anoe is up 26996 and our parts sales are ~ 34296. From 1993 to today, the avle moc~ls from each menufaduroer has grown tn~rner~dously. In 1993, Au3di hed 6 modals, today they have 23, Maroedes-Benz had 14, today they have 46 and Porsche h~i 5, #odaY they have 13. This does not account for all the trim level variarrls or engine ~. It is a buss ra3oesa~jr tv inventory an eacie of mc~t of the models plus ~atQly BO days supply. On average, rre ~l 260 un~s in ~ve~ory. Frequently ttrat number ~ irxed by preascae from the manurers to #ake adclflional in~nentay: In addiflon to irnrentory, new and used sales customer parking, service r parking, Parts c~storr~er pafkin9 we r~eiec# to park: b0 service ~s and 9EI ~r~loyee vehicles as well as provide space fior tronsp~rt-trt~dcs un In ~n9 Ern high•end ~ we have hd vam rid ~ p ~ ~bc~ond that wed by ctomeetic or J brar~dsj to aooorr~noda~e, ~ some roses, the vehicle she, but ~ a~ comes the rrehicaes value. Ancrther ~ be~+een our fac~ty and a hider volume brand is our k-wer tr~afftc flow. Our ir~y of use is much barer due fio acqu~iticm Prue, quality and the exclusive nature of the brae. With the grvaeth we have e~erienoed and our ~ , it has bscorne ex~eedic~y ~, often ties . ~ Provic~ the superior comer e~serle~ce tit is the irk a# our organization. The t#noe Wirers vae t rc8enz, Audi and Porsd~e are all requires dedkd, brie tomes. P~h ~ ~ regrd to provl~ dwe ~rt~ing, brand id and ~ ~ avow tl~ ~ ~ with the product the band. ~ our ~ fa exceed customer ems ~ eves res do, ne~elty dire ~ grcwrtM and demarx~s P on us ~ ~s x~ ~ ii is-oex ~ to coact art p on #tie 11Abprood for the s®le ar-d service of auks: We #~ ~ ~n o€ ~d i~cx ek~r~rt years been a d nor: Our d be ors of ~e l ~ cau' c~et~ ors ar+a ~~tlter rl flr . tau ~ ~lrr~e wvttkl ham ate! pert '~~ ~d~ ~~i lll~n of - _ _: . ~ 15 =° ~_ :4 ~_; Pill ..� .. ,. 4—hIIII'l ll L .. .. - .. wko dl m a Ak� Al 4 �+ r SJ fC ria 2 Attachment 3. - ~~ ~._ w~ J J f r, E 8 ~ ____I E 1# ! r ,~ 1 J J f 6~ I I ~~ I I ~ I I 'JJ J J fE s ~ ~ ~ ! ^ I 1 338 1356 I i J Jf J 1 J ~ f~ ~ s l l 1J f'.` ~ ~ ~ 1~ 16 i! JJ f k ~ ~7 .. r " 1 f~ 2616 ~" I ! I f ~ J~~ ~/ ' 1 r laf 2A02 1 t E Ir ~ !rr --'~I ~ I-1I 41 li r f r 1 1 •~ I I ~ ' I I tl fl # ~~{ ti ~~ I ~ ' 258 ~ I # !; J I ~<L ~,~, ~ 1 2581 ' I I ! ,1` f +! ! ~ I I ~ ~ t 2571 ~ 1 # ~ ~ ~ I ~ ! ~ I ~ o f 2s67 ^ 1 ! ti.. ~. I ~ ~~ ~~ ~ f . ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ 2558 1~r ~ 1~ `4 F ~~ I 1 J ~ ~ J~ 1 1 1~1.~Jr! ~~'"rfrr ~ 11 ! ~+ JI + y~-~ !. r 11, ! f. JJ f r•,~•, ii . t f }~ Jf I ~~r 1 i . / j, J f ! ~~ I 1 ! ! JJ J f1 I# l~lJJ-1 J! Ili ~~ tJ ~ fr ~ tl !r ~~ i JJ 2 tl ~` `~ ` ' J ~~. . +. J ~l i ~j = tl I f ~ ! _ . _._... . f f! r ~ ~~ ~ 284 I!~ f AJ J` ~ i ~ r J ~!J J ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2~ '! J EJ y i ~ . I ~ ! ~ ~ I 1R Owl oo� --NTY ROA C —--—-------- ---—._ _ i� t'�'1I, i # 1. 116 11 J 1l1r f!! I!I f iff�11 f f I IIIF ! II iII r.l � 1l � 1if- f !I !I I f I FII f I ! ! I / if NM- if ( R--- ——___—___—_ ! I }.. _ - - _ ..- �. _- - -- - -� _ .-. _ - !- - - - - - - - - -- - - - w:> ' 1.9 E:4 I .. I ,: I I A . of , 41-1 i All r r pyo} Tl-,, N .. / 1m Wool -- ----- .txr" - - - - NTY c - - I 1 1 - i � ■ � IIIA I� r � E f 4 {� w F . - ` WIR I I F .SORE®am ._.., �r I I IN c f 1.3 comi vim "'TF•vr u AV TV j + - nat —- __ — -- � SA —--———— — — — — —— - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -—>INGBYWY 3$ - ` - - _ - - - - WPM in 11 _ qZ t k t 21 A, aI -A-. ti:" ,.. W ,. : - At~a,c~enf 8 T- ~:~;~:. ,. .. .~~ ,:,.- .. ,. ~. t ~ ~~ ~ ~ ` • 1 h ~ ~ _ ~ / ~ v ~ ~ , , l . f ~ . . t .~ + r ~ ~ t ~ ` ___ ~ - / ~ ~ A ~ y.,.~.. •• ~ ~ : - ~ti A ~ w-_._ ~ ~ v 'Lrr - ~ i _ ' r w ~ ~ ...._._, -~-- _- --~- . ~ r r t 0 C f ~ ,. y .. - , " __ ,. ~ i rrrrw ~ r+n+r++~u. . rw ~iwwrra~~i-T`w ~ w ~ ww~ w an w ~ ~~r arra `~~ ~r r +w~"~i- wr+r S ~Ilr~ 11Y/ ~ q~TiT IOw~ AT 1T! INWMN - MO T! MIINOI 4 N 1 ~~n~-r;~~, .ram Attachment 9 ~"3F1~~ ~,~~~' '.~ ~ C-t~i1,.f~E ~1L DFcT} A~7~D STAkl.~ ~~hcl8} 431 EA, ACC~.E ~'f~L~ (8x~) 3 EA. TOTAL. PAQIG ~TAt.I~ t~i7 43S EA. ~~ .: ` ~i :' 'fllfl~r ~T STAMA~iD ST~.S {~r~) i154 EA. ~-~~ s~~t:ts 4sx~) ~ EA. TOTAL. PARG S~ALL3 P~01E13 !169 EA. ~. 5~~ A STAt~NZD STIR {~i M3~ 3p40 EA. act TAt.I~ t~~e}' o EA. TOTAL. PART6~NG 9TAi~3 RI~~ 340 EA. _ :~ Attachment 1'i `~~ \'~°~ TatAt sfAW:J #MEq, ltis tA. -, :. :. ;. ... , - ~ ~ ~ s~r~+w wwR ~r+rwK - aM M111Mw ~~ IIII~ MME ~ j,~,,,,,,.,,.,..... ~..~.~. ~~ • ~ ,. ,. ~ .. .'a. ~;.~ - ~. w.. ~... ~~. ~~ ~ ~ -- ,~~~ ~~~ achment 15 ~.. ~.+f P . tta'chment ~ ~ ^ ~ r r r r. r ~ .rrw ~ ".d'•~ .a r ~.r ~ gar ^ err ~ awr r ..r ~ i^. • ~ rir •r w.ir ~ ~ rww ~~~ a ~~ ~• ~ wr r /r.w ®ri rr. nr~ ~i t a M r.1w O 1 ~ ~. •~ - -•- o -~ ~ . ar .~^ ra .. r.r ~.n. ~s1 m~e. r ... ~.~ ®~~ ~_ ~. .r .. .._ _0 . r . w s r ..r r w r r r sw M r.w ~~r ~ ^ ^y ~• ~ i^ ^ ~ /^ y ~i ~ ~•IY Mii rr M M.~ • a . ~1r_ ~~ -^^ .~ r.r ~ • ~ ~ ~ 1rr r ^1iw ~~ O ~ • ^ rw ri^1 err ~ ar^ r.1rAti~ rM rw .w .• r.~ w.r ~p ~ ^wrr' • ~ 1 ~~ ~ iK 111 ^.. /I ~ M~11• • ^ . Mr1 r^~ •^•a^wrs IR r M•1r ~~ IIIU r*•rl 0 ~ ~ Rq6 M •i.ry Q • ,ors ~*r sa wr ^r. ^r y~ ~ r 1~~ +~~r .K wr •.w ~ ~~ r ~~ ~~/ iK M ~.A •~ /RJrti1r ~ A^ • his A ~ I~~1~ Y1\ ~ ~1~i A •~+r111 ^^~,~~~~ rwrr~^~y11N11 r~~ A~•~•~wM•1111i•~ •111~~G +^~ ar+rM1•ry^i~i~w^rw^r^s1~1r rr r~1~^wwr.•1w•w•rrrr~rrr~w~rlrrrraM ^~1w•wrlr•r1rs1^r+^rw1^~rwrrr^r~~.r •r1rF•r^nrw•r rlrsy.rwlr~•r~arrrr.r^ ', _ ~ ~rr1~+r1wrrlr~wwwww. w^1r+~r..•ys - 'f 1 y rril ~~~~}YA~ t 1 , .. 3Q ;. ., ..: .��.. �; .: �.,,..-�,,.:,. a :.?P.,r.. _ .,;; ,�,aa�€w.+ w�,•.,a.;rrcF �::�rsne�+zfa�«x,.. .. fr i.. a 4~ '-- ~wA:~ ~, _. i ;_'""" ~ }- r ,., - -m . ~ . ~~~ ~ , i r ,.. ',. ~~ - ~ '~ i - j, d i~ '. i~3 I ,,' _ ~'. M ,'' , ~~ _.. I ~ - '~ ~' ~ ~ ~: ~~ '~" .., rr ~~ ~ w ~~ I~nil~l-Jfi~° -~,~ _~: ~~`, S <,j rl `-k ' 'F I~ ~$ .i~ iI' E ' trA rr_: ~.~ a i ~' ~' ~ s ~ ~C a ooh t~,t ~ ~ . .. e:~. . ~ ~'~'~t~I 1ot~. b. Tlntba~ rro~kl f~ iie ~'~er~y' t~kwgt ~f'ths , . . ~ n rid ~ + ~d ~s:~!wnsr c~ mt ~s its #~e'a~ ~rou~€1 ~w e1~t r'~t a ~ ('I') 3 ' (8D ~D oo~.' '~ s+~r. a '~ ~ ~ a.> ' ~.~a~'~~Pl~atlbt~e;L. '~~ aNGid' ~i+~t f~o~ a ~~ ~' fie. b. ~I` ~o ~ 13a~ ~ in ae~ot~e~ 44=~(~(~~ w ~ ~ ~. e. , !iII' . o!' mar , ~' w~ri~ o~ 1as: ~t ' fba $aaa' a~ ~e ,~P ~ ~. ~. g ' ~ ' fur ~mo~r ~ alert 6e ~ ~ ~e ~ ~r mc~e t~ #~~n, eaoaapt ~m- abo~ ~r'e~rs tit ~ ~ ~' e :~J`~~oatx~r~t~ . =~~~ ~~~~: _ ~~~::~: ~~: ~~~ _ :. ~~F ~.~~~~~ ~~~: ~. ~~~~~~e~~~ ~,~.~~.. ~~~~~ ~d_ ~;~~ .~ ~ .o_:. ai _ ~_ ~trw.. r~i n. '.>-: N.:I~ Y x.ul iau..wi'..nG..«ax... ... ..e. .. . dr ~'1"w. SJ~wu' ZOWNG. -4"12 a Mx tag low wv� � do tobw .. " ,Nohow ' .. .. 1_Ifidw�.� (10) Am O*wmgt ta'jlwglf�v b. Uo r. Jol".40WOD044 somovokud ii*Aqo& 146 -AIL �� s'u.- fiOi K: yy„ S CID la t Aar lip 7,7 AWPW 1000 '.444 . low • L .. i ~ �tt_�- - fkX mhj Attachment 25 Maplewood Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: Maplewood Imports Auto Center PROJECT NO: REVIEWED BY: Chuck Vermeersch and Chris Cavett DATE: December 10, 2004 LeJeune Investment has submitted revised plans for the construction of four auto dealerships on the former Miggler property. The applicant revised the plans in response to the review of their initial submittal. The first review raised several issues that the applicant has addressed in their current submittal. The previous (first) submittal proposed the phased construction of four car dealerships, an automotive support building, and about 2,224 paved parking spaces on the 32-acre site. The storm water treatment system proposed was a standard pond, built within the wetland buffer of Gerten Pond. At full development, about 70 percent of the site would have been impervious surface. The current submittal also proposes the phased construction of four car dealerships and an automotive support building. The number of parking spaces has been reduced from 2,224 to 1,945. Approximately 2.4 acres of the parking area (340 spaces) is intended for storage and would be constructed using a pervious pavement system. The plans now show all storm water treatment systems located outside the wetland buffer. The proposed treatment system now includes a storm water pond of sufficient size and depth to meet the city's water quality standard by itself. Downstream of the pond, the plans show an infiltration basin larger than the storm water pond. In addition to the pond and infiltration basin, the plans show nine rainwater gardens to promote infiltration and pretreatment of runoff from the parking lot. At full development, the amount of impervious surface is reduced from 70 percent of the site in the initial submittal to about 65 percent in the current submittal. All comments from the initial review are included below in italics. They are followed by comments on how the current submittal addresses these comments. 1. Since Gerten Pond is a large, high quality wetland with an undisturbed buffer area in good condition, it is the opinion of engineering staff that the storm water pond for this project should not encroach on the wetland buffer. As stated earlier, the current submittal does not encroach on the wetland buffer. 2. The high percentage of impervious surface significantly increases the runoff volume to the wetland over the existing conditions. For the proposed plan, the runoff volumes for the 1, 10 and 100 year events represent increases of 240%, 115% and 80% respectively over existing conditions. As stated earlier, the current submittal reflects a 5 percent reduction in impervious surface compared to the initial submittal. The proposed 65 percent impervious fraction is comparable to that of a town home development. With the additional water quality improvements, there will be no storm water discharge from the site for rainfall events of 46 one inch or less. While runoff volumes will be higher compared to the present undeveloped condition, this would be true for almost any type of developed condition. 3. Although the proposed storm water pond limits the peak outflow from the property, increased volumes move relatively quickly to the nearby wetland. Under the proposed condition for the 1, 10 and 100 year storm events, the wetland will receive 87%, 84% and 77% of the runoff volume within 24 hours respectively. This comment is still true. However, runoff from the first one inch of rainfall will remain on site and be infiltrated. 4. With the increased storm water runoff from paved surfaces and rooftops of the proposal reaching the wetland in a relatively short amount of time, staff has a concern about the increased temperature of the runoff and what effect this may have on the wetland. As stated in comment under item #2, the level of impervious surface proposed currently is comparable to town homes. The addition of water quality measures above and beyond the current city standard also makes this less of a concern. 5. The development is about 1200 feet (byroad) from a residential area (to the north). Staff has questions as to what effect the development might have on the immediate area as to increased traffic (both from trucks and cars). City staff also has questions as to whether there is adequate access from the existing streets for the development. Additional information on traffic impacts is needed. The applicant has provided a traffic study for the project which was conducted by Traffic Data, Inc. City staff had this study reviewed by the city's traffic engineering consultant Tom Sohrweide of SEH, Inc. Preliminary comments from Mr. Sohrweide (in a separate attachment) indicate the study and report may need to be refined. The study examines traffic at the four main intersections in the area, during the weekday afternoon peak hours and weekend midday peak hour for three development options. The three development options studied were No-Build (property remains undeveloped), the property is developed as an office building, and the property is developed as auto dealerships. The study draws the following conclusions: Forecasting to 2006, all four intersections examined will operate acceptably during the weekend midday peak hour under all of the three development options. However, during the weekday afternoon peak hours, only two of the four will operate acceptably under all of the three development options. The intersections forecast to operate unacceptably by 2006 under any of the three development options are the westbound TH61/Connor Avenue intersection and the TH36/English Street intersection. The traffic study also recommends improvements at these two intersections that would enable "acceptable" traffic operation in 2006, but does not quantify the benefits, or expected level of service resulting from the proposed improvements. In addition, it is the stated intent of MnDOT that both of these intersections would eventually be closed, raising possible access issues not only for this development, but for the other 47 businesses in the area as well. Additional staff comments on this aspect of the submittal will be forthcoming when the traffic study has been finalized and reviewed. 6. The applicant proposes to grade and prepare the site this year, and build the first and second buildings in 2005 and 2006. Particular attention will need to be paid to the phasing of this project in the area of erosion control. Interim stabilization of the site until the development is completed will be an important piece of the erosion and sediment control plan. The applicant and his engineer met with city and watershed staff to discuss the current proposal, as well as the phasing of the project. The proposed interim condition was arrived at with input from the city and the watershed. 7. Staff feels that this development calls for storm water best management practices beyond the minimum requirements. This is due to the intensity of the development and because of the potential for adverse environmental effects. Discussions with staff from the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District (RWMWD) indicate they are in agreement on this assessment. City staff feels that the current proposal reflects the use of storm water best management practices well beyond the minimum requirements. 8. There does not appear to be any issues with providing utilities to the site. This comment is still applicable. Review Summary: The initial submittal for this project proposed the minimum storm water best management practices, encroachment into the wetland setback buffer and the high percentage of impervious surface typically associated with commercial development. In addition, staff had concerns as to what effect the development would have on traffic in the surrounding area. These concerns led to a staff recommendation that the applicant complete an environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) for the project to address these concerns. Given the quality of the current submittal, and the attention given to addressing the concerns staff raised in the review of the initial submittal, staff believes the proposed project no longer warrants the preparation of an EAW. Staff also feels that this development, as proposed, is a reasonable use of this property. That being said, the following comments apply to the current submittal: 1. It is recommended that the traffic study be revised as recommended by the city's traffic engineering consultant with an eye toward addressing capacity and possible access issues in more detail, and that city staff be given time to review the revised study and comment on it. In general: There are some larger regional traffic concerns related to TH 61 and TH 36. The proposed development will impact the regional transportation system 48 less than would a development that fits the current zoning. There is no basis of denying the proposal based on the status or possible effects on the regional transportation system. The developer would likely be partially responsible for any mitigation or street improvements deemed necessary on the local system. Some traffic mitigation measures recommended by the traffic study will likely be necessary, however staff was not able to recommend those measures at the time this review was prepared. At this point, staff recommends that any traffic mitigation improvements that are deemed necessary by the traffic study, the city's traffic engineering consultant and the Maplewood city engineer, shall be made a financial requirement of the development and a condition of approval. 2. Provided the project is approved, the engineering department would require approval of final plans, to include all utilities as well as details on sump structures, outlet structures and rainwater garden construction before the city would issue a grading permit for the site. 3. The city will require maintenance agreements for the storm water pond, infiltration basin, and the rainwater gardens and native turf establishment. 4. The applicant shall obtain all necessary approvals and permits from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), MnDOT and the RWMWD. 5. The applicant should contact the Metropolitan Council of Environmental Services, (MCES), to determine if there are any site conditions or restrictions, as a major sanitary sewer interceptor passes through the west end of the property near the frontage road). 49 Attachment 26 TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT FOR MAPLEWOOD IMPORTS #2449 MAPLEWOOD. MN Prepared by TDI October 2004 r~"4~~4~° ~ `~ r?~~y c .- ~: ~. \ ~ ~~4 V 50 ~.PF~QJECT DESCRlPTIQIV Maplewood Imparts is proposing to build an automobile dealership and sales facility on the "Migler Property" east of Trunk Highway 61 and southeast of Duluth Street in Maplewood, Mfg (see Figure 1). The facility will include one 42,000 square foot Audi sales and service center along with three other 42,000 square foot automobile sales and service centers (see the Appendix for the proposed site plan). The 31.96 acre site is currently undeveloped. 5.43 acres along the westerly portion of the site is zoned M-1 (Light Manufacturing District) and the balance of the site is zoned CO (Commercial Office District}. Automobile sales and service centers are currently allowed under the M-1 zoning, but not the CO zoning. Maplewood Imports is requesting a zoning change of the GO portion of the site to M-1. The purpose of this report is to analyze how the nearby roadway system will accommodate the proposed dealership traffic and compare that with how the system would operate if an office park is built on the site. One or two of the dealership buildings will likely be occupied by 2006 with the remaining dealership buildings being built over the next ten years. For ease in making the comaarison between office park and auto dealership, it is assumed the site will be fully occupied as an office park or auto dealership in 2006 even though build out will take longer. 2.EX1STIlVG CQNDfTIQIVS Traffic operations were analyzed for the weekday p.m. peak hour and the Saturday midday peak hour at the following intersections: • TH 61 and County Road C • TH G1 and Connor Avenue • County Road C and Duluth Street • TH 36 and English Street The existing lane configurations and traffic control for the intersections are shown in Figure 2. TD! staff collected peak hour turning movement coon±s at the study intersections in October 2004. The data is included in the Appendix. The existing peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. r~~2ipi~~ .,,^,,~ In;rw~-iC f1 ~~[: C1 ~~ 1 .-..._ _._ _._.__ ___ ntn~n i.,. ,. / n nn r Trat,°,~c impact °epe; t etcher ~vG4 ~~rc„-~N yn tv18~1 Pa t,~ound ~ rar ~'r~:~es 81 ~sd~~nce Fndle}• tde~ :anfet Thor?~iF,. ~~ 1 '~~~6r14htc~n~, Ivlahtomedi GaluinL-ia ~ tlev: ~' a'' hts ~; , 81 , H t0 ~t ~ `_ - Ht~~~e~_ #~.F'~ai ~' ~ i=,ntfionF' ~ _~ „ _ ~~ _ - ~ rC~ Pose•ille Ptorth'•ot. ,, 100 < -~ ~- ~..*L P. «Paul t' arodtt~3 ,~y Falcon acla• ~ ~ .'~ t ~oltlen ~ ~----- Heights 'rl 6~aple~aaood Lake a(le~y ~ ~^ Elmo ~..~~_ Minneapolis _ ~ ro rb ~ "rM. ^80 i ~ r,akclale :-: ~ -:-~ m _ _ •~~ St. Lour - ~ ''t F, Park' - _ 12 -_- - St:-P8U1- - I` x s~r;~innet~~nl«:-zJ + N -' Hopkins ~dt~ootll~ury 3 ~' , `. ,.: 'y Site Location: Maplewood Imports Maplewood, MN f:~°. ~ : [:~ = tut ~~;.a t~ s .-~'z~ r~ _ _ '~' °~ ``` 1 ti [ i^~ f~ z __ _-_. .. t' ~ •r gym;,' " "~~ont Raed ~ E ' ~ ~i -: ~ ._ ', y ,Cj ~ t. h t _ ~ ,~, __ ~ ' F t ._. . :-, :~ _ ~ , ~ ;' _ J)tl _ _. . ~ ~ ~: ^_- ,1'.rtl~ ..s - ~-- ___w_Va___ ~_ _ -,_ __.~.,,..~. •- ._ - i ...- .~ _ 2• i ~. • it t. ~' •, W •-. F a a~ _ r _ r v ~ a, r, S Site Location: Maplewood Imports Figure 1 Location Maps Maplewood Imports #2449 Maplewood, MN Prepared by TDI October 2004 ti4-'~ 52 SIGNAL Co Rd C ' (35 mph) ~ \~ 1 + _ Co Rd C ~ Co Rd C ~ (30 mph) ~ 1 (35 mph) Y ~ OP --~-- ~ ~ i UJ L ~~ ~ I i I ~ E I ~~ =o _ L ~ ~ F ~ No Scale .'k.' E _ .-.~ ~4 _ +Ha -. 1 1 1=~~i~171~~ L4:+~ ~_~a - tr,,'! .._...... _ rte.-:=". ~,} - _ {-~ ,=0. ," L1J ~ ~ 'r ?fie S e i ~. ~':' L t.'- r~ ° r r4 dj' .. ~~ `.~~ a -. `~# Site _ - , ~„ . ~ ~ . ~... .rc ~. . ,~ °eet~rit ~k~ - r.. ~- ,~' ~'C't tiles:-,; 5r _ _ ~~'a't ~#F-. to ,i . ~ , ~, _ f~ _~ _,~ 7 EE ,~[ q~. +- .~:_ , i ~ ~ :, 1,, ' ilk-•....~-.~~. '- ~~~.(~~ ~': ` f 1, .. -' .... ..~.... .___a..~. ~rf~e._~ -~{ ~ - ..__~ . . n - Q £.. 1 ~. ~ ~ °Yb - 4 ~ 1~ C7. ~ ii f: m ~ ~~ 5yt ~ 1° my ,~ ~ _ - ._, ~ _ ~~.{t~~ __.~ _ - _.. ~~~ Sb o-r u S e` -. - 4 L L L d /STOP W ~ SIGNAL ~ -i~ ~ `~ Figure 2 - ConnorAve ~ ~ ; ~ , TH36 ~~ EXIStin Geornetrics (30 mph) _ ~ ~ (55 mph) ~ g 1 C ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ & Traffic Control STOP Maplewood Imports #2449 Maplewood, MN Note. Conner Ave has signs and medians meant ,'~ ~ to allow only right turns onto TH 61, but vehicles Prepared by T~~ ~ ~ ~ made the prohibited moves anyway. October 2004 53 ~o~ ~ ~ rn ~- 63(59 - 172!139 ~- 11/7 I - 63!39 Co Rd C ~, ~- 84173 Co Rd C 484!204 - 27/0 ~- 182169 ~~ ~ i ~ ~ 150/54 -- I I I 29127-~ ~~o ~~ OWN (/~ N r O L N N N CO j 1 II F ~ No Scale 5 r, .- ~ ~ ~~ ,_ a ~ i s ,~; - . cn _. 4, _ _.. s '~.. ~~ s 3°J ~~ _ !sg .., i` '~ ~ir ~14>t rt'ty Rt~l ii ld{~'s ~ err 8 ~~ _,.~ .. _~._.~_ ~.~~., ~'~ ~.'~.' ~ ~ ~' 3 ~ ~ _. ~- - o. .. ~, . , t ~ - 6 } ~ ';t E ,~ ~~ X21 ~. ' ~l -~ .~. a ~4 r, e -. - ~ ~3 F_ t ~" .~'! Ite ~' 5= ~ .~ s; - o .. -._ f~ . r .~~a' _ y .~ _ -.. .,-.. ~9 ~+ __._ r.. .~fi -'...-.. _.~_ - - ~ ..~ .._~... ~. +5 L~ ik ' t ~, - _ - ~ a - ~~ ~,tr~~~~ ~~ ~ r~, ~ ;. ,~ _ -. - _., a . . ~ ,~ ~~ 1 ." z :~_ - _ ~°. _ .. ,~ - ~ 5 .., M 0 ~ ~ N ~ N N W M (`~ r N 120/40 -~ ~- 54/25 ~ In W r (`') ~ I~ NI M I 16!18--' 272711695 - 198/139 - 27/10 -1825/1599 - 90/112 1 1 I' Figure 3 - ~~N Existing Turning u~ N r Movement Volumes lil N (`7 fh co ro .- ~o{ N ~ Q ~~ Legend Weekday P.M. Peak Hour ~ Midday Saturday Peak Hour XX%~yy% Maplewood Imports #2449 Maplewood, MN ~ = ~ ~~~~- Prepared by TDl ~ ~'~ . Q~ October 2004 54 An intersection capacity analysis was conducted for the existing intersections per the Highway Capacity Manual. The intersection is assigned a "Level of Service" letter grade based on the intersection geometry, traffic volumes, and traffic control. Level of Service A (LOS A) represents light traffic flow (free flow conditions) white Level of Service F (LOS Fj represents heavy traffic flow (over capacity conditions). LOS D is considered acceptable in urban conditions, although LOS C or better is preferred. In addition to the LOS grade for the whole intersection, the stop controlled, side street approaches also get LOS grades. An unsignalized intersection that has side-street stop control usually has a good LOS grade for the intersection because most of the traffic is moving through without stopping. It is common though for the side street approach to have a poor LOS during the peak hours. LOS F is considered acceptable at stop controlled approaches as long as the approach volumes are relatively light and there are no stacking problems. The LOS calculated at a stop sign controlled intersection is different than the LOS calculated at a signalized intersection. Motorists have more tolerance for delay at a traffic signal than they do at a stop sign. The existing peak hour LOS results are shown in Tables 1 and 2 (the LOS calculations are included in the Appendix). Table 1 -Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour LOS Results Intersection 2004 Weekday P.M. Peak Hour TH 61 and Count Road C C (27.9) TH 61 and Connor Avenue A (1.7) i E (35.x) Count Road C and Duluth Street A (2.2) / C (16.6 TH 36 and English Street D (51.2) The first LOS gives the LOS for the intersection followed by the average delay (in seconds) at the intersection in parentheses. The second LOS gives the LOS for the stopped approach with the poorest operation followed by the approach delay (in seconds) in parentheses. Table 2 -Existing Saturday Midday Peak Hour LOS Results intersection 2004 Saturday Midda Peak Hour TH 61 and Count Road C B (10.1) TH 61 and Connor Avenue A (0.8) / B (13.3) County Road C and Duluth Street A (0.9) / B (10.1) TH 36 and En lish Street C (21.6) The first LOS gives the LOS for the intersection followed by the average delay (in seconds) at the intersection in parentheses. The second LOS gives the LOS for the stopped approach with the poorest operation followed by the approach delay (in seconds) in parentheses. The City's traffic engineering consultant noted that there is some concern in the City about the daily traffic volume on County Road C east of Duluth Street since .Maalewood lmpo~ts #2448 5 ~~u~ie,~,~,~o~ n~r~, Traffic ?mpact P,eport 55 Octo~er 2004 it is a residential area. There were 6,200 vehicles per day using County Road C east of Duluth Street in 2003 according to Mn/DOT's Traffic Flow Map. A trip generation analysis was performed for the site based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7`t' Edition. Trip generation rates are shown for the site if it is developed as an office park (as predominantly zoned) or if it is developed as a car dealership site (as proposed). The results are shown for a typical weekday in Table 3 and for a typical Saturday in Table 4. Table 3 -'~eekda Trip Generation ITE _Trip Rates _ _ Land Daily _ _ AM Peak Hour PM Pea k Hour Use Description Trips* In Out In Out 750 Office Park (31.96 acres} 6,236 754 66 136 768 841 New Car Dealership (Four 42,000 Sq Ft Dealerships) 5,601 255 90 173 271 " Daily trips are round trips -one car in plus out of the business (i.e. 1,600 daily trips = 80C vehicles) Table 4 - Saturda Trip Generation iTE Tri Rates Land Daily Midda Peak Hour Use Description Trips* In Out 750 Office Park (31.96 acres 937 38 38 841 New Car Dealership (Four 42,000 Sq Ft Dealerships) 3,533 254 244 " Daily trips are round trips -one car in plus out of the business (i.e. 1,600 daily trips = 800 vehicles) Traffic forecasts were developed for the year 2006 weekday p.m. peak hour and Saturday midday peak hour. It was determined that the car dealerships will have the largest impact on these peak hours and that it is not necessary to analyze the weekday a.m. peak hour. A 2% yearly growth rate was used to account for growth in background traffic on the area roadways. The directional trip distributions for the uses in Tables 3 and 4 are shown in Figure 4. The trip distributions are based on existing travel patterns in the area. The combination of background traffic and trips generated by the proposed development are shown in the traffic forecasts on Figures 5 and 6. It is anticipated that there will be 6,450 vehicles per day using County Road C east of Duluth Street in the 2006 No-Build scenario, 6,760 in 2006 with the office park, and 6,730 with the car dealerships. M,a~,,rer,~~ood Ir.,po~st#?aag 6 M,aple~vood M,N Tr-a>`f~c Impact Peport 56 Ooro~e'" 2004 ,_ ~ ~ ~ v, v" .~ - j i 9 ~t . t 33~~ ~._ ~~ 1M' .. ~ i ~ ' - _ ~ ~~ t .. _ ~ ~ ~, ~u~r R.~a~ ,~f ~ E ~" ~ , ~ .: ..~ t _-- r~. v . ,. ~ 5%/5% r ~ ~.~ ~d . , ' ~a ~ - _. ~i. r4cya~ : ~}~ q~, i t. t "~ -. ~ Y ~ ~°.`u~4°s:~«'~`'` . ~ P Te t~~F t ~,7 X11 S _., . '- ~µ} ~, S, 5.s. ~ y .~- 4 . ~. ... 3y~ tr i.e a~6.•;~ rn -.. . 1T 14 A t _r i- -s - r. .. s. . . ., x - 45°!0/5~°!0 ~ =~~ I51, ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~.~ ~i ~; - _ _ 25%/3D°Io _.. k~i~,~ ;~,~ ~, x: ~ E ~ ~.. - .. ~ .~, _. Cr~ _ ~ ~.. V u " ~ ty ~ C ."s ~? „~ *- ` _ {.. u~i 3.I i 1 E" i3 = ~ ~- ~ ..~ u ". G~: ~ 3~. x. ,. ~, p Lef~ro~~ ~~~ ~• .~.~ri~.1~~,r.r . •.~~~ ., ~ ' _ ~ ' w __ _ 10%l5% -~t~r~~~ti~r, ,` ~..~ _ _: . ~ - e a Legend Car Dealership Trip Distribution ~- Office Park Trip Distribution xx%/yy% Figure 4 - Trip Distributions Maplewood Imports #2449 Maplewood, MN Prepared by TDI - ~ v ~ ~ Q; October 2004 57 O O ~ O ~ ~ N O O 0 ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ° ~- 70/70/70 - 180/180/180 ', - 70/70(70 Co Rd C -- 10/20!20 ~ 90/170/120 Co Rd C 5001500/500 - 30/30/30 --- ~ ^ 1 9011 901190 -~ ~ ~ ~ 160/160/160 -- ~ ~ ~ °m c°o 30/30/30 --. ~ 0 0 ° rn _°o° ~ ~~ O ~ N ~ p N N O ~ = O N ~ ~ O N No Scale .if° ~`'' hd ~ , ~ Gi ,~ ~' --~~ f~ lWS .`,, __ . ,_ air . r ,-+ T <~ ~QUeyt°y R:~aad ~ E rm: 'f '~ F ~" . . z - ~ '' ~ . ~,. `' F' ~~, ~, ~_~ ': v _. ... ;, , ,~ -. ~ ,.. ~s. ~r, s .:` Site ero ,,, - ._ .;,.. r;. ~~ " R -- V `~ r% ~~ ~ ~ ""~` ~~ t: f w"~ ! e a i <~ f, r f Z 9 _ ._..{ ....q.-.-.~- - ._ ~.. a ... q ry ^~~~~rMp ~} .tea- p~ _~ ~ >i iw~Bi<. ~ ~, ~i ca ,. -, _ ._ _ F ~ L3 F ~ ,; •`; ' 0 4^, v f L,~ i.l l s s ~.°` ~l p f" ~, ~c'~• ~; ._~~~ g/+'~ «~, ! .~:~ 4! ~~' ~. ~ LEI°~tF~i ~` ;{ - k ~ L s ~ ~ r'F ~f F'; F F r~p~" ~.. ,r ~ u , ... -- ` e ., ° .- ~° ~, t~ ~ .~ . ~. ,~ __ ,,_ ._a _. _,.,. 0 a o 0 N ~ ~ Ned' OMO N ~ M M ON N N ~ ° ° N e~ ~ 30/70/70 I - 1890/1890/1890 ~~ ~ 60/180/130 / + l - 90/90/90 Connor Ave TH 36 120/120/120 ---~ ~ 20!50/60 = ~ ~ g u re 28401284012840- o ~ 2101210/210-~ ~ ~ ~ 2006 Weekday P.M. ~o~ ~ ~°° = N ~ N ~ ° Peak Hour Forecasts ~ M N ~ (OD ~ O W r N Maplewood Imports #2449 Legend Maplewood, MN No-Build ~, Forecasts with Office Park `~~_, Forecasts with Car Dealerships Prepared by TDI ~ ~~ 4': xx%~yy%/zz% October 2004 ~~-•~ 58 O o _ ~ O N O O m O O ~ ° rn ~° '~ 60/60(60 -140!140/140 I ~ ) - 40/40/40 Co Rd C ~ 10/10/20 ~ ; '~ ,~ 80/80/100 .,o Rd C 21 C(21 C/210 - 1 I> 70/70/70 --' / 0/010 -~ I 60/60(60 ~ 1 I ~I ro ^~ 30/30/30 --~ O o 0 \ 0 0 N ~ v ~ O ~ ~ O O M \ o O O ~ O ~ ~ I O ~ ~ O No Scale ti~ ~ t•d ~ ~:1c~~~i i , - ~ ~ e ^~, - ~- ' ~' ~ Y ~ ~ i~ - ' ` ~ 'S~ - ~ E l !s~ 1 ~ I I i ~ fi 6 F r - ~ B ? k 5E 1 . b F 1T J- ~ -~ 3 3 {lF ~~ ~ ~ U nt~+ l~~ aRl ~ E ~~ t,' 1~~~ , .~f ~ ~ _: ` , ! i i ! ~. ~E". i ~ ~ '~, td ~b sg '' _ v .... .' i ~ ~' f S -.. ~: t ~'_ ~ ~ .. C 1T/~ V ~ iii ~ ~ '. .. - .. ~. .ors, s _r .~ ,... ~: .~ r ~._ _~ ~e,~ ~ ._ ~ ~~;~~ ~~ z +'i, ~. r ~, "a `tS ;r i ~,~ ~~j~1f C~~ -~ra tr - ~ ~~RIi6G ~"~4 ~ ~~ 'v +- ~ ~~ __ _ _._e r~ L_i~ri~-i ~a~~ = ~, v~atiriitilr~ ~;_' ~ ~~~; ~, .: w e. _ o; _ ,.. t ~ ~ ..~-~_ ~ - .. ,_ -.~ -- z ~ - ~.. ~ti~~-- ~ / o °~ ° _ ~ O N r O O N I~ -- 30/40/80 Connor Ave 40/40/40 ~ ~ ~ / I 000 ~ rn ono ~ ~ (° N O O O ~~ < o r~ o 00 ~ N I~ ~ O O \ N ~°v ° ° ~ 10/20/70 - 1660/1660/1660 .~ 120/120/120 TH 36 20!30/20 -~ 1760/176011760 - 140/140/140 -~ ~ o ~ N 0~ 0 O O N No-Build Forecasts with Office Park Forecasts with Car Dealerships xx%lyy%!ZZ% Figure 6 - 2006 Saturday Midday Peak Hour Forecasts Maplewood Imports #2449 Maplewood, MN , Prepared by TDI October 2004 . ~. "~~~ , Y 59 4.TR~FFIC OPERATIONS AdVALYSIS Mn/DOT staff reviewed the proposed Maplewood Imparts site plan and noted in an October 7, 2004 letter to the City of Maplewood that the Connor Avenue intersection with TH 61 and the English Street intersection with TH 36 may be closed in the future. However, a date has not been set for these closures. It is assumed that these intersections will remain open through the study year of 2006 and that a large scale transportation study of the area will be done before any intersections are closed. The traffic forecasts shown on Figures 5 and 6 were used with the existing traffic control and Pane configurations shown in Figure 2 to calculate LOS grades for the study intersections. The LOS results ale shown in Tables 5 and 6. Table 5 -Forecasted V1leekday PM Peak Hour LOS Results 2006 with 2006 with Intersection No-Build Offices i3eaierships TH 61 & County C (32.2) D (38.7) D (35.5) Road C TH 61 & A (1.8) / E (36.8) A (7.6) / F (148.8) A (3.8) / F (75.7) Connor Avenue _ County Road C _ A (2.0) / C (15.5) A (5.6) / C (23.3) A (3.1) / C (17.9) & Duluth Street TH 36 & English E (66.3} F (172.9) F (85.8) Street The first LOS gives the LOS for the intersection followed by the average delay (in seconds) at the intersection in parentheses. The second LOS gives the LOS for the stopped approach with the poorest operation followed by the approach delay (in seconds) in parentheses. Table 6 -Forecasted Saturday Midday Peak Hour LOS Results 2006 with 2006 with Intersection No-Build Offices dealerships TH 61 & County g (11.2) B (11.9} B (12.3) Road C TH 61 & A (0.8) / B (13.6) A (0.9) / B (13.8) A (1.2) / B (14.8) Connor Avenue County Road C A (1.0) / B (10.1) A (1.0) / B (10.1) A (1.9) / B (10.8) & Duluth Street TH 36 & English C (22.0) C (22.0) C (23.2) Street The first LOS gives the LGS for the intersection followed ay the average dewy (in seconas~ a~ cne intersection in parentheses. The second LOS gives the LOS for the stopped approach with the poorest operation followed by the approach delay (in seconds) in parentheses. The Level of Service calculations are in the Appendix. They include LOS calculations for each intersection approach as well as a queuing analysis. ,M,aple~ti~ood Imports #2449 10 Maple!vood. 1!~IN Traffic Impact ,Report 60 Octoher 2004 All of the intersections and stop sign controlled approaches operate acceptably in 2006 during the Saturday midday peak hour under the no-build, office and car dealership scenarios. The TH 51/County Road C and County Road C/Duluth Street intersections and stop sign controlled approaches operate acceptably in 2006 during the weekday p.m. peak hour under the no-build, office and car dealership scenarios. The TH 35/English Street intersection will operate unacceptably in 2005 during the weekday p.m. peak hour under the no-build, office and car dealership scenarios. The westbound TH 51/ConnorAvenue approach ti^~ill operate at LOS E in 2005 during the weekday p.m. peak hour no-build scenario. It will operate at LOS F during the 2005 weekday p.m. peak hour office and car dealership scenarios. The westbound approach will have acceptable stacking in the no- build scenario, but the stacking will be unacceptable in both the office and car dealership scenarios. ~.ltl9-~~l®B7 ~dSt.~~"~~ Mn/DOT is aware of the poor performance at both the TH 51/Connor Avenue intersection and the TH 35/English Street intersection. That is why they plan to close them in the future (as previously described). Following are mitigation plans that will allow these intersections to operate acceptably during the typical weekday p.m. peak hour in the near term with the car dealerships in place. TH 35/English Street This intersection will operate unacceptably at LOSE (55.3 seconds of average delay at the intersection) in the 2005 p.m. peak hour under the no-build scenario. It will operate unacceptably at LOS F (85.8 seconds of average delay at the intersection) in the 2005 p.m. peak hour if the car dealership is built. The intersection will operate acceptably under the car dealership scenario at LOS D (52.4 seconds of average delay at the intersection) if the southbound approach is widened to include one exclusive left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. The close proximity of the English Street/Maplewood Drive (the northern TH 35 frontage road) intersection to the TH 35/English Street intersection make this a less than ideal solution, but it is the only feasible solution to mitigate the poor LOS. The TH 35/English Street intersection will be significantly over capacity (LOS F - 172.9 seconds of average delay at the intersection) in the 2005 p.m. peak hour if the office park is built. The only way to mitigate the poor operation without closing the median on TH 35 is to upgrade the northbound and southbound approaches to include one exclusive left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane as well as add another through lane in each direction on TH 35. Then the intersection will operate at LOS D (50.4 seconds of average delay at the intersection). .Map~le~Nood Im,oorts X2449 ~~ 11 "v?aple~~~~,ou~J. ,~,~;^~.; Tranic Impact P,cpor~t Cctoher 2004 TH 61/Connor Avenue The Highway Capacity Itilanual does not take channelized right turn lanes into account when calculating LOS, but the addition of a larger "pork chop" island and better channelization or the westbound approach combined with a yield control instead of stop control will mitigate the stacking problem identified in the above analysis. .~cncfuse®ns end i~ccar~rncn~f~tdc~ns Maplewood Imports is proposing to build an automobile dealership and sales facility on the "Migler Property" east of Trunk Highway 61 and southeast of Duluth Street in Maplewood, MN. The facility will include one 42,000 square foot Audi sales and service center along with three other 42,000 square foot automobile sales and service centers. The 31.96 acre site is currently undeveloped. 5.43 acres along the westerly portion of the site is zoned C~~- (Light Manufacturing District) and the balance of the site is zoned CO (Commercial Office District). Automobile sales and service centers are currently allowed under the M-1 zoning, but not the CO zoning. Maplewood Imports is requesting a zoning change of the CO portion of the site to M-1. The purpose of this report is to analyze how the nearby roadway system will accommodate the proposed dealership traffic and compare that with how the system would operate if an office park is built on the site. One or two of the dealership buildings will likely be occupied by 2006 with the remaining dealership buildings being built over the next ten years. For ease in making the comparison between office park and auto dealership, it is assumed the site will be fully occupied as an office park or auto dealership in 2006 even though build out will take longer. The above analysis shows that the roadway network is much busier during the weekday p.m. peak hour than it is during the Saturday midday peak hour. The site with an office park will generate significantly more traffic during the weekday p.m. peak hour than it will if it is developed as the proposed car dealership. Developing the site as a car dealership will have significantly less impact on the roadway network than developing the site as an office park. The TH 36/English Street and TH 61/Connor Avenue intersections will operate unacceptably during the 2006 weekday p.m. peak whether or not the site is developed. These intersections can operate acceptably with the car dealership being built if minor improvements are made to the intersections. The only way to mitigate the poor operation of these intersections if the site is developed as an office park is to add through lanes on TH 36 and TH 61. ,Maplewood Imports #?4~9 12 ILrapleU~~~od, A~1N Traffic Impac Repo; ~ 62 Octo!~2r 200T The car dealership will generate more traffic on Saturdays than the office park, causing slightly more delay. but a(I of the intersections will operate acceptably on Saturdays whether the car dealership is built or the office park is built. Although the a.m. peak hour was not analyzed, based on the a.m. peak i,n~~.?r trip generation rates for the office park and car dealership the area roadways would be much more impacted in the morning rush hour by an office park than they would be by the car dealerships. The TH 61/Connor Avenue and TH 36/English Street intersections will operate unacceptably in 2006 whether or not the site is developed. Based on the above traffic analysis, the only way to mitigate the poor operations at these intersections if the site is developed as an office park is to add through lanes to the highways or close the medians to make these intersections right-in/right-out accesses. Closing the medians would have significant impacts on the major roadways in the area and restrict access to the existing businesses. The existing roadway network can accommodate the praposed car dealership in 2006 if the following improvements are made: • TH 61/Connor Avenue: Build a westbound to northbound, yield controlled channelized right turn with an acceleration lane onto TH 61. • TH 36/English Street: Widen the southbound approach of English Street to provide one exclusive left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. These improvements would also be necessary to alleviate unacceptable Levels of Service at the intersections in 2006 even if the site is undeveloped. Maple-°~~ood Irr?ports#2449 13 M,apie~~rnod. ,M,N Traffic Impact Report 63 October 2~J04 /~ SEH Dtcemba 10.2004 ' Attachment 27 12E: Maplewood, Mimeanta Mspkwond Imports Traffur Study Review SEH No. A-11fAPI.E020g.00 Mr. Chris Cavell, PE Abistaat City Engines City of Maplewood 1830 Coolly Road B Fast Maplewood, MN 55109-2702 Dar Chris: At your requert, I have reviewed the Tutfic Impact Report far Mapewood Lapau as prepared by TDI and dated October 2004. My mvrew is inbaded b assist the City's Plmning Commission-sad Comcil m then deh'beaation oa graotiaa a wainB change far this Proposed development. The giplicmt,bas proposed m automobile asks sal scrvix development fora 31.96 acre sib. locaoed east of Highway 61 between Comty Road C and Highway 36: The city reeprves a zaewig efiaoge b albw this development. The applicmt's`tnffic study analysis the impact of this development on the adjaceeu strut system and campsra it to m offxx park development (which is allowed under the current coning for this sib). I ceocar wide the report's fmdiogs that the proposed allto-nleted development would be leas ill>pac~g thw m office park developmem, becrose it would geaeYab teas traffic. However, then amlysis in the tralfie report does sot allow fix a fiml detamimtion of the miflgation measures Ilecesaary as a result of this devekpmem. The report b t~ervative by rot ~g P~-bY ~ ~-~ ~ ~ ~ a~f'e ~P >3 rabee inseead of rates tltb rehMe b tlpecific alas of the deveopment. This nram that the appiicam's traffic report is tlafiIDtlulg traffic vohmla daft am mipher then what will likely occin. Contrary to 1hia, a cheek of some of the 29115 forecast traffic vdt®es ie me traffe report>lnds that some have been urldastabd VYhik the :pal opeiratioa aanlysis in the report does give a comparative evaluation, it does. not pteaed die tnx iotpwat of dle adl~oaal traffle vohmb. This is due to the use of improper signal Bening dsu reLtin~ b lnrasxtion cycle Iwg1h wed Imt am timrg. Ilecrose the proparrd dewlopmeut will generate less traffic volume than a development allowed by ffie current mmj. the City aYad joolt favorably toward the proposal from a traffic perspative. However, so detrlmiue what iapeove~ rary >w aeoessary b effickntly accommodate the proposed devaloPme~, the applicab's taif5c t ahitald mvbe the traffic study with regard b the above wmmants. This envision should also foar og the impact of tratlic hacloip on Caltmr Avenue err Highway 61. The slnHtfy also points out MnIDOT's desire b modify highway access at both Connor Avemiie and et Eaglith 3lraae. , _ Soeh"ciari/as ealdd obviously be vary impacting b this area regardless of type of development that ocema ~ this dte wed wuuld ndse further ire in depth study ova a greater aura. We appweiate ~ opportunity b assist the City of Maplewood in review of this report. If you have say whh mgard b the shove, Please comet me at your convenience. S~ Y, Thomas A Sohrwedde, PE, PTOE Manager. Transportation Eagincering Services a Km Roberts, city ofMapkwood / RECEIVED x:u~le~ozot°°~p°.aeae`"'Ya"2'°°m~atfie''.m` DEC 1 0 2004 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.,9535 Vadmis Cemer brh~e, Sc Paul, MN SSI10-5146 "'°'~°~~~~" SEH is an equal opporcuniry employer ~ www.sehinc.eom ~ 651.490.2000 ~ 800.325.2055 ~ 651.490.2150 (ax 64 Attachment 28 Department of Public Works City of Maplewood MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager C: Melinda Coleman, Assistant City Manager/Dir. Comm. Dev. FROM: R. Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: December 30, 2004 SUBJECT: Trunk Highway 36 Issues Maplewood Imports Auto Center On December 20, 2004, the Planning Commission reviewed a proposal from LeJeune Investments and Maplewood Imports for four new automobile dealerships and support services on property at 2450 Maplewood Drive. Included with that site proposal was a traffic study required by the engineering staff that concluded some improvements were needed to accommodate traffic from the site on Trunk Highway 61 at Conner Avenue and on Trunk Highway 36 at English Street. That project was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission and is scheduled to be reviewed by the City Council on January 24, 2005. On December 27, 2004, the Planning Staff received correspondence from MnDOT summarizing their review of the proposed plat. Included within that letter is information of significant concern to Maplewood: The ConnerAvenue right in/right out maybe closed in the future. Also, the TH 36/English Street Intersection will likely be closed in the future. Therefore, access to this area will be only from County Road C. The future design for access off of TH 36 in this area has not yet been determined. ..... Public Works staff has also been in discussion with MnDOT officials regarding the TH 36 and Hazelwood intersection and pedestrian crossings during the past 12 - 15 months. The MnDOT comments and continued approach by MnDOT officials are not consistent with our current Comprehensive Transportation Plan and the potential impacts related to this type of decision are substantial. At this point, the proposed development by Maplewood Imports did not appear, from engineering's opinion, to warrant the type of transportation changes suggested by MnDOT's letter. Conversely, the MnDOT comments clearly indicate that local planning is highly recommended to avoid future impacts that may be extremely difficult to mitigate and solutions may be difficult and expensive. We continue to recommend approval of the Maplewood Imports project, however, also recommend proceeding with an update of the Transportation Section of the Comprehensive Plan. We do not believe the issues are connected. If the Maplewood Imports project is not approved, we still must address these issues. 65 RICHARD FURSMAN MEMO MAPLEWOOD IMPORTS TRANSPORTATION ISSUES PAGE TWO DECEMBER 30, 2004 Following is a summary of the position that engineering staff have maintained with MnDOT on the issues related to this section of our City, along with a plan for updating our Transportation Plan: Brian Kamnacar, Frank Pafko and Marc Goers (MnDOT Officials) 1 received your recent voice mail and wanted to assure you that Maplewood is also concerned with the Ped X-ing (at TH 36 and Hazelwood). We fully understand that the X-ing is an unsafe condition and should be removed. Maplewood previously submitted a federal funding request to eliminate the X-ing as part of the regional solicitation package and requested MnDOT Traffic Engineering financial support for that project. The MnDOT traffic office declined to help us financially to look for a solution, and the Met Council declined to fund our request. Maplewood acknowledges that the crossing should be removed. We are concerned that MnDOT does not acknowledge that by removing the ped crossing that they have a responsibility to assist with the solution. Map/ewood's adopted position is that we were promised by MnDOT in the early 1970's, when the full intersection at TH 36 and Hazelwood was revised to a right in -right out condition, that MnDOT would program an interchange. As 1 understand, MnDOT no longer acknowledges that responsibility. Additionally, we recently received notice as part of the Maplewood Imports Preliminary Plat Review that MnDOT is planning a similar closure at TH 36 and English Street as well as a closure at TH 61 and ConnorAvenue. These MnDOT actions will have a significant impact on our local transportation network that we may not be prepared to handle. We also believe that MnDOT has a role in assisting us in providing upgrades necessary to mitigate the closure of these intersections. 1 know that Maplewood is not opposed to the removal of the ped crossing at TH 36 and Hazelwood; nor are we necessarily requesting an interchange at TH 36 -Hazelwood; nor are we fundamentally opposed to the removal of the signal at TH 36 and English; however, we need to understand the total impacts of each of these changes and have an understanding of MnDOT's role in implementing an ultimate solution to the various changes, including possible mitigation improvements through a cooperative improvement program. 1 will be recommending to our City Council in January 2005 that the City of Maplewood initiate a Comprehensive Study of these various issues by hiring a transportation consultant to complete a report by April 2005. Our intent would be to have various options and mitigation strategies prepared for the changes and to conduct a number of discussions with MnDOT personnel about the various issues. 1 have copied this message to Frank Pafko and Marc Goers who have participated in traffic discussions in this area and as part of the Maplewood Imports review. If MnDOT is willing to commit to a cooperative review of the various proposed changes to TH 36, 1 believe that Maplewood would support MnDOT's removal of the crosswalk at Hazelwood. 1 believe that commitment from MnDOT should include an acknowledgement that the removal of the crosswalk will not necessarily eliminate the pedestrian crossings, especially the junior high students that current cross at this location, and will include an investigation into providing a safe location for these future pedestrian crossings of the roadway. 1 look forward to developing a cooperative solution with MnDOT to these issues during the first months of 2005. 66 RICHARD FURSMAN MEMO MAPLEWOOD IMPORTS TRANSPORTATION ISSUES PAGE THREE DECEMBER 30, 2004 Recommendation We are currently proceeding to review proposals from a consultant from our consultant pool to conduct an update of the Transportation Section of the City's Comprehensive Plan. I will have a report to the City Council with a recommendation on which consultant to hire along with a recommended funding source for the Comprehensive Plan Update at the regular meeting of January 24, 2005. RCA P:\works\eng\04projdocs\0428\Transportation Plan U pdate 67 Attachment 29 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Jon Hansen, representing the property owner, proposed a change to the city's land use plan from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing). WHEREAS, this change applies to the vacant property on the east side of Maplewood Drive, north of Gervais Avenue, in Maplewood, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: On December 20, 2004, the planning commission held a public hearing. City staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the proposed plan amendment. 2. On January 24, 2005, the city council discussed the proposed land use plan change. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above- described land use plan change because it will: 1. Provide for orderly development. 2. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods. 3. Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase jobs and provide desirable services. 4. Minimize the land planned for streets. 5. Minimize conflicts between land uses. 6. Prevent premature use, overcrowding or overuse of land especially when supportive services and facilities, such as utilities, drainage systems or streets are not available. 7. Help to implement the goals of the comprehensive plan including: a. The city will not approve new development without providing for adequate facilities and services, such as street, utilities, drainage, parks and open space. b. Safe and adequate access will be provided for all properties. c. Whenever possible, changes in types of land use should occur so that similar uses front on the same street or at borders of areas separated by major man- made or natural barriers. d. The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each neighborhood. e. Group compatible businesses in suitable areas. f. Promote the joint use of parking areas, drives and trash containers. g. Avoid disruption of adjacent or nearby residential areas. 8. The previous property owner never constructed the office park on the property that the CO land use designation was for, that the city had implemented for the site. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on , 2005. 68 Attachment 30 ZONING MAP CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Jon Hansen, representing the property owner, proposed a change to the city's zoning map from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing). WHEREAS, this change applies to the vacant property on the east side of Maplewood Drive, north of Gervais Avenue, in Maplewood, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: On December 20, 2004, the planning commission held a public hearing. City staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the proposed zoning map change. 2. On January 24, 2005, the city council discussed the proposed zoning map change. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above- described change in the zoning map for the following reasons: The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. 2. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood, and that the use of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. 3. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. 4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. 5. The previous property owner never constructed the office park on the property that the CO zoning designation was for, that the city had implemented for the site. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on , 2005. 69 Attachment 31 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Jon Hansen, representing the property owner, applied for a conditional use permit for a motor vehicle sales and maintenance complex, including a new Audi dealership and three other motor vehicle dealerships; WHEREAS, this permit applies to the vacant properties on the east side of Maplewood Drive, north of Gervais Avenue. The legal descriptions are: All of Lots 15, 16 and 17 lying Easterly of Duluth Street and Maplewood Drive, W. H. Howard's Garden Lots and all that part of Lot 18 lying easterly of Duluth Street and Maplewood Drive and westerly of the east 300 feet thereof, W. H. Howard's Garden Lots, Ramsey County, Minnesota (PINS 09-29-22-14-0007, 09-29-22-13-0001, 09-29-22-14-0002, 09-29-22-14-0003 and 09-29- 22-14-0004) (Addresses: 2444, 2464 and 2490 Maplewood Drive) WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On December 20, 2004, the planning commission held a public hearing. City staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the proposed permit. 2. On January 24, 2005, the city council discussed the proposed conditional use permit. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approved the above-described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approves this permit because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. 4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 70 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The construction of the proposed Audi building must be started within one year of city council approval or the approval for this addition shall end. The city council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The loading or unloading of automobiles on the public right-of-way is prohibited. 4. The operators of the dealerships shall park the automobiles and motor vehicles on designated paved or engineered porous or permeable surfaces. 5. The owners and operators of the dealerships shall not store damaged vehicles on the site for more than 48 hours, except in the buildings or in fully-screened storage areas. 6. The owners and operators of the dealerships shall store all garbage, trash, waste materials, tires, vehicles parts and obsolete parts in the buildings or in fully-enclosed trash containers or enclosures. 7. The owners and operators of the dealerships shall not store any tires, vehicle parts, garbage, trash, waste materials or other debris outside. All such storage must be inside the buildings or in approved enclosures. 8. The owners and operators shall ensure that all vehicle repair, assembly, disassembly and maintenance is done within enclosed buildings. 9. The owner and operator shall ensure that the noise from the business operations, including all external speakers, shall not exceed the state noise standards. 10. The city council shall review this permit in one year. The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on 2005. 71 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2004 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Present Commissioner Eric Ahlness Present Commissioner Jeff Bartol Absent Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai Present Commissioner Mary Dierich Present Commissioner Michael Grover Present Commissioner Daniel Lee Present Commissioner Gary Pearson Present Commissioner Dale Trippler Present Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary Chuck Vermeersch, Staff Engineer b. Maplewood Imports Auto Center (2450 Maplewood Drive) (7:18 - 7:57 p.m.) Mr. Roberts said Jon Hansen, of LeJeune Investments and Maplewood Imports, is proposing to build four new automobile dealerships and a support services building on the 32-acre property at 2450 Maplewood Drive. This complex would include 4 separate dealership buildings (each with sales and service facilities), a support services building and up to 1,945 parking spaces for inventory, customers and employees. The city has planned and zoned this site CO (commercial office) and M-1 (light manufacturing.) Commissioner Pearson said the plans show a significant swale going from the east side of the Audi building to the pond and he wondered what happens to the swale when the second building to the east is constructed? Mr. Chuck Vermeersch, Staff Engineer, addressed the commission. He said the swale shown on the plans is an interim condition. When the second building is built more storm sewer pipes would be installed and the swale could be eliminated. The city engineering department is trying to eliminate having the applicant install pipe in the ground and then change it later. Commissioner Pearson said regarding the zoning changing from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing), should the market not dictate additional dealerships be built the change in zoning would preclude the footprints be used for commercial office. (His concern was regarding the traffic study with the different uses as an auto dealership or as a commercial office building.) Commissioner Trippler asked if he read correctly in the TDI traffic study that it was assumed that all four car dealerships would be in place in 2006 even though built out it would take longer? Planning Commission -2- Minutes of 12-20-04 Mr. Roberts said for analysis purposes they had one traffic study done with all buildings built instead of a study done every year for three years as the project progressed. Commissioner Trippler asked if the city engineer could clarify a statement he made on page 47, number 3 of the staff report. Mr. Vermeersch said he meant that you can't develop an entire site and not have some increase in the volume of runoff from what it is now as the site is currently undeveloped. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Mr. Jonathan Baker, AIA, 100 South Fifth Street, Suite 250, Minneapolis, addressed the commission. He said they are in agreement with the staff report and hope to receive the planning commission's recommendation for approval. Mr. Baker reviewed the plans with the commission on the screen. He said the first building would be for Audi, the second building may be for Mercedes or Porsche, and the other buildings would be for another high end dealership. These buildings would not have an outside intercom system, there would be no overcrowded displays, and there would no inflatables and no overcrowded parking lots. Chairperson Fischer stepped away for 5 to 10 minutes.. Commissioner Trippler said in the report it states the applicant plans on incorporating pervious surfaces to encourage the infiltration. He asked if the pervious surface was going to be used throughout the whole facility or just in certain areas? Mr. Baker said the final component of the development would be additional parking and storage and would be pervious paving. The water for the rest of the site would drain into the rain gardens. Commissioner Dierich asked how they planned on stabilizing the site during the three or four years of construction? Mr. Baker said they intend on disturbing as little of the site as possible. Grading will be done to level the site. The disturbed area would be seeded to stabilize the site until the next phase of construction. Commissioner Trippler asked if these buildings were mandated by the manufacturer. He asked if Audi, Mercedes, etc. build the exact building all over the world. Mr. Baker said correct. There are a number of significant components that need to be uniform in all of their buildings. Commissioner Desai asked if the traffic issue concerns the dealership? Mr. Baker said with any business on Highway 61 it's important for traffic to flow efficiently so people can access the businesses and people can run their business. According to the traffic report the traffic generated by this project isn't a significant factor in terms of the overall project. The traffic issue has to do with the growth of the area and the traffic traveling on Highway 61. Planning Commission -3- Minutes of 12-20-04 Mr. Baker said at this point they aren't concerned about the overall traffic. As a business owner in the neighborhood they want to make sure traffic isn't a problem. Acting Chairperson Desai asked if anybody in the audience wanted to speak regarding the public hearing for Maplewood Imports? Nobody came forward. Commissioner Trippler asked if he understood correctly that the applicant was asked to share in the cost of future traffic problems that may occur. He asked staff if they had any idea how much the applicant could expect to pay. Mr. Roberts said correct. Staff hasn't received specific dollar amounts yet but the traffic engineers have been discussing the issue. Staff has made the applicant aware that if there were changes the applicant would be part of the process. Engineering has been in contact with MnDot to see what kind of programs or changes they may have in the works for both Highway 36 and English Street and Highway 61 and Connor Avenue to see how this would all tie in. It would be senseless for the applicant to pay for traffic or street improvements and have MnDot come along and remove it. There have been on-going discussions regarding this and staff is confident it will all be worked out in the end. Commissioner Trippler asked if the applicant was comfortable with the wording in condition C. 5. changing the wording from unlicensed or inoperable vehicles on the site to damaged and if they felt 48 hours was enough time to repair vehicles on the site? Mr. Jon Hansen, LeJeune Investments spoke and said they were fine with that language. He said they are not in the body shop business, but they may do dent removal; replace windshields or something like that. Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the land use plan change resolution starting on page 65 of the staff report. This resolution changes the comprehensive land use plan map for the vacant property on the east side of Maplewood Drive, north of Gervais Avenue. This change is from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing). The city is making this change because it will: 1. Provide for orderly development. 2. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods. 3. Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase jobs and provide desirable services. 4. Minimize the land planned for streets. 5. Minimize conflicts between land uses. 6. Prevent premature use, overcrowding or overuse of land especially when supportive services and facilities, such as utilities, drainage systems or streets are not available. 7. Help to implement the goals of the comprehensive plan including: Planning Commission -4- Minutes of 12-20-04 a. The city will not approve new development without providing for adequate facilities and services, such as street, utilities, drainage, parks and open space. b. Safe and adequate access will be provided for all properties. c. Whenever possible, changes in types of land use should occur so that similar uses front on the same street or at borders of areas separated by major man-made or natural barriers. d. The city coordinates land use changes with the character of each neighborhood. e. Group compatible businesses in suitable areas. Promote the joint use of parking areas, drives and trash containers. g. Avoid disruption of adjacent or nearby residential areas. 8. The previous property owner never constructed the office park on the property that the CO land use designation was for, that the city had implemented for the site. Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the zoning map change resolution on page 67 of the staff report. This resolution changes the zoning map for the vacant property on the east side of Maplewood Drive, north of Gervais Avenue. This change is from CO (commercial office) to M-1 (light manufacturing). The city is making this change because: 1. The proposed change is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code. 2. The proposed change will not substantially injure or detract from the use of neighboring property or from the character of the neighborhood and the use of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded. 3. The proposed change will serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the public welfare. 4. The proposed change would have no negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities, such as public water, sewers, police and fire protection and schools. 5. The previous property owner never constructed the office park on the property that the CO zoning designation was for, that the city had implemented for the site. Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the resolution on pages 68 and 69 of the staff report. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for Maplewood Import's plan to construct up to four automobile dealerships/maintenance garages for the property at 2450 Maplewood Drive. The city is approving this permit based on the findings required by the code and is subject to the following conditions: Planning Commission -5- Minutes of 12-20-04 All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2. The construction of the proposed Audi building must be started within one year of city council approval or the approval for this addition shall end. The city council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The loading or unloading of automobiles on the public right-of-way is prohibited. 4. The operators of the dealerships shall park the automobiles and motor vehicles on designated paved or engineered porous or permeable surfaces. 5. The owners and operators of the dealerships shall not store damaged vehicles on the site for more than 48 hours, except in the buildings or in fully-screened storage areas. 6. The owners and operators of the dealerships shall store all garbage, trash, waste materials, tires, vehicles, parts, and obsolete parts in the buildings or infully-enclosed trash containers or enclosures. 7. The owners and operators of the dealerships shall not store any tires, vehicle parts, garbage, trash, waste materials or other debris outside. All such storage must be inside the buildings or in approved enclosures. 8. The owners and operators shall ensure that all vehicle repair, assembly, disassembly and maintenance is done with enclosed buildings. 9. The owner and operator shall ensure that the noise from the business operations, including all external speakers, shall not exceed the state noise standards. 10.The city council shall review this permit in one year. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes -Ahlness, Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Lee, Pearson, Trippler The motion passed. This item goes to the CDRB on January 11, 2005, and to the city council on January 24, 2005. DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2005 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Longrie called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Chairperson Diana Longrie Present Vice Chairperson Matt Ledvina Present Board member Judy Driscoll Absent Board member Linda Olson Present Board member Ananth Shankar Present Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary VI. DESIGN REVIEW a. Maplewood Imports Auto Center (2450 Maplewood Drive) Land Use Plan and Zoning Map Changes, Conditional Use Permit and Design Approval Mr. Roberts said Mr. Jon Hansen, of LeJeune Investments and Maplewood Imports, is proposing to build four new automobile dealerships and a support services building on the 32- acre property at 2450 Maplewood Drive. Mr. Roberts said this complex would include 4 separate dealership buildings (each with sales and service facilities); a support services building and up to 1,945 parking spaces for inventory, customers and employees. The city has planned and zoned this site CO (commercial office) and M-1 (light manufacturing.) Board member Ledvina said in the staff report it states the construction for the Audi dealership would set the standard for the building design for the rest of the site. Board member Ledvina asked if it was staff's expectation that the subsequent dealership buildings to be built on this site would have matching architectural characteristics. Mr. Roberts said city staff expects quality projects and quality buildings to be built. However, because each building will have separate manufacturers and may have a certain prototype or standard they must follow this limits what can be done to the buildings. Mr. Roberts said he couldn't guarantee they would have similar colors or architectural characteristics. Board member Ledvina said the Audi building has a glassed in show floor area and asked if the other buildings would have similar architectural features? Mr. Roberts was unsure because there haven't been any other building plans submitted for review. Board member Olson asked what would happen to the existing car dealership facility? Community Design Review Board 2 Minutes 01-11-2005 Mr. Roberts said the applicant has told him that each manufacturer would like to have their own building so they wouldn't have to share space. Currently they have three dealerships in one building. Audi would be building the first building to be built but he isn't sure about the other dealerships. Anew dealership not now in the area may come into the area as well. Board member Ledvina asked staff about the large drainage swale and how the decision for a drainage area came about. Mr. Roberts said the drainage swale was part of the revised proposal. The reason for the drainage swale was that the city engineer didn't want to put pipes in the ground that they may have to move or disturb because of changing building pads or locations of the future buildings. They felt a better solution was to put the drainage swale in and then finalize the underground storm sewer as the project progressed. Board member Ledvina said then you end up with an additional 5 acres which would require stabilization and would result in erosion. He is curious about the city engineers rational behind that decision. Mr. Roberts stated his understanding of the situation based on what was said at the planning commission meeting and from what was stated in the engineering report. Board member Olson asked what the dark blue areas were shown on the plans, are they ponds, rain basins, or rainwater gardens. Mr. Roberts said those are proposed to be rainwater gardens scattered throughout the site to help with the storm water runoff. Chairperson Longrie said she read in the staff report that a traffic study had been done. There was concern that as this project develops there would be more traffic on the frontage road. On page 49 of the staff report it states the developer would likely be partially responsible for any mitigation or street improvements deemed necessary on the local system. She asked where that condition would be put within this development. Mr. Roberts said not yet. On page 12 of the staff report a condition E. was added after the planning commission meeting, because of MnDot's comments, this project and growth in the area in general, the city engineer has recommended that the city do a traffic study for a large portion of Maplewood. These areas to be studied for the traffic study include this area, the Gladstone area, the mall area and the Legacy Village area. The applicant has been notified that this study needs to be done and that there may be assessments for street improvements. Chairperson Longrie said in developing this large area she was concerned about the traffic as it continues to develop. She was concerned with the mitigation or street improvements as part of the conditions put upon the developer of the site. Mr. Roberts said essentially the city is stating it in an indirect way and the applicant must follow the conditions. If the city engineer says there would be some mitigation that would be accomplished, paid for, or studied. If it turns out public improvements need to be done those would be done through assessments. If there are other things identified during the traffic study then that would be negotiated between the engineering staff and the developers at that point. Community Design Review Board Minutes 01-11-2005 Board member Olson asked if there were any plans to update Highway 61. Mr. Roberts said that is something that would be discovered through the traffic study. MnDot hopes to eventually turn Highway 61 back to Ramsey County. Board member Shankar asked where the applicant planned on unloading the large truck trailer inventory of new cars on this site. Mr. Roberts said the plans show that the first building would have adequate turning radius on each of the sites for truck trailers to unload the cars. Chairperson Longrie asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Jonathan Baker, AIA, 100 South Fifth Street, Suite 250, Minneapolis, addressed the board. Chairperson Longrie said the board would like to hear about the building design and characteristics and the board appreciates seeing building samples of colors and materials. Mr. Baker said he didn't bring any building material samples this evening but could describe what the building would look like. He described the color renderings of the proposed building and the materials that would be used aloud. Chairperson Longrie asked if there would be any foundation plantings around the Audi building. Mr. Baker said yes. Around the showroom portion of the building there will be a deep landscaped area. The roof will be sloped and there are no gutters and the water runs off the front of the roof and down. Typically they use rock, mulch, and plantings in front of the building to take on the snow and water runoff from the roofline. He said around the back of the building is curbing to protect the building. Board member Olson said it sounds like the Audi building is going to be monochrome with glass, silver and metal exterior with light woods used in the interior of the building. She asked what the other buildings would look like that would be built on the site? Mr. Baker said the auto dealerships have building prototypes that they must follow but they do not know what dealerships would go in the remaining buildings yet. One dealership that was proposed for this site was a Land Rover site and they have a dark green metal roof and a different motif for their building. The site is going to be Maplewood Imports Auto Mall and would be fairly compatible in style but with different motif's and logos. Right now there is Porsche, Mercedes, and Audi in their existing facility and the Audi building is the first to be built on this site. Final plans have not been made at this time as to which other dealerships would go in any of the proposed buildings. The intent is to show the maximum way the site could be developed and ultimately that decision is up to Mr. Jon Hansen of LeJeune Investments. Mr. Jon Hansen, President of LeJeune Investments, 9393 Wayzata Boulevard, Minneapolis, addressed the board. Mr. Hansen said Mr. Doug Moulder, General Manager of Maplewood Imports is also in the audience and is available for questions as well. The first goal is to build the Audi building, the second building to be built would be for the Mercedes dealership and Community Design Review Board 4 Minutes 01-11-2005 then they will be regrouping along the way. They can either sell the current dealership facility or develop a facility for Porsche. Board member Shankar asked if the 20 service bays shown on the plans were necessary. Mr. Hansen said yes all 20 service bays were necessary. At the Golden Valley Carousel building they have 26 service bays and they are all used. They are building for future growth in mind. Board member Ledvina said it appears the only glass on the building is associated with the show room area. He asked if there was a possibility of incorporating any glass on the west fagade. Mr. Baker said the way this site is designed the building has many offsets and different heights. There is a large warehouse on that side of the building and landscaping would be used as well so the building is not plain by any means. Functionally it isn't necessary to have windows on that side of the building. Board member Ledvina said his point was to break up the expanse of the large wall of 25 to 30 feet in height. Mr. Baker said the building is broken up with different reveals and accents and there are enough changes in height to break up the expanse. There preference would be to build the building the way it's drawn on the plan. Chairperson Longrie said the west side is the side that people are viewing from Highway 61. She knows that the applicant's focus is on the north side where the building faces. The board visualizes what will be seen driving along Highway 61. Board member Ledvina said putting function aside, other ways to break up this large block building could be with additional detailing to give it more interest because of what people will see driving along Highway 61. She said she knows additional landscaping was mentioned by staff and that could help as well. Mr. Hansen said this building is built in Golden Valley and with the white wall and the crisp reveal it is a very sharp building. When it's built it will be one of the nicest dealership buildings in the area. Chairperson Longrie said it's difficult for her to understand how this building will look and feel without having building samples to refer to. Mr. Hansen gave a photo of the Golden Valley Carousel building to be shown on the screen so the board could visualize what a completed building would look like. Board member Shankar asked where the west elevation transitions from the low to the high roof if there was an opportunity to pull the building out six inches or so rather than have it all the same plain this would give the same effect as a window. Mr. Baker said that could be done. Community Design Review Board 5 Minutes 01-11-2005 Mr. Hansen said this building design is the European look and they like the crisp white high tech look. Any changes to the building design could be denied by Audi. Board member Shankar said he likes the high tech look as well, he is just wondering if there was one more break in the plain this could cast a shadow and make it appear there is a window there. Chairperson Longrie said that brings up an interesting question of what changes Audi would approve compared to the board recommending how they would like to see the project look in the City of Maplewood. She asked how Audi would feel about having an additional reveal band added along the west side to complement the existing band. Mr. Baker said from his experience with the building in Golden Valley that would be denied. As a design professional they tried to make the building better. Audi is very strict with certain elements and believe it or not, the one stripe on the building is a big deal for Audi. Mr. Hansen said they asked if they could use a different color gray and were told they couldn't. Chairperson Longrie said she's trying to get a feel for how much leeway the board has and how restrictive the prototype design is. She believes if Maplewood wants this building in the community, the board has to accept this design. Mr. Hansen said they had similar concerns when they were building the Golden Valley facility along Highway 394 but it turned out to be a very nice building. Board member Ledvina said he would concur with Mr. Hansen in that regard because he has seen the building from the highway and the design of the building is very nice. Earlier he asked if more glass could be added to the building but in consideration of the whole building site and the main show room area having so much glass, he feels comfortable with the building plans and is less inclined to ask for building modifications. Board member Olson said additional landscaping on the west elevation takes care of many of the board's concerns. She asked if the doors on the west side of the building could be treated as a design consideration. Mr. Hansen described how each of the four doors on the west side of the building would look. The doors are going to be mostly glass that can't be seen through along with some silver accents. Mr. Hansen said he would like to address the comment made earlier about the drainage swale. In the first plans based on city staffs comment and the watershed comments, substantial revisions were made. Their main concern was how to handle the swale during construction. They had proposed phasing the buildings in and were told you don't want to move a building on top of a storm sewer. Over 35% of the site will remain green space which takes over 11 acres out of production. So this proposal is not a real high-density development. Mr. Baker said the intent was to have a 32-acre site, build one building in 2005 and another in 2006 and so on. There was discussion regarding how much of this infrastructure to build as part of the 20% of the overall project being constructed. They decided to build the ponds in the back of the property and decide how to get the water to the back of the property. The Community Design Review Board 6 Minutes 01-11-2005 conclusion was to handle it with the drainage swale and as each subsequent building was built, additional infrastructures would go in and they would be that much closer to completion. Board member Olson asked what they had proposed to do with the center of the roundabout that is shown on the plans. Mr. Baker said currently it's shown as landscaping in the middle of the roundabout. The roundabout would not be constructed with the first building. They are still trying to determine what to put there. There has been discussion of having a sign there, a pond, landscaping, or a flag, right now it is just a turn around. Board member Olson asked if the applicant saw any problems with vehicles making the turning radius of the roundabout. Mr. Baker said no, the roundabouts are being built to the emergency standards so fire trucks and other emergency vehicles can get through there. Board member Ledvina moved to approve the plans date-stamped November 17, 2004, for the proposed Audi automobile dealership building and related sales/storage lot at 2450 Maplewood Drive. Approval is subject to the property owner doing the following: (additions to the original recommendation are underlined) 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Signs shown on the site plan and building elevations are not part of this approval and will require separate sign permits. 3. Submit the following for staff approval before the city issues a grading or building permit: (a) Final grading, paving drainage, utility, traffic/street improvement and erosion control plans. These plans shall meet the requirements of the city code and the city engineer. (b) A striping plan for the new automobile sales/storage lot. The plan must include drive aisles that are at least 24 feet in width. (c) A revised landscape plan to include: (1) The ponds should be vegetated with native grasses with Forbes. Native shrubbery and trees should be planted on the upland portion of the perimeter of the pond. (2) All landscaped areas, excluding landscaping within the ponds, must have an underground irrigation system. (3) Showing additional overstory trees on the west side of the site (near the frontage road). Community Design Review Board 7 Minutes 01-11-2005 (d) A revised outdoor lighting and photometric plan. The revised plan shall show the height and style of all outdoor lights and that the light illumination from all outdoor lights does not exceed .4 foot candles at all property lines. (e) A 100-foot-wide wetland protection buffer easement. This easement shall be prepared by a land surveyor, shall describe the boundary of the buffer and shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, grading, filling or dumping within the buffer. The applicant shall record the deed for this easement before the city will issue a grading or building permit. (f) Verification that all watershed district special provisions, as indicated on the watershed district permit, are met before the city issues a building or grading permit for the site. (g) A revised south building elevation showing the final design elements and materials for the gates of the trash enclosure. The gates are to be 100 opaque and shall be constructed of wood or metal instead of chain-link fencing with slats. (h) Combine the five existing parcels into one parcel for tax and identification purposes with Ramsey County. The owner or contractor must submit proof of lot combination to city staff before the city will issue a grading or building permit. (i) A cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. 4. The applicant or the contractor shall complete the following before occupying the Audi building or before using the storage lot: a. Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. b. Install a reflectorized stop sign at the exit and ahandicap-parking sign for each handicap accessible parking space. c. Construct a 100 percent opaque trash dumpster enclosure to meet code requirements, unless trash dumpsters are stored indoors. d. Install an in-ground lawn irrigation system for the parking lot islands and for all landscape areas (except the ponding areas). Lawn irrigation in the right-of-way may be waived if MnDot will not allow it. It is also waived in the wetland buffer area. e. Post signs identifying the customer and employee parking spaces. f. Install city-approved wetland buffer signs at the edge of the wetland buffer easement that notifies that no building, mowing, cutting, grading, filling or dumping is allowed within the buffer. g. Install all the required exterior improvements, including landscaping and signs. Community Design Review Board 8 Minutes 01-11-2005 h. Install all bituminous and the engineered porous or permeable surface and the curb and gutter. Stripe all drive aisles. Install all required landscaping by June 1 if the dealership or if the sales/storage lot is finished in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of completion of the sales/storage lot if it is finished in the spring or summer. k. Install all exterior lighting. Screen all roof-mounted equipment visible from public streets. 5. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City of Maplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished exterior improvements by June 1 if occupancy of the building is in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy of the building if occupancy is in the spring or summer. 6. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 7. This approval does not include the signs. The signage for the development will be reviewed by staff through the sign permit process. 8. This approval does not include any of the other buildings on the site (except the Audi dealership). The owner shall apply to the city for design approval for each of these buildings (including the architectural, landscaping and drainage plans). The community design review board (CDRB) must approve the project plans for each of these buildings before the city can issue a building permit for each building. 9. The design for future buildings on the site maintain a consistent high quality building material selection and architectural design. Board member Olson seconded. Ayes - Ledvina, Longrie, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. Chairperson Longrie said the community design review board bases their recommendation to the city council on the findings that: 1. The design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring, existing or proposed developments and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not Community Design Review Board 9 Minutes 01-11-2005 unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. 2. The design and location of the proposed development is in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and is not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan. 3. The design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. This item goes to the city council on January 24, 2005. Board member Ledvina wanted the applicant to note that the board prefers to see building material samples and would like better renditions and design plans for each building as this project continues. This information is needed for future meetings in order to see how the whole plan works together and for the board to understand the details of the project. Chairperson Longrie said generally speaking the board wants to see building material samples and was disappointed that the applicant did not have samples to present this evening. The board generally reviews samples during presentations and most applicants do provide samples for the board to review. In the future the board expects to see building samples as this project moves forward. She feels comfortable with the plan knowing additional landscaping will be added to the west elevation of the building. This building is the trend setter of this development. Although this building is a prototype there have been other developments that have come before the CDRB that have building prototypes as well and the board has recommended changes for a better fit in the community. AGENDA ITEM K-4 AGENDA REPORT TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Trunk Highway 36 Transportation Plan Update -Authorize Consultant Contract DATE: January 18, 2005 Introduction A number of issues continue to require that the City invest in an update of our Comprehensive Transportation Plan to address current issues with Trunk Highway 36 between TH 61 and White Bear Avenue. MnDOT, Ramsey County, North St. Paul and the Metropolitan Council continue to move forward with changes to Trunk Highway 36 that have the potential for major impacts to Maplewood's local street systems. It is recommended that the City Council authorize an update of our Comprehensive Transportation Plan to prepare for these issues. Background On December 20, 2004, the Planning Commission reviewed a proposal from LeJeune Investments and Maplewood Imports for four new automobile dealerships and support services on property at 2450 Maplewood Drive. Included with that site proposal was a traffic study required by the engineering staff that concluded some improvements were needed to accommodate traffic from the site on Trunk Highway 61 at Conner Avenue and on Trunk Highway 36 at English Street. That project was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission and is scheduled to be reviewed by the City Council on January 24, 2005. On December 27, 2004, the Planning Staff received correspondence from MnDOT summarizing their review of the proposed plat for the Maplewood Imports site. Included within that letter is information of significant concern to Maplewood: The ConnerAvenue right in/right out maybe closed in the future. Also, the TH 36/English Street Intersection will likely be closed in the future. Therefore, access to this area will be only from County Road C. The future design for access off of TH 36 in this area has not yet been determined ... The Maplewood Comprehensive Transportation Plan includes only a passing reference to issues on Trunk Highway 36: The improvement and expansion of Highway 36 from 1-35W in Roseville to 1-694 in Oakdale [is planned by MnDOT]. This project could include adding a HOV or a transit way lane, metered ramps and HOV bypasses of those ramps. This work will eliminate signalized intersections and close several accesses to Highway 36. No particular approach or reference to mitigation or alternative plans was referenced. Discussions with MnDOT officials indicate that preliminary layouts for closure of the TH 36-English Street intersection into a partial cloverleaf have occurred along with a plan to add a third lane to TH 36 between I-35W and TH 61. These improvements have the potential for large changes in local traffic patterns that are not included in Maplewood's current plans. City Council Agenda Background Maplewood Imports/Trunk Highway 36 Transportation Issues Page Two January 18, 2005 Public Works staff has also been in discussion with MnDOT officials regarding the TH 36 and Hazelwood intersection and pedestrian crossings during the past 12-15 months. The MnDOT comments and continued approach by MnDOT officials are not consistent with our current Comprehensive Transportation Plan, and the potential impacts related to this type of decision are substantial. At this point, the proposed development by Maplewood Imports did not appear, from engineering's opinion, to warrant the type of transportation changes suggested by MnDOT's letter. Conversely, the MnDOT comments clearly indicate that local planning is highly recommended to avoid future impacts that may be extremely difficult to mitigate and solutions may be difficult and expensive. We continue to recommend approval of the Maplewood Imports project; however, we also recommend proceeding with an update of the Transportation Section of the Comprehensive Plan. We do not believe the issues are connected. If the Maplewood Imports project is not approved, we still must address these issues. Following is a summary of the position that engineering staff have maintained with MnDOT on the issues related to this section of our City, along with a plan for updating our Transportation Plan: TO: Brian Kamnacar, Frank Pafko and Marc Goess (MnDOT Officials) 1 received your recent voice mail and wanted to assure you that Maplewood is also concerned with the Ped X-ing (at TH 36 and Hazelwood). We fully understand that the X-ing is an unsafe condition and should be removed. Maplewood previously submitted a federal funding request to eliminate the X-ing as part of the regional solicitation package and requested MnDOT Traffic Engineering financial support for that project. The MnDOT traffic office declined to help us financially to look for a solution, and the Met Council declined to fund our request. Maplewood acknowledges that the crossing should be removed. We are concerned that MnDOT does not acknowledge that by removing the ped crossing that they have a responsibility to assist with the solution. Map/ewood's adopted position is that we were promised by MnDOT in the early 1970s, when the full intersection at TH 36 and Hazelwood was revised to a right in -right out condition, that MnDOT would program an interchange. As 1 understand, MnDOT no longer acknowledges that responsibility. Additionally, we recently received notice as part of the Maplewood Imports Preliminary Plat Review that MnDOT is planning a similar closure at TH 36 and English Street as well as a closure at TH 61 and ConnorAvenue. These MnDOT actions will have a significant impact on our local transportation network that we may not be prepared to handle. We also believe that MnDOT has a role in assisting us in providing upgrades necessary to mitigate the closure of these intersections. 1 know that Maplewood is not opposed to the removal of the ped crossing at TH 36 and Hazelwood; nor are we necessarily requesting an interchange at TH 36 -Hazelwood; nor are we fundamentally opposed to the removal of the signal at TH 36 and English; however, we need to understand the total impacts of each of these changes and have an understanding of MnDOT's role in implementing an ultimate solution to the various changes, including possible mitigation improvements through a cooperative improvement program. 1 will be recommending to our City Council in January 2005 that the City of Maplewood initiate a Comprehensive Study of these various issues by hiring a transportation consultant to complete a report by April 2005. Our intent would be to have various options and mitigation strategies prepared for the changes and to conduct a number of discussions with MnDOT personnel about the various issues. 1 have copied this message to Frank Pafko and Marc Goess who have participated in traffic discussions in this area and as part of the Maplewood Imports review. If MnDOT is willing to commit to a cooperative review of the various proposed changes to TH 36, 1 believe that Maplewood would support MnDOT's removal of the crosswalk at Hazelwood. 1 believe that commitment from MnDOT should include an acknowledgement that the removal of the crosswalk will not necessarily eliminate the pedestrian crossings, especially the junior high students that currently cross at this location, and will include an investigation into providing a safe location for these future pedestrian crossings of the roadway. 1 look forward to developing a cooperative solution with MnDOT to these issues during the first months of 2005. City Council Agenda Background Maplewood Imports/Trunk Highway 36 Transportation Issues Page Three January 24, 2005 Comprehensive Transportation Plan Update The City's consultant pool includes transportation professionals that have very good knowledge of Metropolitan Transportation Policies and the Metropolitan Modeling Program. We have reviewed two proposals from our consultant pool: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. and SEH, Inc. Both are very comprehensive proposals and provide approaches that include developing various scenarios for addressing mitigation for Trunk Highway 36 and Trunk Highway 61 intersection closures. Both proposals also include two neighborhood meetings to review the scenarios along with presentations to the Planning Commission and City Council. The cost of the services is as follows: SEH, Inc. $39,665 Kimley-Horn and Assoc. $47,675 It is recommended that SEH, Inc. be awarded the work for this program as the low cost alternative. Budget Impact This item was not included in the approved 2005 Budget. The Public Works Administration Program includes an allocation from consultant services. That fund did not expend all of its allocation in the 2004 budget and has not dedicated any of the 2005 allocation, although a portion of the Council's budget cuts removed $15,000 from this allocation. It is proposed that $35,000 be approved as a carryover from the 2004 budget for the cost of this service. The remaining $5,000 for the project cost will be incurred against the 2005 Budget for Consultant Services in the Public Works Administration Program. Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council approve the hiring of SEH, Inc. as consultant to conduct an update of the Transportation Section of the City's Comprehensive Plan in the amount of $39,665. It is further recommended that the City Council approve the carryover of $35,000 from the 2004 Budget from Public Works Administration and direct the Finance Director to make the appropriate budget changes. RCA Attachments: SEH TH 36 Proposal with Location Map P'~Qposczl fog M ® I t .. ... ~ ~ L .ti r, 1, -~ - -- January 14, 2Q5 _ .. ;lii January 14, 2005 RE: Maplewood, Minnesota Transportation Plan Update SEH No. P-MAPLE0506.00 Mr. Chuck Ahl, PE Public Works Director/City Engineer City of Maplewood 1830 County Road B East Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 Dear Mr. Ahl: The SEH team is excited about the opportunity to work with you on developing a preferred solution for TH 36 through Maplewood and the update of your Transportation Plan. We have structured our proposal to respond to the needs and priorities you articulated through your e-mail request and the subsequent meeting we had on January 7, 2005. Selecting SEH for this project will result in success because we offer: 1. Extensive TH 36 Corridor Experience. We have a clear and thorough understanding of the specific issues at-hand through our work on adjacent Maplewood development projects, the 20- year Mn/DOT Transportation System Plan (TSP) and previous studies we completed for TH 36 in Maplewood and North St. Paul. Unmatched Availability. The project timeline fits in perfect with the completion of several major projects that our key staff were involved in. We will commit the necessary time to give this project the attention it deserves and deliver within your schedule requirements. 3. Proven Technical Approach. Using our expertise with the Metropolitan Council Regional Model we will develop traffic forecasts in the most efficient and accurate way to evaluate the proposed Mn/DOT access changes. Furthermore, we have the skills to quickly produce creative interchange and access concepts that will solve the corridor needs. Our transportation planners and traffic engineers will work closely together to provide you the strongest team that will ensure a technically sound solution developed in the shortest possible timeframe. Respectfully submitted, :~~~ _ .. . Mark D. Benson, PE Project Manager ~ E Thomas A. Sohrweide, PE, PTOE Principal .~, Mark L. Lobermeier, PE Client Service Manager Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 3535 Vadnais Center Drive, St. Paul, MN 55110-5196 SEH is an equal opportunity employer ~ www.sehinc.com ~ 651.490.2000 ~ 800.325.2055 ~ 651.490.2150 fax Project Understanding ....................................................... Issues Map II Project Approach ................................................................3 Schedule III Project Team .......................................................................7 Organizational Chart Resumes IV Detailed Work Plan and Costs ........................................10 2005 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. The informarion contained in this Proposal was prepared specifically for you and contains proprietary informarion. We would appreciate your discrerion in its reproducrion and distriburion. This informarion has been tailored to your specific project based on our understanding of your needs. Its aim is to demonstrate our ideas and approach to your project compared to our comperirion. We respectfully request that distriburion be limited to individuals involved in your selecrion process. TH 36 Serves as an important east-west Principal Arterial between Stillwater and Minneapolis. However, as it passes through the various communities, the character and function of the roadway varies significantly. Within Maplewood's boundaries, TH 36 transitions from a controlled access freeway between I-35E and TH 61 to an expressway with mixed at-grade access. It is the expressway section of the roadway where conflicts occur between providing mobility and reasonable access. Recent correspondence between Mn/DOT and the City of Maplewood have begun to highlight the challenges this corridor faces. Mn/DOT proposed that the English Street intersection be removed in the future, that the pedestrian crossing at Hazelwood be eliminated, and that the Connor Avenue access point on TH 61 be closed. While there are safety and mobility reasons for proposing these changes, there has been no recent comprehensive transportation plan to accommodate the traffic implications of such a proposal In response to these challenges, Maplewood has taken the proactive step of requesting proposals to develop a study of TH 36 to clarify the issues and identify alternative solutions. The results of the corridor study process will be incorporated into the City's Transportation Plan. Beyond the system wide transportation considerations there are several local issues that must be considered when evaluating the TH 36 corridor area, including: ^ Access for the existing commercial/industrial area and the proposed auto dealer development east of TH 61 between County Road C and TH 36. The need for north-south emergency services across TH 36, in particular with the Fire Station located on Hazelwood. ^ Traffic impacts associated with the Gladstone redevelopment area. ^ Pedestrian movement across TH 36 at Hazelwood, especially related to school children circulating between residential areas and John Glenn Middle School and Hazelwood Elementary. ^ The conflicts caused by the cloverleaf interchange at TH 61 which provides system type movements when service access type movements are what is needed. The Study Issues map on the following page highlights these and other major forces in the study area. WV bE'6l'6 -- 9002/l l/l (pxw'deW~euay\g090d\uowwo~\a~deW\pH\'.X) '.~uawn~o4 deW With a clear awareness and understanding of these defining issues we have been able to develop a technical approach that accomplishes the project objectives. Our approach is designed to achieve the goal of a future road system vision within the TH 36 Study area and to document this in an update of the City Transportation Plan. Based on this goal we have developed the following tasks to achieve success: This task includes the day to day project coordination along with the formation of a Project Management Team (PMT). We envision the PMT meeting at the various decision points during the study. Mn/DOT will be invited as a key player at the meetings and we suggest also inviting Ramsey County since County roads will be impacted by the various alternatives. The kickoff meeting of the PMT will be particularly important so that a shared understanding of the study area issues is developed. In addition, this meeting will be used to finalize the study limits and identify key intersections which need to be analyzed. A successful public involvement program will result in a successful Transportation Plan update. We have embedded open houses, Planning Commission meetings and City Council meetings into the process at the key decision points. The first open house will be held after the traffic forecasts have been completed and the implications of the proposed Mn/DOT access changes are understood. This first meeting will be an opportunity to explain the goals of the project and to listen to the various neighborhood concerns so that the development and evaluation of the alternatives can be responsive to their concerns. SEH will prepare aone-page project flyer that can be distributed by the City to advertise the meeting and provide background on the need for the study. This information will also be posted on the City's website. After the alternatives have been developed and refined they will be taken to the Planning Commission and City Council for input. The alternative concepts will be analyzed and a preferred alternative will be identified. At this point the second open house will be held to communicate the decision and process. Finally, the study results and draft Transportation Plan will be presented to the Planning Commission and City Council. The input from these meetings will be used to finalize the Transportation Plan Update. Traffic Forecasts The first major task will be to refine 2030 traffic forecasts using the Metropolitan Council Regional Model. We have created a subarea from the regional model that includes TH 61 on the west, County Road C on the North, White Bear Avenue to the east, and Frost Avenue to the south. The regional model will output 2030 traffic volumes based on the current landuse plans that have been approved. Within this subarea it is anticipated that several developments, like Gladstone, are not adequately represented in the model. We will update the regional model to reflect these site specific developments. Once accurate 2030 traffic volumes are arrived at, the model will be rerun using the access modifications proposed by Mn/DOT. The result of this effort will be a traffic volume map that shows the resultant traffic assignments. This then becomes the starting point for the alternatives development task. Alternatives Development Using an aerial basemap, a full range of innovative concepts will be developed to mitigate the affects of the proposed access closures. These alternatives will vary from the consideration of overpasses and interchanges to frontage roads. During this brainstorming phase, environmental concerns, access needs, system continuity, pedestrian needs and the public and agency input will be considered. This analysis will also include traffic capacity analysis to assure efficient traffic operations. We will take advantage our TH 36 corridor experience and build off this prior work. Alternatives Evaluation and Selection Once the full range of alternatives are developed cost estimates will be prepared. With this information an evaluation matrix will be prepared to fully evaluate the alternatives. Ultimately a preferred alternative will be recommended Transportation Plan Update With the results from the TH 36 Study, we will rewrite the City's Transportation Plan. The Plan will address the staging of improvements and the responsible unit of government to implement. The rewrite will include the results from the recent Beam Avenue study as well. Additional Tasks The proposed work plan has been developed to be sensitive to the funding and schedule constraints identified by the City. However, with the significance of the potential transportation changes in the study area, we would recommend consideration be given to expanding the public involvement program to include additional meetings. The first would be an open house shortly after the project kick-off to inform the public that the study is being undertaken and to gather issues earlier in the process so that it is possible to be more responsive to the concerns without appearing to already "have it all figured out". The second would be to hold targeted meetings with those individuals and business owners that are identified as having a significant stake in the outcome of the study. This would be a proactive measure to avoid the potential of them learning about the study either second hand or at an open house where their concerns may warrant more personal attention than time allows. We are proposing that the key intersections to be analyzed as part of the project be identified at the project kick-off meeting. Therefore at this time we are not sure if traffic count data needed for the analysis of these intersections is available or if it will have to be collected. Upon knowing what counts are needed, we will give the City a proposal to conduct those counts. The schedule on the following page outlines a four month process for completing the study. We believe this is a reasonable schedule based on the work plan we have proposed. The schedule anticipates that project deliverables will be available to supplement City and federal funding requests for the Hazlewood Pedestrian Crossing that are expected to occur in early summer. _ ~, r ; x a~ ,: , .~, L d 3 . y u 0 w a u u 0 'u ~ ~ ._ c ~ ~ Mark will serve as Project Manager for the study and direct the overall activities of the SEH team. He will also lead the public involvement activities. These roles are natural for Mark since his career has involved managing a variety of transportation planning related projects for City, County and State government. Mark has developed a strong track record of successful corridor study efforts that relate directly to the needs of the TH 36 corridor. Similar experience includes: ^ TH 52/CSAH 42 Corridor Study -Dakota County, Minnesota Valley Creek Road/Cottage Grove Drive Corridor Study -City of Woodbury, Minnesota I-35W/Lake Drive Interchange Study -City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota ^ TH 13 Corridor Study -Burnsville, Minnesota Tom will lead the traffic engineering tasks for the study. Tom has an unmatched understanding of the traffic movement, land uses, and destinations in the study area that will ensure the traffic analysis is accurate. In addition, Tom will assist with the public involvement where his local knowledge will benefit the project. Similar experience includes: ^ Nicollet Avenue Traffic Study -Burnsville, Minnesota ^ TH 13 Corridor Study -Burnsville, Minnesota TH 36 Interregional Corridor Study - Mn/DOT Jaimie is an expert at using traffic engineering tools to model and forecast traffic. For the TH 36 corridor, he will use CUBE, the latest traffic forecasting software, to forecast 2030 volumes with the Metropolitan Council Regional Model. Similar experience includes: I-694 Forecasting and Traffic Modeling - Mn/DOT I-35W/Lake Street Traffic Modeling -Hennepin County, Minnesota TH 65 Traffic Modeling -Anoka County, Minnesota Brent has developed a unique strength in blending a strong traffic background with a creative design capability. This allows Brent to quickly and efficiently develop a full-range of conceptual alternatives that respond to the traffic demands. Similar experience includes: Transportation System Plan - Mn/DOT Metro Division ^ East-West Corridor Study -Dakota County, Minnesota ^ TH 52/CSAH 42 Corridor Study -Dakota County, Minnesota Chris will lead the effort to rewrite the City Transportation Plan. As a transportation planner, Chris has extensive experience with developing transportation plans for City, County and State government. Similar experience includes: ^ TH 52 Corridor Study -Twin Cities to Rochester, Minnesota ^ Transportation Plan -City of Cannon Falls, Minnesota ^ TH 13 Transportation Plan -City of Montgomery, Minnesota In addition to the key tem members previous identified, SEH can draw upon other corridor experience which additional staff members have. Scott McBride has worked on the TH Interregional Corridor Study, the Mn/DOT 20-year Transportation System Plan, and the TH 36 Access Plan in North St. Paul. Mike Kotila has managed the North St. Paul TH 36 project. Glen Van Wormer worked on the TH 36 Corridor Management Plan in the 1990's that involved many local meetings with Maplewood residents and included the development of several different access and interchange configurations. As Client Service Manager, Mark Lobermeier will ensure that overall project staffing will meet the needs of the City and oversee the overall service delivery process. He has played similar roles for SEH projects in Maplewood including English Street, Kennard Street, MMATI Area Improvements and TH 61/County Road D area improvements. ~~~_ ,~ ~~~_ ~ .. W _ i i i I i i LI A detailed task/hour estimate is represented in the following pages. As discussed in our approach, our cost estimate represents a significant effort in public involvement and agency coordination. Our work plan emphases extensive involvement of our most experienced senior staff in traffic and transportation planning. Based on the work plan, our estimated for to complete the project is $39,665. ''~^ V+ L 'i L U M ~~ `2 r ~^ i.! ~ (Q ~+ N a W O V Q N i ^~ W C~ G ~~+ U ~ ~ r r O O N N M O N N ~ O p~ J H H M M N V V O C . r ~ Q ~ O V er N C C W O m m rn ~ ~ ~~ .~ U ... p O M O W C U N cA m ~ ~ O O N ~ E o C6 ~ O O O V O N CO CO M ~ ~ 2 H L O N Op V O N CO CO ~y Y O M C6 N ~ m ~ ~ ~ .U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O O L ~ (p Q T O O T N - N ~~ N ~p C C . ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ m a ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ 3 o ~ o aa~ ~. ~ ~ ~ -a~a~ .~ ~ ~ ~o~ - c ~>o ~ w, ~, O ~ H ~ N o U - w i ~ N ~ ~o '~ ~ ~ ~ ~- p ~ ~ .~ -~ ~ -~ ~ .~ `° c o ~ N w ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~~ ° ~ o o ~ ~ w ~ ~ c w - ~ u , d o ~ -~ c~ ~ - o U ~ o~ ~ o~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ o o m U ~ C6 ~' N N >, 'p L w, +~ Qj N w C6 (0 ~ ~ ~ N ~ ul ~ > .~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ° N a m ~ o ~ ~ w ~ a~ ~ c ~ E 'o ~ _ ~ m m E ~ ~ ~'a ~ ~ ~'o o . -~ 3 a,m.o c~ 3 0~ . - ~ m a w B i o o ~ o o w m ~ e ~>~ o ~ ~ o c ` ~ ~ i p ~ a i ~ o g a o E ? o ~o ~~~ ~ o~ o ~ o ~~ o ~~ a 0~.3 U 0 ~ ~ m o o ~-°c m ~ ui ~ ~w U mH U 3.5 o a°'i O N a O N w C U ~ ~ ~ C~ N ~ .p . ~, ~ -7 U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L N C ~ C ~ ~ .p ~+ C6 .~ ~ ~ N N 'p .N N ~ ~ H O ~ N O ~ ~ ~ ~ j~ l~ L j 'p d j~ N C (p C C i N N L ~ ~O ~ ~ ~C Vl ~ '~ "6 ~ ~ ~ N 'p ~ w ~ "6 .~ U ~ E ~ N N N ~ N N ~ N ~ N N Y N ~ ~~ U ~ O U E ° U w `~ ~ O • o ~ m ~° ui ~ a a~~ m H N m v, ~n y~ N N N N N O N C6 a ''~^~ V+ L 'i L U M ~~ 2 H ^~ W ~~ ~^ i.! ~ (Q ~+ N a W ~ N O V Q N i _~ Q C~ G U O N ~ O O ~ N N ~ O CO O ~ J f~7 N ~ CO ~ H M ~ O ~ M H ~ C . N CO m N ~ Q ~ N O N N N C C W N ~O O V ~ cp N 'C Y .~ U ... O N V N N O N O Y7 C U ~~ m~ ~ o ~ ~ ~~ E o . ~ m m o N ~ V N CO N V V V N ~ 2 H L O V N N V V N n C i O C6 N ~ m T ~~ ~_ .3 ~ ~ ~ in o-° ~ o. m~ c -° c o E c p ~ o ~ c r o o m ~~ o ~ 0 0 -° w N ~ w ~ `~ ~ ~ o > a ~ m U ~ a i ~ ~ a i a i ~ m ~ N ~ U a i -p ~ c c = ~ c ~ c ~ ~a>,p, c ~ . oHm o a ~ -° ~~ ~ ~ ~wH ~ c ~ ~ a i E >~.N 0 o x - > m m ai ' ~ ~ a o ~~ m a .~ ~ L pro c' o n o . E E - ~~ a m ~ o~ o c ~ ~ O o QH ~w m ~ ~ ~ a`~i ~ ~~~ . ~ U ~ ~ m ai v m -p w ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ o ~ E ~ C Q w ~ w T 3 I C c/7 . °~ ~ ~ w ~ E . N ~° ~ m ~ m o Q -O o E~ C6 .-. N Q ~~ N N m L >' C ~ p ~ O C6 O Q N C6 U C ~. o N N ~ w ip N ~ 3~~ m ~ o N °' w m v° .~ w o w a ~~ .o `° o ~ E c m o c ~ °~ c ~' ~ ~ m Q m w o - . E a a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o a ~ ~ o ~ > c m Y N ~ ~ -g ~ ~ m m ~ c o w ~ d N C ~ -C 0 ~ C C ~ L ~ N U N U N Q cA .~ ~ C6 C " 6 C6 N L ~ ~ w6 N N ~ ~ ~ R d •~ O O= w ~ ~~ N ~ C "O 7 ~ =O ~ .~ Q i Q Q N O ~• ~ C ~ ~ C6 O~ ~ ~ = c0 C Q C N O C N fe d i O. ~ ~ N N Q~ OU ~ 7 0 0 0 ... = O; ~ O N U ~ O ~ > l1J ~ N ~ ~ °~ ~ ~_ 3 ~ ;-~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~, wpm ~ o ~ o d cn ~ '~ ° 0 ° m 0= N ~ ~ ~ O Q N N o ~ ~~ g E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N p ~ o w m ~ O O U N ~ • N ~ ~ O N O V ~ ~ w ~ c ~ ~ ~ a ~~ ~ R ~ J ~ a O a O O o N a ~ O C6 O a O N ~ m > M N O ~ o ~ > V Q ~ m ~ J ~ Q .~ N N E >' U N N E U N E E Q O Y ~ N N , Q "O ~~ ~ ~ R E H O D ~ a Q ~ ~ m m o ~o ` m ~ Oa ` ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ • H ~ ~ . . . a I a n 3 ~ H ~ N M V ~O CO I~ N Y ` cri ri ri m ri m ri v v o 0 m a AGENDA ITEM K-6 AGENDA REPORT TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director/City Engineer Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: County Road D Realignment (West) Improvements (West of TH 61 to Highridge Court), City Project 02-08 -Resolution Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids (Re-Bid of Street Construction) DATE: January 18, 2005 Introduction During last year's County Road D West Realignment project a change to the contract was required to allow the utility work to be completed in 2004. However, the roadway construction work items were removed from the contract with the plan to re-bid this work early in 2005. The city council will consider approving the attached Resolution Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids. Background On September 13, 2004, the City Council approved the awarding of a construction contract to Palda & Sons, Inc. for the amount of $1,333,032.71. The project included construction of utilities and roadway for the entire County Road D West improvement. The contractor's bid was based upon beginning work immediately on the existing segment of County Road D to replace a sanitary sewer main as part of cooperative work under the contract with Vadnais Heights and utility work within the Trout Land development under the new County Road D alignment. Unfortunately, both the work on existing County Road D for Vadnais Heights and within the Trout Land Development was started but could not be completed as designed. It was not feasible to construct the Vadnais Heights sewer as designed due to conflicts with a Qwest major telephone transmission line. The Trout Land grading work, which needed to be completed before Palda could begin the new County Road D alignment work, was delayed due to unforeseen title work that delayed mobilization. Both issues did not allow Palda to begin work in September 2004 as anticipated by their bid. Each issue was resolved; however, the project could not be completed in 2004 as originally bid and Palda would not guarantee the bid prices that they originally submitted. Palda had requested an increase in the bid in excess of $300,000 to have the delays extended into 2005. Engineering staff rejected their claims and negotiated a project revision and would rebid the roadway portion of the project in 2005. New construction plans and specifications for the remaining roadway construction are complete and ready to be advertised for bids. The bid opening is scheduled for March 18t" and the award of bid will be considered by the city council at the March 28, 2005 city council meeting. City Council Agenda Background County Road D Realignment, West of TH 61 -Plan Approval Page Two January 18, 2005 Budget Impact The original 2004 bid was under the approved budget. Staff originally estimated that the project would be $100,000 below estimate. The remaining roadway construction is being bid early in the construction season and good bid prices are also anticipated. Obviously there will be some extra costs associated with the cancellation of a portion of the 2004 contract and re-bidding of the roadway construction in 2005. At this time cost are still anticipated to be within the original approved project budget and will be reviewed following the new bid. Recommendation It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached resolution approving the plans and specifications for the roadway construction of the County Road D Realignment (West of TH 61 to Highridge Court), City Project 02-08, and authorizing receipt of bids on March 18, 2005 at 10:00 am. JW Attachments: Resolution Location Map RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS ADVERTISING FOR BIDS WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the city council on February 9, 2004, plans and specifications for the roadway construction of County Road D Realignment (West), Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 02-08, have been prepared by (or under the direction of) the city engineer, who has presented such plans and specifications to the city council for approval, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 1. Such plans and specifications, acopy of which are attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby approved and ordered placed on file in the office of the city clerk. 2. The city clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published twice, at least ten days before the date set for bid opening, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be publicly opened and considered by the council at 10:OO.m. on the 18t" day of March, 2005, at the city hall and that no bids shall be considered unless sealed and filed with the clerk and accompanied by a certified check or bid bond, payable to the City of Maplewood, Minnesota for five percent of the amount of such bid. 3. The city clerk and city engineer are hereby authorized and instructed to receive, open, and read aloud bids received at the time and place herein noted, and to tabulate the bids received. The council will consider the bids, and the award of a contract, at the regular city council meeting of March 28, 2005. Approved this 24t" day of January 2005. Location Map County Road D Realignment, (West), Project 02-08 Agenda #K7 MEMORANDUM TO : Richard Fursman FROM: Melinda Coleman SUBJECT: Time Extension for Purchase Agreement DATE: January 18, 2005 INTRODUCTION Jack Krongard, of Krongard Construction, has submitted a purchase agreement with the city to purchase and develop the city-owned lots at the northwest corner of Larpenteur Avenue and Adolphus Street. Mr. Krongard is purchasing the property for $400,000. BACKGROUND On November 8, 2004, the City Council approved the sale of this property to Mr. Krongard for the development of 11 townhouse units. Along with the approval, the City Council required the developer to close the sale of the property by January 31, 2005. REQUEST City staff has been working with Mr. Krongard and the city attorney to finalize the purchase agreement and the necessary title work. This process has taken longer than anticipated and we just agreed on the terms of the purchase agreement on January 13, 2005. Mr. Krongard has now applied for his mortgage loan but the processing will not be completed until mid February. Mr. Krongard is requesting an extension to the end of February to close this sale. We have a tentative closing set for February 24, 2005. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council extend their approval for the closing on the land sale to February 28, 2005. ComdevAsec18\larpenteur rime extension Attachemnt