HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 02-23 City Council PacketAGENDA
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 P.M. Monday, February 23, 2004
Council Chambers, Municipal Building
Meeting No. 04-04
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
C. ROLL CALL
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Minutes from the Council Manager Workshop -February 2, 2004
2. Minutes from the Council Manager Workshop -February 9, 2004
3. Minutes from the City Council Meeting -February 9, 2004
E. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
F. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
1. Resolution of Appreciation - Tzianeng Vang
G. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of Claims
2. Transfer to Fund for Gladstone West Improvement Project 00-OS
3. Conditional Use Permit Review -Highwood Farms Town houses (2666 Highwood Avenue)
4. Adoption of 2004 Public Worl~s Permit Fees
5. Amended Utility Billing Agreement between the City of Maplewood and the City of Woodbury
6. Purchase of Two Police Vehicles
7. Purchase of Tasers
8. Annual State Gambling License Renewal Resolution -Church of St. Jerome's
H. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 7:00 p.m. Hillcrest Area (Larpenteur and White Bear Avenues)
a. Mixed Use District Zoning Code Amendment (Second Reading)
b. Land Use Plan Map Changes (BC, R-1 and C to Mixed Use (MU)) (4 votes)
c. Zoning Map Changes (BC and R-1 to Mixed Use (MU))
2. 7:30 p.m. Woodhill Subdivision (2516 Linwood Avenue)
a. Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development
b. Preliminary Plat
c. Zoning Map Change (F to R-1)
I. AWARD OF BIDS
J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
K. NEW BUSINESS
1. On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License -Bret Shogren, Chipotle Grill
2. On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License -James Gartner, AMF Maplewood Bowl
3. County Road D Realignment (TH 61 to Highridge Court), Project 02-08 -Resolution Approving
Exchange Agreement with Trout Land LLC and Authorizing Commencing of Proceeding Subsequent for
Right of Way Acquisition Agreement
4. Preliminary Approval for Issuance of Refunding Bonds
5. Gladstone Neighborhood Development Moratorium (First Reading)
6. Parl~vay Lift Station Removal Improvements, Project 02-15 -Resolutions for Modification of
Construction Contract (Change Order No. 2) and Acceptance of Project
7. Carlton Street Improvements, Project 03-22 -Resolutions for
a. Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids
b. Order Preparation of Assessment Roll
8. Legacy Parl~vay, Hazelwood to Kennard, Project 03-26 -Resolution Accepting Report and Calling for
Public Hearing
9. County Road D Realignment (TH 61 to Highridge Court), Project 02-08 -Resolution Approving Plans
and Specifications for TH 61 Frontage Road and Utilitiy Improvements
10. County Road D Improvements (Southlawn to TH61), Project 02-07 -Resolution Approving Joint
Powers Agreement with Cities of Vadnais Heights, Gem Lake and White Bear Lake, White Bear
Township, Ramsey County and State of Minnesota for Alternative Transformer Haul Route for Xcel
Energy
11. County Road D Improvements (Southlawn to TH 61), Project 02-07 -Resolution Approving
Memorandum of Agreement with Xcel Energy for Alternative Transformer Haul Route
L. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
Meetings - CounciUStaff Retreat -March 3, 2004
O. ADJOURNMENTS
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 CIVILITYFOR OUR COMMUNITY
Following are some r ales of civility the City of Maplewood expects of everyone appearing at Council Meetings
- elected officials, staff and citizens. It is hoped that by following these simple rules, everyone 's opinions can
be heard and understood in a reasonable manner. We appreciate the fact that when appearing at Council
meetings, it is understood that everyone will follow these principles: Show respect for each other actively listen
to one another, keep emotions in check and use respectful language.
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL/MANAGER WORKSHOP
Monday, February 2, 2004
Maplewood Room, City Hall
5:00 p.m.
A. CALL TO ORDER
Acting Mayor Juenemann called the meeting to order at 5:24 p.m.
Agenda Item D1
B. ROLL CALL
C.
D.
Robert Cardinal, Mayor Absent
Jackie Monahan-Junek, Councilmember Present
Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present
Marvin C. Koppen, Councilmember Present
Will Rossbach, Councilmember Present (Arrived at 5:24 p.m.)
Others Present:
City Manager Fursman
Assistant City Manager Coleman
City Engineer Ahl
Police Chief Thomalla
IT Director Hurley
City Clerk Guilfoile
Parks and Recreation Director Anderson (arrived at 6:00 p.m.)
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to a~rove the a,~enda as submitted.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All
NEW BUSINESS
1. County Road D Improvements West of TH 61 (TH 61 to Highridge Court) -- City Project
02-08 -- Review of Acquisition Agreements for Project Implementation
City Engineer Ahl provided a brief overview of the property acquisition on Hazelwood
and the status of the redevelopment project West of Highway 61.
E.
F.
FUTURE TOPICS
1. Sidewalk Study-Overall City Plan
ADJOURNMENT
With there being no further business the meeting was adjourned.
City Council/Manager Workshop 02-02-04
Agenda Item D2
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL/MANAGER WORKSHOP
Monday, February 09, 2004
Council Chambers, City Hall
6:00 p.m.
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. ROLL CALL
C.
D.
E.
F
Robert Cardinal, Mayor
Jackie Monahan-Junek, Councilmember
Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember
Marvin C. Koppen, Councilmember
Will Rossbach, Councilmember
Others Present:
City Manager Fursman
Assistant City Manager Coleman
City Clerk Guilfoile
Human Resources Director Le
Park and Recreation Director Anderson
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
NEW BUSINESS
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
1. Appointment Process For Boards and Commissions
FUTURE TOPICS
1. Sidewalk Study-Overall City Plan
ADJOURNMENT
City Council/Manager Workshop 02-09-04
A.
B.
C.
D
E.
F.
DRAFT--MINUTES
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:07 P.M., Monday, February 9, 2004
Council Chambers, Municipal Building
Meeting No. 04-03
CALL TO ORDER:
Agenda Item D3
A meeting of the City Council was held in the Council Chambers, at the Municipal
Building, and was called to order at 7:07 P.M. by Mayor Cardinal.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
Robert Cardinal, Mayor Present
Marvin Koppen, Councilmember Present
Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present
Jackie Monahan-Junek, Councilmember Present
Will Rossbach, Councilmember Present
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Minutes from City Council Meeting, January 22, 2004
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the City Council Minutes of January 22,
2004 as amended.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
F2. Chief Thomalla
Ml. Ramsey County
M2. Maplewood City News
M3. NEST
Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to approve the a,~enda as amended.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All
APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
1. Resolution of Appreciation-Will Rossbach and Jackie Monahan-Junek
a. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Assistant City Manager Coleman presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolutions for Will Rossbach and
Jackie Monahan-Junek in appreciation for their service on the Plannin,~ Commission:
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
JOINT RESOL UTION OF APPRECIATION 04-02-017
WHEREAS, William Rossbach has been a member of the Maplewood
Planning Commission since October 10, 1989 and has served faithfully in that
capacity to the present time; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has appreciated his experience,
insights and good judgment and
WHEREAS, he has freely given of his time and energy, without
compensation, for the betterment of the City of Maplewood,• and
WHEREAS, he has shown sincere dedication to his duties and has
consistently contributed his leadership, time and effort for the benefit
of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBYRESOLVED for and on behalf of the
City of Maplewood, Minnesota and its citizens that William Rossbach is hereby
extended our heartfelt gratitude and appreciation for his dedicated service, and
we wish him continued success in the future.
JOINT RESOL UTION OF APPRECIATION 04-02-018
WHEREAS, Jackie Monahan-Junek has been a member of the Maplewood
Planning Commission since March 11, 2002 and has served faithfully in that
capacity to the present time; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has appreciated her experience,
insights and good judgment and
WHEREAS, she has freely given of her time and energy, without
compensation, for the betterment of the City of Maplewood,• and
WHEREAS, she has shown sincere dedication to her duties and has
consistently contributed her leadership, time and effort for the benefit
of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBYRESOLVED for and on behalf of the
City of Maplewood, Minnesota and its citizens, that.Iackie Monahan-Junek is
hereby extended our heartfelt gratitude and appreciation for her dedicated
service, and we wish her continued success in the future.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-Mayor Cardinal,
Councilmembers Koppen and
Juenemann
Abstain-Councilmembers Monahan-
Junek and Rossbach
2. Officer Paul Bartz-Meritorious Service Award
b. City Manager Fursman presented the report.
b. Chief Thomalla presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Koppen moved to approve issuing a Meritorious Service Award to
Officer Paul Bartz in recognition of his outstanding work during the past year as a City of
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
Maplewood Police Officer.
G. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of Claims
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE:
$ 240,434.02 Checks # 62975 thru # 63021
dated 1/27/04
$ 298,831.94 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 1/16/04 thru 1/22/04
$ 9,500.00 Checks # 63022 thru # 63023
dated 1/28/04 thru 1/29/04
$ 1,657,619.31 Checks # 63024 thru # 63098
dated 1/30/04 thru 2/03/04
$ 100,925.91 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 1/21/04 thru 1/29/04
$ 2,307,311.18 Total Accounts Payable
PAYROLL
$ 482,449.93 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 1/30/04
$ 1,228.15 Payroll Deduction check # 96469 thru # 96470
dated 1/30/04
$ 483,678.08 Total Payroll
$ 2,790,989.26 GRAND TOTAL
2. Carry Over of 2003 Appropriations to 2004
Approved the carry over from one year to the next of unspent monies for specific
purposes, this involves reductions in the 2003 Budget and corresponding
increases in the 2004 budget.
3. Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary Church Temporary Liquor License
Approved the temporary liquor license by Stephen Klein, on behalf of the Church
of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, 1725 Kennard Street for the
annual Valentine program that will take place form 6:00 p.m. until midnight.
City Council Meeting 02-09-04 3
4. 2003 Community Design Review Board Annual Report
Accepted the 2003 Community Review Board Annual Report
5. Heritage Square Final Plat (Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway)
Approved the Heritage Square Final plat.
6. Conditional Use Permit Review Comfort Bus Company (1870 Rice Street)
Approved to review the conditional use permit for the bus-maintenance and repair
garage for Comfort Bus Company at 1870 Rice Street again in one year.
7. Conditional Use Permit Review Carriage Homes of Maple Hills (Maple Hills
Drive)
Approved to review that conditional use permit for the planned unit development
(PUD) for the Carriage Homes of Maple Hills again in one year or sooner if the
owner proposes a major change to the site.
Councilmember Koppen moved to approve consent agenda items 1-3 and 5-7 as
presented.
Seconded by Mayor Cardinal
Ayes-All
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the consent agenda item 4 as presented.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All
H. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7:10 p.m. Ohlson Landscaping-1949 Atlantic Street
Lot Division
Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Storage
Conditional Use Permit for Metal Building
Conditional Use Permit for exterior storage within the Business Commercial
Zoning District
Design Approval
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. Associate Planner Finwall presented specifics from the report.
c. Commissioner Desai presented the Planning Commission Report.
d. Boardmember Ledvina presented the Community Design Review Board Report.
e. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents.
The following person was heard:
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
Stephanie Jacques, the applicant, 1706 Barclay Street, Maplewood
£ Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the lot division request to subdivide the
property at 1949 Atlantic Street into two lots based on the following conditions:
a. Provide a certified land survey showing the existing and proposed property lines
and proposed building and parking lot.
b. Deeds describing the two new legal descriptions, which must be stamped by the
city. Ramsey County requires the city acknowledgment of approval to record the
deeds. City code requires that the deeds be recorded with Ramsey County within
one year of the date of lot division approval (February 9, 2005) or the lot division
becomes null and void.
c. There are pending assessments on this property. In order for the city to approve
the lot division the applicants must submit confirmation that the payment of
assessments are resolved between the two property owners to the satisfaction of
the city engineer.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All
Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following resolution approving a
conditional use permit for Thor and Jenny Oehrlein for exterior storage within the
Business Commercial (VCl zoning district in order to store lawn are maintenance
vehicles on Parcel A (north parcel)at 1949 Atlantic Street:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 04-02-019
WHEREAS, Thor and Jenny Oehrlein applied for a conditional use permit for exterior
storage within the business commercial zoning district for their property maintenance business;
WHEREAS, this permit applies to property located at 1949 Atlantic Street, Maplewood,
Minnesota. The legal description is:
The northerly ~/z of the following lot: Vacated alley adjacent and accruing and except the
South 10 feet, the East 8.57 feet of Lot 14; also, the East 8.57 feet of Lots 11 through 13;
also Lot 6, except the South 10 feet of that part West of the East 103.57 feet of said Lot
6; and all of Lots 7 through 10, all in Block 3, Lincoln Park, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Property Identification Number for this property is
16-29-22-14-0089;
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
On January 20, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve the conditional use permit.
2. On February 9, 2004, the city council held a public hearing. City staff published a notice
in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
council conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance to
speak and present written statements. The city council also considered reports and
recommendations from the city staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approves the above-
described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approved this
permit because:
The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and Code of Ordinances.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
The use would not depreciate property values.
4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a
nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor,
fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water runoff, vibration, general unsightliness,
electrical interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not
create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and
parks.
7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic
features into the development design.
9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval of the conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions:
1. Exterior storage is limited to vehicles associated with a property maintenance business.
All vehicles must be licensed and operable. No landscape material can be stored on the
property, including but not limited to, lawn clippings, landscape rock, etc.
2. A 6-foot-high, solid wood, screening fence must be installed and maintained on the north
property line.
3. There shall be no noise-making business activity conducted in the lot, or made by
vehicles entering or leaving the lot, between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m., Monday through
Saturday, or all day Sunday as required by city code.
4. The city council must approve a revision to this permit if the owner wants to put a
permanent building on the site.
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
The city council shall review this permit in one year.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All
Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following resolution approving Erik
Ohlson and Stephanie Jacques request for a conditional use permit to construct a 3,264-
square-foot metal building within the Business Commercial (BC) zoning district on
Parcel B (south barcell at 1949 Atlantic Street:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 04-02-020
WHEREAS, Erik Ohlson and Stephanie Jacques applied for a conditional use permit for
the construction of a metal storage building that is 3,264 square feet in area and 25 feet in height
within the Business Commercial zoning district;
WHEREAS, this permit applies to property located at 1949 Atlantic Street, Maplewood,
Minnesota. The legal description is:
The southerly ~/z of the following lot: Vacated alley adjacent and accruing and except the
South 10 feet, the East 8.57 feet of Lot 14; also, the East 8.57 feet of Lots 11 through 13;
also Lot 6, except the South 10 feet of that part West of the East 103.57 feet of said Lot
6; and all of Lots 7 through 10, all in Block 3, Lincoln Park, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Property Identification Number for this property is
16-29-22-14-0089;
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On January 20, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve the conditional use permit.
2. On February 9, 2004, the city council held a public hearing. City staff published a notice
in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The
council conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance to
speak and present written statements. The city council also considered reports and
recommendations from the city staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approves the above-
described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approved this
permit because:
The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and Code of Ordinances.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
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
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor,
fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water runoff, vibration, general unsightliness,
electrical interference or other nuisances.
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.
Approval of the conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions:
All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of
community development may approve minor changes.
2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of city council
approval or the permit shall become null and void.
The conditional use permit shall be reviewed by the city council in one year.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All
Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following resolution approving Erik
Ohlson and Stephanie Jacques request for a conditional use permit for exterior storage on
Parcel B (south parcel) at 1849 Atlantic Street:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 04-02-027
WHEREAS, Erik Ohlson and Stephanie Jacques applied for a conditional use permit for
exterior storage within the business commercial zoning district for their landscape business;
WHEREAS, this permit applies to property located at 1949 Atlantic Street, Maplewood,
Minnesota. The legal description is:
The southerly ~/z of the following lot: Vacated alley adjacent and accruing and except the
South 10 feet, the East 8.57 feet of Lot 14; also, the East 8.57 feet of Lots 11 through 13;
also Lot 6, except the South 10 feet of that part West of the East 103.57 feet of said Lot
6; and all of Lots 7 through 10, all in Block 3, Lincoln Park, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Property Identification Number for this property is
16-29-22-14-0089;
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
On January 20, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve the conditional use permit.
2. On February 9, 2004, the city council held a public hearing. City staff published a notice
in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The
council conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance to
speak and present written statements. The city council also considered reports and
recommendations from the city staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approves the above-
described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approved 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 runoff, vibration, general unsightliness,
electrical interference or other nuisances.
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.
Approval of the conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions:
Exterior storage is limited to four landscape bins (8 feet wide x 8 feet deep x 6 feet high
in size). Storage within the bins is limited to landscape goods or materials such as rock,
mulch, sand, woodchips, etc.
2. The four landscape bins must be placed on the southeast side of the lot and must be
screened from Atlantic Street with landscaping.
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
There shall be no noise-making business activity conducted in the lot, or made by
vehicles entering or leaving the lot, between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m., Monday through
Saturday, or all day Sunday as required by code.
4. The conditional use permit shall be reviewed by the city council in one year.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All
Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the plans ( rg ading utility, and landscape
plans date-stamped November 18, 2003) FORA 3,264 SQUARE FOOT METAL
BUILDING AT 1949 Atlantic Street with following conditions:
a. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this
project.
b. Provide the following for city staff approval before the city issues a grading or
building permit:
1) A revised grading and drainage plan that addresses all engineering
conditions as outlined in the January 5, 2004, engineering review and
includes that the entire parking lot and driveway be paved. This plan must
be approved by the city engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit.
2) A revised utility plan, subject to the city engineer's approval. The
applicants must sign a developer's agreement with the City of Maplewood
to ensure proper extension of city sewer and water to the site.
3) A revised site plan showing the following:
a) The parking lot layout including the location of at least four striped
parking spaces, with one of those spaces handicap accessible as
required by the Americans with Disabilities Act.
b) The driveway with a width of at least 20 feet is paved between the
street and the parking lot. Any gate along this driveway must also
open to a 20-foot width.
c) The location of four landscape bins a maximum size of 8 feet wide
x 8 feet deep x 6 feet high.
4) Revised elevations showing one exterior faucet located on the building,
the proposed landscape bins to be constructed of concrete block, painted
to match the building, and the southern chain-link fence with beige
colored slats to match the building which creates an 80 percent opaque
screen.
5) Building samples of metal panels, standing seam roof, trim, doors,
wainscot, and fence slats.
6) A revised landscape plan that shows the following:
City Council Meeting 02-09-04 10
a) Replacement of gravel on the north side of the building with grass
or native plantings.
b) Replacement of gravel on the west and south side of the building
with landscaping rock three feet out from the building and sod
used to cover the remaining ground.
c) An infiltration basin/rainwater garden planting plan showing an
adequate number of native plantings to address infiltration needs
as required by the city's engineering department.
7) The requirement for underground irrigation is waived if the applicants
sign an agreement with the City of Maplewood stating that the owners will
hand-water all landscaping, and any required landscape material that dies
will be replaced.
8) A revised photometric plan showing the freestanding lights not to exceed
25 feet in height, including the base, and the light illumination from any
outdoor light not to exceed .4 foot candles at all property lines.
9) If trash is to be stored outside of the building, plans for atrash-dumpster
enclosure is required. The enclosure must have gates that are 100 percent
opaque, and the materials and colors of the enclosure shall be compatible
with those of the metal building.
10) A letter of credit or cash escrow for all required exterior improvements.
The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work.
c. Install all required exterior improvements including paving and striping the
parking lot, installation of landscaping, installation of beige fence slats,
installation of outdoor lighting, etc., before occupying the building.
d. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if:
1) The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health,
safety or welfare.
2) 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.
e. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community
development may approve minor changes.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All
2. 7:45 p.m. Public Meeting for Annual NPDES Report
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
City Council Meeting 02-09-04 11
b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report.
c. Chuck Vermeersch provided further specifics from the report.
d. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents.
The following person was heard:
None
e. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing.
Mayor Cardinal moved to accept the NPDES Annual Report.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All
3. 8:06 p.m. County Road D Realignment Improvements (West of TH 61 to
Highridge Court), City Project 02-08--Resolution Ordering Improvement after
Public Hearing (Petitioned-3 votes)
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. City Consultant Karl Keel, URS Engineers, presented specifics from the report.
c. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents.
The following persons were heard:
George Rossbach, 1406 County Road C, Maplewood
Doug Frid, 2467 Hazelwood Street, Maplewood
d. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution ordering the County
Road D Realignment Improvements (West of TH 61 to Highridge Court), City Project
(l2-(lR~
RESOLUTION 04-02-022
ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AFTER PUBLIC HEARING
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution of the council adopted November 10, 2003, a report
has been prepared under the direction of the city engineer with reference to the County Road D
Realignment Improvements (West of TH 61 to Highridge Court), City Project 02-08, and this
report was received by the council on January 26, 2004, and
WHEREAS, the report provides information regarding whether the proposed project is
necessary, cost-effective, and feasible,
WHEREAS, a resolution of the city council adopted the 26~ day of January 2004, fixed a
date for a council hearing on the proposed County Road D Realignment Improvements (West of
TH 61 to Highridge Court), City Project 02-08, and
City Council Meeting 02-09-04 12
WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was
given, and the hearing was duly held on February 9, 2004, and the council has heard all persons
desiring to be heard on the matter and has fully considered the same;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, as follows:
That it is necessary, cost-effective and feasible, as detailed in the
feasibility report, that the City of Maplewood construct the County
Road D Realignment Improvements (West of TH 61 to Highridge
Court), City Project 02-08.
2. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the council
resolution adopted the 9th day of February 2004.
The city engineer is designated engineer for this improvement and
is hereby directed to prepare final plans and specifications for the
making of said improvement.
4. The finance director is hereby authorized to make the financial
transfers necessary to implement the financing plan for the project
as detailed in the preliminary report and revisions. A project
budget of $2,321,400 shall be established. The proposed financing
plan for is as follows:
Municipal State Aid Street (MSAS) $1,146,800
Special Assessments $ 974,600
Ramsey County Contribution $ 200,000
TOTAL $2,321,400
Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-Councilmembers
Juenemann, Monahan-Junek,
Koppen and Rossbach
Abstain-Mayor Cardinal
4. 8:30 p.m. County Road D Water Main Improvements, City Project 03-09 -
Resolution
Ordering Improvement after Public Hearing (4 Votes)
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report.
c. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents.
The following person was heard:
None
d. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution ordering the
City Council Meeting 02-09-04 13
improvement after Public Hearin, for Phases 2 and 3 of the County Road D Watermain
Improvements, Project 03-09:
RESOLUTION 04-02-023
ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AFTER PUBLIC HEARING
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution of the council adopted May 27, 2003, a report has
been prepared under the direction of the city engineer with reference to the County Road D
Watermain Improvements, City Project 03-09, and this report was received by the council on
January 26, 2004, and
WHEREAS, the report provides information regarding whether the proposed project is
necessary, cost-effective, and feasible,
WHEREAS, a resolution of the city council adopted the 26~ day of January 2004, fixed a
date for a council hearing on the proposed County Road D Watermain Improvements, City
Project 03-09, and
WHEREAS, only Phases 2 and 3, as defined in the feasibility study, are proposed to be
constructed at this time, and
WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was
given, and the hearing was duly held on February 9, 2004, and the council has heard all persons
desiring to be heard on the matter and has fully considered the same;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, as follows:
1. That it is necessary, cost-effective and feasible, as detailed in the feasibility
report, that the City of Maplewood construct the County Road D Watermain
Improvements, City Project 03-09.
2. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the council resolution
adopted the 9th day of February 2004.
3. The city engineer is designated engineer for this improvement and is hereby
directed to prepare final plans and specifications for the making of said
improvement.
4. The finance director is hereby authorized to make the financial transfers
necessary to implement the financing plan for the project as detailed in the
preliminary report and revisions. A project budget of $263,250 shall be
established. The proposed financing plan for Phases 2 & 3 is as follows:
Assessments $198,460
City General Tax Levy $ 12,500
SPRWS Funds $ 52,290
TOTAL $263,250
Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-Councilmembers
Juenemann, Monahan-Junek,
City Council Meeting 02-09-04 14
Koppen and Rossbach
Abstain-Mayor Cardinal
5. 8:00 p.m. Roundabout-Hazelwood St. & County Road C, Project 01-16
a. Resolution Modifying Original Contract after Public Hearing (3 votes)
b. Resolution Requesting Variance from State Aid Standards (3 votes)
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report.
c. Tom Sohrweide with SHE Traffic Engineers provided further specifics.
d. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents.
The following persons were heard:
George Rossbach, 1406 County Road C, Maplewood
James Sanders, 2425 Hazelwood, Maplewood
Rosella Liman, 2480 Hazelwood, Maplewood
Phillip Oswald, 2676 English, Maplewood
Nancy Keinrichs, 2575 Southlawn Drive, Maplewood
Dale Maroushek, 2602 Hazelwood, Maplewood
Jim Oswald, 1948 Cope, Maplewood
Dick Gambeski, 1803 E. County Road C, Maplewood
John Simons, 2409 Hazelwood, Maplewood
Jean Weber, 2440 Hazelwood, Maplewood
Peggy Arnie, 2730 Hazelwood, Maplewood
Karen Fasulo, 2601 English, Maplewood
Doug Frid, 2467 Hazelwood, Maplewood
£ Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Koppen moved to petition the county to keep the 4-wa.~p and
reassess the intersection in 5 years.
Seconded by Mayor Cardinal Ayes-Mayor Cardinal,
Councilmembers Rossbach and
Koppen
Nays-Councilmembers Juenemann
and Monahan-Junek
A five-minute break was taken.
I. AWARD OF BIDS
Award of Bid for New Fire Department Pumper/Tanker
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
City Council Meeting 02-09-04 15
b. Fire Chief Lukin presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to award the bid to Custom Fire for one
pumper/tanker for the fire department in the amount of $299,980.00
Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All
J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
K. NEW BUSINESS
County Road D Realignment, Project 02-07-Resolution Authorizing
Condemnation
Proceedings for Right-of--Way Acquisition
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the following resolution authorizing Eminent
Domain Proceedings on Property for Purposes ofRight-of--way acquisition, City Project
02-07, and direct staff to continue negotiation to acquire the property necessary for right-
of-wadpurposes:
RESOLUTION 04-02-024
AUTHORIZING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS
ON CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY PURPOSES
WHEREAS, on December 9, 2002, the City Council selected an alignment for County
Road D between Hazelwood Street and Trunk Highway 61 (TH 61), and
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution of the council adopted May 12, 2003, a report had
been prepared under the direction of the city engineer with reference to the improvement of
County Road D between Hazelwood Street and Trunk Highway 61, City Project 02-07 and said
feasibility report was received by the council on July 22, 2003, and
WHEREAS, the report provided information regarding whether the proposed project is
necessary, cost-effective, and feasible, and
WHEREAS, to construct said improvement it was deemed necessary to acquire property
for right-of--way purposes from the following properties:
a. Parcel 032922210004, Owner: Richard Schreier
b. Parcel 032922210003, Owner: Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF),
and
WHEREAS, a public hearing for said improvement was held on September 8, 2003, and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to begin eminent domain proceedings to expedite the
City Council Meeting 02-09-04 16
acquisition ofright-of--way and to ensure that the project remains on schedule.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA:
1. The city engineer and city attorney are hereby authorized to acquire through eminent
domain proceedings the following properties for purposes ofright-of--way acquisition:
a. Parcel 032922210004, Owner: Richard Schreier
b. Parcel 032922210003, Owner: Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)
Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All
Councilmember Juenemann moved to extend the meeting past the 11:00 cur ew to
complete the agenda.
Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All
2. County Road D, T.H. 61 to Hazelwood St, Project 02-07- Resolution Approving
State Aid Designation
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following resolution requesting the
approval and desi,~nation of County Road D from TH 61 to Hazelwood Street as part of
Maplewood's Municipal State Aid Street system by the Commissioner of Transportation
of the State of Minnesota:
RESOLUTION 04-02-025
ESTABLISHING MUNICIPAL STATE AID HIGHWAYS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Maplewood desires that the street
hereinafter described meets all necessary criteria and thus should be designated as a
municipal state aid street under the provision of Minnesota law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Maplewood
that the road described as follows, to-wit:
County Road D--T.H. 61 to Hazelwood Street-0.60 miles
be, and hereby is established, located, and designated a municipal state aid street of said city,
subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the described existing municipal state aid segments
be revised as follows, to-wit:
County Road DHazelwood Street to White Bear Avenue
from 0.89 miles to 0.90 miles
Segments 138-121-010 and 138-121-020
City Council Meeting 02-09-04 17
Hazelwood Street-Beam Avenue to County Road D
from 0.53 miles to 0.50 miles
Segment 138-112-040
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the city clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
forward two certified copies of this resolution to the commissioner of transportation for his
consideration, and that upon his approval of the designation of said road or portion thereof,
the same be constructed, improved, and maintained as a municipal state aid street of the City
of Maplewood to be numbered and known as a municipal state aid street.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All
3. Gladstone South Neighborhood Streets, Project 00-03 Resolutions for
Modification of
Existing Construction Contract (Change Order #4) and Acceptance of Project
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the following two resolutions for the
Gladstone South Neighborhood Street Improvements, City Project 00-03:
RESOLUTION 04-02-026
DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made
Improvement Project 00-03, Gladstone South Neighborhood Street Improvements, and has let a
construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and
WHEREAS, construction has now been completed with increases in the quantity of some
contract unit price items that have resulted in a final project cost greater than the original
contract amount, and
WHEREAS, it is now necessary that said final contract be modified and designated as
Improvement Project 00-03, Change Order Nos. 4.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that the mayor and city clerk are hereby authorized and directed
to modify the existing contract by executing said Change Order No. 4 in the amount of
$18,035.93. The final contract amount is $2,229,534.81.
The finance director is hereby authorized to make the financial transfers necessary to
implement the revised financing plan for the project. The revised financing plan is as shown
below:
City Council Meeting 02-09-04 18
Funding Source
Street Assessments:
Storm Assessments:
Sewer Utility Fund
SPRWS:
General Tax Levy:
Private Driveways
Total:
Original Budget Revised Budget
$1,004,500 $988,850
$155,600 $133,245
$153,500 $200,544
$223,100 $111,352
$1,809,300 $1,426,459
$0 $90,292
$3,346,000 $2,950,742
RESOLUTION 04-02-027
ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT
WHEREAS, the city engineer for the City of Maplewood has determined that the
Gladstone South Neighborhood Street Improvements, City Project 00-03, are complete and
recommends acceptance of the project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, that City Project 00-03 is complete and maintenance of these
improvements is accepted by the city. Release of any retainage or escrow is hereby authorized.
Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All
4. Nature Center Exhibits
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. Parks and Recreation Director Anderson presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve in concept the development of new,
interactive exhibits at the Maplewood Nature Center and establish a $90,000 budget and
adopted the following resolution declarin tg he ci . a legal sponsor for the Environmental
Partnership Grant Program and accepted a $20,000 grant from the Ramsey-Washington
Metro Watershed District, and directed the finance Director to authorize a budget transfer
of $50,000 form the PAC fund to the 2004 capital improvement plan for the nature center
exhibit project.:
Resolution 04-02-028
BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Maplewood act as the legal sponsor for the
Environmental Partnerships Grant Program Agreement EP04-3.03.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Maplewood has the financial capability
to meet the match requirement and ensure adequate completion of the project and certifies that it
will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Mayor Cardinal and City Clerk Guilfoile
City Council Meeting 02-09-04 19
are hereby authorized to execute the Environmental Partnerships Grant Agreement EP04-3.03
necessary to implement the project on behalf of the City of Maplewood.
Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All
5. Legacy Village Development Agreement Amendment
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. Assistant City Manager Coleman presented specifics from the report.
Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to approve the Special Assessment Agreement
for the Town and Country Development and the Development A,~reement with Hartford
as presented.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All
L. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None
M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
Ramsey County-Mayor Cardinal mentioned an article in the Sunday paper
regarding the 800 MHz.
2. City News-Councilmember Koppen asked the price of producing one page of the
City News with Parks and Recreation Director Anderson responded in stating the
cost is $580.00.
3. NEST-Councilmember Koppen stated the next NEST Meeting is 7:30 a.m. on
Tuesday, February 10~.
N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
The Gladstone Planning Committee will hold their first meeting on February 11,
2004 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
2. The CounciUStaff Planning Retreat will beheld on March 3rd, more details will be
available at the February 23rd meeting.
O. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Cardinal moved to adjourn the meeting at 11:10 p.m.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes -All
City Council Meeting 02-09-04 20
AGENDA ITEM F-1
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager
FROM: Sherrie Le, Human Resource Director
RE: POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION RESIGNATION
DATE: February 13, 2004
INTRODUCTION
There is a vacancy on the Civil Service Commission due to the resignation of Mr. Tzianeng
Vang. This term expired on 12/31/2003, though Mr. Vang will continue until the vacancy is
filled. City staff advertised this vacancy in the Maplewood City News, on our website and
through postings. We received applications from four qualified residents. I have attached a
resolution of appreciation.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the attached resolution of appreciation for Mr. Tzianeng Vang.
Attachment
bd
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
WHEREAS, Tzianeng Tung has been a member of the Maplewood
Police Civil Service Commission since May 14, 2001 and has served faithfully
in that capacity to the present time; and
WHEREAS, the Police Civil Service Commission has appreciated his
experience, insights and good judgment; and
WHEREAS, he has freely given of his time and energy, without
compensation, for the betterment of the City of Maplewood,• and
WHEREAS, he has shown sincere dedication to his duties and has
consistently contributed his leadership, time and effort for the benefit
of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOL VED for and on behalf
of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota and its citizens that Tzianeng Tung is
hereby extended our heartfelt gratitude and appreciation for his dedicated
service, and we wish him continued success in the future.
Passed by Maplewood
City Council on
Robert Cardinal, Mayor
AGENDA NO. G-1
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council
FROM: Finance Director
RE: APPROVAL OF CLAIMS
DATE: February 23, 2004
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:
$ 300.00 Checks # 63099
dated 2/04/04
$ 134,164.99 Checks # 63100 thru # 63130
dated 2/10/04
$ 2,510,504.99 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 1/30/04 thru 2/05/04
$ 205,715.02 Checks # 63131 thru # 63190
dated 2/13/04 thru 2/17/04
$ 149,164.85 Disbursements via debits to checking account
dated 2/06/04 thru 2/12/04
$ 2,999,849.85 Total Accounts Payable
$ 103,162.00 Merit Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 2/06/04
$ 425,943.84 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 2/13/04
$ 5,964.84 Payroll Deduction check # 96628 thru # 96632
dated 2/13/04
$ 535,070.68 Total Payroll
$ 3,534,920.53 GRAND TOTAL
Attached is a detailed listing of these claims. Please call me at 651-249-2902 if you have any
questions on the attached listing. This will allow me to check the supporting documentation on file
ds
attachments
c:\My Documents\Excel\Miscellaneous\04-AprClms 02-06 and 02-13 ,~
Check Register
City of Maplewood
Page 1
vchlist
02/06/2004 10:23:36 AM
Check Date Vendor Description/Account Amount
63099 2/4/2004 03010 METHODIST HOSPITAL NREMT EXAM - 2 300.00
63100 2/10/2004 02347 10,000 LAKES CHAPTER MARCH 2004 SEMINAR - 4 700.00
63101 2/10/2004 00211 BRAUN INTERTEC CORP. PROJ 02-07 PROF SRVS THRU 10/3 9,254.00
PROJ 02-07 PROF SRVS THRU 12/26 1,343.00
63102 2/10/2004 00307 COLLINS ELECTRICAL CONST. CO. ELEC HOOKUP FOR HOIST CRANE 205.00
63103 2/10/2004 00384 DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SRVS COPIER LEASE 326.54
63104 2/10/2004 00463 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT SERVICE AMB MEDIC 4 297.53
REPAIR RESCUE 1 2,124.99
REPAIR AMB MEDIC 2 288.72
SERVICE AMB MEDIC 3 304.41
REPAIR SERVICE TRUCK 208.95
REPAIR ENGINE 3 328.93
63105 2/10/2004 03011 FIRETEC SALE OF VEHICLE COMMISSION 1,000.00
63106 2/10/2004 00543 GE CAPITAL LEASE COPIER 2/12 TO 3/12 293.94
63107 2/10/2004 00718 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #622 BASKETBALL GYM SUPV 643.75
BASKETBALL GYM SUPV 167.50
BASKETBALL BUILDING SUPV 71.25
CREDIT BALANCE -0.01
63108 2/10/2004 00721 INDEPENDENT SPORTS NETWORK BASKETBALL SCHEDULING SERVICES 1,064.00
63109 2/10/2004 00771 JOHNSON, RICK DEER REMOVAL 300.00
63110 2/10/2004 00790 KELLER ELECTRIC INC ELEC SERVICE 285.00
63111 2/10/2004 02728 KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC PROJ 02-07 PROF SRVS THRU 12/30 923.13
PROJ 02-21 PROF SRVS THRU 12/30 12,761.66
PROJ 02-07 PROF SRVS THRU 12/30 12,802.44
PROJ 03-22 PROF SRVS THRU 12/30 13,087.75
PROJ 03-26 PROF SRVS THRU 12/30 14,944.09
63112 2/10/2004 02877 LA METTRY'S COLLISION REPAIR SQUAD 949 2,083.45
63113 2/10/2004 03012 M A C I A 2004 MEMBERSHIP DUES 25.00
63114 2/10/2004 00891 MAMA MAMA LUNCHEON 18.00
MEMBERSHIP DUES 50.00
63115 2/10/2004 00977 METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY 12 INCH SOFTBALLS 4,231.14
63116 2/10/2004 00985 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WASTEWATER -JAN/FEB REVISED 10,805.87
63117 2/10/2004 01028 MN STATE TREASURER STAR MONTHLY SURTAX -JAN 1,170.91
63118 2/10/2004 01173 NORTH METRO AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR TO U-2 325.34
63119 2/10/2004 01175 NORTH ST PAUL, CITY OF UTIL BILL EDUC SET-UP FEE 1,000.00
63120 2/10/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF WETS BUILDERS -SAC OVRPYMT 30,600.00
63121 2/10/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF REBINA SOBANIA -MEMBERSHIP 612.38
63122 2/10/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF LOU LENTSCH - PROJ 01-16 COMP 209.00
63123 2/10/2004 00396 PUBLIC SAFETY, DEPT OF CRIME PREVENTION COURSE - 2 600.00
63124 2/10/2004 01613 ROCKIN' HOLLYWOODS, THE MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT DP 7/4 1,350.00
63125 2/10/2004 01550 SUMMIT INSPECTIONS ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR INSP 4,213.60
63126 2/10/2004 01649 TRI-STATE BOBCAT, INC. 60" V-SNOW BLADE 1,586.85
63127 2/10/2004 01728 VOYAGEUR ASSET MGMT INC INV MGMT FEE 974.00
63128 2/10/2004 01734 WALSH, WILLIAM P. COMM PLUMBING INSP 218.51
63129 2/10/2004 01750 WATSON CO INC, THE MERCH FOR RESALE 324.87
63130 2/10/2004 02462 WEMYSS, SCOTT D NAME TAGS 16.00
NAME TAGS 23.50
32 Checks in this report Total checks : 134,464.99
2
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Disbursements via Debits to Checking account
Transmitted Settlement
Date Date Payee
01 /29/04
01 /30/04
01 /29/04
01 /30/04
01 /30/04
01 /30/04
01 /30/04
02/02/04
02/02/04
01 /30/04
01 /30/04
01 /30/04
02/03/04
02/04/04
02/02/04
01 /30/04
01 /30/04
01 /30/04
02/02/04
02/02/04
02/02/04
02/02/04
02/02/04
02/03/04
02/03/04
02/03/04
02/03/04
02/04/04
02/05/04
02/05/04
MN State Treasurer
ICMA (Vantagepointe)
MN Dept of Natural Resources
MN State Treasurer
U.S. Treasurer
P.E.R.A.
Orchard Trust
U.S. Bank Trust
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
ICMA
MSA Union
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
ARC Administration
TOTAL
Description
Drivers License/Deputy Registrar
Deferred Compensation
DNR electronic licenses
Drivers License/Deputy Registrar
Federal Payroll Tax
P.E.R.A.
Deferred Compensation
Debt Service payments
Drivers License/Deputy Registrar
State Payroll Tax
RHS contribution
Union Dues
Drivers License/Deputy Registrar
Drivers License/Deputy Registrar
DCRP & Flex plan payments
Amount
15,812.13
13,637.66
1,298.50
13,904.90
98,627.02
48,733.18
26,562.69
2,218,606.88
11,251.50
18,984.16
24,885.00
48.00
7,327.25
9,524.67
1,301.45
~,~ i u,~u4.aa
c:\My Documents\Excel\Miscellaneous\04-AprClms 02-06 and 02-13 3
Check Register
City of Maplewood
vchlist
02/13/2004 11:01:38 AM
Page 1
Check Date Vendor Description/Account Amount
63131 2/17/2004 01908 ADMINISTRATION, DEPT OF HARBOR BACKUP -DEC 1053.6
WIDE AREA NETWORK SRV -DEC 392
63132 2/17/2004 00049 ADT SECURITY SERVICES FIRE STAT 3 SEC UPGRADE, CONFIG 2430
63133 2/17/2004 00111 ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES INC ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES 469.45
63134 2/17/2004 03014 ANOKA TECHNICAL COLLEGE NSRMA FIRE SCHOOL 90
63135 2/17/2004 03015 ASHLAND POLICE DEPT K-9 FUND REGION 18 K-9 FIELD TRIALS 75
63136 2/17/2004 00223 BRODIN STUDIOS, INC. RETIREMENT PLAQUE 238.65
63137 2/17/2004 00232 BURNETT, MORLEY AND BETH REPAIR TV SETS 91.85
63138 2/17/2004 00240 C.S.C. CREDIT SERVICES APPLICANT BACKGROUND CHECKS 50
63139 2/17/2004 00494 CHILDREN HOME & FAMILY SERVICE YTH DIVERSION REST PROG - 4TH QTR 10270.25
63140 2/17/2004 02746 CLOVER SUPER FOODS INC MERCH FOR RESALE 127.36
63141 2/17/2004 03013 COMPASS WINE EVENT - 11/13 870.5
63142 2/17/2004 02816 DAYTON'S COMMERCIAL INTERIORS AMICO LOVESEAT- FINISH: LIGHT CHERRY ON 850.21
63143 2/17/2004 00358 DGM INC. TOW FORFEITURE VEH 90.53
TOW FORFEITURE VEH 90.53
TOW FORFEITURE VEH 90.53
TOW FORFEITURE VEH 90.53
TOW FORFEITURE VEH 90.53
63144 2/17/2004 00363 DLT SOLUTIONS, INC. LAND DESKTOP 2004 NETWORK 7212.97
63145 2/17/2004 00367 DP INDUSTRIAL MARKETING LOCKER PARTS 258.25
63146 2/17/2004 02694 ELERT & ASSOCIATES INC PROF SRVS - 4/1 TO 8/31 1590
63147 2/17/2004 00487 F.M. FRATTALONE EXC INC PROJ 00-03 GLADSTONE S -FINAL PYMT 29093.42
63148 2/17/2004 00532 FRANK MADDEN & ASSOCIATES LEGAL SRVS THRU 1/31 362
63149 2/17/2004 02642 GALLES CORP PRESSURE WASHER REPAIR 210.82
63150 2/17/2004 02945 HEALTHEAST VEHICLE SERVICES REPAIR VEHICLE #601 13.75
REPAIR VEHICLE #949 364.82
REPAIR VEHICLE #947 364.82
REPAIR VEHICLE #950 1595.93
63151 2/13/2004 02970 HIGH FREQUENCY DJ COMPANY DJ COMPANY 2/13 300
63152 2/17/2004 00702 ICMA PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT PROG 5000
63153 2/17/2004 00718 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST #622 GYM SUPERVISION - 4 TEAMS 148
63154 2/17/2004 02136 JOHNSON, DOUGLAS REIMB FOR BOOK 2/11 30
63155 2/17/2004 00785 KAMCOM TECHNOLOGIES PC AMD ATHLON 2800 PROCESSOR, 80 GB HD, 9749.81
63156 2/17/2004 00788 KARIS, FLINT REIMB FOR LUNCH - 2/11 8
REIMB FOR DRIVING SCHOOL 6/24 6.79
63157 2/17/2004 01894 KELLY & FAWCETT PA PROSECUTION FEES -JAN 9825
LEGAL SERVICES -JAN 19836.75
63158 2/17/2004 02728 KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC PROJ 02-07 PROF SRVS THRU 10/31 3209.85
PROJ 02-07 PROF SRVS THRU 11/30 1424.25
PROJ 02-07 PROF SRVS THRU 12/30 3339.08
63159 2/17/2004 00821 KVAM, DAVID REIMB FOR PARKING 1/27 - 1/28 24
63160 2/17/2004 00857 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES CONF REGISTRATION FEE 2004 240
63161 2/17/2004 00945 MASYS CORP SOFTWARE MAINT -MAR 738.68
63162 2/17/2004 03018 MEDICA CHOICE (REFUND) REF AMB 03021847 J LICHNER 57.73
63163 2/17/2004 02906 METRO LAND & SURVEYING & ENG LAPRENTEUR PROPERTY SURVEY 826.25
63164 2/17/2004 01051 MN OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS 138
63165 2/17/2004 01174 NORTH ST PAUL-MAPLEWOOD- WINE EVENT - 11/13/2003 870.5
63166 2/17/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF AMFBOWLING - DUP CIGARETTE LIC 86
63167 2/17/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF JANET HANNIGAN -MEMBERSHIP 55
63168 2/17/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF JOANNE LICHNER -AMB 03021847 25
63169 2/17/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF YUEN FAI NG -SKATING LESSONS 17.5
63170 2/17/2004 02043 OVERHEAD DOOR COMPANY REPAIR DOOR 191.75
63171 2/17/2004 01941 PATRICK GRAPHICS & TROPHIES TROPHIES -GIRLS 5/6TH GRADE 2623.31
63172 2/17/2004 02491 PUBLIC SAFETY MARKETING INC 10 -EMS JACKETS & PANTS 2802.5
RESPONDER JACKET 2832.5
63173 2/13/2004 00396 PUBLIC SAFETY, DEPT OF HOMELAND SEC & EMER MGMT CONF - 3 480
63174 2/17/2004 01337 RAMSEY COUNTY-PROP REC & REV DATA PROCESSING -DEC 3550
63175 2/17/2004 01359 REGAL AUTO WASH DETAIL XX CAR WASHES 251.12
63176 2/17/2004 00069 RISK MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES COLLECTION AGENCY FEE 15
63177 2/17/2004 02001 ROSEVILLE, CITY OF DATA PROC JOINT PWRS -JAN 625
63178 2/17/2004 01393 RUMPCA COMPANIES INC TUB GRINDER & HAULING BUCKTHORN 2000
63179 2/17/2004 01463 SISTER ROSALIND GEFRE MASSAGES -JAN 2196
63180 2/17/2004 03016 ST PAUL CONVENTION & VISITOR MEMBERSHIP 375
63181 2/17/2004 01514 ST PAUL STAMP WORKS INC STAMPS FOR PASSPORT/DMV SRVS 77.56
63182 2/17/2004 01504 ST PAUL, CITY OF HYDRANT & WATER USE - 3RD QTR 513.53
PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 479.08
63183 2/17/2004 01564 SUZANNE'S CUISINE, INC. MEETING MEAL 680.03
MEETING COFFEE -2/24 TO 9/19 3815
63184 2/17/2004 01572 SYSTEMS SUPPLY. INC. INK & TONER CARTRIDGES 416.46
4
Check Register
City of Maplewood
Page 2
vchlist
02/13/2004 11:01:38 AM
Check Date Vendor Description/Account Amount
63131 2/17/2004 01908 ADMINISTRATION, DEPT OF HARBOR BACKUP -DEC 1053.6
INK CARTRIDGE 414.84
63185 2/17/2004 03017 TEAM INC CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY EVAL 125
63186 2/17/2004 01664 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO. INSTALL PHOTO EYES ON BAY DOORS 1140
63187 2/17/2004 01683 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC SHOES 70.95
PANTS 140.12
UNIFORM 21.55
GLOVES 23.5
63188 2/17/2004 01763 WESTERN WATERPROOFING CO., INC URETHANE GROUT INJECTIONS BASEMENT OF 1000
63189 2/17/2004 01789 WOODBURY, CITY OF REFUND -OVERPAID SEWER ACCTS 6081.18
63190 2/13/2004 01190 XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY UTIL -STMT DATE 2/4 50915.61
MONTHLY UTIL -STMT DATE 2/4 7373.94
60 Checks in this report Total checks : 205,715.02
5
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Disbursements via Debits to Checking account
Transmitted Settlement
Date Date Payee
02/05/04
01 /30/04
02/05/04
02/06/04
02/06/04
01 /30/04
02/09/04
02/10/04
02/11 /04
02/06/04
02/11 /04
02/06/04
02/06/04
02/06/04
02/09/04
02/09/04
02/09/04
02/10/04
02/11 /04
02/12/04
02/12/04
02/12/04
MN State Treasurer
WI Dept of Revenue
MN Dept of Natural Resources
MN State Treasurer
P.E.R.A.
ARC Administration
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
MN State Treasurer
Elan Financial Services*
Pitney Bowes
TOTAL
Description
Drivers License/Deputy Registrar
State Payroll Tax
DNR electronic licenses
Drivers License/Deputy Registrar
P.E.R.A.
DCRP & Flex plan payments
Drivers License/Deputy Registrar
Drivers License/Deputy Registrar
Drivers License/Deputy Registrar
Purchasing card items
Postage
*Detailed listings of Elan purchasing card items are attached.
Amount
8,985.04
1,827.42
1,385.50
10,387.30
12,117.43
1,446.94
24,530.24
21,476.78
17,938.98
46,084.22
2,985.00
c:\My Documents\Excel\Miscellaneous\04-AprClms 02-06 and 02-13 6
Transaction Review ~ ~ ~'
For Transactions posted between 01/26/2004 to 02/01/2004
Post Date Vendor Name Settlement Amt Cardholder Name
01/26/2004 STRETCHER'S POLICE EQP 160.29 TIMOTHY FLOR
01/28/2004 STRETCHER'S POLICE EQP 90.42 CLTNT R ABEL
01/28/2004 NEXTEL WIRELESS SVGS 161.72 BRUCE K ANDERSON
01/28/2004 TIME WARNER CABLE R15 219.58 BRUCE K ANDERSON
01/29/2004 GE CAPITAL 298.20 BRUCE K ANDERSON
01/30/2004 ARCH WIRELESS 51.06 BRUCE K ANDERSON
01/30/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 451.71 BRUCE K ANDERSON
01/26/2004 BROWNELLS TNC 17.65 SCOTT ANDREWS
01/26/2004 HEALTHEAST TRANSPORTATN 1,794.80 JOHN BANICK
01/29/2004 SHRED TT 159.84 JOHN BANICK
01/29/2004 GRAFIX SHOPPE 412.42 JOHN BANICK
01/30/2004 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR 115.94 JOHN BANICK
01/30/2004 ARCH WIRELESS 43.58 JOHN BANICK
01/30/2004 CENTURY COMM & TECH 1,770.00 JOHN BANICK
01/30/2004 GRAFIX SHOPPE 282.23 JOHN BANICK
01/26/2004 AQUA LOGIC TNC 1,995.91 JTM BEHAN
01/28/2004 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE 23.26 JTM BEHAN
01/29/2004 PARK SUPPLY TNC 158.47 JTM BEHAN
01/29/2004 MINNESOTA ELEVATOR TNC 310.51 JTM BEHAN
01/30/2004 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE 49.87 JTM BEHAN
01/30/2004 MNTNCE ENGINEERING 194.62 JTM BEHAN
01/26/2004 MICHAELS #9401 4.46 OAKLEY BIESANZ
01/28/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED TNC 371.98 DANIEL P BUSACK
01/27/2004 DGT DYNAMIC GRAPHICS 79.00 HETDT CAREY
01/30/2004 OFFICE MAX 00002204 25.50 HETDT CAREY
01/30/2004 PAPER DEPOT 108.15 HETDT CAREY
01/26/2004 URBAN LAND INSTITUTE 170.00 MELINDA COLEMAN
01/26/2004 PARTY AMERICA 1008 67.68 LINDA CROSSON
01/26/2004 TOYS R US #6046 82.98 LINDA CROSSON
01/26/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED TNC 28.50 KERRY GROTTY
01/29/2004 TERRYBERRY COMPANY 819.15 ROBERTA DARST
01/30/2004 HELM AUTOMOTIVE MANUAL 31.95 ROBERT J DOLLERSCHELL
01/29/2004 CHANNING BETE COMPANY 330.48 VIRGINIA ERICKSON
01/29/2004 OFFICE MAX 00002204 319.48 PAUL E EVERSON
01/30/2004 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCT 489.45 PAUL E EVERSON
01/28/2004 ADAMS PEST CONTROL 321.74 DAVID FISHER
01/28/2004 ADAMS PEST CONTROL 193.04 DAVID FISHER
01/28/2004 ADAMS PEST CONTROL 321.74 DAVID FISHER
01/30/2004 TNT'L CODE COUNCIL TNC -30.00 DAVID FISHER
01/26/2004 CHAMPS #4019 80.00 TIMOTHY FLOR
01/26/2004 STRETCHER'S POLICE EQP 15.01 TIMOTHY FLOR
01/26/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 90.00 TIMOTHY FLOR
01/30/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED TNC 27.64 TIMOTHY FLOR
01/26/2004 OFFICE MAX 00002204 55.36 MYCHAL FOWLDS
01/28/2004 CIRCUIT CITY SS #3137 85.19 MYCHAL FOWLDS
01/30/2004 COMPUSA #197 47.91 MYCHAL FOWLDS
01/29/2004 STRETCHER'S POLICE EQP 161.61 JOHN FRASER
01/30/2004 TWIN CITY SAW 24.17 RONALD FREBERG
01/30/2004 PERKINS 10.00 RICHARD FURSMAN
01/26/2004 GLOBAL PRODUCTS CTR 60.70 MIKE GRAF
01/26/2004 TARGET 00011858 68.05 MIKE GRAF
01/26/2004 KMART 00071068 11.98 JANET M GREW HAYMAN
01/26/2004 BLUE RIBBON BAIT & TACKLE 18.43 JANET M GREW HAYMAN
01/27/2004 FACILITY SYSTEMS TNC 70.29 KAREN E GUILFOILE
01/28/2004 NAPA AUTO PARTS 133.27 MICHAEL HEMQUIST
01/26/2004 GAL GALLS TNC 8.41 STEVEN HIEBERT
7
Transaction Review ~ ~ ~'
For Transactions posted between 01/26/2004 to 02/01/2004
Post Date Vendor Name Settlement Amt Cardholder Name
01/26/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 52.07 STEVEN HIEBERT
01/30/2004 GAL GALLS INC 58.48 STEVEN HIEBERT
01/26/2004 WATER GEAR INC. 162.70 RON HORWATH
01/28/2004 ESRI INC 1,226.00 STEVE HURLEY
01/29/2004 RAD10 SHACK 00161455 21.29 STEVE HURLEY
01/29/2004 RAINBOW FOODS 1-885 20.69 ANN E HUTCHINSON
01/29/2004 MENARDS MAPLEWOOD 11.42 DON JONES
01/26/2004 CONTINENTAL RESEARCH 150.39 MICHAEL KANE
01/27/2004 FITNESS WHOLESALE INC 40.15 MARY B KOEHNEN
01/28/2004 SUPREME AUD10 139.20 MARY B KOEHNEN
01/29/2004 CHIPOTLE MEXICAN #0263 5.78 DAVID KVAM
01/30/2004 CHIPOTLE MEXICAN #0263 6.55 DAVID KVAM
01/28/2004 METRO SALES INC 237.35 STEVE LUK1N
01/26/2004 SUPERAMERICA 4022 25.87 CORDON MALLORY
01/28/2004 KEEPRS 159.90 ALESIA M METRY
01/30/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 115.02 AMY N1VEN
01/30/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 4.00 AMY N1VEN
01/29/2004 TARGET 00011858 5.31 KURT PARSONS
01/30/2004 KOHL'S #0052 49.99 GARY K PIKE
01/27/2004 MEDTECH FORENSICS INC 67.00 PHILIP F POWELL
01/28/2004 MASUNE COMPANY 100.30 PHILIP F POWELL
01/29/2004 TECHONWEB.COM 72.49 PHILIP F POWELL
01/30/2004 METRO SALES INC 319.00 WILLIAM J PRIEFER
01/26/2004 SUNRAY BTB 123.03 STEVEN PRIEM
01/26/2004 KREMER SPRING AND ALIGNME 996.18 STEVEN PRIEM
01/27/2004 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS 308.56 STEVEN PRIEM
01/27/2004 CONTINENTAL RESEARCH 150.39 STEVEN PRIEM
01/28/2004 TOUSLEY FORD 127200039 60.49 STEVEN PRIEM
01/28/2004 SUNRAY BTB 23.15 STEVEN PRIEM
01/29/2004 AMERICAN FASTENER 9.67 STEVEN PRIEM
01/29/2004 CATCO PARTS AND SERVICE 140.82 STEVEN PRIEM
01/29/2004 KATH AUTO PARTS 25.86 STEVEN PRIEM
01/30/2004 FORCE AMERICA 588.70 STEVEN PRIEM
01/30/2004 TRUCK UTILITES 1N00 OF 00 206.61 STEVEN PRIEM
01/30/2004 TRl STATE BOBCAT 122.12 STEVEN PRIEM
01/28/2004 AMOCO 07847502 426.00 KEVIN RABBETT
01/30/2004 AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES 147.00 KEVIN RABBETT
01/26/2004 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 1,259.94 MICHAEL REILLY
01/26/2004 ZANY BRAINY #510 13.99 AUDRA ROBBINS
01/27/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 249.28 DEB SCHMIDT
01/27/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 52.01 DEB SCHMIDT
01/30/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 9.71 DEB SCHMIDT
01/26/2004 PETSMART 00004614 23.93 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT
01/26/2004 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 125.09 GERALD SEEGER
01/28/2004 T-MOBILE 22.67 ANDREA S1NDT
01/30/2004 NEXTEL WIRELESS SVGS 371.55 ANDREA S1NDT
01/29/2004 SUZANNE'S CUISINE, INC 905.25 PAULINE STAPLES
01/28/2004 METRO SALES INC 1,920.00 JOANNE M SVENDSEN
01/30/2004 MENARDS MAPLEWOOD 13.64 RONALD SVENDSEN
01/26/2004 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY INC 173.18 RUSTIN SVENDSEN
01/27/2004 METRO FIRE 157.70 RUSTIN SVENDSEN
01/26/2004 HIRSHFIELD'S MAPLEWOOD 20.94 LYLE SWANSON
01/26/2004 HIRSHFIELD'S MAPLEWOOD 508.77 LYLE SWANSON
01/28/2004 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 352.25 LYLE SWANSON
01/28/2004 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 352.25 LYLE SWANSON
01/30/2004 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 132.17 LYLE SWANSON
Transaction Review
For Transactions posted between 01/26/2004 to 02/01/2004
Post Date Vendor Name
01/29/2004 SHRED 1T
01/26/2004 THE HOME DEPOT 2801
01/27/2004 OFFICE MAX 00002204
01/27/2004 SEARS ROEBUCK 1122
01/26/2004 P1ONEERPRESS SUBSCRIPTI
01/27/2004 GARLAND INDUSTRIES 1NC
01/28/2004 GARLAND INDUSTRIES 1NC
Settlement Amt Cardholder Name
16.65 JUDY TETZLAFF
7.16 TODD TEVLIN
3.19 JOSEPH WATERS
8.50 JOSEPH WATERS
8.30 SUSAN ZW1EG
-27.04 SUSAN ZW1EG
494.11 SUSAN ZW1EG
27,020.10
2 10 2004
9
Transaction Review
For Transactions posted between 02/02/2004 to 02/08/2004
Post Date
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/04/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/04/2004
02/04/2004
02/05/2004
02/06/2004
02/06/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/05/2004
02/04/2004
02/06/2004
02/04/2004
02/04/2004
02/06/2004
02/03/2004
02/05/2004
02/04/2004
02/05/2004
02/06/2004
02/03/2004
02/05/2004
02/06/2004
02/06/2004
02/02/2004
02/03/2004
02/05/2004
02/05/2004
02/05/2004
02/05/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/03/2004
02/06/2004
02/02/2004
02/04/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/04/2004
02/06/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/05/2004
02/06/2004
02/06/2004
02/02/2004
Vendor Name
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC
DEX MEDIA EAST #2
NEXTEL WIRELESSSVCS
CONTINENTAL RESEARCH
SIMPLEXGRINNEL
HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE
METROPOLITAN MECHANICAL C
WW GRAINGER 500
POOLSIDE
EXCEL DRYER INC
CHAMPS #4019
MENARDS 3022
FACTORY CARD OUTLET #284
KINKO'S #0617
OFFICE MAX 00002204
NEXTEL WIRELESSSVCS
MINNESOTA EROSION CONTRO
PAPA JOHN'S # 00418384
SENSIBLE LAND USE COAL
D BRIANS DELI #3 QOS
TARGET 00011858
BEST BUY 00000109
GLOBAL EQUIPMENT CO
EZGOV MN LABOR IND
COLLINS ELECTRICAL CONSTR
GOLDCOM INC
COMPUSA #197
COMPUTER RENAISSANCE
BEST BUY 00000109
OXYGEN SERVICE CO INC
SPRINTPCS AUTOPYMT RC1
STREAMLINE DESIGN
STREAMLINE DESIGN
STREAMLINE DESIGN
METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY
HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE
MIKES LP GAS INC
METRO SALES INC
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWSP
MASUNE COMPANY
LAW ENFORCEMENT TARGETS
KMART 00071068
WALGREEN 00031229
RAINBOW 1-8852
MICHAELS #9401
MSU-CASHIERS OFFICE
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC
TARGET 00011858
VERIZON WRLESSRCRK2RE3
ADT SECURITY SERVICES
ADVANCED GRAPHIX INC
PANERA BREAD #3459
VIKING ELECTRIC ST PAUL
LTG POWER EQUIPMENT
10 2004
Settlement Amt Cardholder Name
43.61 GLINT R ABEL
51.65 GLINT R ABEL
118.60 BRUCE K ANDERSON
80.84 BRUCE K ANDERSON
341.58 JIM BEHAN
548.48 JIM BEHAN
14.96 JIM BEHAN
833.84 JIM BEHAN
1,055.31 JIM BEHAN
96.28 JIM BEHAN
206.00 JIM BEHAN
69.99 JOSEPH A BERGERON
57.89 RON BOURQUIN
15.92 HEIDI CAREY
95.85 HEIDI CAREY
9.36 HEIDI CAREY
122.52 CHRISTOPHER CAVETT
315.00 CHRISTOPHER CAVETT
42.40 ROBERTA DARST
30.00 ROBERTA DARST
19.96 ROBERTA DARST
35.61 VIRGINIA ERICKSON
79.86 PAUL E EVERSON
814.04 DAVID FISHER
110.00 DAVID FISHER
229.01 DAVID FISHER
253.00 MYCHAL FOWLDS
69.21 MYCHAL FOWLDS
42.59 MYCHAL FOWLDS
42.58 MYCHAL FOWLDS
293.83 RONALD FREBERG
116.83 RICHARD FURSMAN
18.00 MIKE GRAF
436.00 MIKE GRAF
490.00 MIKE GRAF
95.23 MIKE GRAF
9.94 MARK HAAG
120.29 MARK HAAG
248.33 LORI HANSEN
73.10 LORI HANSON
1,048.34 LORI HANSON
136.35 RON HORWATH
49.22 FLINT KARTS
5.63 HEATHER KOS
15.84 HEATHER KOS
16.05 HEATHER KOS
19.20 HEATHER KOS
45.00 DAVID KVAM
34.43 DAVID KVAM
42.59 DAVID KVAM
39.48 SHERYL L LE
155.57 STEVE LUKIN
151.13 STEVE LUKIN
39.88 STEVE LUKIN
51.95 CORDON MALLORY
115.30 MARK MARUSKA
10
Transaction Review
For Transactions posted between 02/02/2004 to 02/08/2004
Post Date
02/03/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/03/2004
02/06/2004
02/06/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/06/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/03/2004
02/03/2004
02/03/2004
02/04/2004
02/04/2004
02/04/2004
02/05/2004
02/05/2004
02/06/2004
02/06/2004
02/06/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/06/2004
02/06/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/06/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/04/2004
02/03/2004
02/05/2004
02/02/2004
02/04/2004
02/05/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/04/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/04/2004
02/03/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
02/02/2004
Vendor Name
COMMONWEALTH ELECTRIC MN
KOHL'S #0052
KOHL'S #0055
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE
MILLS FLEET FARM #27
MILLS FLEET FARM #27
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 1NC
VARDA COMPANY
OXYGEN SERVICE CO 1NC
KREMER SPRING AND ALIGNME
FACTORY MOTOR PARTS
KATH AUTO PARTS
BAUER BULT TRE33200023
JOHN FRYE DISTRIBUTING
KATH AUTO PARTS
GOPHER BEARING COMPANY 1N
SUNRAY BTB
KATH AUTO PARTS
BAUER BULT TRE33200023
KATH AUTO PARTS
MERIT CHEVROLET
SPRAY CONTROL SYSTEMS 1NC
TRUCK UTILITES 1NC
CONTINENTAL RESEARCH
U OF M CCE ON LINE
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
HOSPITALITY MINNESOTA
T-MOBILE
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 1NC
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 1NC
MINNESOTA EROSION CONTRO
SUZANNE'S CUISINE, 1NC
METRO SALES 1NC
FREDPRYOR/CAREERTRACK
MENARDS 3059
CUB FOODS, INC.
ASPEN MILLS 8005717343
CIRCUIT CITY SS #3137
PEN PENNWELL BOOKS
SDP LITERATUREDISPLAYS
NORTHERN DOOR COMPANY
TWIN CITY HARDWARE
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 1NC
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 1NC
T-MOBILE
NAPA AUTO PARTS
KOHL'S #0052
STRETCHER'S POLICE EQP
U OF M CCE ON LINE
NAPA AUTO PARTS
VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS
10 2004
Settlement Amt Cardholder Name
551.38 MARK MARUSKA
22.35 JON A MELANDER
22.35 JON A MELANDER
181.47 JEAN NELSON
9.30 KURT PARSONS
48.97 KURT PARSONS
64.90 GARY K PIKE
134.65 GARY K PIKE
90.00 PHILIP F POWELL
17.02 STEVEN PR1EM
814.88 STEVEN PR1EM
20.96 STEVEN PR1EM
43.93 STEVEN PR1EM
94.79 STEVEN PR1EM
92.59 STEVEN PR1EM
50.64 STEVEN PR1EM
38.82 STEVEN PR1EM
43.40 STEVEN PR1EM
50.58 STEVEN PR1EM
46.44 STEVEN PR1EM
5.73 STEVEN PR1EM
1,827.54 STEVEN PR1EM
68.12 STEVEN PR1EM
63.90 STEVEN PR1EM
681.57 MICHAEL REILLY
240.00 ERIN M SCHACHT
292.88 DEB SCHMIDT
287.50 DEB SCHMIDT
30.00 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT
45.10 SCOTT SCHULTZ
331.96 MICHAEL SHORTREED
176.00 MICHAEL P SHORTREED
45.00 ANDREA S1NDT
621.65 PAULINE STAPLES
-248.33 JOANNE M SVENDSEN
44.62 JOANNE M SVENDSEN
125.35 RONALD SVENDSEN
50.48 RONALD SVENDSEN
295.60 RUSTIN SVENDSEN
102.22 RUSTIN SVENDSEN
141.40 RUSTIN SVENDSEN
273.22 LYLE SWANSON
135.45 LYLE SWANSON
404.35 LYLE SWANSON
25.03 THOMAS SZCZEPANSKl
210.83 THOMAS SZCZEPANSKl
101.06 DOUGLAS J TAUBMAN
9.14 TODD TEVLIN
123.30 PAUL THIENES
109.95 JOSEPH TRAN
240.00 CHARLES J VERMEERSCH
22.77 JOSEPH WATERS
27.86 SUSAN ZW1EG
19,064.12
11
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT
dd 2/13/2004 JUENEMANN, KATHLEEN 358.00
dd 2/13/2004 KOPPEN, MARVIN 358.00
dd 2/13/2004 COLEMAN, MELINDA 3,967.87
dd 2/13/2004 DARST, ROBERTA 1,499.68
dd 2/13/2004 FURSMAN, RICHARD 4,629.25
dd 2/13/2004 SWANSON, LYLE 1,702.57
dd 2/13/2004 EDSON, KAREN 62.50
dd 2/13/2004 LE, SHERYL 3,824.76
dd 2/13/2004 RAMEAUX, THERESE 2,197.61
dd 2/13/2004 FAUST, DANIEL 3,982.97
dd 2/13/2004 SCHMIDT, DEBORAH 1,348.44
dd 2/13/2004 ANDERSON, CAROLE 2,340.91
dd 2/13/2004 BAUMAN, GAYLE 6,575.86
dd 2/13/2004 JACKSON, MARY 1,766.84
dd 2/13/2004 KELSEY, CONNIE 2,180.66
dd 2/13/2004 TETZLAFF, JUDY 1,733.24
dd 2/13/2004 ERHARDT, DANIELLE 137.50
dd 2/13/2004 FRY, PATRICIA 1,651.64
dd 2/13/2004 GUILFOILE, KAREN 2,747.80
dd 2/13/2004 OSTER, ANDREA 1,713.07
dd 2/13/2004 CARLE, JEANETTE 1,649.14
dd 2/13/2004 FIGG, SHERRIE 1,179.11
dd 2/13/2004 JAGOE, CAROL 1,639.70
dd 2/13/2004 JOHNSON, BONNIE 1,304.74
dd 2/13/2004 OLSON, SANDRA 1,203.39
dd 2/13/2004 WEAVER, KRISTINE 1,761.48
dd 2/13/2004 BANICK, JOHN 3,297.65
dd 2/13/2004 CORCORAN, THERESA 1,721.20
dd 2/13/2004 POWELL, PHILIP 2,053.41
dd 2/13/2004 SPANGLER, EDNA 308.00
dd 2/13/2004 THOMALLA, DAVID 3,817.59
dd 2/13/2004 ABEL, GLINT 2,111.40
dd 2/13/2004 ALDRIDGE, MARK 2,286.20
dd 2/13/2004 ANDREWS, SCOTT 3,128.96
dd 2/13/2004 BAKKE, LONN 2,288.81
dd 2/13/2004 BELDE, STANLEY 2,519.43
dd 2/13/2004 BIERDEMAN, BRIAN 1,833.22
dd 2/13/2004 BOHL, JOHN 2,459.65
dd 2/13/2004 BUSACK, DANIEL 2,181.10
dd 2/13/2004 COFFEY, KEVIN 1,703.98
dd 2/13/2004 GROTTY, KERRY 2,380.58
dd 2/13/2004 DOBLAR, RICHARD 2,424.04
dd 2/13/2004 ERASER, JOHN 2,264.08
dd 2/13/2004 HEINZ, STEPHEN 2,481.66
dd 2/13/2004 HIEBERT, STEVEN 2,773.86
dd 2/13/2004 JOHNSON, KEVIN 3,460.26
dd 2/13/2004 KARIS, FLINT 2,786.41
dd 2/13/2004 KONG, TOMMY 2,330.93
dd 2/13/2004 KROLL, BRETT 1,911.42
dd 2/13/2004 KVAM, DAVID 2,917.78
dd 2/13/2004 CARSON, DANIEL 2,607.60
12
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT
dd 2/13/2004 LU, JOHNNIE 2,156.85
dd 2/13/2004 MARINO, JASON 1,984.14
dd 2/13/2004 MARTIN, JERROLD 2,002.32
dd 2/13/2004 MCCARTY, GLEN 1,767.81
dd 2/13/2004 METRY, ALESIA 1,776.68
dd 2/13/2004 PALMA, STEVEN 2,777.69
dd 2/13/2004 RABBETT, KEVIN 3,124.61
dd 2/13/2004 STEEPEN, SCOTT 3,409.86
dd 2/13/2004 SZCZEPANSKI, THOMAS 2,305.56
dd 2/13/2004 THIENES, PAUL 2,479.83
dd 2/13/2004 TRAN, JOSEPH 1,712.06
dd 2/13/2004 WENZEL, JAY 2,264.32
dd 2/13/2004 WINGATE, DAVID 1,552.39
dd 2/13/2004 XIONG, KAO 1,911.42
dd 2/13/2004 BARTZ, PAUL 2,590.16
dd 2/13/2004 BERGERON, JOSEPH 2,964.75
dd 2/13/2004 DUGAS, MICHAEL 1,945.04
dd 2/13/2004 DUNN, ALICE 3,027.57
dd 2/13/2004 ERICKSON, VIRGINIA 2,479.83
dd 2/13/2004 EVERSON, PAUL 2,492.55
dd 2/13/2004 FLOR, TIMOTHY 2,959.10
dd 2/13/2004 HALWEG, JODI 1,611.48
dd 2/13/2004 KATZMAN, BARBARA 1,704.37
dd 2/13/2004 L'ALLIER, DANIEL 1,177.50
dd 2/13/2004 LANGNER, SCOTT 1,660.10
dd 2/13/2004 OLSON, JULIE 2,212.31
dd 2/13/2004 PARSONS, KURT 1,963.48
dd 2/13/2004 PIKE, GARY 516.97
dd 2/13/2004 DAWSON, RICHARD 1,849.37
dd 2/13/2004 DUELLMAN, KIRK 1,842.82
dd 2/13/2004 JOHNSON, DOUGLAS 1,790.44
dd 2/13/2004 NOVAK, JEROME 1,796.99
dd 2/13/2004 PETERSON, ROBERT 1,922.14
dd 2/13/2004 SVENDSEN, RONALD 1,922.14
dd 2/13/2004 GERVAIS-JR, CLARENCE 2,501.66
dd 2/13/2004 BOYER, SCOTT 1,808.45
dd 2/13/2004 FEHR, JOSEPH 2,279.83
dd 2/13/2004 FLAUGHER, JAYME 1,833.26
dd 2/13/2004 JACKSON, LINDA 1,650.09
dd 2/13/2004 LAFFERTY, WALTER 1,874.60
dd 2/13/2004 LINN, BRYAN 1,762.00
dd 2/13/2004 PACOLT, MARSHA 2,142.40
dd 2/13/2004 RABINE, JANET 2,040.00
dd 2/13/2004 STAHNKE, JULIE 1,833.25
dd 2/13/2004 LUKIN, STEVEN 3,353.68
dd 2/13/2004 SVENDSEN, RUSTIN 2,678.00
dd 2/13/2004 ZWIEG, SUSAN 1,710.84
dd 2/13/2004 DOLLERSCHELL, ROBERT 266.30
dd 2/13/2004 AHL, R. CHARLES 4,188.70
dd 2/13/2004 NIVEN, AMY 1,369.39
dd 2/13/2004 PRIEFER, WILLIAM 2,462.94
13
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT
dd 2/13/2004 WEGWERTH, JUDITH 1,715.29
dd 2/13/2004 BRINK, TROY 1,876.48
dd 2/13/2004 DEBILZAN, THOMAS 2,233.16
dd 2/13/2004 EDGE, DOUGLAS 2,268.12
dd 2/13/2004 JONES, DONALD 2,208.52
dd 2/13/2004 KANE, MICHAEL 2,722.50
dd 2/13/2004 LUTZ, DAVID 2,272.57
dd 2/13/2004 MEYER, GERALD 2,346.62
dd 2/13/2004 NAGEL, BRYAN 2,484.20
dd 2/13/2004 OSWALD, ERICK 2,478.20
dd 2/13/2004 TEVLIN, TODD 2,288.05
dd 2/13/2004 CAVETT, CHRISTOPHER 3,056.22
dd 2/13/2004 DUCHARME, JOHN 2,230.84
dd 2/13/2004 ENGSTROM, ANDREW 1,453.24
dd 2/13/2004 JACOBSON, SCOTT 1,453.24
dd 2/13/2004 LINDBLOM, RANDAL 2,233.07
dd 2/13/2004 MURRA, AARON 252.63
dd 2/13/2004 PECK, DENNIS 2,336.01
dd 2/13/2004 PRIEBE, WILLIAM 2,279.29
dd 2/13/2004 SCHACHT, ERIN 2,166.04
dd 2/13/2004 VERMEERSCH, CHARLES 2,007.64
dd 2/13/2004 ANDERSON, BRUCE 3,939.03
dd 2/13/2004 CAREY, HEIDI 1,896.44
dd 2/13/2004 HALL, KATHLEEN 1,715.29
dd 2/13/2004 MARUSKA, MARK 2,513.20
dd 2/13/2004 NAUGHTON, JOHN 1,744.03
dd 2/13/2004 SCHINDELDECKER, JAMES 1,786.04
dd 2/13/2004 BIESANZ, OAKLEY 1,662.91
dd 2/13/2004 HAYMAN, JANET 1,410.32
dd 2/13/2004 HUTCHINSON, ANN 2,092.14
dd 2/13/2004 KOS, HEATHER 315.25
dd 2/13/2004 NELSON, JEAN 1,093.61
dd 2/13/2004 SEEGER, GERALD 569.67
dd 2/13/2004 GAYNOR, VIRGINIA 1,881.24
dd 2/13/2004 EKSTRAND, THOMAS 2,635.15
dd 2/13/2004 KROLL, LISA 1,161.08
dd 2/13/2004 LIVINGSTON, JOYCE 1,016.97
dd 2/13/2004 SINDT, ANDREA 1,482.04
dd 2/13/2004 THOMPSON, DEBRA 719.01
dd 2/13/2004 YOUNG, TAMELA 1,410.84
dd 2/13/2004 PINWALE, SHANN 2,293.38
dd 2/13/2004 ROBERTS, KENNETH 2,460.51
dd 2/13/2004 CARVER, NICHOLAS 2,415.47
dd 2/13/2004 FISHER, DAVID 2,878.23
dd 2/13/2004 RICE, MICHAEL 1,456.44
dd 2/13/2004 SWAN, DAVID 1,810.04
dd 2/13/2004 KONEWKO, DUWAYNE 2,321.24
dd 2/13/2004 ANZALDI, MANDY 934.50
dd 2/13/2004 BJORK, ALICIA 116.00
dd 2/13/2004 BJORK, BRANDON 367.50
dd 2/13/2004 DAVISON, LINCOLN 459.00
14
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT
dd 2/13/2004 FINN, GREGORY 1,917.13
dd 2/13/2004 GRAF, MICHAEL 1,728.26
dd 2/13/2004 HADDAD, JULIE 178.50
dd 2/13/2004 KELLY, LISA 1,396.01
dd 2/13/2004 MCBRIDE, PATRICK 40.00
dd 2/13/2004 NIEMAN, JAMES 224.00
dd 2/13/2004 NIEMCZYK, BRIAN 160.00
dd 2/13/2004 ROBBINS, AUDRA 1,783.14
dd 2/13/2004 SHERRILL, CAITLIN 429.75
dd 2/13/2004 TAUBMAN, DOUGLAS 5,065.27
dd 2/13/2004 BREHEIM, ROGER 1,794.49
dd 2/13/2004 NORDQUIST, RICHARD 1,852.87
dd 2/13/2004 SCHULTZ, SCOTT 1,961.14
dd 2/13/2004 CROSSON, LINDA 2,227.27
dd 2/13/2004 EASTMAN, THOMAS 2,345.93
dd 2/13/2004 FONTAINE, ANTHONY 825.58
dd 2/13/2004 LEIER, SARA 47.40
dd 2/13/2004 PELOQUIN, PENNYE 744.29
dd 2/13/2004 SCHMIDT, RUSSELL 1,778.19
dd 2/13/2004 STAPLES, PAULINE 2,720.85
dd 2/13/2004 ABRAHAMSON, DANIEL 35.00
dd 2/13/2004 ABRAHAMSON, REBECCA 161.21
dd 2/13/2004 BENDTSEN, LISA 151.20
dd 2/13/2004 BRENEMAN, NEIL 540.49
dd 2/13/2004 EDSON, JAMIE 172.13
dd 2/13/2004 ERICKSON, CAROL 60.75
dd 2/13/2004 GREDVIG, ANDERS 66.00
dd 2/13/2004 GUZIK, JENNIFER 35.96
dd 2/13/2004 HALEY, BROOKE 203.10
dd 2/13/2004 HORWATH, RONALD 1,783.14
dd 2/13/2004 IRISH, GRACE 178.50
dd 2/13/2004 JONES, LACEY 37.50
dd 2/13/2004 KOEHNEN, AMY 82.43
dd 2/13/2004 KOEHNEN, MARY 518.07
dd 2/13/2004 KRONHOLM, KATHRYN 659.64
dd 2/13/2004 LAWSON, JOSHUA 173.75
dd 2/13/2004 LINDSTROM, AMANDA 147.28
dd 2/13/2004 MARTINEZ, AMY 114.00
dd 2/13/2004 MARUSKA, ERICA 18.60
dd 2/13/2004 OVERBY, ANNA 74.60
dd 2/13/2004 SCHULTZ, PETER 30.83
dd 2/13/2004 SHAW, KRISTINA 75.48
dd 2/13/2004 SIMONSON, JUSTIN 654.40
dd 2/13/2004 TUPY, HEIDE 159.00
dd 2/13/2004 TUPY, MARCUS 413.91
dd 2/13/2004 GROPPOLI, LINDA 329.38
dd 2/13/2004 KURKOSKI, STEPHANIE 45.50
dd 2/13/2004 BEHAN, JAMES 1,727.48
dd 2/13/2004 CRAWFORD - JR, RAYMOND 341.79
dd 2/13/2004 LONETTI, JAMES 969.79
dd 2/13/2004 MILES, LAURA 279.30
15
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT
dd 2/13/2004 PATTERSON, ALBERT 1,203.88
dd 2/13/2004 PRINS, KELLY 936.85
dd 2/13/2004 REILLY, MICHAEL 1,614.80
dd 2/13/2004 STEINHORST, JEFFREY 86.80
dd 2/13/2004 AICHELE, CRAIG 1,803.48
dd 2/13/2004 PRIEM, STEVEN 2,118.93
dd 2/13/2004 BERGO, CHAD 2,071.54
dd 2/13/2004 FOWLDS, MYCHAL 1,762.54
dd 2/13/2004 HURLEY, STEPHEN 2,878.23
wf 96490 2/13/2004 CARDINAL, ROBERT 406.78
wf 96491 2/13/2004 MONAHAN-JUNEK, JACQUELINE 358.00
wf 96492 2/13/2004 ROSSBACH, WILLIAM 358.00
wf 96493 2/13/2004 INGVOLDSTAD, CURTIS 106.25
wf 96494 2/13/2004 KARSTENS, BRAD 50.00
wf 96495 2/13/2004 JAHN, DAVID 1,573.98
wf 96496 2/13/2004 MALDONADO, JUANA 644.47
wf 96497 2/13/2004 MORIN, TROY 221.00
wf 96498 2/13/2004 MATHEYS, ALANA 1,847.41
wf 96499 2/13/2004 GENNOW, PAMELA 208.00
wf 96500 2/13/2004 HANSEN, LORI 1,598.84
wf 96501 2/13/2004 SCHACHT, BARBARA 615.81
wf 96502 2/13/2004 PALANK, MARY 1,639.70
wf 96503 2/13/2004 RICHIE, CAROLE 1,701.81
wf 96504 2/13/2004 SVENDSEN, JOANNE 1,813.77
wf 96505 2/13/2004 SHORTREED, MICHAEL 2,847.39
wf 96506 2/13/2004 STEINER, JOSEPH 459.00
wf 96507 2/13/2004 WELCHLIN, CABOT 2,305.56
wf 96508 2/13/2004 FREBERG, RONALD 2,329.32
wf 96509 2/13/2004 EDSON, DAVID 2,341.33
wf 96510 2/13/2004 HELEY, ROLAND 822.31
wf 96511 2/13/2004 HINNENKAMP, GARY 2,455.72
wf 96512 2/13/2004 LINDORFF, DENNIS 1,790.50
wf 96513 2/13/2004 NOVAK, MICHAEL 2,061.46
wf 96514 2/13/2004 GERNES, CAROLE 218.75
wf 96515 2/13/2004 SOUTTER, CHRISTINE 199.13
wf 96516 2/13/2004 ADAMS, CAILIN 60.00
wf 96517 2/13/2004 ANDERSON, MIKE 22.50
wf 96518 2/13/2004 ANZALDI, KALI 426.00
wf 96519 2/13/2004 BROZAK, KATHERINE 22.50
wf 96520 2/13/2004 CHOINIERE, ROBERT 22.50
wf 96521 2/13/2004 DRESSEN, EMILY 32.00
wf 96522 2/13/2004 FRANK, SARAH 42.00
wf 96523 2/13/2004 FREYBERGER, RACHEL 191.25
wf 96524 2/13/2004 GEBHARD, MADELINE 153.00
wf 96525 2/13/2004 GOODRICH, CHAD 348.50
wf 96526 2/13/2004 GORE, MICHAEL 24.00
wf 96527 2/13/2004 GRAF, ASHLEY 24.00
wf 96528 2/13/2004 GREENER, DOUGLAS 45.00
wf 96529 2/13/2004 HARGROVE, CAYLA 66.50
wf 96530 2/13/2004 HAWKES, SCOTT 64.50
wf 96531 2/13/2004 HJELMGREN, NICOLE 21.00
16
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT
wf 96532 2/13/2004 HOEKSTRA, ANGELA 36.00
wf 96533 2/13/2004 HOLDER, RYAN 84.00
wf 96534 2/13/2004 HORNER, KIMBERLY 27.00
wf 96535 2/13/2004 LANDE, JOSEPH 52.50
wf 96536 2/13/2004 CARSON, RYAN 33.00
wf 96537 2/13/2004 LIUKONEN, SHAWN 45.00
wf 96538 2/13/2004 MARTINUCCI, KAITLIN 27.00
wf 96539 2/13/2004 MEHL, AMANDA 27.00
wf 96540 2/13/2004 MICK, KYLE 34.50
wf 96541 2/13/2004 O'GRADY, BENJAMIN 30.00
wf 96542 2/13/2004 OHLHAUSER, MEGHAN 231.00
wf 96543 2/13/2004 OLSON, KRISTIN 27.00
wf 96544 2/13/2004 OLSON, SCOTT 13.50
wf 96545 2/13/2004 RAJAN, RAJIU 53.25
wf 96546 2/13/2004 RASMUSSEN, KEVIN 44.00
wf 96547 2/13/2004 ROERING, JORDAN 84.00
wf 96548 2/13/2004 RYDEEN, SARAH 36.00
wf 96549 2/13/2004 RYDEL, RACHEL 63.50
wf 96550 2/13/2004 SHOBERG, KART 125.81
wf 96551 2/13/2004 SIKORA, JACOB 112.00
wf 96552 2/13/2004 SIKORA, PAUL 41.00
wf 96553 2/13/2004 STOREBY, SHAWN 320.00
wf 96554 2/13/2004 TARR-J R, GUS 84.25
wf 96555 2/13/2004 WERNER, KATIE 255.00
wf 96556 2/13/2004 WILLMS, DUSTIN 168.00
wf 96557 2/13/2004 WISTL, ZACHARY 210.00
wf 96558 2/13/2004 YORKOVICH, BRADLEY 60.00
wf 96559 2/13/2004 ZIELINSKI, JESSICA 13.00
wf 96560 2/13/2004 ZUSTIAK, CODY 40.50
wf 96561 2/13/2004 ZWICK, NICHOLAS 146.25
wf 96562 2/13/2004 GERMAIN, DAVID 1,794.93
wf 96563 2/13/2004 HAAG, MARK 1,729.01
wf 96564 2/13/2004 NADEAU, EDWARD 2,722.50
wf 96565 2/13/2004 BROWN, LAURIE 357.05
wf 96566 2/13/2004 DISKERUD, HEATHER 222.00
wf 96567 2/13/2004 GLASS, JEAN 1,638.76
wf 96568 2/13/2004 MOY, PAMELA 571.46
wf 96569 2/13/2004 TOLBERT, FRANCINE 249.00
wf 96570 2/13/2004 UNGER, MARGARET 530.14
wf 96571 2/13/2004 WEISMANN, JENNIFER 338.51
wf 96572 2/13/2004 ANDERSON, CALEB 246.60
wf 96573 2/13/2004 BOTHWELL, KRISTIN 294.86
wf 96574 2/13/2004 BRIN, LAUREN 108.88
wf 96575 2/13/2004 COSTA, JOSEPH 169.20
wf 96576 2/13/2004 DEMPSEY, BETH 109.60
wf 96577 2/13/2004 DIXON, REGINALD 234.00
wf 96578 2/13/2004 DUNN, RYAN 774.15
wf 96579 2/13/2004 ESTRADA, KIEL 132.00
wf 96580 2/13/2004 FENCER, JUSTIN 28.18
wf 96581 2/13/2004 FONTAINE, KIM 810.14
wf 96582 2/13/2004 GRANT, MELISSA 133.00
17
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT
wf 96583 2/13/2004 GRUENHAGEN, LINDA 419.08
wf 96584 2/13/2004 HOLMGREN, LEAH 103.13
wf 96585 2/13/2004 HOULE, DENISE 81.98
wf 96586 2/13/2004 JOHNSON, ROBERT 721.70
wf 96587 2/13/2004 JOYER, MARTI 96.95
wf 96588 2/13/2004 KROLL, MARK 132.00
wf 96589 2/13/2004 OLSON, MARGRET 40.80
wf 96590 2/13/2004 OTTESON, JANET 154.95
wf 96591 2/13/2004 PEHOSKI, JOEL 64.00
wf 96592 2/13/2004 PROESCH, ANDY 247.15
wf 96593 2/13/2004 RENSTROM, KEVIN 168.31
wf 96594 2/13/2004 SMITLEY, SHARON 286.90
wf 96595 2/13/2004 VANG, VICTORIA 52.80
wf 96596 2/13/2004 WARNER, CAROLYN 185.60
wf 96597 2/13/2004 WELTER, ELIZABETH 176.75
wf 96598 2/13/2004 WHITE, NICOLE 520.86
wf 96599 2/13/2004 WOODMAN, ALICE 140.95
wf 96600 2/13/2004 BOSLEY, CAROL 307.98
wf 96601 2/13/2004 HAGSTROM, EMILY 9.00
wf 96602 2/13/2004 HANSEN, ANNA 60.00
wf 96603 2/13/2004 KELLY, MICHAEL 210.00
wf 96604 2/13/2004 NORLIN, AMANDA 21.00
wf 96605 2/13/2004 ODDEN, JESSICA 76.38
wf 96606 2/13/2004 OIE, REBECCA 32.50
wf 96607 2/13/2004 QUINN, KELLY 51.00
wf 96608 2/13/2004 BATTLER, MELINDA 120.00
wf 96609 2/13/2004 VAN HALE, PAULA 42.00
wf 96610 2/13/2004 VERNER, JEAN 100.00
wf 96611 2/13/2004 COLLINS, ASHLEY 96.98
wf 96612 2/13/2004 DOUGLASS, TOM 1,289.75
wf 96613 2/13/2004 HER, CHONG 63.18
wf 96614 2/13/2004 LOGAN, HEATHER 6.60
wf 96615 2/13/2004 NAGEL, BROOKE 8.31
wf 96616 2/13/2004 O'GRADY, ZACHARY 119.70
wf 96617 2/13/2004 PETSCHEN, DANIEL 29.93
wf 96618 2/13/2004 QUIWONKPA, THOMAS 39.90
wf 96619 2/13/2004 RHODE, ERIC 390.12
wf 96620 2/13/2004 RICHTER, MICHAEL 71.44
wf 96621 2/13/2004 SCHULZE, BRIAN 605.70
wf 96622 2/13/2004 VERDELL, TRAQUEZ 51.54
wf 96623 2/13/2004 VOSS, NICOLE 161.26
wf 96624 2/13/2004 WHITE, STEVEN 198.44
wf 96625 2/13/2004 WILLIAMS, NICK 63.50
wf 96626 2/13/2004 ZIEMER, NICOLE 66.60
wf 96627 2/13/2004 MULVANEY, DENNIS 1,967.73
425, 943.84
18
AGENDA NO. G-2
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager
FROM: Finance Director
RE: Transfer to Fund for Gladstone West Improvement Project 00-05
DATE: February 17, 2004
The Gladstone West Improvement Project has been completed. Additional bond
sale proceeds need to be allocated to this project based upon the final financing
plan approved by the City Council last year. There are surplus bond sale
proceeds available in the fund for Project 00-03 (Gladstone South Improvements)
because the costs for this project were less than anticipated when the bonds
were sold.
It is recommended that the City Council approve a transfer of $13,735.85 from the
fund for project 00-03 to the fund for Project 00-05 effective 12-31-03 and
authorize the appropriate budget changes.
P\agn\TRANSFER TO PROJECT 00-05.doc
Agenda #G3
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
PROJECT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
City Manager
Ken Roberts, Associate Planner
Conditional Use Permit Review
Highwood Farms Town Houses
2666 Highwood Avenue
February 6, 2004
INTRODUCTION
The conditional use permit (CUP) for the Highwood Farrns Town Houses planned unit development
(PUD) is due for review. This CUP is for a PUD for an 18-unit town house development. Refer to
the maps on pages 3-6 and the city council minutes starting on page 7.
BACKGROUND
On February 10, 2003, the city council approved the following for the Highwood Farms Town Houses
PUD:
1. Aland use plan change from R-1 (single dwellings) to R-3L (low density multiple dwellings).
2. A conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) for an 18-unit housing
development. (Please see the site plan on page five.)
3. The preliminary plat to create the lots in the development.
(See the city council minutes starting on page seven.)
DISCUSSION
The developer has not yet received design or frnal plat approval from the city for this development.
Charles Cox, the applicant and the owner of site, recently told me that it is his intention to complete
the city requirements and to build the development later this year. (Please see his letter on page
two.) Since neither the owner nor the developer has started this project, the city council should
review this permit again in one year.
RECOMMENDATION
Review the conditional use permit for the planned unit development (PUD} for the Highwood Farms
Town Houses on Highwood Avenue again in one year or sooner if the owner proposes a major
change to the site.
psec13-28Mighwood Farms TH.CUPrev 2004.doc
Attachments:
1. February 3, 2004 letter from Charles Cox
2. Location Map
3. Properly Line2oning Map
4. Site Plan
5. Proposed Grading Plan
6. Council minutes dated February 10, 2003
Attachment 1
February 3, 2004
Ken Roberts
City of Maplewood
1830 East County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55109
Re: Highwood Farms
Dear Ken:
~, ~.:
RECEI~l~EO
I am sending this letter as a request for an extension on the current approval for the Highwood Farms
property development. We ran into a few obstacles; however construction will begin in 2004. Thank
you in advance for your time and efforts.
Sincerely,
~~?~f~~
~.
Charles E. Cox Jr.
2
Attachment 2
~"'~ ' ` 2 DEFR RIDGE tr
. ~ DGE DR. W' ~
16 ~ O HIILWODD a $' ~
gg O
2. OR. 0 JDGf ~ ~
1. HUNTINGTON CT. Z Sp ~ ~' 6~,,r Cr ~ 25
2. OAKRIDGE LN. ~ ~ ~Nr+SJpf ~ ~~' ~
o v
7 ~ 0 ~ __ ~ LINWOOD R ~c,~ ~ AVE.
~PHL AVE. UNW C , pY~~' 'in
U g~ ~o ~~ ~ PROpoM ~~
~ ~' ~, s ER
TIMBER TR. ~ ~ ~ TIMBER W}N1.E NR. 0
71M 4~i ~ z CT ER DR. dye
PHYU CT. ¢ Ate' ~ ~ ~W'
v R. ~ 1 NEW CENT(IRY
1. CURRIE CT. YN~' V VIEW AVE. 2 NEW CENTURY 7~ER
2. VALLEY VIEW CT. 3 NEW CENNRI' W
3. LAKEWOOD CT. r. AV, 3' pR
I`74) 1_[ 2• HIGHWOOD vii ~ u~i ~ J J ~
9 60S ~ -~ ~~~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~ 25
~ o ~a~ ~
~ ~ . ~~' ~ ~ ~ ~ a 4) 25
~ ga° AYE. ~ ~ ~ EMI ~•
8 scjuTHCRE5T ~ ~ ~ vew.w SOUTH EST ~~'~ 72
WiK HEIGHTS Cf. U ~ Pork
MOR ~_p<v CT: ~~G.
SN ~ ~v~~q G~ ~ Car~uor
BOXWOOD 5C`~" ~ OR Q ~i ~ LaVke~
1200S ~~
~~ ~ ~ _
43
° cARVeR Avg. + 2)
43
1 ~ ovERLOo
C.R. 3. Z
~F/cyrS W
1440S ,~~ (n ~
~ ~z
~~>_ ~ _
LN•
2 0 z ~~ Q
~ ~
LOCATION MAP
3
~V
AttacFment 3
e9 ~ ~s r v. ~~ pr 3 ~, 2 ~.
~s s W OUT LOT ~~
v r•
I'bv :. ~a Rr Im5'4 4 C9q~ ~ X70) W
,0 ;q,~ D -~ ~3e 2 V
,~ , ., .~, q ~ ? .
2 ~ * 2 $ 3/
~, I
_
l4
60
_..._
f4- I
143. ~ ,
I 6 Q
[48) '° ~~o) J
AVE. ; %3, 2 9 m
~~-,~ 7
9
N
N
o ljZ I n
~
143.E ~
~f~ ~ IZ
~,
2r•
: N °+
y~ w
. a .
ly
_
p° .=_ 2_(, CG9 r
~
~
Y = L
r~ 8 ~,4'
~'
1 o 14-0 1 ' 135.fi o°
63
a 1 (%°) ~ ~' ~ (4) I ~ 1 I o ° 966= M .7 i!
2660
0
m - ° -
2 ~lI) -
°
l1!
~ ~5J 2 135.41 ,8
~ 2 0 N
99.62 N ~
2)
*° a
71 " 978 ~ o~ f
4 3 iI~ '^
~ Q
9
(~O~ 3
~ ~ Tl~i
;° IN 137.
155•BZ
0 ~
lao z Ivy - n
(,o) m
~ 984
`° 4 ~
~ m rr
W (
o`90 `?~ 4 I s 3.`'0
s 2 q(41) ~ ~ 229. IB ;,
o LL f o ° ~
994 ~
M q
mAT E S m (~` 5 ~
s
I{Gs
H O
H
,,° 1 '~ 1004
b
zz
m 6 (is~ h „~9~ 6
m ~ (43) ~
•o {29)
~ i4o 30 30 1 m
~ S"'jZ,69 ~ 1012 ~
J
a ~ ~ ~
O ~ ~ I - ~ /inl
i ~ 1018
Iv Z I .o
O ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p
8 P Z N /711
"
_ (47) ~4 `) _
_ (45) ~ •
1024 ~
"J4, (bl) ~
g.
3 NEMIT j I I
~
~ Z
~ q~E NEMITZ AVE.a Pr-vl
,
62 ~y ,,o•~y :.
o~ so•
~
140 a 1030
I
-
1
'"'~ (45) ~
(
2
~ EST •
~
~~' (4L) a ~'.cea) y
j
~
~ (49'
3 - 1036
` ~ 2 1 I
z
.
1
~
(47)
~,
3 71D. 4"I ~ 10
m
s
3 6 o)a .
~ (
4?
N
BA X90 ~ N
~ 7 -
~ ~ ~ 5 h1 ~'
($2)~ (51)0 ^ti. , ,. ,
N
o s 9(ga) ~2 ~ 1050
(ero) -(es~ 90.0 ?' ~ 1 n
57l , „ ~
150UtHGREST AVE7s 123.21 qaZ~ 1000
1 10 I I (y1.95 I 123 , A I r'~ 1106$ °>. ,.~f
- HIGHWOOD AVENUE 6
., ~ _-,
2666 - ^^~_~_o< 2692
~ ~ 1 ~ T 1T~!
^f' ~ 1 (21) lV
SITE Q; 2670 CA
1 3.y5 ti. ~~
` ~
E
3zo. a~
1.8 ina.•
OC
/ ~) o
.7/sc.a
1 r3~ n~o
v
ao -
r
2.4Tac.
};
F-
Z
O
N ~
~~ nl , V.
5 i
v ~
M
Q
m
~. ~. ~" Q .
rr. ~ ~~r>•-~t-~ ~ - -- o
ian~ ~~ 157' -
p r`"' ~ Z
2714 ~ 2730 __; w -,
1 Y ~ V N /~
/ 01~ ~y ~~
~~ 7
140 _ _ -
ti9 `
VER REPAIR i n
S~
(22, i
- ---,
CE~-L y '
~ :p
1 - -~ ~9~ ~ - _ ' Rf
%. ` ~
. o
/h ./" C
i
00
~ ~ to
- - -~~ -~ v ~I=
-,~ •~ - - -- ~ ~e
. . ~ ,''[.~ o It 1''S oo ~
yr • / ~ /` ..i`3
~'~ - - - -~ - ~- - w
n'
Z
Q
PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP
r SITE
4
~~~ ~ ~
~`~~
`C~\ pUTLOT A
G cbB)
. ^
~ ~
1V
A,; Attachment 4
~•>e•~1 ,~.~,
-- --- n ~ ~
i16..
/^' nwM~rolt
( I N~ 16o ao ss.o ~,
B;r mad ~I® I
u .g°~~ ~I
~~ --I--
~ ~ ~; Y ~~
~~~
~~
~-- - ~ ~~
/ N O
`° , g $~~ ~
r- wrn t g ~V~
~~ O 160 a0 16A ' ~ G Y
~ ~~ ~ ~'~ t~~~ ~ Y~
~ `~~
s~ ~ ~~ ~~_
~ a~ ~ 33 ~8
y951.~i No
,~ ~ ~ ilRw Y~
~ L ~ kJtXJP ~v ~
- ~ ~~~~ ~
t s~
$8
m ~~
Y
x~
.4~ y~
r
y~
~Y /
~I
= VI
~~+'
A
4 :
~e+3 ~~
-„~~_ / Z~G- Z
B ~ ' M 0!'76'JO' E O
SITE PLAN
PRELIMINARY PLAT: HIGHWOOD FARM
5
Attachment 5
PROPOSED GRADING PLAN
4
N
At achment 6
~-,,, ~ ~
MINUTES
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 P.M. Monday, February 10, 2003
Council Chambers, Municipal Building
Meeting No. 03-03
S- `~_d
7:10 (7:27) p.m. Highwood Farms Town Houses (Highwood Avenue)
Land Use Plan Change (R-1 to R-3 (L))
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Preliminary Plat
a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b. Associate Planner Roberts presented specifics from the report.
c. Commissioner Fisher presented the Planning Commission Report.
d. Charles Cox, applicant, was present to answer questions.
Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The
following person was heard:
John Maslowski, 1004 Dennis Street South, Maplewood
Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution approving a land use plan
change for the Hi~hwood Farm plat on the south side of Highwood Avenue, east of Dennis
Street This change is form R-1 (single dwellings) to R-3 (L)(low-density multiple dwellings):
RESOLUTION 03-02-016
LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Mr. Charles Cox is proposing a change to the city's land use plan from R-1 (single
dwellings) to R-3(I.) (low density multiple dwellings).
WHEREAS, this change applies to the property now known has 2666 Highwood Avenue in Section
13, Township 28, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
1. On January 22, 2003, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff published a
hearing notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The
planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written
statements. The planning commission recommended that the city council not approve the plan
amendment.
2. On February 10, 2003, the city council discussed the proposed land use plan change. They
City Council ~2-10-03
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
for the following reasons:
It would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. These include
having similar uses fronting on the same street, having a grading plan that preserves many
significant natural features and uses a planned unit development to allow for creative design
solutions.
2. This site is proper for and consistent with the city's policies for low-density multiple dwelling
use. This includes:
a. Creating a transitional land use between the existing low density residential and
the existing telecommunications site.
b. It is on a collector street and is near an arterial street.
c. Minimizing any adverse effects on surrounding properties because there would
be no traffic from this development on existing residential streets.
3. It would be consistent with the proposed planned unit development (PUD) and land
uses.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All
Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution approving a conditional
use permit for a planned unit development for the Hi~hwood Farm development on the
south side of Hiahwood Avenue, east of Dennis Street.
RESOLUTION 03-02-017
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Mr. Charles Cox, representing the project developers, applied for a conditional use
permit (CUP) for the Highwood Farm residential planned unit development (PUD).
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the Highwood Farm town house development plan the city
received on December 26, 2002 for the property at 2666 Highwood Avenue. The legal description
is:
Subject to State TH 100/117 and HWY 393, the north 1100 feet of the West 173 feet of the
East 198 feet of the West'/s of the NE'/4 of the SE I/a of Section 13, Township 28, Range 22,
Ramsey County, Minnesota. (This is the property to be known as Lots 1-19 of the proposed
Highwood Farm)
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
On January 22, 2003, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve this permit.
City Councj~ 02-10-03
2. On February 10, 2003, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a
notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The council
gave everyone at the hearing 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 city council approve the above-described
conditional use permit because:
The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
3. The use would not depreciate property values.
4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a
nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor,
fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness,
electrical interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not
create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and
parks.
7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and
scenic features into the development design.
9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
All construction shall follow the plans approved by the city. The city council may approve
major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor
changes to the plans. Such changes shall include:
a. Revising the grading and site plans to show:
(1) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation.
(2) All driveways at least 20 feet wide. If the developer wants to have parking on
City Counci102-10-03
9
one side of the main drive, then it must be at least 28 feet wide. However,
widening of the driveway must not lessen the side setback of the driveway
from the east property line.
(3) All parking stalls with a width of at least 9.5 feet and a length of at least 18
feet. Revise the plans to reduce the number of spaces between the buildings
from three to two to allow more space between the parking area and the edge
of the building. Also, revise the parking spaces and the turn-around area at the
south end of the site to maximize the number of trees to be saved, to maximize
the number of spaces and to minimize the amount of hard surface area.
(4) Revised storm water pond locations and designs as suggested or required by
the watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the city's design
standards.
(5) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation including
keeping and protecting as many of the large trees in the undisturbed area south of
the town houses and parking areas.
2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or
the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
3. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall meet
all the conditions and changes noted in the engineer's memo dated January 14, 2003.
a. Include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, streets, trails, sidewalks, tree,
retaining walls, driveway and parking lot plans.
b. Show no grading or ground disturbance in the conservation easement. This land is to be
preserved for open space purposes. The developer and contractors shall protect this
area, including the large trees that are in and near the south side of the site, from
encroachment from equipment, grading or filling.
c. Include a storm water management plan for the proposal.
4. The design of all ponds shall meet Maplewood's design standards and shall be subject to
the approval of the city engineer. If needed, the developer shall be responsible for getting
any off-site pond and drainage easements.
5. The developer or contractor shall:
a. Complete all grading for the site drainage and the ponds, complete all public
improvements and meet all city requirements.
b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
City Counci102-10-03
10
c. Remove any debris or junk from the site, including the conservation area.
d. Provide the city with verification that the town houses on the proposed site plan
will meet the state's noise standards. This shall be with a study, testing or other
documentation. If the noise on this site is a factor, then the contractor will have to
build the town houses such that they can meet the noise standards. This may be
done with thicker walls, heavier windows, requiring air conditioning or other
sound-deadening construction methods. The developer shall provide the city with
this documentation before the city will issue a building permit for the town houses.
6. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Highwood Farm PUD shall be:
a. Front-yard setback (from a public street or a private driveway): minimum - 30 feet,
maximum - 35 feet
b. Rear-yard setback: 30 feet from any adjacent residential property line
c. Side-yard setback (town houses): minimum - 47 feet from the west property line and 50
feet from the east property line.
7. The developer or builder will pay the city Park Access Charges (PAC fees) for each
housing unit at the time of the building permit for each housing unit.
8. Submit the homeowners association documents to city staff for review and approval.
9. The developer shall provide a permanent means to preserve and maintain the common
open space. This may be done by conservation easement, deed restrictions, covenants or
public dedication. The developer shall record this document with the final plat and
before the city issues a permit for grading or utility construction
10. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
11. This approval does not include the design approval for the townhomes. The project
design plans, including architectural, site, lighting, tree and landscaping plans, shall be
subject to review and approval of the community design review board (CDRB). The
projects shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. Meeting all conditions and changes as required by the city council.
b. For the driveways:
(1) Minimum width - 20 feet.
(2) Maximum width - 28 feet.
(3) All driveways less than 28 feet in width shall be posted for "No Parking" on
both sides. Driveways at least 28 feet wide may have parking on one side and
City Counci102-10-03
11
shall be posted for No Parking on one side.
c. Showing all changes required by the city as part of the conditional use permit for the
planned unit development (PUD).
12. The city shall not issue any building permits for construction on an outlot (per city code
requirements). The developer must record a final plat to create buildable lots in the
preliminary plat before the city will issue a building permit.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All
Councilmember Koppen moved to improve a preliminary plat to create the lots for the town
houses The developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final
Plat:
1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will:
a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and
meet all city requirements.
b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Have Xcel Energy install Group V rate street lights in two locations -primarily at the
street intersection and near the south end of the driveway. The exact style and location
shall be subject to the city engineer's approval.
d. Pay the city for the cost of traffic-control, street identification and no parking signs.
e. Provide all required and necessary easements, including any off-site easements.
f. Demolish or remove the existing house and garage from the site, and remove all other
buildings, fencing, trailers, scrap metal, debris and junk from the site.
g. Cap and seal all wells on site that the owners are not using; remove septic systems or
drainfields, subject to Minnesota rules and guidelines.
h. Complete all the curb and gutter on Highwood Avenue on the north side of the site.
This is to replace the existing driveways on Highwood Avenue and shall include the
restoration and sodding of the boulevards.
i. Install a sign where the new driveway intersects Highwood Avenue indicating that it is
a private driveway.
Install survey monuments and signs along the edges of the conservation easement area.
These signs shall explain that the area beyond the signs is a conservation easement area
and that there shall be no building, fences, mowing, cutting, filling, dumping or other
ground disturbance in that area. The developer or contractor shall install these signs
City Cou 1 ~ 02-10-03
before the city issues building permits in this plat.
2. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. The applicant
shall have these plans revised to follow the comments of the city engineer and shall
include the grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree and street plans. The plans shall
meet the following conditions:
a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code.
b. The grading plan shall show:
(1) The proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each building
site. The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat.
(2) Contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb.
(3) Building pads that reduce the grading on sites where the developer can save large
trees.
(4) The proposed street and driveway grades as allowed by the city engineer.
(5) All proposed slopes on the construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the
plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1.
On slopes steeper than 3:1, the developer shall prepare and implement a
stabilization and planting plan. At a minimum, the slopes shall be protected with
wood-fiber blanket, be seeded with a no-maintenance vegetation and be stabilized
before the city approves the final plat.
(6) All retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls taller than four feet require a
building permit from the city. The developer shall install a protective rail or fence on top
of any retaining wall that is taller than four feet.
(7) Sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed board or by the city
engineer.
(8) No grading beyond the plat boundary without temporary grading easements from
the affected property owner(s).
(9) As little grading as possible west and south of the town houses. This is to keep as
many of the existing trees on the site as is reasonably possible.
c. The street, driveway and utility plans shall show:
(1) The driveway shall be a nine-ton design with a maximum grade of eight percent
and the maximum grade within 75 feet of the intersection at two percent.
City Counci102-10-03
13
(2) The street (driveway) with continuous concrete curb and gutter, except where the
city engineer determines that curbing is not necessary for drainage purposes.
(3) The removal of the unused driveways and the completion of the curb and gutter on
the south side of Highwood Avenue and the restoration and sodding of the
boulevards.
(4) The coordination of the water main alignments and sizing with the standards and
requirements of the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS). Fire flow
requirements and hydrant locations shall be verified with the Maplewood Fire
Department.
(5) All utility excavations located within the proposed right-of-ways or within
easements. The developer shall acquire easements for all utilities that would be
outside the project area.
(6) The plan and profiles of the proposed utilities.
(7) A detail of any ponds, the pond outlets and the rainwater gardens. The contractor
shall protect the outlets to prevent erosion.
d. The drainage plan shall ensure that there is no increase in the rate of storm water run-
off leaving the site above the current (predevelopment) levels. The developer's
engineer shall:
(1) Verify inlet and pipe capacities.
(2) Submit drainage design calculations.
e.* The tree plan shall:
(1) Be approved, along with the landscaping, by the Community Design Review
Board (CDRB) before site grading or final plat approval.
(2) Show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan
shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site.
(3) Show the size, species and location of the replacement and screening trees. The
deciduous trees shall be at least two and one half (21/z) inches in diameter and
shall be a mix of red and white oaks, ash, lindens, sugar maples or other native
species. The coniferous trees shall be at least eight (8) feet tall and shall be a mix
of Black Hills Spruce, Austrian pine and other species.
(4) Show no tree removal in the buffer zones, conservation easement, or beyond the
approved grading and tree limits.
(5) Include for city staff a detailed tree planting plan and material list.
City Counci102-10-03
14
(6) Group the new trees together. These planting areas shall be:
(a) near the ponding areas
(b) on the slopes
(c) along the west side of the site to screen the proposed buildings from the homes to
the west
(7) Show the planting of at least 37 trees after the site grading is done.
3. Change the plat as follows:
a. Add drainage and utility easements as required by the city engineer.
b. Show drainage and utility easements along all property lines on the final plat. These
easements shall be ten feet wide along the front and rear property lines and five feet wide
along the side property lines.
c. Label the common areas as an outlot or as outlots.
d. If allowed, show the conservation easement on the final plat.
e. Show the building pads and the common area as a Common Interest
Community (CIC).
4. Pay for costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans.
5. Secure and provide all required easements for the development including any off-site
drainage and utility easements. These shall include, but not be limited to, an easement for the
culvert draining the pond at the northwest corner of the plat.
6. The developer shall complete all grading for public improvements and overall site drainage.
The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that the developer
or contractor has not completed before final plat approval.
7. Sign a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor
will:
a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet
all city requirements.
b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Provide for the repair of Highwood Avenue (street, curb and gutter and boulevard) after
the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the private driveway.
8. Record the following with the final plat:
a. All homeowners association documents.
City Coun15 02-10-03
b. A covenant or deed restriction that prohibits any further subdivision or splitting of the lots
or parcels in the plat that would create additional building sites.
c. A covenant or deed restriction that prohibits any additional driveways (besides the one
new driveway shown on the project plans) from going onto Highwood Avenue.
d. The conservation easement for the undisturbed area of the site.
The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions to the city for
approval before recording. The city will not issue a building permit until after the developer has
recorded the final plat and these documents and covenants.
9* Submit the homeowners association bylaws and rules to the director of community
development. These are to assure that there will be one responsible party for the maintenance
of the common areas, outlots, private utilities, driveways, retaining walls and structures.
10. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for grading.
11. If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the director of
community development may waive any conditions that do not apply to the final plat.
12. The developer shall complete all grading for public improvements and overall site
drainage. The city engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading
that the developer or contractor has not completed before final plat approval.
*The developer must complete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit or
approves the final plat.
Seconded by Councilmember Collins Ayes-All
City ~qunci102-10-03
AGENDA ITEM G-4
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: Resolution for Adoption of 2004 Public Works Permit Fees
DATE: February 17, 2004
Introduction/Summary
The public works department has proposed revisions to the permit fees collected by that
department.
The city council will consider approving the attached resolution for adoption of the 2004 public
works permit fees.
Background
Late in 2003, the engineering department began seriously evaluating the fees that were being
collected by Public Works for such things as: grading, sewer services, private sanitary and
storm sewer mains and driveways. For years these fees had not been revised to account for
inflation.
Some fees have been raised by an inflationary factor using the Federal Reserve Bank of
Minnesota Inflation Calculator. Others have been determined by estimating the amount of
time involved with a given permit. Below are summaries and a table of the permit fees and
the proposed revisions:
Sewer Service Connection:
The current sewer service connection fees were set at least five years ago following a review
of those fees at that time. Staff has proposed to raise these fees by a calculated inflation
factor of 1.1 for the years 1999 to 2003. The exception is sewer repair fee, which was raised
50%, from $20 to $30.
Private Sanitary or Storm Sewer Main:
This is the only permit that had any significant restructuring and fee adjustments. The past
permit fees for private storm and sanitary sewer main construction seemed to have no relation
to the amount of staff time involved with such a permit. With the large increase in the amount
of private storm and sanitary sewer main construction taking place, a significant amount of
staff time (mostly the utility division) has been obligated to deal with them. Staff evaluated the
work involved with each type of permit to justify the fee or to justify fee increases. The fees
were set at a rate conservatively lower than what was felt could be justified. The permit has a
large number of fee schedules, but any given permit application is usually only comprised of a
few of these. Staff reviewed what the impacts might have been to some of the permits
reviewed in 2003 had these new fee schedules been applied. Most applications fees would
have increased 20%-80% depending on the degree of work involved.
Driveway Permit:
This fee has been at its current $10 rate for many years. Staff has proposed to raise it by
50% from $10 to $15.
Grading Permit Fees:
These fees were set based on a fee schedule in the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). The
fees have never been adjusted. Staff has proposed to raise the 1997 UBC fees by a
calculated inflation factor of 1.174 for the years 1997 to 2003.
Discussion
Attached is a table of current and proposed Public Works permit fees as they apply. It is
recommended that these fees take effect for any applications received after February 23,
2004. In addition, it is recommended that these fees be reviewed annually with a
recommendation brought before the city council for consideration.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the city council approve the attached Resolution for Adoption of
the 2004 Public Works Permit Fees.
CMC
Attachments: Resolution
Public Works Permit Fee Schedule
RESOLUTION
ADOPTION OF THE 2004 PUBLIC WORKS PERMIT FEES
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has established permit fees for sewer service
construction, storm sewer and sanitary sewer main construction, driveway construction and
grading, and
WHEREAS, city staff have reviewed the permit fees and prepared a schedule of fees titled
2004 Public Works Permit Fees, dated February 17, 2004.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA, that
1. The updated public works fees are approved for all related permit applications
received after February 23, 2004.
2. The rates shown will be reviewed by staff on an annual basis with recommendations
for revision brought to the city council for consideration.
- -
,x
~,. __
t
fi~-X
}
5~.
c
. ` o
„~{ }-
S
L
h., a
___ _. ~ a~~x.
AGENDA ITEM G-5
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Bill Priefer, Public Works Administrative Assistant
Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Amended Utility Billing Agreement between the City of Maplewood and the City of
Woodbury
DATE: February 17, 2004
Introduction
The City of Woodbury has requested an amendment to the utility billing agreement between the City
of Maplewood and the City of Woodbury dated June 23, 1997. The City of Woodbury has requested
that the amended agreement contain language that specifically addresses the new environmental
utility charge for storm water management. They have also requested an increase in the rate
charged for the billing and collection of each utility bill sent to Maplewood properties.
Background
In 1997, the City of Maplewood stopped billing for utilities after negotiating billing agreements with
the agencies that provide water service to Maplewood properties. The agreements with St. Paul
Regional Water Services and the cities of North St. Paul, Woodbury, Roseville and Little Canada
resulted in a more equitable billing of sanitary sewer charges to our citizens based on actual water
volume usage rather than a flat rate basis.
The language of the 1997 agreement with the City of Woodbury also included the billing of any
miscellaneous charges, but it did not specifically address the type of miscellaneous utility charge or
the amount to be charged. The amended agreement, however, specifically states that the City of
Woodbury will perform the billing, collection and customer service function for recycling and storm
sewer charges for properties where Woodbury supplies water service. The 2004 rates charged for
recycling and storm sewer are also specified within the amended agreement.
The amended agreement also increases Woodbury's charge for the billing and collection function
for each account from $2.00 to $4.00 per billing. Since the City of Woodbury only bills nine
commercial properties on a monthly basis and fifteen residential properties on a quarterly basis, the
increase of $336 per year is minimal.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached agreement with the City of
Woodbury.
WJP
Jw
Attachment
AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CTTY OF MAl'L,EWOOD
AND
CITY OF WOODBU12Ir
TH~SS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of the -day of
200 , by and between the City of Maplewood, a municipal corporation of the State of
Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as MAPLEWOOD, and the City of Woodbury, a
municipal corporation of tine State of 1~Zir,nesota, hereinafter referred to as
WOODBURY.
Sanitary Sewer Billing
Maplewood atrrees to have Woodbury perform the billing, collection, and
customer service functions for residential and commercial sanitary sewer services to
those properties where Vtiroodbury supplies water service. The designation of each
account as either residential or commercial will be determined by Maplewood and
provided to Woodbury.
Woodbury will bi11 Mapletivood residential and commercial saziitary sewer
customers based on water consumed on a volume basis. All residential and coirunercial
aecoluits wi11 be billed on the same cycle as established by Woodbury for water billing
purposes. A trrininium sewer charge will be billed to any account when there is no
water consumption and when no notice to shut off or discontinue water service has been
received by Woodbury.
Sanitary Sewer Rates
The residential and Nonresidential rates for sanitary sewer service for 200,
.shall be .$2.62 per 1,000 gallons_ T1,ere gha11 bP a minimur!~ charge of $3.66 monthly
for each sewer service connection billed on a monthly basis, and a minimum charge of
$10.99 quarterly for each sewer service connection. These rates will be revised from
time to time by the Maplewood Cif Council.
Flow Calculations
The sanitary sewer service charges for one-and two-fanny dwellings for the
billing year shall be deterr~ained by the amount of water consumed during the winter
quarter. The winter quarter is the rust three months prior to the first billing of the year.
If the actual i7leter readings are not available for the printer quarter, then an estimate
shall be made based on the size of the dwelling, number of occupants, comparison wit~n
other dwellings, or any ot:~ier equitable and reasonable method as deters-maned by
VJoodbul-5~.
The sewer ser~~ce charges far on-and two-family dwellings for the billing year
shall be determined by tl~e amount of wafer consumed, regardless of the size of the
water meter, and the amount billed shall never be greater than tree amounto~f water
consumed during the quarter consisting of the first three months prior to the first billing
of the vear, except for those dwellings assessed, minimum charges.
The sanitary sewer service charge for all nonresidential properties shall be
based on the amount of water consumed for each billing period,
Recycling and Starzx~ Sewer Charges
1lffzctive January 1, 2004, Maplewood agrees to have Woodbury perform the
billing, collection and customer service functions for recycling and storm sewer charges
for properties where Woodbury supplies water service.
Recycling Rates
The 2004 rate for recycling is $5.40 per quarter for residential properties. This
fee applies to residential properties only, This rate will be revised from time to time by
the Maplewood City Council,
Storm Se~~ver Rates
The storm sewer rates are:
$5.25 per quarter for single family residential properties (one and two family dwellings}
mn ~ n r~ rv m.,~,rh fpr rnj}i~i~le family dwellings.
,~ ~ ~ ,~7 p er ac. ~, ~„r ~ .,_.~~.
$17.23 per acre, per month for commercial properties.
,p 1 ~.4=+ per aCr ~, per tazoiiui lOr u~li~ iiL u uy.
$13.44 per acre, per month for institutional properties.
These rates will be reti~ised from time to time by the Maplewood City Council.
BiIling Charge
Woodbury will charge Maplewood $4.fl0 per quarter, for each account far the
billing and collection function, Woodbury will send to Maplewood, quarterly; the
collected sanitary sewer, recycling and storm sewer charbes, less the $4.60 billing iee
for each account.
The billing and collection sei~~ice provided by Woodbury for Maplewood i11ay
be terminated by either party, provided that six n~ontl~s written notice is provided to
the other part'.
IN VvTITI~~SS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to '~e
executed as of the day and year first above written.
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD CITY OF WOODBURY
~.
By By , ,n
Its Maynr s ayo'~
By
Its City Manager
~ ~.
By ~' ~~ <<
Its '~ y A ~ ~nistrator
AGENDA REPORT
To: City Manager Richard Fursman
From: Chief of Police David J. Thomalla
Subject Purchase of Police Vehicles
Date: February 13, 2004
Introduction
AGENDA #G6
Money was carried over from the 2003 budget to purchase two police vehicles,
and we are requesting authorization to order them at this time.
Background
The Police Department is requesting permission to purchase two new vehicles.
They are:
1 - 2004 Chevrolet Impala for the Investigative Division. The vehicle will
cost $14,751 plus tax, license and delivery fees and will be purchased
under State Contract #432235.
1 - 2004 Ford Crown Victoria squad car. The vehicle will cost $20,174
plus tax, license and delivery fees and will be purchased under State
Contract #432096.
Due to excessive mileage on existing department vehicles and one vehicle being
cut from the 2004 budget, we are making this request at this time.
The money to pay for these vehicles was carried over from the department's
2003 budget.
Recommendation
It is recommended that authorization be given to purchase the two vehicles
described above.
Action Required
Submit to the City Council for review and approval.
DJT:js
AGENDA REPORT
To: City Manager Richard Fursman
From: Chief of Police David J. Thomalla
Subject: Purchase of Tasers
Date: February 13, 2004
Introduction
AGENDA #G7
The Police Department is requesting permission to purchase 32 Tasers.
Background
The Maplewood Police Department currently has eight Tasers, which are
electronic incapacitation devices which can be applied to the body through
contact or used to send adart-like projectile. It should be noted that Tasers have
been used by the department on many occasions as an alternative use of force
and have proven to be a valuable tool in controlling violent suspects, thus
resulting in fewer injuries to suspects and officers.
Our goal is to purchase 32 more Tasers so each patrol officer may be
permanently assigned this piece of equipment. Due to the fact that the
department currently owns only eight, not all officers have access to a Taser
during their shift.
Tasers are only available from one vendor, Taser International. The price per
Taser is $800, for a total purchase price of $25,600.
Money to purchase these Tasers was carried over from the Police Department's
2003 budget.
Recommendation
It is recommended that authorization be given to purchase 32 Tasers, thus
allowing us to supply each patrol officer their own personal Taser.
Action Required
Submit to the City Council for review and approval.
DJT:js
Agenda No. G8
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
DATE: February 18, 2004
RE: Lawful Gambling License -Church of St. Jerome
Tntrndnctinn
The Church of St. Jerome currently operates lawful gambling at Dean's Tavern located at
1986 Rice Street. They are requesting approval of an annual premise permit by approval
of the following resolution.
RESOLUTION
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, that
the premises permit for lawful gambling is approved for Church of St. Jerome, to operate
at Dean's Tavern located at 1986 Rice Street, Maplewood, Minnesota.
FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council waives any objection to the
timeliness of application for said permit as governed by Minnesota Statute §349.213.
FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council requests that the Gambling
Control Division of the Minnesota Department of Gaming approve said permit
application as being in compliance with Minnesota Statute §349.213.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it further resolved that this Resolution by the City Council
of Maplewood, Minnesota, be forwarded to the Gambling Control Division for their
approval.
Recommendation
It is recommended that council approve the lawful gambling resolution application for the
Church of St. Jerome to operate at Dean's Tavern.
Agenda #H1
REPORT SUMMARY
Applicant: City of Maplewood
Location: Hillcrest Neighborhood
Existing Zoning: Business Commercial (BC), Single-Dwelling
Residential (R-1)
Existing Land Use: Business Commercial (BC), Single-Dwelling
Residential (R-1), and Church (C)
Proposed Zoning
and Land Use: Mixed-Use (M-U)
City Council Hearing Date: February 23, 2004
Project Description: The City of Maplewood is proposing to change the
comprehensive land use and zoning map for the Hillcrest area. These changes
would be from business commercial (BC), single-dwelling residential (R-1), and
church (C) to the newly adopted mixed-use (M-U) land use designation and
zoning district. The comprehensive land use and zoning map changes are
intended to promote the redevelopment of the Hillcrest area into amixed-use
urban center with compact, pedestrian-oriented commercial and residential land
uses.
Request: City staff is requesting that the city council approve the following land
use requests:
1. Second reading of the mixed-use zoning district. This new zoning district
will allow for the mixture of low-impact commercial developments along
with higher density residential developments.
2. Comprehensive land use map change for the Hillcrest area. This change
would be from business commercial (BC), single-dwelling residential (R-
1), and church (C) to the newly adopted mixed-use (M-U) land use
designation. State law requires comprehensive land use map changes to
be passed by atwo-thirds city council vote (4 votes).
3. Zoning map change for the Hillcrest area. This change would be from
business commercial (BC) and single-dwelling residential (R-1) to the
newly adopted mixed-use (M-U) zoning district.
Recommendations: The planning commission unanimously recommended
approval of the comprehensive land use and zoning map changes for the
Hillcrest area at their February 2, 2004, planning commission meeting.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Shann Finwall, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Mixed-Use Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Map Changes
APPLICANT: City of Maplewood
LOCATION: Hillcrest Area
DATE: February 13, 2004
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
The City of Maplewood is proposing to change the comprehensive land use and zoning map for
the Hillcrest area. These changes would be from business commercial (BC), single-dwelling
residential (R-1), and church (C) to the newly adopted mixed-use (M-U) land use designation and
zoning district. The comprehensive land use and zoning map changes are intended to promote
the redevelopment of the Hillcrest area into amixed-use urban center with compact, pedestrian-
oriented commercial and residential land uses. Refer to the existing and proposed land use and
zoning maps attached on pages 7 through 9.
Request
City staff is requesting that the city council approve the following land use requests:
1. Second reading of the mixed-use zoning district. This new zoning district will allow for the
mixture of low-impact commercial developments along with higher density residential
developments.
2. Comprehensive land use change for the Hillcrest area. This change would be from
business commercial (BC), single-dwelling residential (R-1 ), and church (C) to the newly
adopted mixed-use (M-U) land use designation. State law requires comprehensive land
use map changes to be passed by atwo-thirds city council vote (4 votes).
3. Zoning map change for the Hillcrest area. This change would be from business
commercial (BC) and single-dwelling residential (R-1) to the newly adopted mixed-use
(M-U) zoning district.
DISCUSSION
Background
2003: City staff, planning commission, and the community design review board drafted the
mixed-use zoning district. This new zoning district is based on the Metropolitan Council's smart-
growth concepts and will allow for a mixture of land uses, made mutually compatible through land
use controls and high-quality design standards.
On January 26, 2004, the city council approved the first reading of the mixed-use (M-U) zoning
district and comprehensive land use changes.
On February 2, 2004, the planning commission recommended approval of the comprehensive
land use plan and zoning map changes for the Hiltcrest area (refer to the 2/2/04 planning
commission minutes attached).
Mixed-Use Zoning District
The attached resolution on pages 10 through 23 consists of proposed changes and additions to
the city code with the implementation of the mixed-use zoning district. The city council should
approve the final reading of these changes prior to making a motion on the comprehensive land
use and zoning map changes for the Hiltcrest area as described below.
Comprehensive Land Use Map Change
The purpose of the Maplewood Comprehensive Plan is to help the public and private sector in
planning for future physical, social and economic development within the city, while considering
surrounding cities and the region. The city's implementation of the mixed-use land use
designation in the Hiltcrest area is consistent with regional policies and will help manage
projected population growth in the metropolitan area by fostering more residential and
employment opportunities. Refer to the Hiltcrest Area Proposed Mixed-Use map on page 9 for
the exact location of the comprehensive land use change.
Zoning Map Change
One purpose of the Maplewood Zoning Code is to promote the health, safety, and general
welfare of the inhabitants of the city by encouraging the most appropriate use of land. The
Metropolitan Council and the cities of Maplewood and St. Paul created the Hiltcrest Village
Redevelopment Plan in order to implement smart-growth principles within the Hiltcrest area. The
goal of the plan was to help guide changes within the area in order to create a village center with
an active street life that mixes shops, workplaces, housing, recreation and civic uses. The city's
implementation of the mixed-use zoning district will encourage the most appropriate use of the
land based on smart-growth principles. Refer to the Hiltcrest Area Proposed Mixed-Use map on
page 9 for the exact location of the zoning map change.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Approve the second reading of the resolution on pages 10 through 23. This resolution
creates a new zoning district within the City of Maplewood that will allow for the mixture of
low-impact commercial developments along with higher density residential developments.
2. Adopt the comprehensive map change resolution on pages 24 and 25. This resolution
changes the land use designations in the Hiltcrest area from business commercial (BC),
single-dwelling residential (R-1 ), and church (C) to mixed-use (M-U). The comprehensive
map change includes the following properties:
Properties north of Larpenteur Avenue and south of Frost Avenue, along White
Bear Avenue, North St. Paul Road, and Van Dyke Street as follows:
All properties lying 295 feet west of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur
Avenue to the Frost Avenue; all properties lying 1,139 east of White Bear
Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue and North St. Paul
Road.
Hiltcrest Rezoning/Comp Plan Change 2 February 13, 2004
The comprehensive map change is based on eight specific comprehensive plan land use
and housing goals and four land use policies as follows:
Goals:
a. Provide for orderly development.
b. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods.
c. Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase
jobs and provide desirable services.
d. Minimize the land planned for streets.
e. Minimize conflicts between land uses.
f. Provide a wide variety of housing types.
g. Provide safe and attractive neighborhoods and commercial areas.
h. Plan multi-family housing with an average density of at least 10 units per acre.
Polices:
a. Include a variety of housing types for all types of residents.
b. Disperse moderate-income developments throughout the city near bus lines.
c. Support innovative subdivision and housing design.
d. Protect neighborhoods from activities that produce excessive noise, dirt, odors or
which generate heavy traffic.
3. Adopt the zoning map change resolution on pages 26 and 27. This resolution changes
the zoning map for the Hillcrest area in the City of Maplewood from business commercial
(BC) and single-dwelling residential (R-1) to mixed-use (M-U). The zoning map change
includes the following properties:
Properties north of Larpenteur Avenue and south of Frost Avenue, along White
Bear Avenue, North St. Paul Road, and Van Dyke Street as follows:
All properties lying 295 feet west of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur
Avenue to the Frost Avenue; atl properties lying 1,139 east of White Bear
Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue and North St. Paul
Road.
The city is making this change because:
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 that the use
of the property adjacent to the area included in the proposed change or plan is
adequately safeguarded.
c. The proposed change wilF segue 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.
Hillcrest Rezoning/Comp Plan Change 3 February 13, 2004
CITIZEN COMMENTS
On November 17, 2003, city staff submitted the mixed-use zoning district to all affected property
owners within the Hillcrest area. Of the 47 mailings sent, staff has received six responses back
as follows:
Dr. Steven Hallstrom, Minnhealth Family Physicians, PA, 1814 No. St. Paul Road,
Maplewood, MN 55109: The Hillcrest area is very much in need of a major
redevelopment. The area looks very run down and poorly kept up. We struggle with our
business neighbor, Performance Transmission, in the failure to meet Maplewood city
ordinances in terms of storage of materials outside the physical building. We need a fresh
redevelopment in order to attract businesses and residential properties.
2. Raleigh P. Nelson, 1 Hill Farm Ct., North Oaks, MN 55129: My business associates and
myself have a very poor opinion of the City of Maplewood. In the year 2000, we closed
our Burger King Restaurant at 1706 White Bear Avenue. We sold the property to
Walgreen's and received an earnest money contract. Walgreen's representative and our
attorneys and the architect made many changes on the building and property design to
comply with the City of Maplewood's requests. After three council meetings we were
defeated. This cost us considerable money and Walgreen's over $30,000. Now since
plan changes have been made, there is a new Walgreen's on the corner of White Bear
Avenue and Larpenteur. This increases the tax base for St. Paul (it is in St. Paul) and
reduces the tax base for Maplewood. 1 do not believe that the City of Maplewood is
business oriented.
3. Sue Q. Allhiser, 1799 White Bear Avenue N., Maplewood, MN 55109: The proposed
rezoning map shows the area up to Hejny Rental. The map we looked at in the meeting
did not show the homes on White Bear being affected, only a few at the comer of White
Bear and Larpenteur. A lot of good can come from the redevelopment however. Being
respectful of the neighborhood, its homes, and type of people here is crucial. For
example, no one living in this area now is going to buy a $300,000 condo.
4. Craig Nelson, 1783 White Bear Avenue N., Maplewood, MN 55109: During a telephone
conversation with Mr. Nelson, he expressed concern over possible tax increases with a
zoning change to his property. He inquired about whose responsibility it would be to
remove snow from future sidewalks. He also indicated that he thought the existing angle
of North St. Paul Road acts as atraffic-slowing feature and questioned plans for
realignment.
5. John Mirsch, 1769 White Bear Avenue N., Maplewood, MN 55109: During a telephone
conversation with Mr. Mirsch, he questioned whether the City of Maplewood was looking
to purchase his property.
6. Samuel S. VanTassel, Senior Real Estate Representative, Marathon Ashland Petroleum
(representing Super America): Marathon Ashland is opposed to any new regulation that
would make the Super America station/store anon-conforming use.
Hillcrest Rezoning/Comp Plan Change 4 February 13, 2004
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site Size: 41 Acres
Existing Land Use: Commercial and Single-Family Houses
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Ramsey County Campus (Zoned F)
South: Larpenteur Avenue and the Hillcrest Shopping Center in the City of St. Paul
East: Single-Family Houses on Hazel Street and Larpenteur Avenue (Zoned R-1)
West: Single-Family Houses on Flandrau Street (Zoned R-1)
PLANNING
Existing Zoning: Business Commercial and Single-Dwelling Residential
Existing Land Use: Business Commercial, Single-Dwelling Residential and Church
CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL
1. Land Use Plan Amendment: 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. Eight specific land use and housing goals apply to this proposal:
a. Provide for orderly development.
b. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods.
c. Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase
jobs and provide desirable services.
d. Minimize the land planned for streets.
e. Minimize conflicts between land uses.
f. Provide a wide variety of housing types.
g. Provide safe and attractive neighbofioods and commercial areas.
h. Plan multi-family housing with an average density of at least 10 units per acre.
In addition, four specific land use policies apply to this proposal:
a. Include a variety of housing types for all types of residents.
b. Disperse moderate-income developments throughout the city near bus lines.
c. Support innovative subdivision and housing design.
d. Protect neighbofioods from activities that produce excessive noise, dirt, odors or
which generate heavy traffic.
2. Rezoning: Section 44-165 of the zoning 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.
Hillcrest Rezoning/Comp Plan Change 5 February 13, 2004
b. 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.
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.
P:com-devUtillcrest~hillcrest rezoning memorandum
Attachments:
1. Hillcrest Area Existing Comprehensive Land Use Map
2. Hillcrest Area Existing Zoning Map
3. Hillcrest Area Proposed Mixed-Use Map
4. Mixed-Use Zoning Code Resolution
5. Comprehensive Land Use Map Change Resolution
6. Zoning Map Change Resolution
Hillcrest Rezoning/Comp Plan Change 6 February 13, 2004
Attachment 1
~' ~ _ ~'`
Larpenteur Avenue
~ Government
~ Business Commercial
Single Dwelling Residential
- Church
Hillcrest Area Existing
W~` Comprehensive Land Use
Attachment 2
F
Larpenteur Avenue
Farm Residence
~ Business Commercial
Single Dwelling Residential
N
W E
S
Hillcrest Area
a Existing Zoning
Attachment 3
Ramsey Cc
Campus
Larpenteur Avenue St. F'~au
1
~ . ~
~ ~.
~,
~ '
~
^ •.
'
~ ^
~'
i ~ ' ~
^ ~
!
- Proposed Mixed-Use Zoning and Comprehensive Land Use Areas
N
W E
S
Hillcrest Area
Proposed Mixed-Use
9
i ' '~_-
:,y.~' " ,
~ (~f~~%.
s
_~'~ ~~
Attachment 4
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE MIXED-USE ZONING DISTRICT
The Maplewood City Council approves the following additions to the Maplewood Code of
Ordinances:
Section I. This section adds Section 34-16 to Chapter 34 (subdivisions) to the city code:
Section 34-16. Special subdivision regulations in the M-U mixed-use district.
Chapter 34 (subdivisions) of the city code applies to the mixed-use zoning district unless specified
differently below.
(a) Blocks: Maximum block length of six hundred (600) feet.
(b) Right-of-way width: Subject to discretion of the director of public works and approval by the
city council.
(c) Road pavement widths: Subject to discretion of the director of public works and approval
by the city council.
(d) Alleys: Interconnected roads and alleys are strongly encouraged within the mixed-use
zoning district.
(e) Alley right-of-way and pavement widths must be adequate for the following: vehicle
passing, vehicle loading and unloading and storage of snow. Alley right-of-way and
pavement widths are subject to the discretion of the director of public works and approval
by the city council.
(f) Cul-de-sacs: Cul-de-sacs are prohibited within the mixed-use zoning district.
(g) Sidewalks: Sidewalks are required on both sides of roads.
Section 11. This section adds the following language to Section 44-6 (definitions) to the city
code:
Bed and breakfast means a transient lodging establishment located in asingle-family dwelling unit
or other approved building in which guest rooms are rented on a nightly basis for periods of less
than a week and where at least one meal is offered in connection with the provision of sleeping
accommodations only.
Drive-through sales and service means an opening in the wall of a building designed and intended
to be used to provide sales and/or service to patrons who remain in their vehicles.
10
Drive-up food or beverage window means an opening in the wall of a building or restaurant
designed and intended to be used to provide food and/or beverage sales and/or food and/or
beverage service to patrons who remain in their vehicles.
Dry cleaning and laundry pick-up station means an establishment or business maintained for the
pick up and delivery of dry cleaning without the maintenance or operation of any dry cleaning
equipment or machinery on the premises.
Dry cleaning plant means an establishment or business maintained for cleaning clothing or other
fabrics by immersion and agitation, or by immersions only, in volatile solvents including, but not
limited to, solvents of the petroleum distillate type and/or the chlorinated hydrocarbon type, and the
processes incidental thereto.
Dwelling, secondary means an additional dwelling unit located within and subordinate to the
principal dwelling on asingle-dwelling lot, designed for a single occupant or small family.
Standards and conditions for such a unit shall include the following:
1. A secondary dwelling unit shall be located within asingle-family dwelling or above its
accessory structure.
2. In the case of an addition to an existing structure, the exterior finish, roof pitch, windows,
eaves and other architectural features must be the same or visually compatible with those
of the original building.
3. The additional dwelling unit may not contain more than thirty percent (30%) of the principal
dwelling's total floor area or eight hundred (800) square feet, whichever is less.
4. There shall be no more than two (2) dwelling units on a lot.
5. At least one (1) dwelling unit on the lot shall be owner-occupied.
Dwelling, townhouse means a residence for one family that is attached either horizontally or
vertically to at least two other residences, each with a private outside entrance.
Laundry means an establishment or business where patrons wash and dry clothing or other fabrics
in machines operated by the patron.
Limited production and processing are those uses that produce minimal off-site impacts due to
their limited nature and scale, are compatible with commercial and residential uses and may
include wholesale and off-premise sales. Odors, noise, vibration, glare and other potential side
effects of manufacturing processes shall not be discernable beyond the property line or to other
tenants located in a building. Limited production and processing includes, but is not limited to, the
production, processing, repair or service of the following:
1. Apparel and other finished products made from fabrics.
2. Computers and accessories, including circuit boards and software.
3. Electronic products, components, assemblies and accessories.
4. Film, video and audio production.
5. Food and beverage products, except no live slaughter, grain milling, cereal, vegetable oil or
vinegar processing.
6. Jewelry, watches and clocks.
7. Milk, ice cream and confections.
8. Musical instruments.
11
9. Novelty items, pens, pencils and buttons.
10. Precision dental, medical and optical goods.
11. Signs, including electric and neon signs and advertising displays.
12. Toys.
13. Wood crafting and carving.
14. Wood furniture and upholstery.
Live-work unit means a dwelling unit in combination with a shop, office, studio or other workspace
within the same unit, where the resident occupant both lives and works. Standards and conditions
for these shall include:
1. The workspace component must be located on the first floor or basement of the building,
with an entrance facing the primary abutting road.
2. The dwelling unit component must be located above or behind the workspace and maintain
a separate entrance accessible from the primary abutting road.
3. The office or business component of the workspace shall not exceed thirty percent (30%) of
the total gross floor area of the principal dwelling unit and shall meet all building code
requirements.
4. A total of two (2) off-street parking spaces shall be provided on site for alive-work unit,
located to the rear of the unit, or underground/enclosed (including attached or detached
garage parking spaces).
5. No more than one (1) passenger or light commercial vehicle (i.e., delivery truck) associated
with the office or business component of the workspace may be stored on site. Heavy
commercial vehicles are prohibited.
6. The size and nature of the workspace shall be limited so that the building type may be
governed by residential building codes. An increase in size or intensity beyond the
specified limit would require the building to be classified as a mixed-use building and will
require different construction standards.
7. The workspace component of the building may include the following uses: offices, small
service establishments, home crafts which are typically considered accessory to a dwelling
unit or limited retail associated with fine arts or crafts. The workspace component shall be
limited to those uses otherwise permitted in the district that do not require a separation from
residentially zoned or occupied property. The workspace component may not include a
wholesale business, manufacturing business, motor vehicle service or repair for any
vehicles other than those registered to residents of the property and a commercial food
service requiring a license, except for a catering business which meets all conditional use
permit requirements as specified in Article V (conditional use permits).
8. Signage for alive-work unit is restricted to one (1), fifteen-square-foot (15 s.f.) wall sign and
shall not be internally illuminated.
Over story tree means a large deciduous shade-producing tree with a mature height over thirty (30)
feet.
Photocopying establishment means a business engaging in the reproduction of written or graphic
materials through processes that do not include the use of volatile organic compounds which are
subject to federal or state air emissions regulations.
Publishing or printing establishment means a business engaging in the reproduction of written or
graphic materials through processes that include the use of volatile organic compounds which are
subject to federal or state air emissions regulations.
12
Section III. This section adds Chapter 44, Article II, Division 14 to the city code to create
the mixed-use zoning district (M-U):
Division 14. M-U Mixed-Use District
Section 44-679. Purpose and intent. The purpose of the mixed-use zoning district is to provide
areas in the City of Maplewood with a mixture of land uses, made mutually compatible through
land use controls and high-quality design standards. With this district, the City of Maplewood
intends to promote the redevelopment or development of an area into amixed-use urban center
with compact, pedestrian-oriented commercial and residential land uses that are within an easy
walk of a major transit stop. The intent of the mixed-use zoning district is to enhance viability within
an area and foster more employment and residential opportunities. The placement and treatment
of buildings, parking, signage, landscaping and pedestrian spaces are essential elements in
creating the pedestrian-friendly and livable environment envisioned by the city in a mixed-use area.
To ensure these elements are achieved, basic design standards are included in the district.
Section 44-670. Uses.
Uses allowed within an M-U mixed-use zoning district are as follows:
Permitted (P)
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Tvae of Use Prohibited (PR)
Residential Uses
Single-family dwelling P'
Double dwelling P'
Multiple dwelling P
Secondary dwelling CUP
Mixed Commercial-Residential Uses
Multiple-dwelling residential and commercial P
Live-work unit CUP2
Commercial Uses
Adult uses and sexually oriented businesses PR
Antennas which are freestanding and not PR3
located on existing structures
Bakery/candy shop/catering, which produces P
goods for on-premise retail sale
Bank, credit union P
Bed and breakfast P/CUP/PR4
Cemetery, crematory or mausoleum PR
Clinic, medical or health related P
Clinic, veterinary P/PR5
13
Type of Use
Commercial Uses (cont.)
Permitted (P)
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Prohibited (PR)
Currency exchange business PR
Drive-through sales and service PR
Drive-up food or beverage window PR
Dry cleaning and laundry pick-up station P
Dry cleaning plant P/PR6
Exterior storage, display, sale or distribution of goods or materials PR
Health/sports club P
Indoor recreation P
Indoor theater P
Laundry P
Limited production and processing P/CUP'
Maintenance garage PR
Major motor fuel station PR
Mining PR
Minor motor fuel station CUPe
Motor vehicle wash PR
Office P
Off-street parking as a principal use PR
Off-sale liquor business P9
On-sale liquor business P9
Pawnbroker PR
Planned Unit Development PR
Photocopying establishment P
Publishing or printing establishment P/PR10
Restaurant P
Retail P
Small appliance and electronic component or equipment repair P
Accessory use customarily incidental to any of the above uses. P
The city may allow commercial uses similar to the above if they
would not create a nuisance and if they are not noxious or hazardous.
The city council shall review uses that are not clearly similar for
determination of compatibility.
'Nonconforming single and double-dwelling residential uses and structures: Any pre-existing
conforming or nonconforming single or double-dwelling residential use or structure which would
become nonconforming by adoption of the mixed-use zoning district and may be expanded,
extended or intensified so long as such expansion, extension, or intensification would be permitted
under the R-1 single-dwelling residential district or the R-2 double-dwelling residential district
and/or M-U mixed-use district.
14
ZLive-work units are a conditional use in the mixed-use zoning district if they meet all standards
and conditions as defined in the live-work definition. Live-work units do not require a home
occupation license as specified in Section 14-56 (home occupations).
3All other antenna requirements as specified in Article XI (commercial use antennas and towers)
shall apply.
°Bed and breakfast establishments are allowed as follows: 1)single-dwelling residential:
permitted if the bed and breakfast has four (4) or fewer guest rooms and as a conditional use
permit if the bed and breakfast has more than four (4) guest rooms; 2) commercial or mixed-use
building: permitted; 3) double dwelling, townhouse, or multi-family: prohibited. All bed and
breakfast establishments must meet the required number of off-street parking spaces as specified
in Section 44-17 (off-street parking).
SVeterinary clinic with exterior kennels are a prohibited use in the mixed-use zoning district.
BA dry cleaning plant is a permitted use in the mixed-use zoning district only if located within a
commercial-only building. A dry cleaning plant is a prohibited use in the mixed-use zoning district if
located within amixed-use building (i.e., residential and commercial).
'Limited production and processing is a conditional use in the mixed-use zoning district only if such
use has more than five thousand (5,000) square feet of gross floor area, in which case total floor
area shall not exceed ten-thousand (10,000) square feet.
8A minor motor fuel station is a conditional use in the mixed-use zoning district subject to the
following:
1. All parts of the minor motor fuel station shall be at least 100 feet from any residential use
within the mixed-use zoning district, including mixed-use buildings that comprise at least 50
percent residential uses.
2. All parts of the minor motor fuel station shall be at least 350 feet from any single, double or
multi-family residentially zoned land.
3. All new or replacement underground fuel storage tanks shall meet the standards of state
statutes and the standards of the state pollution control agency. Such tanks shall also have
a UL listing appropriate for their use. In addition, installation plans shall be submitted to the
state fire marshal's office for approval.
4. There shall be leak detection equipment on all new and existing tanks according to the
federal environmental protection agency schedule deadlines. Leak detection facilities shall
include electronic (in tank) monitoring equipment and manual measurement and recording
equipment of tank levels for daily records. Records of daily tank levels, fuel purchases and
fuel sales shall always be available on site for inspection by the fire marshal.
9All alcoholic beverage licensing requirements apply as specified in Chapter 6 (alcoholic
beverages).
10Publishing and printing establishments are a permitted use in the mixed-use zoning district only if
located within acommercial-only building. A publishing and printing establishment is a prohibited
use in the mixed-use zoning district if located within amixed-use building (i.e., residential and
commercial).
15
Section 44-671. Dimensional standards.
Lot Size Per Unit Structure Setbacks (Feet)
Building Tvpe (Square Feet) Height (Feet) Front Side Rear
Single dwelling 7,260 35' 20 to 25 52 152
Double dwelling/ n/a 35' 20 to 25 52 152
townhouse
Residential garage n/a Per Section n/a 5 0 to 6
accessed from alley 44-114
Residential garage not n/a Per Section 20 to 25 5 5
accessed from alley 44-114
Multiple dwelling n/a 35' 0 to 20 03 03
Mixed-use/residential n/a n/a 0 to 10 03 03
and commercial
Commercial/including n/a n/a 0 to 10 03 03
structure parking
'No single dwelling, double dwelling, townhouse or multi-dwelling building shall exceed a height of
thirty-five (35) feet, or three stories, unless the city council approves a conditional use permit.
2V11hen a mixed-use zoned single ordouble-dwelling/townhouse adjoins a single or double-dwelling
residential zoning district, the side and rear yard setbacks of the adjacent single or double-
dwelling residential zoning district shall apply, or a side yard setback of ten (10) feet and a rear
yard setback of twenty (20) feet, whichever is greater.
3The zero (0) setback specified above is allowed except as otherwise specified in the building
code. Side and rear yard setbacks of at least ten (10) feet shall be required when amixed-use
zoned commercial, mixed-use (residential and commercial) or multi-family use adjoins amixed-use
zoned single or double-dwelling/townhouse residential use. Side and rear yard setbacks shall be
as specified in Section 44-20 (c)(6)(b) (additional design standards) when amixed-use zoned
commercial, mixed-use (residential and commercial), ormulti-family use adjoins a single or double-
dwelling residential zoning district.
Section 44-672. Maximum density.
The density of the mixed-use zoning district shall not exceed the maximum density permitted by
the land use classification and people per unit designated in the city's adopted comprehensive
plan. Density bonuses are allowed per Section 44-300 (density credits). In addition, the net
acreage for calculating density may be increased by three hundred (300) square feet for each
affordable dwelling unit, as defined by the Metropolitan Council guidelines.
16
Section 44-673. Off-Street Parking.
Section 44-17 (off-street parking) of the city code applies in the mixed-use zoning district unless
specified differently below.
Placement of surface parking within the mixed-use zoning district must meet the following:
1. Surface parking must be located to the rear of a principal building, or an interior side yard if
parking in the rear is impractical.
2. Surface parking must maintain aten-foot (10') setback to a road when constructed on the
side or rear of a building on a corner lot.
3. Surface parking must maintain afive-foot (5') side and five-foot (5') rear yard setback,
unless the surface parking adjoins a single or double-dwelling residential zoning district, in
which case the required setback is as specified in Section 44-19(a) (landscaping and
screening).
4. The city may approve variances to the surface parking placement standard if a building has
special needs and site constraints. In these cases, there should be good pedestrian
connections between the sidewalk and building entrance, and the area in front of the
parking lot should be well landscaped.
Amount of parking:
1. The minimum amount of required parking spaces shall be as specified in Section 44-17 (off-
street parking).
2. The maximum amount of surface parking spaces shall not exceed the specified minimum
by more than ten percent (10%), or two (2) spaces, whichever is greater. If additional
parking is desired, it must be placed underground, within an enclosed building, or in a tuck-
under garage.
3. On-street parking located in front of a commercial or mixed-use building may count toward
the required number of parking spaces.
4. For retail, medical, service and office uses, if a transit shelter is provided on site or in front
of the building, then the minimum required number of parking spaces may be reduced by
five percent (5%), but not to exceed five (5) parking spaces total.
5. Commercial parking district: For retail, medical, service and office uses, required parking
may be reduced by the establishment of a commercial parking district for the purpose of
sharing parking with varying peak parking hours or availability of off-street public parking.
The establishment of a commercial parking district to allow a reduction in parking required
shall be subject to review and approval by the community design review board during the
development's initial site plan review or subsequent site plan changes.
6. In addition to the above-referenced allowances for parking reduction, the city council may
authorize other reduced off-street parking requests through a special agreement. The
reduction must be based on proven parking data for a specific development.
Parking space size:
1. 90-degree parking: 9 feet x 18 feet
2. 45-degree parking: 8.5 feet x 18 feet
3. Parallel parking: 8 feet x 21 feet
17
Section 44-674. Design standards.
Section 44-20 (additional design standards) of the city code applies to the mixed-use zoning district
unless specified differently below.
Awnings: Awnings must be properly maintained, and if in poor repair must be repaired or replaced
in a timely manner. Metal awnings are prohibited unless the design of the awning is compatible
with the building, as determined by the director of community development (if the awnings require
administrative review) or the community design review board (if the awnings require design
review). Awnings may extend up to five (5) feet over the public right-of-way, where approved by
the city, and must meet all building code requirements.
Commercial/mixed-use building facade: Any exterior building wall, except for single and double-
dwelling/townhouse residential buildings, adjacent to or visible from a public right-of-way or public
open space may not exceed forty (40) feet in width. New buildings of more than forty (40) feet in
width are allowed if the building wall is divided into smaller increments, between twenty (20) and
forty (40) feet in width, through articulation of the facade. This can be achieved through
combinations of the following techniques and others that may meet the objective:
1. Facade modulation -stepping back or extending forward a portion of the fagade.
2. Vertical divisions -using different textures or materials (although materials should be drawn
from a common palette).
3. Division into storefronts, with separate display windows and entrances.
4. Variation in rooflines by alternating dormers, stepped roofs, gables, or other roof elements
to reinforce the modulation or articulation interval.
5. Arcades, awnings, window bays, arched windows and balconies.
Exterior building materials: Exterior-building materials shall be classified primary, secondary or
accent material. Primary materials shall cover at least sixty percent (60%) of all facades of a
building. Secondary materials may cover no more than thirty percent (30%) of all facades of a
building. Accent materials may include door and window frames, lintels, cornices and other minor
elements, and may cover no more than ten percent (10%) of all facades of a building. Allowable
materials are as follows:
1. Primary exterior building materials may be brick, stone or glass. Bronze-tinted or mirror
glass are prohibited as exterior materials.
2. Secondary exterior building materials may be decorative block or stucco.
3. Synthetic stucco may be permitted as a secondary material on upper floors only.
4. Accent materials may be wood or metal if appropriately integrated into the overall building
design and not situated in areas that will be subject to physical or environmental damage.
5. All primary and secondary materials shall be integrally colored with no painted materials.
Fences: Fences over four (4) feet in height are prohibited in all front yards, except as required for
storage/service/loading as specified below.
First floor height: The first floor of commercial or mixed-use (residential and commercial) buildings
shall be designed with a minimum ceiling height of twelve (12) feet.
18
Material change: The front facade building material changes shall not occur at external comers
(toward a public right-of-way or public open space), but may occur at reverse or interior comers or
as a return at least six (6) feet from external comers.
Mixed-use building and development remodeling/additions/alterations: Remodeling, additions or
other alterations to mixed-use buildings and development (buildings and developments previously
approved and built with mixed-use design standards) shall be done in a manner that is compatible
with the original building or development. Original materials shall be retained and preserved to the
extent possible.
Model variety: Each single or double-dwelling development of one hundred (100) or more units
must have at least four (4) models with three (3) elevations and material treatments each. For
single or double-dwelling developments of less than one hundred (100) units, at least three (3)
models with three (3) variations each are required. No road block should have more than two (2)
consecutive single-dwelling houses with the same house model.
Nonconforming buildings and developments: Additions to nonconforming buildings or
developments (buildings or developments built before mixed-use design standards) must be
constructed with materials required by this ordinance if the addition exceeds twenty-five percent
(25%) of the floor area. Exterior remodeling or alterations to a nonconforming building or
development must be constructed with materials required by this ordinance. The director of
community development (if administrative review is required) or the community design review
board (if design review is required) may authorize the use of other materials if the addition,
remodeling or alteration is deemed to be minor in nature and not visible from a public right-of-way.
One-story buildings: One-story buildings taller than eighteen (18) feet in height shall be
architecturally detailed to simulate atwo-story appearance.
Parks/playgrounds: The city may require that a reasonable portion of any proposed subdivision or
development be dedicated to the public or preserved for public use as parks, playgrounds, trails or
open space.
Pedestrian access: Each ground floor space with road frontage shall have its primary entrance on
the front facade. Additional entrances may be provided off of a parking area or an access corridor.
Porches and entries: Porches, steps, pent roofs, roof overhangs and hooded front doors or similar
architectural elements shall be used to define all primary residential entrances. Decks shall be
prohibited on all primary residential entrances. Front porches must have a minimum depth of six
(6) feet clear. Porches may extend six (6) feet into the required setback in the mixed-use zoning
district.
Residential garages: Single ordouble-dwelling/townhouse attached garages must not be located
in front of the primary facade and must have architectural elements to minimize the impact of the
garage door or be recessed from the primary front facade (not including porches, bay windows or
other minor projections) by a minimum of eight (8) feet. Single or double-dwelling/townhouse
garages, either attached or detached, which are placed in the rear yard must be accessed by
either an alley or a side-yard driveway.
Setbacks: Within the mixed-use zoning district, all setbacks shall be measured from the outlying
property line of a development and either a public right-of-way or from the edge of a private road,
19
whichever applies. The term "road" as used to define setbacks within the mixed-use zoning district
applies to public right-of-ways and private roads.
Storage/service/loading: If an outdoor storage, service or loading area is visible from adjacent
residential uses, or a road or walkway; it shall be screened by a decorative fence, wall or screen of
plant material at least six (6) feet in height. Fences and walls shall be architecturally compatible
with the primary structure.
Windows: Buildings containing office and retail uses shall maintain forty percent (40%) minimum
window coverage on the first floor that faces a road or public open space. These windows shall
extend to a minimum of two (2) feet to the front facade elevation.
Exceptions and Appeals to Design Standards:
Exceptions: The director of community development (if administrative review is required) or the
community design review board (if design review is required) may consider exceptions to the
above-mentioned design standards if they uphold the integrity of the guidelines and result in an
attractive, cohesive development design as intended by this ordinance.
Appeals: Appeals to the approved design conditions for a building or development are permitted
as specified in Section 2-285 (approval of plans).
Section 44-675. Landscaping.
Section 44-19 (landscaping and screening) of the city code applies in the mixed-use zoning district
unless specified differently below.
Landscape requirements:
1. All areas of land not occupied by buildings, parking, driveways, sidewalks or other hard
surface shall be sodded or mulched and landscaped with approved ground cover, flowers,
shrubbery and trees.
2. Hard surfaced areas, including sidewalks and patios, must include amenities such as
benches, planters and bike racks.
3. For parking lots consisting of twenty (20) or more spaces, interior landscape islands are
required. Interior landscape islands shall be at a rate of one (1) landscape island for every
ten (10) parking spaces. Landscaping areas located along the perimeter of a parking lot
beyond the curb or edge of pavement shall not be included toward satisfying this
requirement. Landscape islands shalt be a minimum of one hundred and forty-four (144)
square feet in area and shall be a minimum of eight (8) feet in width, as measured from
back of curb to back of curb. The landscape islands shall be improved as follows:
a. One (1) over story tree with a trunk size a minimum of two and one-half (2-1/2)
inches in caliper shall be provided for every landscape island.
b. A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of every landscape island shall be planted with an
approved ground cover in the appropriate density to achieve complete cover within
20
two (2) years. Mulch may only be used around the base of the plant material to
retain moisture.
4. Perimeter landscape or pedestrian walls are required for all parking lots and shall be
established along the road and edges of the parking lot. The landscape treatment or
pedestrian wall shall run the full length of the parking lot and be located between the
property line and the edge of the parking lot as follows:
a. Perimeter parking lot landscaping adjacent the road shall be at least ten (10) feet in
width, as measured from the property line or edge of a private road to the back of
curb.
b. The primary plant materials used in perimeter parking lot landscaping adjacent the
road shall be over story trees. Ornamental trees, shrubs, hedges and other plant
materials may be used to supplement the over story trees, but shall not be the sole
contribution to such landscaping.
c. Perimeter parking lot landscaping along the rear and sides of a parking lot (not
adjacent the road) shall be planted with a minimum of fifty percent (50%) ground
cover approved by the city to achieve complete cover within two (2) years. Mulch
may only be used around the base of the plant material to retain moisture.
d. In lieu of, or in addition to, perimeter parking lot landscaping, a pedestrian wall along
the perimeter of the parking lot may be constructed. The pedestrian wall is limited
to four (4) feet in height, must be at least eighty percent (80%) opaque and must be
architecturally compatible to the principal building or development.
5. Over story trees are required at regular intervals along the road to help define the road
edge, to buffer pedestrians from vehicles and to provide shade. The over story trees shall
be located in a planting strip at least five (5) feet wide between curb and sidewalk, or in a
planting structure of design acceptable to the city.
Section 4-676. Lighting.
All outdoor lighting shall be of a design and size compatible with the building and as specified in
Section 44-19(c)(1) (outdoor lighting), except that light pole height maximum is limited to sixteen
(16) feet.
Section IV. This section adds Subdivision VII, Schedule No. VI, to Article III (sign
regulations).
Subdivision Vll. Schedule No. VI
Section 44-990. Scope.
This schedule No. VI applies to signs in the M-U mixed-use district. Article 111 (sign regulations) of
the city code applies to the M-U mixed-use district unless specified differently below.
Section 44-991. Sign review.
The community design review board shall review all signage on new buildings or developments to
ensure that the signs meet mixed-use sign requirements and are architecturally compatible with
21
the new building or development. In addition, the community design review board shall review all
comprehensive sign plans as required in Section 44-736 (comprehensive sign plan).
All signage on mixed-use buildings or developments (buildings or developments previously
approved and built with mixed-use design standards) shall be reviewed by the director of
community development and shall be done in a manner that is compatible with the original scale,
massing, detailing and materials of the original building. All signage on non-mixed-use buildings or
developments (buildings or developments not built with mixed-use design standards) shall be
reviewed by the director of community development and shall comply with the mixed-use sign
requirements, unless classified as apre-existing nonconforming sign in which case it shall comply
with Section 44-12 (nonconforming buildings or uses).
Section 44-992. Projecting signs.
Projecting signs are allowed as part of the overall signage. Projecting signs may not extend more
than four (4) feet over a public right-of-way and a private road or sidewalk, and must not project out
further than the sign's height.
Section 44-993. Overall wall signs.
Allowable area of overall wall and projecting signage for each establishment is one and one-half
(1 '/2) square feet of signage per lineal foot of building or frontage on a road, public open space or
private parking area, or thirty (32) square feet, whichever is greater. Each wall shall be calculated
individually and sign area may not be transferred to another side of the building. Minor motor
vehicle stations with canopies are allowed to place signage on the canopy and the building as long
as they do not exceed the requirements above. Wall and projecting signs shall not cover windows
or architectural trim and detail.
Section 44-994. Freestanding signs.
One (1) freestanding sign for each establishment is allowed if the building is set back at least
twenty (20) feet or more from the front property line. Freestanding signs must meet the following
requirements:
1. Limited to six (6) feet in height and forty (40) square feet in area.
2. Maintain afive-foot (5') setback from any side or rear property line, but can be constructed
up to the front property line.
3. Must cons~gt of a base constructed of materials and design features similar to those of the
front facade of the building or development.
4. Must be landscaped with flowers or shrubbery.
22
Section 44-995. Prohibited signs.
Signs painted directly on the wall of a building; reader boards located in permanent signage,
except for reader boards advertising gasoline prices at minor motor vehicle stations; signs which
advertise a product and not a specific business.
Section IV. This ordinance shall take effect after the city publishes it in the official
newspaper.
The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on , 2004.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Ayes -
Nays -
23
Attachment 5
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has requested a change to the city's comprehensive
land use plan from business commercial (BC), single-dwelling residential (R-1), and church (C)
to mixed-use (M-U) for the Hillcrest area.
WHEREAS, this change applies to the Hillcrest area in the City of Maplewood,
Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the change applies to the following properties:
Properties north of Larpenteur Avenue and south of Frost Avenue, along White Bear
Avenue, North St. Paul Road, and Van Dyke Street as follows:
All properties lying 295 feet west of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to the
Frost Avenue; all properties lying 1,139 east of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur
Avenue to Ripley Avenue and North St. Paul Road including the following:
ProcertV Identification Number
152922440085
142922330021
152922440015
142922330019
142922330014
152922440014
142922330020
152922440013
152922440012
152922440011
142922330011
142922330001
152922440010
142922330009
152922440019
152922440009
152922410002
152922440018
152922440008
142922330024
152922440017
152922440007
152922440006
152922440005
152922440004
152922440003
152922440002
152922440001
142922330013
152922410015
142922330012
142922330023
142922330006
152922410080
152922410013
142922330010
142922330016
142922330004
152922410012
Address
1685 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1698 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1699 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1705 VAN DYKE ST N
1706 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1709 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1715 VAN DYKE ST N
1717 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1721 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1733 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1735 VAN DYKE ST N
1740 VAN DYKE ST N
1743 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1750 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1751 LARPENTEUR AVE E
1753 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1756 FROST AVE E
1759 LARPENTEUR AVE E
1759 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1762 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1763 LARPENTEUR AVE E
1763 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1769 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1773 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1779 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1783 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1789 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1799 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1804 N ST PAUL RD E
1805 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1814NSTPAULRDE
1815 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1819NSTPAULRDE
1829 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1831 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1834 N ST PAUL RD E
1835 LARPENTEUR AVE E
1847 LARPENTEUR AVE E
1849 WHITE BEAR AVE N
24
142922330005 1851 N ST PAUL RD E
152922410010 1865 WHITE BEAR AVE N
152922410009 1871 WHITE BEAR AVE N
152922410008 1883 WHITE BEAR AVE N
142922330003 1887 LARPENTEUR AVE E
152922410007 1895 WHITE BEAR AVE N
142922330002 1899 LARPENTEUR AVE E
152922410006 1899 WHITE BEAR AVE N
152922410005 1909 WHITE BEAR AVE N
152922410004 1913 WHITE BEAR AVE N
152922410003 1919 WHITE BEAR AVE N
152922410001 1925 WHITE BEAR AVE N
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
On February 2, 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 land use plan
change.
2. On February 23, 2004, the city council discussed the land use plan changes. 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 for the following reasons:
1. The land use plan change is based on eight specific Maplewood comprehensive plan
land use and housing goals as follows:
a. Provide for orderly development.
b. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods.
c. Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase
jobs and provide desirable services.
d. Minimize the land planned for streets.
e. Minimize conflicts between land uses.
f. Provide a wide variety of housing types.
g. Provide safe and attractive neighborhoods and commercial areas.
h. Plan multi-family housing with an average density of at least 10 units per acre.
2. The land use plan change is based on four specific Maplewood comprehensive plan
land use policies as follows:
a. Include a variety of housing types for all types of residents.
b. Disperse moderate-income developments throughout the city near bus lines.
c. Support innovative subdivision and housing design.
d. Protect neighborhoods from activities that produce excessive noise, dirt, odors or
which generate heavy traffic.
The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on , 2004.
25
ZONING MAP CHANGE RESOLUTION
Attachment 6
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has requested a change to the city's zoning map
from business commercial (BC) and single-dwelling residential (R-1) to mixed-use (M-U).
WHEREAS, this change applies to the Hillcrest area in the City of Maplewood,
Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the change applies to the following properties:
Properties north of Larpenteur Avenue and south of Frost Avenue, along White Bear
Avenue, North St. Paul Road, and Van Dyke Street as follows:
All properties lying 295 feet west of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to the
Frost Avenue; all properties lying 1,139 east of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur
Avenue to Ripley Avenue and North St. Paul Road including the following:
Prooertv Identification Number
152922440085
142922330021
152922440015
142922330019
142922330014
152922440014
142922330020
152922440013
152922440012
152922440011
142922330011
142922330001
152922440010
142922330009
152922440019
152922440009
152922410002
152922440018
152922440008
142922330024
152922440017
152922440007
152922440006
152922440005
152922440004
152922440003
152922440002
152922440001
142922330013
152922410015
142922330012
142922330023
142922330006
152922410080
152922410013
142922330010
142922330016
142922330004
152922410012
142922330005
152922410010
152922410009
152922410008
Address
1685 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1698 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1699 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1705 VAN DYKE ST N
1706 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1709 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1715 VAN DYKE ST N
1717 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1721 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1733 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1735 VAN DYKE ST N
1740 VAN DYKE ST N
1743 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1750 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1751 LARPENTEUR AVE E
1753 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1756 FROST AVE E
1759 LARPENTEUR AVE E
1759 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1762 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1763 LARPENTEUR AVE E
1763 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1769 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1773 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1779 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1783 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1789 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1799 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1804 N ST PAUL RD E
1805 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1814NSTPAULRDE
1815 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1819NSTPAULRDE
1829 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1831 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1834 N ST PAUL RD E
1835 LARPENTEUR AVE E
1847 LARPENTEUR AVE E
1849 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1851 N ST PAUL RD E
1865 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1871 WHITE BEAR AVE N
1883 WHITE BEAR AVE N
26
142922330003 1887 LARPENTEUR AVE E
152922410007 1895 WHITE BEAR AVE N
142922330002 1899 LARPENTEUR AVE E
152922410006 1899 WHITE BEAR AVE N
152922410005 1909 WHITE BEAR AVE N
152922410004 1913 WHITE BEAR AVE N
152922410003 1919 WHITE BEAR AVE N
152922410001 1925 WHITE BEAR AVE N
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
On February 2, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve the rezoning change.
2. On February 23, 2004, the city council held a public hearing. City staff published a
notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners.
The council conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a
chance to speak and present written statements. The city council also considered
reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-
described change in the zoning map for the following reasons:
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 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.
The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on , 2004.
27
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2004
V. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Hillcrest Area (Larpenteur and White Bear Avenues)
Ms. Finwall showed a power point presentation while describing the proposed changes to the
Hillcrest area. Ms. Finwall said the City of Maplewood is proposing to change the comprehensive
land use and zoning map for the Hillcrest area. These changes would be from business
commercial (BC), single-dwelling residential (R-1 ), and church (C) to the newly adopted mixed-
use (M-U) land use designation and zoning district. The comprehensive land use and zoning
map changes are intended to promote the redevelopment of the Hillcrest area into amixed-use
urban center with compact, pedestrian-oriented commercial and residential land uses. State law
requires comprehensive land use map changes to be passed by atwo-thirds city council vote (4
votes).
Commissioner Trippler had concerns with the way the area was described. He thought the
property description should be defined better.
Ms. Finwall said she would confer with the city attorney to ensure a legally binding description.
Chairperson Fischer opened the discussion to the public. She asked anyone who wanted to
speak on this item give their name and address prior to addressing the commission.
Mr. Ken Schwartz, Performance Transmission business owner at 1735 Van Dyke Street,
Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said he is against the rezoning of commercial
property because he believes it devalues the property. He said when you rezone residential
property to commercial property you raise the value of the property. But when you go from
business commercial to mixed use it devalues property. Rezoning his property to mixed use
would not fit the criteria of his business. He said when you rezone a building you change the
value of the building. When the time came that he wanted to sell his property it would limit him as
to who he could sell his property to. The city needs to address what would be taken away from
the individual when someone's property gets devalued. He wants his property to remain
business commercial.
Commissioner Bartol asked what the nature of his business was?
Mr. Schwartz said his business is auto/transmission repair.
Mr. AI Meister, business owner at 1696 to 1698 White Bear Avenue, and 1715 Van Dyke Street,
Maplewood, addressed the commission. He agreed with Mr. Schwartz that by doing this the city
would be devaluing his property. He said he had a tenant in one of his properties that moved out
already because of what the Met Council has told everyone. The tenant said "who knows, next
year the building may be gone", so he left. He said they are having a hard time getting tenants
because of the future changes. Very few companies could relocate to that location because of
the new changes. Unless you have a developer that would come in and buy everyone out,
people don't have the money to upgrade because of the economy.
Mr. Ken Schwartz, addressed the commission again. He said 1 year ago the city adopted Fire
Code 1306. The code reads if you change the occupancy within your building you have to
sprinkler the whole building. He is looking at remodeling a portion of his business. Within the
guidelines of the adopted rule the city would consider the remodeling change to the occupancy,
which requires a sprinkler system. He said in Mr. Meister's case to replace the tenant that was in
the Laundromat space would run about $60,000 to get a new renter in the building to bring the
building up to code. It's hard for a property owner to spend $60,000 not knowing if you can get
the money back or not. He doesn't have a problem spending money on his building if his building
would be there 30 years from now. He does have a problem spending that kind of money on a
building that may be demolished in the next few years. The city needs to ask what impact would
this have on the people in the community? He said it's not easy to move a business. It's
expensive to retain your customers and you hope they follow you to the new location.
Mr. Dave Hulke, residing at 1831 White Bear Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the commission.
He said he would like his property to be considered as one of the properties for this change. He
said his property is located just north of Hejny Rental and is about 1 acre in size. The Hejny
Rental property is roughly 1'/a acre in size. He said his father passed away in December 2003
and they have been trying since 1969 to get this property changed to commercial to upgrade its
value. He spoke to several neighbors and another one of his neighbors is interested in having
their property considered for this change as well.
Chairperson Fischer asked what the street frontage was for Mr. Hulke's property?
Mr. Hulke said his property has 150 feet of street frontage and Hejny Rental has about 200 feet of
street frontage.
Mr. Bob Cutshall, Building Committee Chair for the Woodland Hills Church located at 1740 Van
Dyke Street, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said the church wants to be a good
neighbor. They want to understand the rezoning of this property. Their understanding is under
the new zoning they would be a permitted use under a conditional use permit as they are
currently.
Ms. Finwall said churches would remain under the conditional use permit as they are currently.
Chairperson Fischer asked if the permit the church currently has has been is grandfathered in?
Ms. Finwall said yes.
Mr. Cutshall asked if he understood correctly that the church would not be anon-conforming use?
Ms. Finwall said the use itself would not be anon-conforming use, however, the parking lot and
building would be non-conforming under the new design standards.
Mr. Cutshall asked if they would be expected at some point to bring the building up to the design
standards? He said the new design standards would be difficult for the church to meet since the
building is over 40 years old.
Ms. Finwall said the ordinance would not require the church to update the building unless the
church was proposing an addition or exterior remodeling. If the addition exceeded 25% of the
floor area of the building it would have to be constructed with the new design standards and any
exterior alteration or remodeling would have to meet the design standards?
Mr. Cutshall asked if this would have an impact on the finishing of the inside of the building since
they are half done?
Ms. Finwall said that would not affect the interior building the church has proposed.
Ms. Darlene Duran, residing at 1849 White Bear Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the
commission. Her property is next door to David Hulke's property and she would like her property
to be considered for the rezoning of the area. She is concerned that the commercial zoning has
spread past Ripley Avenue. She said Hejny Rental could sell their business to many different
companies that wanted to relocate in that location.
Chairperson Fischer asked staff to explain the difference between the proposed mixed-use
zoning and the current business commercial zoning?
Ms. Finwall said Ms. Duran lives north of Mr. Hulke's property. Currently Hejny Rental is
operating with a CUP for the exterior storage and the rental facility but they are anon-conforming
use because they are located in a residential zoning district. Currently Hejny Rental could sell to
a similar type use or the property could be converted to residential property. When the property is
rezoned, lower impact commercial uses such as retail or restaurant could be developed or multi-
family housing could go there. It appears that the residential portion would develop along the
western side of White Bear Avenue before commercial property.
Ms. Duran said she would still like her property to be considered as the same zoning as Mr.
Hulke. She thinks it's a strange place to make the cutoff on White Bear Avenue and she thinks
including one more property shouldn't make difference.
Mr. Schwartz asked if there would be a minimum lot size requirement under the new rezoning?
Ms. Finwall said only for asingle-family home. She doesn't foresee a small lot such as the size of
the Duran property developed on its own but the lot could be included with other properties for
future redevelopment.
Mr. Kevin Johnson, residing at 207 West Kenwood, Maplewood, and a member of the pastoral
staff at the Woodland Hills church, addressed the commission. He said the church wants to be
supportive of the efforts of improving the community and want to do their best job of being a good
neighbor.
Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the comprehensive map change in the Hillcrest area from
business commercial (BC), single-dwelling residential (R-1 ), and church (C) to mixed-use (M-U).
The comprehensive map change includes properties located north of Larpenteur Avenue and
south of Ripley Avenue, along White Bear Avenue and Van Dyke Street as follows: (changes to
the original motion are underlined and additions are in bold).
Properties 295 feet west of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to the north
property line of 1849 White Bear Avenue; all properties east of White Bear Avenue from
Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue; all properties east and west of Van Dyke Street from
Larpenteur Avenue to Ripley Avenue, including 1847, 1887, and 1899 Larpenteur Avenue.
The comprehensive map change is based on eight specific comprehensive plan land use and
housing goals and four land use policies as follows:
Goals:
a. Provide for orderly development.
b. Protect and strengthen neighborhoods.
c. Promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase jobs
and provide desirable services.
d. Minimize the land planned for streets.
e. Minimize conflicts between land uses.
f. Provide a wide variety of housing types.
g. Provide safe and attractive neighborhoods and commercial areas.
h. Plan multi-family housing with an average density of at least 10 units per acre.
Policies:
a. Include a variety of housing types for all types of residents.
b. Disperse moderate-income developments throughout the city near bus lines.
c. Support innovative subdivision and housing design.
d. Protect neighborhoods from activities that produce excessive noise, dirt, odors or which
generate heavy traffic.
Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the zoning map change for the Hillcrest area in the City of
Maplewood from business commercial (BC) and single-dwelling residential (R-1) to mixed-use (M-
U). The zoning map change includes properties located north of Larpenteur Avenue and south of
Ripley Avenue, along White Bear Avenue and Van Dyke Street as follows: (changes to the
original motion are underlined and additions are in bold).
Properties 295 feet west of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur Avenue to the north property
line of 1849 White Bear Avenue; all properties east of White Bear Avenue from Larpenteur
Avenue to Ripley Avenue; all properties east and west of Van Dyke Street from Larpenteur
Avenue to Ripley Avenue, including 1847, 1887, and 1899 Larpenteur Avenue.
The city is making this change because:
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 that 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.
Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes - Bartol, Dierich, Fischer, Trippler
The motion passed.
This item goes to the city council on February 23, 2004.
Agenda #H2
SUMMARY MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FROM: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Woodhill
LOCATION: South of Linwood Avenue, east of Sterling Street
DATE: February 17, 2004
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Mr. Bruce Nedegaard, representing Nedegaard Custom Homes, is proposing to develop a 15-lot plat
for single dwellings called Woodhill. It would be on a 12.44-acre site on the south side of Linwood
Avenue, east of Sterling Street. Refer to the applicant's statement and the maps in the staff memo
for more information about this request.
Requests
To build this project, Mr. Nedegaard is requesting that the city approve:
A conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD). The PUD would allow the
development of the site with 15 single dwellings on a cul-de-sac with a narrower right-of--way (50
feet instead of 60 feet) and narrower pavement width.
2. A preliminary plat for 15 lots for single dwellings.
In addition, city staff is proposing to change the zoning for the site from F (farm residence) to R-1
(single dwellings).
ISSUES
The primary issues or concerns that staff and the planning commission had with this proposal is
about site grading and wetland protection. The developer's engineer has been working closely with
city staff and the watershed district to ensure that the project, if built, would be sensitive to the site
conditions. The latest plans for this proposal have incorporated many of the changes and comments
of city staff, the planning commission and of the watershed district.
RECOMMENDATIONS
There are three requests for the Woodhill development that the city needs to take action on. They
include a conditional use permit for a planned unit development, a preliminary plat and a zoning map
change from F (Farm Residence) to R-1 (Single Dwelling Residential). Staff is recommending
approval of the proposal and the requests, subject to the conditions of approval in the full staff memo.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FROM: Ken Roberts, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Woodhill PUD and Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: South of Linwood Avenue, east of Sterting Street
DATE: February 12, 2004
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Mr. Bruce Nedegaard, representing Nedegaard Custom Homes, is proposing to develop a 15-lot plat
for single dwellings called Woodhill. 1t would be on a 12.44-acre site on the south side of Linwood
Avenue, east of Sterting Street. Refer to the applicant's statement on pages 14-17, the maps on
pages 18-24, 35-37, and the attached plans.
Requests
To build this project, Mr. Nedegaard is requesting that the city approve:
A conditional use permit {CUP) for a planned unit development {PUD). The PUD would allow
the development of the site with 15 single dwellings on a cul-de-sac with a narrower right-of-
way (50 feet instead of 60 feet) and narrower pavement width. In addition, the developer is
asking the city to allow a variety of front yard setbacks for the houses within the development.
2. A preliminary ptat for 15 lots for single dwellings. (See the maps on pages 21 through 24 and
on 35-37 and the enclosed project plans.)
In addition, city staff is proposing to change the zoning for the site from F (farm residence) to R-1
(single dwellings).
BACKGROUND
The city bought the 24 acres south of this site for open space and park purposes in 1995.
DISCUSSION
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
Section 44-1093(b) of the city code says that it is the intent of the PUD code "to provide a means to
allow flexibility by substantial deviations from the provisions of this chapter, including uses,
setbacks, height and other regulations. Deviations may be granted for planned unit developments
provided that:
Certain regulations contained in this chapter should not apply to the proposed development
because of its unique nature.
2. The PUD would be consistent with the purposes of this chapter.
3. The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or superior quality to
that which would result from strict adherence to the provisions of this chapter.
4. The deviations would not constitute a significant threat to the property values, safety, health
or general welfare of the owners or occupants of nearby land.
5. The deviations are required for reasonable and practicable physical development and are
not required solely for financial reasons."
The applicant has applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD)
for the 15-unit housing development. They are requesting the CUP for the PUD because of the
proposed narrower street right-of--way, narrower pavement width and to have a variety of front yard
setbacks for the houses. In other words, having a PUD gives the city and developer a chance to be
more flexible with site design and development details than the standard city requirements would
normally allow. It is the contention of the applicant, as they note in their project statement, that the
proposed code deviations meet the findings in the city code for approval of a PUD.
City staff agrees with the applicant that the development, with the proposed code deviations, would
produce a development of equal or superior quality, that the proposals do not constitute a threat to
the area and that the deviations are required for reasonable and practicable development of the site.
The narrower street with reduced house setbacks will lessen the amount of grading and tree
removal on the property. If the applicant followed all the city subdivision and zoning standards, such
a plan would require more tree removal and grading because of the wider street and the larger
setbacks. In addition, it is important to note that the proposed code deviations do not increase the
number of lots or the density of the housing in the development
The developer intends to sell each of the houses and expects that each will sell for at least
$400,000. A homeowners' association would own and maintain the landscaping, rainwater gardens
and retaining walls.
Density and Lot Size
As proposed, having 15 units on the 12.44-acre site calculated to 1.21 units per acre (an average of
33,868 square feet per unit). This is consistent with the density standards in the comprehensive
plan for single dwelling residential development and is well above the 10,000- square-foot minimum
lot area that the city requires for each single dwelling.
Preliminary Plat
The development of this site into anything more than its current use of a house and accessory
buildings will be a challenge. There are several existing factors inGuding the topography, wetlands
and pipelines that limit and direct the possible development of the site. In addition, the shape of the
property (823 feel wide by 624 feet deep), the street grades on Linwood Avenue, its one access
poin# (on Linwood Avenue) along with its characteristic of generally sloping from the middle of the
site to the north and to the south limit the development and design possibilities for the property.
With the existing conditions on the property, there are not many options for designing a subdivision
to fit the site. The proposed preliminary plat, with its street and lot design, raises many issues for
the city to consider. 1 will discuss the major issues with this proposal below.
Subdivision Ordinance
Chapter 34 of the city code (subdivisions) regulates the platting or subdividing of property in
Maplewood. The purpose of this part of the code is "to protect and promote the public health, safety
and general welfare, to provide for the orderly, economic and safe development of land...". As
such, the city must balance many interests when reviewing and considering a subdivision in
Maplewood. These include the interests of the property owner, the developer, the neighbors and the
2
Based on staff s review of the site and the existing topographic conditions, the proposed street and
lot layout are reasonable. The proposed lots within the development that are also on Linwood
Avenue have extra depth (they range from 172 to 209 feet deep) so that the proposed houses will
not be right on top of Linwood Avenue. Staff is also recommending that the city require covenants
or deed restrictions for the double frontage lots that will prohibit driveways onto Linwood Avenue.
Trees
As proposed, the contractor for Mr. Nedegaard would grade about 6 acres in the center of the site to
create the street right-of-way and the house pads. (See the grading and tree plans on pages 23, 24
and 36.) This grading would remove about 74 large trees (including Colorado spruce, oak, birch and
maple) and would leave about 137 large trees on the 12.44-acre site. Since the city code requires
the developer to save at least 124 trees (10 per acre) on this site, the proposed plans meet this
requirement.
Watershed District Comments and Wetland Ordinance
The Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District reviewed the preliminary plans for this
development. (See the comments from Tina Carstens on page 25.) They have classified the large
wetland on proposed Outlot B as a Class One Wetland. These are the wetlands that humans have
impacted the least and have the most diverse types of vegetation and the most community resource
significance. This wetland classification requires a 100-foot-wide no-disturb buffer area. In addition,
the building foundations must be at least ten feet from the edge of the wetland buffer. The
proposed grading plan (on page 23) meets these requirements.
Ms. Carstens also told me that the 60-foot buffer as shown on the plans for the wetland on the east
end of the site near Lot 8 is adequate. This is because this wetland is of a lower quality and
importance than the larger wetlands to the west. The watershed district approved the preliminary
project plans on February 4, 2004. It is important to remember that Mr. Nedegaard or the contractor
must meet all the conditions of the watershed district and that they must get a permit from the
watershed district before starting grading or construction.
City Engineering Department Comments
The city engineering department has been working with the applicant's engineering consultant in
reviewing this proposal and plans. Chris Cavett's and Erin Laberee's comments are in the
attachment starting on page 26.
Public Utilities
There is sanitary sewer and water near the site to serve the proposed development. Specifically,
water is to the east of the site at the intersection of Linwood Avenue and Ferndale Street. The
developer will extend the water main across Linwood Avenue to and through the site. The Saint
Paul Water Utility will need to approve the plan for the water main.
Sanitary sewer is west of the site near the intersection of Linwood Avenue and Sterling Street. The
developer is proposing to extend the sewer up Linwood Avenue from Sterling Stn:et to and through
the development. The city engineer must approve the final engineering plans before the applicant or
contractor may start construction. As noted in the engineering comments, the city is going to install
the improvements on this site as part of a public improvement project -including utilities, street and
curbing. This, however, requires the property owner to petition the city to install the public
improvements. After the city receives such a petition, the city will do the final design of the project
plans and the developer or applicant will pay the city back for all costs.
4
Drainage
Most of the site drains to the north and to the south. The developer's engineer told me that by using
the proposed ponds and rainwater gardens as s#orm wa#er detention facilities, the development would
not increase the rate of storm water runoff from the site. That is, the runoff leaving the site will be at
or below current levels. Mr. Cavett noted this requirement, along with several others, in his
comments. (See the information starting on page 26.)
Magellan (Williams Brothers) Pipelines
There are three Magellan Pipeline Company pipelines running north and south near the west end of
the site. The developer has proposed to create Outlot A over this part of the site since the city code
prohibits the construction of homes or buildings with habitable space within 100 feet of a pipeline. The
proposed plat and lot layout meets this setback requirement and it creates anorth/south corridor with
creation of Outlot A. The proposed plans show utility and trail construction within Outlot A near the
pipelines. Mr. Cavett noted that any grading or construction near the pipelines requires the written
approval of the pipeline company.
Other Engineering Concerns
Chris and Erin noted in their comments that the developer is to construct the retaining walls within the
project during the grading of the site. This is to ensure that the walls are in place before the
contractors start building the houses. They also noted a concern about the proposed house locations
on Lots 6, 7 and 8 of Block 2. As originally proposed, these houses would have been set back about
77 feet from the front property line. This is much greater than the typical front setback of 30-35 feet
and also is a larger setback than most of the other houses within this development. Chris and Erin
recommend that the developer place the houses on these lots closer to the street so they would be
more closely aligned with the neighboring homes. Staff recommends that the city set a range of front
setbacks of 20 to 45 feet within this development to address these concerns. The latest project plans
date-stamped February 12, 2004 (on pages 35-37) show these changes.
Other Comments
Lieutenant David Kvam of the Maplewood Police Department noted that he wanted the city to be sure
that there is enough room within the site to allow emergency vehicles to maneuver and also noted
that the entrance/exit of the development may present visibility problems for drivers. The sight visibility
at the new intersection was an initial concern of the reviewing engineers. However, the developer's
engineer provided Mr. Cavett supporting data and asight-line analysis that showed the proposed
intersection would meet design standards such that his initial concerns were satisfied.
Fire Marshal
Butch Gervais, the Maplewood Fire Marshal, noted that the cul-de-sac must have a turning radius of
at least 42 feet (for equipment) and that there be fire hydrants in proper locations.
Neighbors' Comments
City staff surveyed the 62 property owners within 500 feet of the site. Refer to the comments on page
12 and the written messages on pages 32 and 33.
5
Zoning
The city has zoned this property F (Farm Residence) and has planned it R-1 (Single Dwelling
Residential) in the city's comprehensive plan. The city's subdivision ordinance allows #or the platting
of single-family lots within the Farm Residence zoning district. To be consistent with the
comprehensive plan, however, staff recommends that the city change the zoning of the site from F
(Farm Residence) to R-1 (single dwellings).
COMMISSION ACTION
On February 2, 2004, the planning commission recommended approval of the proposed PUD,
preliminary plat and zoning map change, subject to several conditions.
RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Approve the resolution starting on page 38. This resolution approves a condi#inal use permit
for a planned unit development for the 15-unit Woodhill development on the south side of
Linwood Avenue. The city bases this approval on the findings required by code. (Refer to the
resolution for the specific findings.) Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the plans approved by the city. The city council may approve
major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor
changes to the plans. Such changes shall include:
a. Revising the grading and site plans to show:
(1) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation inGuding
keeping and protecting as many of the trees as possible.
(2) Revised storm water pond locations and storm water system designs as suggested
or required by the watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the
city's design standards.
2. The proposed construction of the plat must be substantially started within one year of
council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one
year.
3. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall
meet all the conditions and changes noted in the city engineer's memo dated January 22,
2004.
4. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Woodhill development shall be:
a. Front-yard setback (from a public street right-of--way): minimum - 20 feet, maximum - 45
feet
b. Front-yard setback (public side street right-of--way): minimum - 20 feet, maximum -none
c. Rear-yard setback: 30 feet from any adjacent residential property line
d. Side-yard setback: minimum - 10 feet from a property line and 20 feet minimum
between buildings.
6
5. The developer or contractor shall:
a. Complete all grading for the site drainage and the ponds, install all retaining walls as
required and any other site improvements required by the city engineer and meet all city
requirements.
b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Remove the house, any debris or junk from the site.
6. The city council shalt review this permit in one year.
B. Approve the Woodhill preliminary plat (received by the city on February 12, 2004}. The
developer shall complete the following before the city council approves the final plat:
1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will:
a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all retaining walls, site
landscaping and meet all city requirements.
b.'' Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Have Xcel Energy install Group V rate street lights in two locations -primarily at the
street intersections and at the west end of the cul-de-sac. The exact style and location
shall be subject to the city engineer's approval.
d. Provide all required and necessary easements (including all utility easements and ten-
foot drainage and utility easements along the front and rear lot lines of each lot and five-
foot drainage and utility easements along the side lot lines of each lot).
e. Install permanent signs around the edge of the wetland buffer easements. These signs
shall mark the edge of the easements and shall state that there shall be no mowing,
vegetation cutting, filling, building, grading or dumping beyond this point. City staff shall
approve the sign design and location before the contractor installs them. The
developer or contractor shall install these signs before the city issues building permits in
this plat.
f. Install survey monuments along the wetland and wetland buffer boundaries.
g. Pay the city for the cost of traffic-control, street identification, wetland buffer and no
parking signs.
h. Provide all required and necessary easements, inGuding any off-site easements.
i. Demolish or remove the existing house and garage from the site, and remove all other
buildings, fencing, trailers, scrap metal, debris and junk from the site.
j. Cap and seal all wells on site that the owners are not using; and remove septic systems
or drainfields, subject to Minnesota rules and guidelines.
k. Complete all curb on Linwood Avenue on the north side of the site. This is to replace the
existing driveways on Linwood Avenue, and restore and sod the boulevards.
7
2.'' Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall
include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, and street plans. The plans shall
mee# all the condi#ions and changes lis#ed in the memo da#ed January 22, 2004, and shall
meet the following conditions:
a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code and shall be extremely
detailed to the satisfaction of the city engineer.
b. The grading plan shall show:
(1) The proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home site.
The lot lines on this plan shaft follow the approved preliminary plat.
(2) Contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb.
(3) House pads that:
a. Reduce the grading on sites where the developer can save large trees. This shall
include following the project plans submitted to the city on February 12, 2004. The
house pad locations on Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block 2 shall meet the approved
development setback requirements to more closely match the other house
setbacks and orientation on the street.
b. Meet the 100-foot setback from the pipelines for Lot 6, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2.
(4) The proposed street and driveway grades as allowed by the city engineer.
(5) All proposed slopes on the construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the
plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. On
slopes steeper than 3:1, the developer shall prepare and implement a stabilization
and planting plan. At a minimum, the slopes shall be protected with wood-fiber
blanket, be seeded with a no-maintenance vegetation and be stabilized before the
city approves the final plat.
(6) Include the tree plan that:
a. Shows where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan
shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site.
b. Shows no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits.
(7) All retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls taller than 4 feet require a
building permit from the city.
(8) Sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed district or by the city
engineer.
(9) No grading beyond the plat boundary without temporary grading easements from
the affected property owner(s).
(10) As little grading as possible north and south of the proposed street. This is to
keep as many of the existing trees on the site as is reasonably possible.
8
(11) The pipelines and the 8-foot-wide trail from the cul-de-sac to the south property
line.
c. The street and utility plans shall show:
(1) The street with a width of 28 feet (with parking on one side), shall be a 9-ton
design with a maximum street grade of eight percent and the maximum street
grade within 75 feet of the intersection at two percent.
(2) The new street (Dahl Avenue) with continuous concrete ribbon curb, except where
the city engineer determines that concrete curbing is necessary.
(3) The completion or replacement of the curb on the south side of Linwood Avenue
and the restoration and sodding of the boulevards.
(4) Repair of Linwood Avenue (curb, street and boulevard) after the developer
connects to the public utilities and builds the new street.
(5) A set of utility services to the eastern part of the property at 2480 Linwood Avenue
and public utility services to each new lot.
(6) The coordination of the water main alignments and sizing with the standards and
requirements of the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS).
(7) All utility excavations located within the proposed right-of--ways or within
easements. The developer shall acquire easements for all utilities that would be
outside the project area.
(8) The plan and profiles of the proposed utilities.
(9) A detail of any ponds, the pond outlets and the rainwater gardens. The contractor
shall protect the outlets to prevent erosion.
(10) The cul-de-sac with a minimum pavement radius of at least 42 feet.
(11) Label Linwood Avenue and the new street as Dahl Avenue on all construction and
project plans.
d. The drainage plan shall ensure that there is no increase in the rate of storm water run-off
leaving the site above the current (predevelopment) levels. The developer's engineer
shall:
(1) Verify inlet and pipe capacities.
(2) Submit drainage design calculations.
e. A landscape plan for the areas along the street, including the rainwater gardens and the
cul-de-sac island. The coniferous trees shall be at least six feet tall and any deciduous
trees shall be at least 2% inches in diameter.
3. Change the plat as follows:
a. Add drainage and utility easements as required by the city engineer.
9
b. Show drainage and utility easements along all property lines on the frnal plat. These
easements shall be ten feet wide along the front and rear property lines and five feet
wide along the side property lines.
c. Label any common areas as outlots.
d. Label the new street as Dahl Avenue on all plans.
e. As may be necessary to ensure that houses on Lot 6, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2
would be at least 100 feet from the pipelines.
4. Pay for costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans.
5. Secure and provide all required easements for the development including wetland buffer
easements and any off-site drainage and utility easements. These shall include, but not
be limited to, an easement for the culvert draining the pond at the northwest comer of
the plat.
6. The developer shall complete all site grading and retaining wall construction. The city
engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that the developer or
contractor has not completed before final plat approval.
7. Sign a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or
contractor will:
a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, install all retaining walls, install the
landscaping for the rainwater gardens and the cul-de-sac island, install all other
necessary improvements and meet all city requirements.
b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Provide for the repair of Linwood Avenue (street, curb and boulevard) after the
developer connects to the public utilities.
d. Meet all the requirements of the city engineer.
8. Submit the homeowners' association bylaws and rules to the director of community
development. These are to assure that there will be one responsible party for the
maintenance of the common areas, landscaping and retaining walls.
9. Record the following with the final plat:
a. All homeowners' association documents.
b. A covenant or deed restriction with the final plat that prohibits any driveways on Lots 1
through 6, Block 1 and Lot 9, Block 2 from going onto Linwood Avenue.
c. A covenant or deed restriction that prohibits any further subdivision or splitting of the
lots or parcels in the plat that would create additional building sites unless approved
by the city council.
d. A covenant or association documents that addresses the proper installation,
maintenance and replacement of the retaining walls.
10
e. Deeds transferring the ownership of Outlots A and B to the city. The city will accept
ownership of these outlots in lieu of charging PAC (park access charges) with the
building permits.
f. All wetland and wetland buffer easements.
The applicant shall submit the language for these dedica#ions and restrictions to the city
for approval before recording.
10. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for grading.
11. Obtain a NPDES construction permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA).
12. Submit to city staff a copy of the written permission from the pipeline company for any
grading or construction within the pipeline easement.
13. The property owner shall submit a petition to the city requesting the installation of the
public improvements.
14. If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the director of
community development may waive any conditions that do not apply to the final plat.
*The developer must complete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit or
approves the final plat.
C. Adopt the zoning map change resolution on page 40. This resolution changes the zoning map
from F (Farm Residence) to R-1 (Single Dwelling Residential) for the proposed Woodhill plat
on the south side of Linwood Avenue. The city is making this change because it will:
Be consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code.
2. 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. Serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and
the public welfare.
4. 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. Serve the site better as the owner plans to develop this property for lots for single-
family houses.
11
CITIZENS' COMMENTS
I surveyed the owners of the 62 properties within 500 feet of this site and received three written
replies. The following are the comments we received:
1. Our only concern at this time is Linwood Avenue itself. It is very difficult to turn left from Ferndale
onto Linwood because you cannot. see traffic coming up the hilt. So, pefiaps when the new
intersection is made you can do some grading and we will be able to see oncoming traffic. (Brooks
- 699 Femdale Avenue).
Also, see the e-mail message on page 32 and the letter on page 33.
12
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 12.44 acres
Existing land use: A single dwelling and accessory buildings from the former property owner
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Single dwellings across Linwood Avenue
South: City-owned Applewood open space
West: Houses fronting on Linwood Avenue and on Sterling Street
East: Houses fronting on Linwood Avenue
PLANNING
Existing Land Use Plan designation: R-1 (single dwellings)
Existing Zoning: F (farm residence)
Proposed Zoning: R-1 (single dwellings)
Criteria for Conditional Use Penmit Approval
Section 44-1097(a) sta#es #hat the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards. (See
findings 1-9 in the resolution on pages 38 and 39.)
APPLICATION DATE
The city received the complete project plans and application materials for this proposal on January 2,
2004, and revised project plans (per staff comments) on February 12, 2004. As such, the city needs
to take action on the proposal by March 1, 2004, unless the developer agrees to a time extension.
kr/p:/sec13-28/Vlloodhill plat.doc
Attachments:
1. Applicant's Statement
2. Location Map
3. Property Line Map
4. Area Map
5. Proposed Preliminary Plat dated 1-02-04
6. Proposed Utility Plan
7. Proposed Grading Plan dated 1-02-04
8. Proposed Tree Plan
9. Tina Carstens' comments dated 01-22-04
10. Engineering department plan review dated 01-22-04
11. Ginny Gaynor's comments dated 01-21-04
12. Bruce Anderson's comments dated 01-22-04
13. E-mail message from Nate Smith dated 1-13-04
14. Letter from John Gregerson
15. Letter from Humphrey Engineering dated February 11, 2004
16. Proposed Preliminary Plat dated February 12, 2004
17. Proposed Grading Plan dated February 12, 2004
18. Proposed Erosion Control plan dated February 12, 2004
19. Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development (PUD) Resolution
20. Zoning Map Change Resolution
21. Project Plans date-stamped February 12, 2004 (separate attachments -including 11x17s and full-size)
13
Attachment 1
r
~ECEivED
Woodhill Planned Unit
Development
Project Description
December 31, 2003
Irltroduct ion
This Woodhill Planned Unit Development is proposed as a
single family residential development consisting of sixteen
market rate homes. The project meets all of the City codes
with the exception of three items. They are:
1) Road pavement width
2) Front yard setback criteria
3) Road right of way.
Due to some of the unique ecological characteristics of the
property as well as an existing gas pipeline corridor, Two
out-parcels have been proposed. As a result of the three
variances and the proposed out-parcels, the developer has
considered the project to fall within the category of a
Planned Unit Development. The applicant is also asking the
City to consider the acquisition of the two out-parcels or
use the park fees towards this acquisition.
Site Description:
The proposed Woodhill Planned Unit Development is a 12.44
acre parcel of land located at 2516 Linwood Drive in the
City of Maplewood. The property is bordered by Linwood
Drive to the north, single family residential lots to the
east and west, and a large wooded open space parcel to the
south which the City has purchased for a future city park
and as permanently dedicated open space.
The development parcel has a specific set of physical and
visual characteristics that not only have guided the
development strategy, but provide the character inherent to
this site. They include the following:
A. A pristine, perched wetland pond and drainage
system on the south side of the property which
extends into the future parkland and city owned
open space system.
Woodhill
Planned Unit Development
12/31/03
14
B.A linear wetland corridor along Linwood Drive on
the northwest corner.
C. Underground gas pipeline that runs adjacent to the
west property line.
D. Steeply sloping topography on the north and south
sides of the site.
E. Dense mature woodland cloaking the north and south
facing slopes.
Proposed Plan:
The proposed plan consists of sixteen market rate single
family homes arranged along a publicly dedicated interior
neighborhood residential road. Lot widths along the road
are varied, but maintain a minimum width of seventy five
feet. Building envelopes have been indicated that
establish a minimum setback of twenty five feet from the
edge of pavement to the front yard building envelope, a
minimum sideyard setback of ten feet from property line
(for an aggregate of twenty feet from sideyard building
envelope to building envelope), and fifteen feet of
sideyard setback where building envelopes are adjacent to
the overall parcel property line. Rear yard building
envelopes have been set at a minimum of seventy five feet
from the surveyed edge of wetlands and an average of one
hundred feet for the overall development. The building
envelopes are a minimum of 10,000 sq. ft. Habitable living
space has been set at a minimum setback of 100 feet from
the underground gas line.
The road right-of-way width is fifty feet, with the paved
road surface proposed at twenty eight feet in width. A
ninety four foot diameter cul-de-sac is proposed at the end
of the street system. A planted inner island is proposed
at the center of the cul-de-sac to foster the woodland
image within the development.
In the interests of the City and the gas company, two out-
parcels have been created. The largest out-parcel
incorporates the wetland corridor to the south. The
western out-parcel incorporates the underground gas line.
It is intended that all two out-parcels be dedicated to the
City of Maplewood in lieu of park fees.
Woodhill
Planned Unit Development
12/31/03
15
Justification For Deviations From City
Code
The proposed project deviates from the City code in three
areas, they are:
1. The paved road width has been reduced from 36' to
28'.
2. The front yard building envelope setback is twenty
five feet from the edge of the paved road surface
instead of the right-of-way line.
3. Right of way width has been reduced from 60 ft. to
50 ft.
There are a number of supportive arguments for why these
changes have been proposed. They can be summarized as
follows:
1. Paved Road Width Reduced From 36' to 28'
This site has a special character that derives from
the extensive woodland frame and the unique wetland
environment. Since the development consists of only
sixteen homes, the development team felt that a
narrower pavement width would be more visually
appropriate within this woodland environment. The
narrower width also minimizes the extent to which the
homes are pushed down the steep sloping terrain
thereby reducing the grading footprint and minimizing
tree loss.
2. Front yard Building Envelope Setback
The front yard building envelope setback of twenty
five feet has been taken from the edge of pavement
instead of the right-of-way line. The reason for this
deviation derives primarily from the need to minimize
the extent to which the building site must extend onto
the steeply sloping rear yard. The extent of
retaining walls, site grading, foundation wall depth
and tree loss are all minimized with this deviation.
Since the road paving width has also been reduced,
this setback adjustment is not significant. Ample
space has been allowed for two guest vehicles to park
within the front driveway.
4. Right of way reduction
Because of the special character that exists on the
property with the woodland frame and unique wetland
Woodhill
Planned Unit Development
12/31/03 16
environment, the right of way is being proposed as a
reduction from 60 ft. to 50 ft. Reducing the right of
way width minimizes site grading, tree loss, and
impacts to wetland areas. Because the paved roadway
width reduction and the setback are shown from the
paved road, it is a good planning practice to minimize
the right of way width as well.
In summary, these three deviations from the City code are
keeping with all five of the City's findings for approval.
This includes the unique nature of the site, consistency
with the purposes of the chapter, the equal or superior
quality of the proposed development changes, the absence of
any significant threat to homeowners, and the demonstrated
requirement to meet reasonable and practicable physical
development.
woodhill
Planned Unit Development
12/31/03
17
Attachment 2
240S ` °
LowE
R
s ooRUND Ro.
~ 8~ ~
~
~,.
~
Ov
~
15 REC7
N,4L
~ Ci LoNDIN w. ® FACILITY
0 HIG° ~ ~
~'b
3
0 DAY
PO
~
,
4
~ ~~ z
ND ~p 5
LN• ~
IAAftY
~ 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ o W. FOND
v ~
'
'q~ ~
48 0 S O
DAY
8 ' ~i~wo ~ a . PONDS OF
o aaTnF ~ O
~
CREEK
o ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ < p
~
~
~EA~~
~ 3
° ~
D DR.
YIhOD ~
o ~ QAKRIDGE DR. ~ aR
W
16 z
HlLLwooD ~
1. HUNTINGTON CT.
2. OAKRIDGE LA ~ 2• ~•
HIU- ~ ~~E
v ~
. ,
O
720S uNwo ~` ~•
AVE V ~0 ~
a
~o cr. a~.
g
~
~~
~
~
~ W ~ RED
~ K
17 rc. ~c~.
S nl~~ ~
71M BEER ~ g z DR. v
PI~IYUS cr. ~ ~ ~ ° ~'•
DR ~
2
I
1. CURRIE CT.
2. VALLEY VIEW CT. VALLEY
VIEW ~ 3 W VAL-LEY VIEW AVE. ~ T
ER
3 NEIY CENnXIy t,1~
3. LAKEWOOD CT. AV ~
2
960S HIGHWOOD ~ ~ ~ ~ i t t
dui'
-
~ ~ ~ Z ~ N
~~
~,AVE Q~ ~ AVE. ~ ~ ~ z
z o
,
W ~C. NEAIITZ AVE W z ~ ~ ~
~
8
p
C ~ J
~ ~ ~ NE~IITZ AvE
18 ~ AVE.
~
~
SOUTH CREST AVE.
oNC HDans Cf.
`'
V
~. P/~a~on6iw
f~?
~
~~CC % { i~ 4 t
~ ti `..
wr
Q~ ~ ~
,,,,U~D~ ~ € { f !
WI X01
12 0 O S ,
BOXWOOD AV. ~"' ~R. ~ '
r'~ ! (~~
-
€ ~-
~
O Z
~ i
!
~. ' 1 '
'"f i i~
,~~-.,t
"
0 W .~..
d'
D
CARVER AVE.
19
ovERloolc
CIR. ~, 3`
LOCATION MAP
18
4
N
Attachment 3
_ nu ~ 1 ~y ~ n2u ~P ~ k .
Q nA _
>
°6 'SE O 19 21 e ~ $ 11 ~,, v~ 0
17 18 ~ OUTCOT ~ .~ N Q9
pu 20 ~ Pb + 1 1.
nu .8 $ mi dt +y
7 _~ `~
_ 1 H~T+'" ~ ~OUTL 10
mi 7 ~ Pb ~"'~a~ ~ ~
~yrr ~ ~ w ~nu 2 as ~_~ ~U~~~ ~\7
\7l }, ,n
1}S' M.Y' i1.ZY ~ PA D' }4I} ~ 0 S ~
to 3 tl ~ N 1 L
Pu ./ Py ~ 4sA ~ ~ ~ ea3`' ss. Pn 'e~ 7 O
}nP}• ca a i V °® <Cl1`3 w rav 8
) 2 3 i ~.~ ,~ `~ , ~ -_-_' }"' _-- ~os urn.
H ~, •u c 1
w1' w ~ t ' _S dINNMI~___ESN7.
tt ~ pA ~ ~ Sn
sx xsnir a s __ 'ran
z}r . tra
. _.. _ ..
` I I i
r°i l
/ ; j r~K
Pb W
N
1 /
N / r0 8 P) 0 8 nJ
~ a` nu
is m° ~°.. ~ ~ h
W KK ..~.~ Pry
`fa\ RA ~ ~ ~ .ieK
°i' :u~ ~ W - SITE rsa
1 6 ' a
s., ~ 12
_< ~, ~ a "' N 11
~ JS ~ N
17 69 S
~. , - ~ER l+~ ~ au
21> ' OUTLOTA ~wprcr `, ~ ~
N
0 i~ Nay rss.aA
' ensiu~i ~ 13
11 DI.~U ~2 -'su 3 . i N
P, ~ l+
r ., .$
12 2 , 14
` PA
w s .i} }s sy y nb
/~ 13 ____ _______ _ 7 '°
m' ~ 14 15 8 ~/
~ nb ns 1
z ~E ~° o1Firy ~P'a $ I CITY OPEN SPACE
S .4 el r U
A 9,
4 ...} , 1 i
3 sl
Pb Pu N P ~
i
^ ~ 8
w S S Z )sc
_M/8 13 ~ pn pu
i"~1 0 14 15 Np~ 4 w' T i
1 N 1 i Tlll[8L'le COURT oo ~ej1 ~ 6
$ uzo N 'W '''s
10 Ri 3 8 7 PA5 ~~~~ry- 1 ~/$Y) 1 2
PA Psl by ~~ '~ ~/ S~rPA
_ ~' _ 3au O 1 +lj+ 4 f
& N4 ~~, ~~ 3 ~ Pb
P„
+~
. i~° •7PU4 3 Z lsA ° K q N iq3"
A J Pu 1
au
----------
b~~ 1Lii"--
"wV
'+Cr„~jyp~
rnrt
OUTtOF C
dan
r
R ~;ib°
m
_ n b ~ ~ty
8 9 10 ~ i1
Pu PA w N ,.~ ...
SCHALLER DRIVE
5 ~
T ~~
-. _ _ :.5 s
S~ I bsA
PROPERTY LINE MAP
19
N
~r~iw~ oa
24
.d8
~'
LINWOOD AVE E
TIMBER CT
- lINWOOD
AREA MAP
- ~
PRACTICE
I
RANGE
20
Attachment 5
DEVELOPER ENGINEER SURVEYOR ARCHITECT
NEOEGAARD CUSTOM HOMES HUMPHREY ENGINEERING, INC. BOHLEN SURVEYING k ENGINEERING HART HOWERTON
4200 CENTRAL AVENUE NE 145 MAIN STREET, P.O. BOX 252 4735 723RD STREET WEST
SUITE 200 30 HOTAUNG PLACE
,
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55421 WOODVILLE, WI 54028 SAVAGE, MN 55376 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94711
763.757.2928 715.698.3440 952
895
9272
.
.
415.986.4260
Mt MlER CF 111E MC II{ OF
atctlaN 1y r6eH:ar m. aAN9E ~ L~NWOOD AVE. E.
fellf4/ GSf IROI YON6IFNT THE NORTH UNE OF THE NWI/4 OF THE NE1/1 DF SEC. 13. T_2& R. 22
'
"
W 824.65 •-••-••
30
S 88'34
$ oEOICATeo ro THE Pueuc 20.05'
-----
-_- $
--------
------ ,_
--
s ----
.s
n ~ .><-""s_.w+~._.,,..s __",.~-_,^.__...._:„ ~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~
''575.03' 7&82'
~~
• -- - --
~~ 9599
.._..-..
d 75.03' 7507 75.03
5.03'
tq
~1
_ _ _ 20' DR NAGS EASEMENT _ _ _ _ _
-
WETLAND ~+ 4 r ~ j w
-E~ I ,a'
N - -
_
i, /- uy
d
-_~
i
>-~ r'~a ~ ~ BLOCK 1 _- -~ ~ 12115 SF.
~ ~ 11496 SF.
h'i ~ , 0.26 Aa
~ E
,,.. W W _-
0.T8 Aa
~
~
W f I-
v
1 r . ~ ..
in N _________ _________W ,-~ ~
' 4071 SF. fy
~
r °--------- 1
!r 2 ~ / f A 13735 SF. 'I' 14091 SF iIX iy' ~ '- 0.32 Ac '°~I,
~ ~ 1H SF
i~ it op °~ 15193 SF
}09 I
~
' 7'~"-- ~ ~ i$
~ ~,
/ h I
u
I
'~F / ~ ~
r
~
\ ,
.
~
.
0 0.32 Ae. .p A ml 13794 SF. g
0.32 Aa ..I e5 0.35 AC d 'P ~ 2 iz
i '
~l~ /~ ~ i44 Ae ry ~ I$ i$ ~ N 0.36 Aa i$ °~ i , r
1
,, ~~ ~ I
s '
;: 4 ~
6 ~ ~
"~ ~
.~ S 8945'40° W
~ foa9o
q
3
5
I
~
I~ i I ' ~ ~ 4Q.~i/
~ __-_ ~_µ.l j
` 33r .fir .I
$ ~
yY
~
~ ~//
~
__J 06
p V
~~
~--~
14.90'1
~3 ~ 4
"~-
~ SS.O
•
OS /I
~
i
Id'
,
z ,
-
~
_
~
~ 7 f4•
...
~~ N >E `~ ~~.. `' T_ - ________ A ~ ~q
~, 443 ~ "
~9~~ , ig / / '-
7 yA, y t ~
22890 SF.
-~` `~
0.53 k ~ ro
M
.
~~
.
i'
~
~ .
_..~.. ~.
r ee~ ~ . a
+
37.9a"~~
7
9r
'~ ~
M~
I
.
:~11
eD.z7~. ~g!~ ~ ~ 3
I '
I
1 r
________~ ,~ 1939
~~ ! ' Q A ~~`` ` ~ ~' : i i ' i 16
44'
`
B$~
r '
F. ~ !RI ~' ~ \~`t
~ri
F I
.
.
r
~~ 3 0 -; ~
1 0.451
i
Af.~
^
-
4
a
--- i ~ BLOC$ ~ ,
~ 1
~
j >E N 8874'47 E
Y
' ~ ^
a~
g
d
N
4 11
~ ~
~ g ~
~ r 3 r
338 O 1 14743 S.F. a '~ 15545 SF. ~ y 4 13729 SF. ~ w 0.45 A¢
_ I
~ I ~ 48750 SF. ie° 0.34 Ae. i . ~'{ D•36 Ae. i~L `~ 14459 SF. i$ ~ 0.32 Ae IW ~ z~ ~
I I '. ° I g
0.43 A
°
----'-
~ A
~ 1DSn
I
~ ;~ ~ +~~e ~~
b~
. ~ ~q
,
T 0.33 Ac ~ 5 ~
-
3 33 W j
e -''-/
'~~ I I
,(
~ yi
04 WEZlANO
7
I
S 1 ' ~ ~~~ i y,-____- ~ I Z
W ~
m ~
Inl ~I z l~ d
21' 75.00' 7500' 7500' 75.00',; 10500'
~ 3 33 u $ 105
~
i y
I
~F
~~
Q .
~ i I i ' N 8574'47 E 513.23• .__.
O 3'~ q °i I ~'~ I ~~
N ~ §
I ' 13099
Z
8 SF.
X33 3.47 AC ~\ I .
i ~ WE1lAN0 I~ i
~3~ ! -
_
/
WETLAND ~ I~ i /
333 ~
~~~ ~ J
I ; 7zaar
Too.ao' .-..-.
N 8834'47" E 823.67
! THE SW1H ONE Of THE NORTH 7/2 OF THE NWI/4 OF THE NEt/4 OF SEG 13, T. 28. R. 22
CITY OPEN
SPACE
i
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PIAN, SPEC9lGT10N,
OR REPORT WAS PREPMED BY ME OR UNDER Mr DIRECT
SUPERNSION AND THAT
91sT
I AM A OUIY flECI51ERED
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE TAWS OF THE WOODHILL
STATE DF M1"NESOTA.
-
NEDEGAARD CUSTOM HOMES ~~ ~ .IRR
DATE REC. NO. 146 1[eln 9troet ~ n
P.o. a": ue IanJ su:.e~.
MAPLEWOOD, MN ~~ ~ RO1
Treea.w., n awes cee.wouon It.>z.een oec nIe za4-oo7
owc
~ 71s-we-s44o Fu: 716-age-s441 PRELIMINARY PLAT .
,o, ,,,~ ~~,
PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT
4
N
Attachment 6
.'_...'. - -- _. -- PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER
---.~~~-~--- --~-- PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER
• ~ PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER
-~-- PROPOSED WATER MAIN
_____ CONNECT TO E%ISDNC 12" OIP _____________-______________.___-___________J
~__-__-__-__-_-~__-__---u o. -__~__
7
i, -- MA/1
~-,p.,
UNI~VOOD AVENUE
_ __ _ _____
~
- ~ _-_ ____._ _- ~
~• r
CONNECT TO EIOSDNG
SANITARY MANHOLE .
~
MEt1.~H0 ~! ! r - - - ~ 1
- - -
'3 5 MH/3
3
_
-t
--~ _
'
I I r
.'/ ~ ~
BLOCK
1 -~
--
_ i
MN~11
_ ~ ~ --
L~
+
n
/
? --- 6---- 5
~ ~ --- 4--- 3 ~ ~ -----------
.
.. ( (
r3 ~ MH/4 - _________
. j
i
_ ~ I
1
:, ( ~
r ( i
.` ~
r
~
g ~
-
_
_
- M ~ ~
~
;q \
______
~
I~ I _ ```l
~~ 3 _'i
i ~
i
~ ~ r
i .~ ~
i
i __ __-
i
~
_
~ _____ ~ ~
it I ~ ~ ~
i
I, ~ ~ 3
~ ~ --------- ~ 2
~~ j 1 ~
------ I
333 ~
i ~
'--
---------
~
--------
5
j
__ _
~ =
_-
i
da.¢'
ntAiw
_.. _. _
y '-
333
~
`
~
I
I
S
p
WW .
-_ ~
i -- -
y-
y
33 33
' j•
~~ a• /~ _
~
_.. _.. ~ 3 ~ ~~.~. j
Ili
333
I
"t'i"NO
I
.
33i
I ~
333
~
I xETtAro
.-.. i
333
I i i
PROPOSED UTILITY PLAN
22
4
N
Attachment 7
r cERnar THAr THIS PUN, sPECIFlanon,
)Ri WAS PREPMED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
'ION M10 THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED
70NA1 ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE
T MINNESOTA.
REC. N0.
146 Y~In S4aet Ea~lnean
P.O. Boz 262 Iaud Sune7on
soaawe, wl s4aze coo,wcuon Y.u.iers
Bur. 716-eY8-3440 Fez: 7Id-698-3441
PROKCf:
WOODHILL
NEDEGAARD CUSTOM HOMES
MAPLEWOOD, MN
GRADING PLAN
~" ~: 4
aRP
olECZm er: RLH
ooc feE 28h007.OW0
.IOB Hu4Bm: 28h007
PROPOSED GRADING PLAN
23
4
N
CITY OPEN SPACE
J- Z-a
Attachment 8
-------
-- ---- -~-------------------____-__ ...------_--- ------- LINWOOD AVENUE-._-~-- _ .. .
-- ----
---- - --~-_ --,E--w n~Ne--- ----- ----- --~ ~- ---=sue ---- -r - ----- .._.._..
,~~
vEnAen ~ - ~"~.`-~i 3 3 ~'° _ ~' _ •: sae ~ I ~ ~ _ -r.~~
~ : en ::. ae }:j yyf ~ 99- - ~ 736 -~?j~ - ~ -
F i uC`~I j ~~ S.K s ~ e+ t` »7 73a ~73~31 s27 ---'- ~,. ~
.a ~
,,.
:; „R ! ~'
i
._• ~ a~1
i
m i '--'---'- ORADIN IT'S ----'--- c .
~ ~-,
- I -
_ ~~-- 1 i
6D ~ - _ _ _ - , 4,~
612
7.
w
t~ sa
'~ ~ ORADINO
N N3 6A
~ 7
632 ci2 t` `+l 63
3o r~ ~ `
r~ 631
~ [uww,~a
621
Y,En.ANo
~~
s6o
663
>~
} ~p
~1TOf ~F~ ,y
w n NERANp >o<
I 7m
f;Y T6T
7a
I '~~`
702
'~ 696 ~ 699 ~
697
iEREBY CERTIFY TNAT TNIS PIAN, SPECIFIGTION,
' REPORT Y/AS PREPARED BY NE OR UNOER NY DIRECT
PERVISION AND TNAT I AN A DULY RECISTEREp
OFESSR7NA1. ENGINEER UNDER THE UYIS OF THE
ATE OF NWNESOTA.
E REC. NO.
- V K9
1 /
V
C:~6
i a~~,i
6N a 6T1 6B9 a
~q~
` ~ 6N
67~ uT F~+ 6„C~ 692
S.~ 6Ti
617 ~- S~ 693
~V~
~~cc~~,,
Cu'+ 6~ ~~ ~ 6N
t ~ 6B3
7 ~ 697
NE7L,W0 yw 696
69i
CITY OPEN SPACE ~ ~_ 2 -O~
~' ~ 9
WOODHILL
NEDEGAARD CUSTOM HOMES °"~"' ~^ JRR
MAPLEWOOD, MN aim ~` Rui
TREE INVENTORY ~ ~ ~~~~
.~2 ~~: Y96-007
PROPOSED TREE PLAN
24
4
N
Page 1 of 1
Attachment 9
Ken Roberts
From: Tina Carstens [tina cLDrwmwd.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 1:38 PM
To: Ken Roberts
Subject: Woodhill Comments
Hi Ken,
Here are the comments from the Watershed District regarding the Woodhill development.
1. Sill need to receive a full size plan and also an updated erosion control plan for the development. More
comments may be generated at the time when those are received.
2. Special features shall be designed and engineered to diffuse all flows from the homes south of the street
before hitting the buffer area. The concern here is that concentrated flows will cause tilling and erosion
in the buffer area due to lack of ground cover in the shaded buffer.
3. The larger infiltration basin located at the end of the cul-de-sac shall have a piped outlet. Overflow from
this basin and others in the development shall be directed to the north.
4. The larger infiltration basin shall have a freeboard of 2 ft above the 100 year flood elevation.
5. Silt fence shall be placed at least 2 feet back from the buffer line.
6. The wetland buffer edge shall be signed at every other lot line.
Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Tina Carstens
Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District
Permit Program Coordinator
1 /22/2004
25
Attachment 10
Engineering Plan Review
PROJECT: Woodhill
PROJECT NO: 03-35
REVIEWED BY: Chris Cavett and Erin Laberee, Maplewood Engineering
Department
DATE: January 22, 2004
Nedegaazd Custom Homes is proposing to develop the property at 2516 Linwood Avenue
with 16 single-family lots on a cul-de-sac. Williams Pipeline has an easement and
pipelines on the west side of the property and there aze several wetlands on the property.
The developer is proposing to incorporate ribbon concrete curb into the street design. In
addition, the applicant is proposing rainwater gazdens in the street boulevards as part of
the storm sewer system. The ribbon curb will allow storm water to sheet off the street and
into rainwater gazdens. The gazdens will catch sediment and allow runoff to infiltrate into
the ground instead of flowing directly into a storm sewer system. The proposed design is
a benefit to the environment and will improve the quality of water dischazging into the
wetlands.
It is proposed that the street and utilities be public infrastructure. As such, they aze to be
constructed as pazt of a public improvement project with all costs assessed to the
developer. The Maplewood Engineering Department will prepare the detailed plans and
specifications for the street and utilities. The city will address the many small details of
the street and utility plans when the city prepazes the plans and specifications. The
developer shall make the changes to the plans and site as noted below and shall address
the concerns listed below.
The applicant or the applicant's engineer shall address the following issues:
Drainage
The watershed district has reviewed the proposed plans. It is our understanding
that unless the area of direct runoff into the main wetland can be reduced, they are
recommending that the proposed storm sewer line be directed to the northern
wetland instead of the southern wetland as the plans currently show. The city does
have concerns about directing additional drainage to the northern wetlands. If
drainage is to be directed to the northern wetland, as the watershed has requested,
then the applicant must meet the following conditions:
• The rate of dischazge into the northern wetland must be equal to or less
than existing conditions.
• Resubmit plans showing the revised storm sewer and ponding.
• Submit drainage calculations that reflect the revised plans. Model the
effect additional runoff will have on the existing wetlands.
• If the pond is to remain on the Williams Pipeline easement, an agreement
will be required with the pipeline that details the type of pond (wet/dry) to
be constructed within their easement.
26
2. Provide an emergency overflow outlet for the pond west of the cul-de-sac, (if it is
to remain). Due to the steepness of the site and concerns about erosion, an
overflow pipe should be constructed. Again, an agreement with Williams Pipeline
will be required.
Gradin~& Erosion Control
Maintain 3:1 slopes throughout the grading plan. If 3:1 slopes cannot be achieved,
the city may require a retaining wall. In areas where 2:1 slopes are appropriate
(Block 2, Lot 9), the city will require a specific slope stabilization detail plan that
uses permanent soil stabilization blankets and a native seeding plan. The proposed
slopes at Block 1, Lot 3 are currently proposed to be 1:1. This area needs to be
revised to show 3:1 slopes or the city may require retaining walls.
2. The contractor shall use riprap at all outlets. The riprap will be shown on final
plans.
3. A building permit will be required for the proposed retaining wall located north of
the wetland since the total height of the wall is greater than four feet. A plan and a
specific soil stabilization detail for the wall design will be required as part of the
building permit. The city will require a covenant on the adjoining properties to
ensure proper installation, maintenance and replacement of the wall.
4. The developer or applicant shall construct any retaining walls during the grading
phase of the project, not during the construction of the buildings.
5. The proposed structures on Block 2, Lots 6, 7 and 8 are set too far back on the
lots. The city shall require the applicant to shift the structures to the north closer
to the street to more closely match the front yard setbacks of the adjacent
structures.
NOTE:
The proposed elevation of the site seems generally too high. The overall site grades
would benefit by lowering the street 2 to 3 feet, especially near Block 2, Lots 4 and 5.
This would reduce the height of the proposed retaining wall. The 1:1 slopes at Block
1, Lot 3 could also be reduced. This change would help several driveways achieve a
positive slope towards the street and other negative driveway slopes could be
reduced. Negative driveway grades shall not exceed 5%.
Lowering the site also would allow additional runoff from the roofs and front yards to
be directed towards the street. This would reduce the amount of runoff sheeting
directly into the wetlands, which was a goal of the watershed.
Currently, the proposed sanitary sewer is 22' deep at the deepest spot. Lowering the
site by several feet also would reduce the depth of the sanitary sewer.
27
Streets
1. The city will require concrete curb around the center island in the cul-de-sac.
2. Provide calculations that support bus-turning movements around the cul-de-sac
and center island.
3. Provide the city with an additional copy of the site distance calculations done for
the intersection of the proposed street with Linwood Avenue.
Misc
The proposed plan currently shows the construction of utilities within the
Williams Pipeline Easement. A pond and grading also are proposed within the
pipeline easement. The applicant shall submit the proposed plans to Williams
Pipeline Company for their approval. A written agreement with Williams Pipeline
will be required for construction of utilities, ponds and grading within their
easement and before the city approves the final plat.
2. A bituminous trail is planned directly over the Williams Pipeline. A written
agreement with Williams Pipeline will be necessary for the construction of the
proposed trail within their easement and over the pipeline.
Verify with the watershed district that the 60 foot buffer around the eastern
wetland is adequate.
4. Sewer and water services for the property at 2480 Linwood Avenue shall be
constructed as part of this project and will be shown on the final plans.
5. A developer's agreement will be required before final plat approval. This
agreement shall detail the payment for or the who will be the responsible parties
for following issues:
• A landscape plan for the rainwater gardens and cul-de-sac island.
• The landscaping to be installed by the developer.
• An association to maintain the rainwater gardens and cul-de-sac island.
• Wetland signs are required at the edge of the buffer area for each lot
abutting the wetlands.
• Coordination and installation of private utilities (gas, electric, etc.).
6. Several sanitary sewer manholes should be shifted to reduce the number of
manholes required. MH # 11 can be eliminated by moving MH # 10 to the north
and connecting the service for Lot 9, just south of the manhole. Shifting MH #6 to
the south and connecting it to MH #4 will eliminate MH #5. The water main can
then be offset from the sanitary sewer with 11 1/4° bends.
28
Attachment 11
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ken Roberts, Maplewood Community Development
CC: Ann Hutchinson, Bruce Anderson, Chris Cavett, Erin Schacht
FROM: Ginny Gaynor, Open Space Coordinator
DATE: 1/21/04
RE: Proposed Woodhill Developme~rt
Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed Woodhill development, which would be
adjacent to Applewood Neighborhood Preserve.
The primary focus of open space staff and task force review for this development is protecting the
uniqueness and high quality of the pond that Applewood Preserve shares with Woodhill
Development. Our comments are directed to development's southern wetlands. The best way
ensure protection is to:
1. Enforce the 100' wetland buffers.
2. Limit the amount of surface runoff entering the wetland by directing it into rain gazdens
and swales for infiltration.
Buffers. My understanding from Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District is that the three
wetlands on the south end of the site all have the same protection - a 100' buffer under
Maplewood ordinance. The proposal shows a 100' buffer around the pond and central wetland,
and a 60' buffer for the eastern wetland. The eastern wetland is very degraded but has the higher
protection because it connects to the other wetlands.
Recommendation: The 100' buffer should be strictly enforced on the pond and central
wetland. The 100' buffer should be enforced on the east wetland or mitigation should be done
that helps protect this series of wetlands. Mitigation might be the donation of the out lots to the
city and vegetative improvements to the eastern wetland. If the 60' buffer stands (with or without
mitigation) it should be identified as an ordinance deviation in the proposal.
In addition, page 2 of the proposal states that the rear yard-building envelope is a
minimum of 75' from any wetland. Is this referring to the wetlands along Linwood? As
discussed above, the envelope should be a minimum 100' from the southern wetlands.
Enforcing Buffers. We are concerned about the difficulty of enforcing the buffer during and
after construction. As a no~listurb area, there can be no removal of existing vegetation, no
grading, no planting lawns, no installation of patios. A couple of the homes will have only a 10'-
15' strip of yard behind the house. Without educational efforts and design assistance, there may
be little compliance with the buffer standards.
Recommendation: Enforce consequences for the builder if the buffer is violated during
construction. Ensure that prospective homeowners are informed in advance about the wetland
buffer and how far from their backdoor they can plant or put patios. Someone should provide
landscape design assistance to homeowners for their back yards.
29
Runoff. I understand that the Watershed District has discussed the possibility of adding a
shallow berm on the hillside to help slow runoff and reduce gully erosion. We strongly support
this idea if the berm is not within the 100-foot wetland buffer.
If the city recommends that runoff be piped into the eastern wetland (rather than to storm
sewers on Linwood), the eastern wetland would require biological and structural modifications to
help slow and filter water before it enters the central wetland. We would hope that before piping
runoff here, the city or the developer would run models to determine: 1) how much runoff will
enter the wetlands, 2) how water levels might change in the wetlands, and 3) predicted nutrient
inputs to these wetlands.
Summary
This site has one of the most unique and ecologically healthy ponds in Maplewood. Open space
staff and task force look forward to working with neighbors to help protect it.
30
Attachment 12
TO: Ken Roberts, Associate
FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Dire
DATE: January 22, 2004
SUBJECT: Proposed Woodhill Development
I have reviewed the proposed Woodhill development project and applaud their efforts in
designing a plat within an extremely sensitive ecological area.
I support and wholeheartedly endorse the comments made by open space coordinator Ginny
Gaynor in her memo dated January 21, 2004.
I would further amplify Ms. Gaynor's comments by stating that the city would waive the park
development charges for the 16-lot subdivision with the following understanding:
1. The developer would deed outright to the city Outlot A in the amount of 1.53 acres.
2. The developer would deed outright to the city Outlot B in the amount of 3.47 acres.
3. The developer would work in cooperation with the city to construct a trail at the
developer's expense on the west side of the proposed cul-de-sac through Outlot A to the
city's border as highlighted in the proposed grading plan. The trail would be constructed
of a pervious surface to be designed in cooperation with the city parks and recreation
department and would ultimately tie into the proposed trailway corridor system to be
constructed at the city's expense onto the city open space property.
Should you have any questions regarding my comments, feel free to contact me directly at ext.
2102.
kh\woodhill development.parks-openspace.mem
c: Ginny Gaynor, Open Space Coordinator
31
Attachment 13
Ken Roberts
From: Nate Smith [nate~aarontech.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 12:53 PM
To: Ken Roberts
Subject: Woodhill Subdivision comments
RE: Development of Kayser property at 2516 Linwood Ave.
Dear Ken,
I'm really bothered by someone trying to stuff 16 houses in an area
where there is really only room for less.
If someone were asking for relief from city codes for a single lot, I
would find it a lot easier to approve it. But for every house in an
entire subdivision?
The developer is asking to reduce the street width which could result
in problems. For example, if someone in the neighborhood has a large
gathering there will be many vehicles parked on the street. Any
children playing in the area will be more at risk due to the narrower
street.
The fact that the houses would be built closer (reduced set-back) to
the narrower street means that the driveways would be shorter and
smaller gatherings would more frequently result in streets crowed
with parked vehicles.
Additionally, it seems paradoxical to try to preserve the natural
features of the land while crowding 16 homes onto it.
Instead of altering the code to fit the plan, how about the developer
altering the plan to fit the code?
I am opposed to these deviations from code being approved.
Thank you for your time.
Nathan Smith
2546 Beth Court
Maplewood, MN 55119
651-730-1800
32
Attachment 14
John Gregerson
2622 Linwood Ave. E.
Maplewood, MN 55119
Ken,
This is a response to the proposed Woodhill Subdivision, Kayser property, 2516 Linwood
Ave.
I have great respect for the work done by City planners and the difficulty of trying to
please everyone, even anyone. So, I submit these comments with great respect as well
even though I disagree with the revised proposal and the staff recommendations.
The revised recommendation still allows the developer to profit at the existing resident's
expense.
- I have the same concerns with the Woodhill proposal as I did with the New
Century plan, particularly the variances and changes (access, primarily) to the
City master plan and City code that were granted to allow higher density housing.
The recommendation to allow setback and road width variances only serve to give
the developer the greater profit of selling 171ots and increasing the traffiic loading
on Linwood by another 17 households. Linwood already has much more than the
planned traffic loading because of other concession made by the city to
developers in the past.
- Amore appropriate City response, if you care about existing residents, is to offer
no additional deviations to City code to developers in South Maplewood. This
might mean the Woodhill developer can get only 8-91ots, so be it. That would be
in keeping with the special nature of the site and would be easier on the traffic
loading of Linwood.
The bottomline is: The City shouldn't feel they have to make concessions to
developers that hurt current residents. More traffic on Linwood is hurting us.
As an alternative, take some traffic offLinwood.
- Close the firing range. Yes we can influence the St. Paul police department to
move. The Arden Hills ammunitions plant site would be a perfect long term home
for the firing range.
- Make it more difficult for Woodbury residents to cut across South Maplewood
using Linwood.
- Put another east-west access through the New Century development.
Give the existing residents some compensation for the very real loss in property value
due to the high level of traffic on Linwood. Maybe the developers should take it out of
their windfall profits due to City concessions.
c el
~ ~ `~~~ 1 6 2~~4
J hn Gregerson
-.~....-
33
r ~ Attachment 15
~~~ k' k
February 11, 2004
Kenneth Roberts
Associate Planner
City of Maplewood
1830 East County Road B ~~~ s a ~~~~
Maplewood, MN 55109
RECEIVEfl
Dear Ken,
On January 28~' 2004, Humphrey Engineering, Inc. received comments from your office
pertaining to the proposed subdivision of Woodhill PUD. Enclosed please find 8 copies of the
revised Preliminary Plat, Grading Plan and Erosion Control Plan. The following items have been
revised on the enclosed plans:
• The front yard setback (from a public street right of way) has been shown as a minimum
of 20' and a maximum of 45'.
• Contour information has been shown for all land that will be disturbed during
construction. Rain garden design is pending hydrologic analysis.
• The house pad locations for Lots 6, 7, & 8, Block 2 have been revised to save trees and
comply with the approved development setback requirements.
• The proposed street and driveways grades aze shown.
• By lowering the street and raising some of the building pads, the site grading has been
minimized north and south of the proposed street to save as many trees as possible.
• All common areas have been labeled as outlots.
• Dahl Avenue has been labeled on the plans.
• The lotline for Lot 8, Block 2 has been revised to be more radial to the street right-of-
way.
• The north line of Outlot B at Lots 1,2 and 3 of Block 2 has been moved 30 feet north.
The cul-de-sac was shifted north to provide more separation from the wetland buffer.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact our office.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Humphrey Engineering
145 Main Street
PO Box 252
Woodville, WI 54028
/~ . /2~~------
Jason R. Raverty, PE
Project Manager
145 Main Street, P.O. Box 252 ^ Woodville, WI 54028 ^ humphreyengineering.com ^ 715-698-3440 ^ Fax: 715-698-3441
34
Attachment 16
DEVELOPER ENGINEER SURVEYOR
NEDEGAARD CUSTOM HOMES HUMPHREY ENGINEERING, INC. BOHLEN SURVEYING k ENGINEERING
4200 CENTRAL AVENUE NE 145 MAIN STREET, P.0. BOX 252 4735 123RD STREET WEST, SUITE 200
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55421 WOODVILLE, WI 54028 SAVAGE, MN 55378
763.757.2928 715.898.3440 952.895.9212
ARCHITECT
HART HOWERTON
30 HOTALJNG PUCE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111
415.986.4260
"" 0°"1°` °F TIE "E'" °F LINWOOD AVE. E.
gcna" .x row"sr m. AAr~ u
FuAq CAtt IR011 MOMIMENT THE NORTH ONE OF THE NM/4 OF 1HE NE7/4 OF SEC. 13, T. T& R. 22
S 88'34' 0" W 824.65
g DEDICATED TO THE PUBU
~_-._-__. of L- ..,.. ~ -. Ms ., - _.'~~1 3~~~'36"E"~BY~D' ~ ~ -- -- - 93.43
_ .1A --_- - 0-- --73.00-- - 73.00' 73.00' 75.00
'" 3 2C ORAWAGE E $ENEMT ~.
C We'TLMlD ~~ IJ~
~ y%
~~ a~b ~ a BLOCK 1 ________
~ "~ __ i ~ 14240 S.F.
n ~ ~ / o
^ 3~ ~ / ~ ,~„ ~ z zo zo zr,,-'~- i~ ~~ 0.33 Ac.
d - _ _ _ or_______~ ~_________ - ~",
~ 1i J / ~ ~ £i 74237 4F ~m "'~ 13963 S.f. i.~" ~ fir', - pia ~ 14413 S.F. u c 1
2W •~S ~ ~ i 0.33 Aa ~ 0 0.32 Ac. = ~ 75031 S.F. ~i$ v, 13620 S.F. i~ w 0.33 Ac. Fi
. ~ 7 ~ ~ I / ~ / i ~ 0.35 Ac. ~° a 0.36 Ar_ a ~~
~ ' i
~ ~
i ~
~ ~s~ s ~ ~ g 5 ~'~ ~ E; 2 ~,
~ .N , ~ ~
i
~ ti ~/ i I ~ ~, 4 ~ ~--~--
~'f~ .4 --~y°' .js' ` 25.17' i i 3
i
i
z ,~/ ~ ;" r0. SST~g,71' 74. Syr 1.2g,i ________ B
b ~ .' 79756 s.F. ;~ ~~/ ~ ~- ~AH~'gy _ ~,
1.63 Ac ~
~...~.. } ~ ~~ ; 0 ~~6'80 -_T 6J-54' 12.1 6p.27 I - ~'I~5' -~
~ I a Md~}y~'' ~3~ : -~ r-~- `'---_ 6.4 -7s:3i' __-_- ,~ 4
~y i Imo' ~i ~ ~i
_ ~' ~~ 4
~ ~, J 1 ~~ 8. o I '. 6
ate..-.. ~,, ' ". ~ ~ a & 13145 S.F. ig ~ 13729 S.F. i~ ~ z, 5 z
0 8894 S.F. '~o i 0.30 Ac ~~~ w O.S1 Ac. ti 'a,i'' 13334 S.F. i~ °d ~ $ 79385 S.F.
S ~ ~'3 X0.39 Ac. ~ ~°i ~ Mi ip
F N Fi fi 0.31 Ae. 13729 S.F. ~4 ~ 0.45 Ac.
i i i
ly ^ i ~; ' Ei ~ m 'a,'~i 0.32 Ac.
i ~
- ~ ~ ~- -
t0
J W
i .r3
= P a' ~ ~" 106 25' 75.00' 75.00' .. ~ . _ _ _ ~. ~
~ r
N'i I ~
. E
m ~ ~~i~ /
~
~
Q 0 i i
. /
$ "S
o
(~ o
~"
~
i ~
53
~~
iii
~.~3
~.
.-.. l
X35
~'wp
° ounoT e
163368 S.F.
3.73 Ac.
METLAND ,
NETLAND
723.61'
N 88'34 47" E 823.61
THE SOU1H LINE OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF 1HE NWI/4 OF THE NEt/4 aF SEC. 13, T. 28, R. 22
I
~-1 Z-o~{
3Y CERTIFY THAT THIS PUN, SPECIFlG710N,
'ORi WAS PREPARED RY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT ~~: s1sEEr ~;
2
ISION AND TIUT I AM A DULY REGISTERED
SIONAI ENGINEER UNDER THE UWS OF THE
WOODFIILL
'F ~"""~°`A
REG. NO.
145 Pain Street
Bagia NEDEGAARD CUSTOM HOMES °""''" ~
p~ ~.. JRR
RLH
P.o. ea: 262
lfoodville, 11I 34023 Lead SMneyore
CoaaWetlca Yaaagara MAPLEWOOD, MN
OaG EILC
284-00701YC
Bur. 713-398-9440 r.:: 713-398-3441 PRELIMINARY PLAT .ae MMMSER 23,_007
PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT
35
T O,PS' r- 93 99'--
. LZ9' pINNA4E EASEMENT
y m
+g N_'
°.~ 1 _________.1
1 ~ 14817 S.F. ~
1 IY 0.34 Ac
1
~ ;~ 9 ;~
1 / it
~ N d'~
8
M
16334 S.F.
0.42 Ac. ~ n
~ ~ a:
f _ _
\ 3
~
-
M
M ~
n
N 39'06'27 E
- ~^
88.59' :n
8 ~
~~
~r°
~ '~z
y
`
a'" of
ME1lAND b
Pi
~~
.. ~~
7.9r 7 ~I ~ ~~
l ~
E 17562 ~S.F.''
0.40~c.
1' ~ ( ~
a2
~~
~~
~~
Za
~~
~z
7~
N
W ~
ZF Z
4
N
Attachment 17
~: i
e' B17UMM10U3 TRAIE j
~1
~..
\ \.
l~ _ f
1
2--I Z- ~T
IY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLW, SPECIFlGTION,
ORf WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT
PR0.1ECf:
SION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED
~IONAL ENGINEER UNDE
~~ 51~E'f ~
R THE IAWS OF THE
F MHNESOTA WOODHILL
REG. NO.
143 Y.in Street
&npneen
~ NEDEGAARD CUSTOM HOMES °"""' ~ B""
P.O. Boz 25E
1loodrMle, Trt s402e Loa sur.eyore
Cowtructlou Man.~er. MAPLEWOOD, MN ~gfFD ~'~ R~+
9w: 716-69e-9440
Fu: 7I5-eBe-3441
GRADING PLAN oAC mr: ze4-007.
~~ xuuam: 294-007
PROPOSED GRADING PLAN
36
N
Attachment 18
3Y CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFlCATION,
'ORi WAS PREPARED 9Y ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT ~~ N~
SIONAL ENGINEER UNDEROTHE U'A5 OF ETHE WOODHILL
"MI"NESOra NEDEGAARD CUSTOM HOMES ~~ ~ JRR
REG. NO. 145 Main Street
P.O. Box 252 Sneineere
Lnd Surveyors
MAPLEWOOD, MN ~~ ~: RLH
lfoodville, 111 54029 ConatrucUon Hena`era OaG FllE 294-007 C
Sue: 715-999-3449 Fa:: 715-999-9441 EROSION PLAN e s
r .w
u9BEA: 294-007
37
4
N
------
~- -
Attachment 19
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Mr. Bruce Nedegaard applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for the Woodhill
residential planned unit development (PUD).
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the 16-lot Woodhill development the city received on January 2,
2004. The legal description is:
The North one-half of the West one-half of the NW '/. of the NE '/+ of Section, Township 28,
Range 22, according to the US Govemment Survey thereof: and
The North one-half of the West one-half of the West one-half of the East one-half of the NW'/.
of the NE'/. of Section 13, Township 28, Range 22, according to the US Govemment Survey
thereof, in Section 13, Township 28, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
(The property to be known as Lots 1-7, Block 1 and Lots 1-9, Block 2 of Woodhill)
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
On February 2, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve
this permit.
2. On , 2004, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a notice
in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The council gave
everyone at the hearing 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 city council approves the above-described
conditional use permit because:
The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
3. The use would not depreciate property values.
4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance
to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes,
water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical
interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create
traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, inGuding 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.
38
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 plans approved by the city. The city council may approve
major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor
changes to the plans. Such changes shall include:
a. Revising the grading and site plans to show:
(1) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation including keeping
and protecting as many of the trees as possible.
(2) Revised storm water pond locations and storm water system designs as suggested or
required by the watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall meet the city's
design standards.
2.The proposed construction of the plat must be substantially started within one year of council
approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
3. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall
meet all the conditions and changes noted in the city engineer's memo dated January 22,
2004.
4. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Woodhill development shall be:
a. Front-yard setback (from a public street right-of--way): minimum - 20 feet, maximum - 45
feet
b. Front-yard setback (public side street right-of-way): minimum - 20 feet, maximum -none
c. Rear-yard setback: 30 feet from any adjacent residential property line
d. Side-yard setback: minimum - 10 feet from a property line and 20 feet minimum between
buildings.
5. The developer or contractor shall:
a. Complete all grading for the site drainage and the ponds, install all retaining walls as
required and any other site improvements required by the city engineer and meet all
city requirements.
b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs a# the grading limits.
c. Remove the house, any debris or junk from the site.
6. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on 2004.
39
Attachment 20
ZONING MAP CHANGE RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Maplewood city staff is proposing to change the Maplewood zoning map
from Farm Residence (F) to Single-Family Residential (R-1).
WHEREAS, this change applies to the property located at 2516 Linwood Avenue in the
north one-half of Section 13, Township 29, Range 22, in Maplewood, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the property owner is proposing to plat the property into 16 lots for single
dwellings.
WHEREAS, the proposed development is known as Woodhill and the new legal
description will be:
Lots 1 through 7, Block 1, and Lots 1 through 9, Block 2, Woodhill.
WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows:
On February 2, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve the zoning map change.
2. On February _, 2004, the city council held a public hearing. City staff published a
notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners.
The council conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance
to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and
recommendations from the city staff and planning commission.
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 owner has plans to develop this property for lots for single-family houses.
The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on , 2004.
40
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2004
VI. NEW BUSINESS
a. Woodhill Subdivision (Linwood Avenue)
Mr. Roberts said Mr. Bruce Nedegaard, representing Nedegaard Custom Homes, is proposing to
develop a 16-lot plat for single dwellings called Woodhill. It would be on a 12.44-acre site on the
south side of Linwood Avenue, east of Sterling Street.
Mr. Roberts said the developer intends to sell each of the houses and expects that each will sell
for at least $400,000. A homeowners' association would own and maintain the landscaping,
rainwater gardens and retaining walls. As proposed, the lots in the plat will range from 11,496
square feet to 22,890 square feet with an average lot size of about 15,939 square feet. The city
requires each single dwelling lot in the R-1 (single dwelling) zoning district to have at least 75 feet
of width at the front setback line and be at least 10,000 square feet in area. All of the proposed
lots would meet or exceed the standards in the city code.
Commissioner Trippler asked if it was correct that even though it's the homeowners own property
within the 100 foot setback for the pristine wetland there can be no development on the 100 feet
on the south half of lots 1 and 2 and the south portion of lots 3 and 4?
Mr. Roberts said correct.
Commissioner Trippler asked if the city thought people would want to buy a house that they can't
do anything with except from 5 feet from the back of their house? He said on page 29 of the staff
report it says the best way to ensure protection of the wetland is to enforce the 100 foot wetland
buffers and to limit the amount of surface runoff entering the wetland by directing it into rain
gardens and swales for infiltration. He asked how the city intended to enforce that?
Mr. Roberts said the city has this same issue at different developments in Maplewood. He said
the city hopes through proper signage and through education that the homeowners realize they
cannot do anything to that part of the property. If a complaint should occur that activity has been
occurring in a buffer area beyond the signage and limits the city would investigate it. If there is no
complaint the city may not know about the occurrence. Mr. Roberts said he thinks people would
jump at the chance to look at a wetland and not have the grass or maintenance to deal with as
well as not have another home in their backyard.
Commissioner Trippler asked what the city could do if someone started mowing the grass in an
area where they shouldn't be?
Mr. Roberts said the city would try and let the homeowner know what the rules are and handle it
that way. If they don't comply the homeowner could end up in court.
Commissioner Trippler asked how many cases the city has had go to court for noncompliance of
the wetland buffer?
Mr. Roberts said there haven't been any cases and that is why the city has been successful in
getting compliance and not having to go to court.
Commissioner Trippler asked if there were three or four retaining walls planned on page 23 of the
staff report?
Mr. Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineering for Maplewood said there are three, three-foot high
retaining walls.
Commissioner Trippler asked if the three foot high retaining walls pose any type of a safety
hazard for children?
Mr. Cavett said as long as there isn't a falling hazard over four feet tall, and there is a grassy turf
area, then it's typically not a hazard.
Mr. Bartol said those retaining walls are on private property and are outside the buffer area. If the
homeowner wanted to put some type of railing up to keep from any hazard happening they could
do that.
Commissioner Dierich asked Mr. Cavett why the retaining walls weren't going to be constructed
as far over as lot 1 and how the retaining wall should be stabilized?
Mr. Cavett said the reason the retaining walls are proposed is because of the difference in the
grade in that location. He said according to the building code any retaining wall four feet and over
requires a building permit. However, because of the difference in height the city is going to
require a building permit for the three three-foot high retaining walls. As part of the building
permit process the applicant would be required to submit details of the design. He said typically a
retaining wall like this would require a geogrid, which would help stabilize the soil and would be
done by the developer as part of the grading of the site. The other concern was to be a covenant
or restriction so the homeowners know who is responsible for long-term maintenance of the
retaining wall.
Commissioner Dierich said the grading is coming very close to the buffer area on lots 1 and 2.
She asked how the city would recommend the homeowners to stabilize the area until vegetation
and landscaping was put into place? She said the whole hillside slid into the wetland behind her
house and now there isn't much of a wetland left. Her concern is that this wetland has vegetation
that isn't any place else in the Ramsey County area.
Mr. Cavett said he agrees that this is a big concern of the city and the Watershed District. He
said anytime you have construction activity taking place there is the potential for problems
especially near buffer areas. There are no guarantees but it will have to be looked at very closely
and cared for by the developer and the builder.
Commissioner Bartol said in the staff report it states lots 6, 7, and 8 don't comply to the
appropriate setbacks, he asked if staff meant lots 5, 6, and 8?
Mr. Roberts said that is correct.
Commissioner Bartol asked if there was a reason there wasn't a house shown on the plans for
Lot 1 Block 1 and Lot 9 Block 2?
Mr. Roberts said it his understanding that those are general pads with full basements and
lookouts or walkouts would not work there. One of the requirements of the final plans is that all of
those details should be shown.
Commissioner Bartol asked if there is an anticipated use for the buffer zone north of the wetland
area? People are going to walk there so unless there is a plan for people to walk in a specific
area they will walk through people's backyards. He said homeowners might be upset having
people walk through their property. He asked if Outlot B could be slightly larger to allow actual
usable city space north of the pond to accommodate a public path? He said if you don't put a
path there people will create their own walking path and will generate an erosion problem.
Mr. Roberts said it is staff's opinion that if the trail is built to the cul-de-sac and staff did not
anticipate much foot traffic around the north side of the pond. Clearly it's a possibility and
Commissioner Bartol raised a good point.
Commissioner Bartol said with that many houses and that many kids, not to mention the kids
coming over from the New Century development, traffic will increase as the population increases.
He said because this is a wooded area it will be a magnet for kids.
Mr. Roberts said the public may walk where they want to walk but neither staff nor the parks
department anticipated having a trail put there and because of the erosion, buffer area and the
sensitivity, he hopes people don't won't walk through peoples property. He said the outlot could
possibly be enlarged but he is not sure that would accomplish much.
Commissioner Bartol said the single-family lots are already larger than the minimum size, it would
give the city greater control over the buffer zone.
Mr. Roberts said it would be more under fee ownership verses easement if that was changed,
and the question becomes is 10 feet enough space?
Chairperson Fischer asked what the paved area of the street would be?
Mr. Roberts said the paved area is 28 feet wide instead of the standard 32 feet wide.
Chairperson Fischer asked if there would be any problems with on-street parking in this location?
Mr. Roberts said 28 feet is wide enough for parking on one side of the street.
Chairperson Fischer asked if the city had any plans to visit any of these "no mowing areas" to see
if people are complying or not?
Mr. Cavett said all the wetland setbacks will have signs as part of the development. One
advantage this site would have over other sites is that this will be part of the open space. He
spoke with Ginny Gaynor, the Open Space Coordinator, and she said they have volunteers that
go through the open spaces to check for those things. He said there will be more eyes policing
the area. Neighbors will also be policing the area and the signs indicate what the rules are.
Chairperson Fischer asked if neighbors have blown the whistle on other neighbors?
Mr. Cavett said the city has received calls from residents asking what was going on and have
asked the city to check it out, which keeps the city and the Watershed District more involved.
Commissioner Dierich asked if the retaining wall would be built during the grading process or
during the construction of the homes?
Mr. Cavett said it is important that these retaining walls are built as part of the grading process
and not as part of the home construction process.
Commissioner Dierich said there are some huge drums in the back yard of the house, she asked
what they were used for and if there would be some clean up charges because of pollution?
Mr. Roberts said the applicant could address that issue.
Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission.
Mr. Roger Humphrey, Humphrey Engineering, Inc., 145 Main Street, Woodville, Wisconsin,
representing the applicant, addressed the commission. He said they have worked very closely
with staff and with the Watershed District early in the process and they will do the best they can in
addressing the issues.
Commissioner Trippler asked what the small rectangles represented on the plans off the back of
each house?
Mr. Humphrey said originally an architect drew up the plans and the rectangles are depicted on
the plans as elevated decks for that type of building and are shown for illustration purposes only.
Commissioner Trippler asked how many levels these homes would be?
Mr. Humphrey said they would be one and two story homes.
Commissioner Trippler asked for an answer regarding what the drums were in the yard of one of
the homes?
Mr. Humphrey said those drums are salvaged milk tanks that the homeowner used for
landscaping purposes.
Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant if he had any concerns regarding the conditions listed in
the staff report?
Mr. Humphrey said no.
Commissioner Bartol said he would agree with Commissioner Dierich regarding the concern of
the erosion during the construction process. Concerns such as soil run off, concerns for the trees
and killing the vegetation. He was glad to see the developer trying to save as many trees as
possible. He has seen less challenging conditions where runoff killed the trees. Trees can only
tolerate so much silt and dirt on its root system before it gives way and dies. As a result of the
construction process in his neighborhood in the Homes of New Century, the trees are dying and
falling over and these too were protected areas. Every measure should be taken to save the
trees that are marked. As a result of any trees that don't survive the construction process and die
there should be a penalty charged to the developer.
Commissioner Trippler said there are a lot of things he likes about this proposal but he's going to
vote against it. The reason he is against this is there is over 40 feet of elevational drop from the
wetland to the top of the hill. To put the three or four houses on lots 1-4 at the 100-foot setback, is
courting sheer disaster. Even if the homeowners are conscientious of not going over the 100-foot
setback anything they do to their property will end up in the wetland. He said if this is the most
pristine wetland left in Maplewood the city is doomed to put this section of homes in this location.
Commissioner Dierich said like Commissioner Trippler, she is very nervous about the grading and
elevation of these lots and homes. She is also concerned about homeowners having decks on
the rear of the property. Commissioner Dierich asked Chairperson Fischer what her opinion was
about this proposal?
Chairperson Fischer said recognizing the difficult situation with the large drop in elevation, the
wetlands, and the pipelines, many things have been addressed in this report. She said if staff is
comfortable with the conditions that are listed, than she is comfortable too.
Commissioner Dierich moved to approve the resolution starting on page 34 of the staff report.
This resolution approves a conditional use permit for a planned unit development for the 16-unit
Woodhill development on the south side of Linwood Avenue. The city bases this approval on the
findings required by code. Approval is subject to the following conditions:
All construction shall follow the plans approved by the city. The city council may approve
major changes to the plans. The Director of Community Development may approve minor
changes to the plans. Such changes shall include:
a. Revising the grading and site plans to show:
(1) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation including
keeping and protecting as many of the trees as possible.
(2) Revised storm water pond locations and storm water system designs as
suggested or required by the watershed district or city engineer. The ponds shall
meet the city's design standards.
2. The proposed construction of the plat must be substantially started within one year of council
approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
3. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall
meet all the conditions and changes noted in the city engineer's memo dated January 22,
2004.
4. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Woodhill development shall be:
a. Front-yard setback (from a public street right-of-way): minimum - 20 feet, maximum -
45 feet.
b. Front-yard setback (public side street right-of-way): minimum - 20 feet, maximum -
none.
c. Rear-yard setback: 30 feet from any adjacent residential property line.
d. Side-yard setback: minimum - 10 feet from a property line and 20 feet minimum
between buildings.
5. The developer or contractor shall:
a. Complete all grading for the site drainage and the ponds, install all retaining walls as
required and any other site improvements required by the city engineer and meet all city
requirements.
b. Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Remove the house, any debris or junk from the site.
6. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
Commissioner Dierich moved to approve the Woodhill preliminary plat (received by the city on
January 2, 2004). The developer shall complete the following before the city council approves
the final plat: (additions to the conditions are underlined).
1. Sign an agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will:
a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all retaining walls, site
landscaping and meet all city requirements.
b. *Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits.
c. Have Xcel Energy install Group V rate street lights in two locations -primarily at the
street intersections and at the west end of the cul-de-sac. The exact style and location
shall be subject to the city engineer's approval.
d. Provide all required and necessary easements (including all utility easements and ten-
footdrainage and utility easements along the front and rear lot lines of each lot and five-
foot drainage and utility easements along the side lot lines of each lot.
e. Install permanent signs around the edge of the wetland buffer easements. These signs
shall mark the edge of the easements and shall state that there shall be no mowing,
vegetation cutting, filling, building, grading or dumping beyond this point. City staff shall
approve the sign design and location before the contractor installs them. The developer
or contractor shall install these signs before the city issues building permits in this plat.
f. Install survey monuments along the wetland and wetland buffer boundaries.
g. Pay the city for the cost of traffic-control, street identification, wetland buffer and no
parking signs.
h. Provide all required and necessary easements, including any off-site easements.
Demolish or remove the existing house and garage from the site, and remove all other
buildings, fencing, trailers, scrap metal, debris and junk from the site.
Cap and seal all wells on site that the owners are not using; and remove septic systems
or drainfields, subject to Minnesota rules and guidelines.
k. Complete all curb on Linwood Avenue on the north side of the site. This is to replace
the existing driveways on Linwood Avenue, and restore and sod the boulevards.
2. '`Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall
include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, and street plans. The plans shall meet
all the conditions and changes listed in the memo dated January 22, 2004, and shall meet the
following conditions:
a. A specific detailed erosion control plan shall be submitted for staff approval prior to
issuance of a grading permit.
b. The grading plan shall show:
(1) The proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home site.
The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat.
(2) Contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb.
(3) House pads that reduce the grading on sites where the developer can save large
trees. This shall include changing the house pad locations on Lots 6, 7 and 8,
Block 2 so they meet the approved development setback requirements, to more
closely match the other house setbacks and orientation on the street.
(4) The proposed street and driveway grades as allowed by the city engineer.
(5) All proposed slopes on the construction plans. The city engineer shall approve
the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than
3:1. On slopes steeper than 3:1, the developer shall prepare and implement a
stabilization and planting plan. At a minimum, the slopes shall be protected with
wood-fiber blanket, be seeded with a no-maintenance vegetation and be
stabilized before the city approves the final plat.
(6) Include the tree plan that:
• Shows where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This
plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the site.
Shows no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits.
(7) All retaining walls on the plans. Any retaining walls taller than 4 feet require a
building permit from the city.
(8) Sedimentation basins or ponds as required by the watershed district or by the city
engineer.
(9) No grading beyond the plat boundary without temporary grading easements from
the affected property owner(s).
(10) As little grading as possible north and south of the proposed street. This is to
keep as many of the existing trees on the site as is reasonably possible.
(11) The pipelines and the 8-foot-wide trail from the cul-de-sac to the south property
line.
12 The developer is encouraged to make the footprint on lots 1 and 2 on Block 2 as
small as possible.
a. The street and utility plans shall show:
(1) The street shall be a 9-ton design with a maximum street grade of eight percent
and the maximum street grade within 75 feet of the intersection at two percent.
(2) The street with continuous concrete ribbon curb, except where the city engineer
determines that concrete curbing is necessary
(3) The completion or replacement of the curb on the south side of Linwood Avenue
and the restoration and sodding of the boulevards.
(4) Water service to each lot.
(5) Repair of Linwood Avenue (street and boulevard) after the developer connects to
the public utilities and builds the new street.
(6) The coordination of the water main alignments and sizing with the standards and
requirements of the Saint Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS).
(7) All utility excavations located within the proposed right-of-ways or within
easements. The developer shall acquire easements for all utilities that would be
outside the project area.
(8) The plan and profiles of the proposed utilities.
(9) A detail of any ponds, the pond outlets and the rainwater gardens. The
contractor shall protect of the outlets to prevent erosion.
(10) The cul-de-sac with a minimum pavement radius of at least 42 feet.
(11) Label the street as Dahl Avenue on all construction and project plans.
b. The drainage plan shall ensure that there is no increase in the rate of storm water run-off
leaving the site above the current (predevelopment) levels. The developer's engineer shall:
(1) Verify inlet and pipe capacities.
(2) Submit drainage design calculations.
c. A landscape plan for the areas along the street, including the rainwater gardens and the
cul-de-sac island. The coniferous trees shall be at least six feet tall and any deciduous
trees shall be at least 2'/z inches in diameter.
3. Change the plat as follows:
a. Add drainage and utility easements as required by the city engineer.
b. Show drainage and utility easements along all property lines on the final plat. These
easements shall be ten feet wide along the front and rear property lines and five feet
wide along the side property lines.
c. Label any common areas as outlots.
d. Label the street as Dahl Avenue on all plans.
e. Change the lot lines for Lot 8, Block 2 so they are more radial to the street right-of-way.
f. Move the north boundary of Outlot B north 20 feet behind lots 1, 2, and 3.
4. Pay for costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans.
5. Secure and provide all required easements for the development including any off-site
drainage and utility easements. These shall include, but not be limited to, an easement for
the culvert draining the pond at the northwest corner of the plat.
6. The developer shall complete all site grading and retaining wall construction. The city
engineer shall include in the developer's agreement any grading that the developer or
contractor has not completed before final plat approval.
7. Sign a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor
will:
8. Submit the homeowners' association bylaws and rules to the director of community
development. These are to assure that there will be one responsible party for the
maintenance of the common areas, landscaping and retaining walls.
9. Record the following with the final plat:
a. All homeowners' association documents.
b. A covenant or deed restriction with the final plat that prohibits any driveways on Lots 1
through 7, Block 1 and Lot 9, Block 2 from going onto Linwood Avenue.
c. A covenant or deed restriction that prohibits any further subdivision or splitting of the lots
or parcels in the plat that would create additional building sites unless approved by the
city council.
d. A covenant or association documents that addresses the proper installation,
maintenance and replacement of the retaining walls.
e. Deeds transferring the ownership of Outlots A and B to the city. The city will accept
ownership of these outlots in lieu of charging PAC (park access charges) with the
building permits.
The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions to the city for
approval before recording.
10.Obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for grading.
11.Obtain a NPDES construction permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
12. Submit to city staff a copy of the written permission from the pipeline company for any
grading or construction within the pipeline easement.
13. If the developer decides to final plat part of the preliminary plat, the director of community
development may waive any conditions that do not apply to the final plat.
*The developer must complete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit or
approves the final plat.
C. Commissioner Dierich moved to adopt the zoning map change resolution on page 36 of the
staff report. This resolution changes the zoning map from F (Farm Residence) to R-1 (Single
Dwelling Residential) for the proposed Woodhill plat on the south side of Linwood Avenue.
The city is making this change because it will:
1. Be consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the zoning code.
2. 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
include in the proposed change or plan is adequately safeguarded.
3. Serve the best interests and conveniences of the community, where applicable, and the
public welfare.
4. 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. Serve the site better as the owner plans to develop this property for lots for single-family
houses.
Commissioner Bartol seconded. Ayes - Bartol, Dierich, Fischer
Nay - Trippler
The motion passed.
This item goes to the city council on February 23, 2004.
Commissioner Dierich said she would like to thank the staff for a great job on the report. This
item has been before the planning commission before and the report was very complete. She
also thanked the developer for listening to the past concerns of the commission and incorporating
the issues and concerns into this proposal.
Agenda # Kl
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
DATE: February 17, 2004
RE: Change of Manager-Chipotle Mexican Grill
Introduction
Bret Allen Shogren has submitted an application for an intoxicating and Sunday liquor
license for Chipotle Mexican Grill located at 2303 White Bear Avenue.
Background
Mr. Shogren has been residing at his current Minneapolis address for over five years. He
is becoming the new manager of the Maplewood Chipotle where he has been working
since February of 2001. As part of the investigation the Duluth Police Department was
contacted. The records clerk of the Duluth Police Department advised us that she
personally new Mr. Shogren very well and spoke very highly of him.
As required by City ordinances, the necessary background investigation was completed
by the Police Department on Mr. Shogren. During the background check the following
organizations were contacted for information regarding the applicant: State and Federal
criminal history check, State and Federal wants and warrants, State Motor Vehicle and
Drivers License files, Duluth Police Department, St. Paul Police Department and
Ramsey, Hennepin and St. Louis Counties.
There was nothing found that would prohibit Mr. Shogren from holding a liquor license
in the City. He has been given a copy of the City Code of Ordinances that apply to being
an intoxicating liquor license holder and he has met with Chief Thomalla to discuss
measures to eliminate the sale of alcohol to underage persons, general security and retail
crime related issues.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council approve the liquor license application.
Agenda # K2
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
DATE: February 17, 2004
RE: Change of Manager-AMF Maplewood Bowl
Introduction
James Joseph Gartner has submitted an application for an intoxicating and Sunday liquor
license for AMF Maplewood Bowl located at 1955 English Street.
Background
Mr. Gartner has been residing in the metropolitan area for many years. He has been a
manager at the AMF Maplewood Bowl for the last four years.
As required by City ordinances, the necessary background investigation was completed
by the Police Department on Mr. Gartner. During the background check the following
organizations were contacted for information regarding the applicant: State and Federal
criminal history check, State and Federal wants and warrants, State Motor Vehicle and
Drivers License files, the City of Robbinsdale and St. Paul, and Ramsey and Hennepin
Counties.
There was nothing found that would prohibit Mr. Gartner from holding a liquor license in
the City. He has been given a copy of the City Code of Ordinances that apply to being
an intoxicating liquor license holder and he has met with Chief Thomalla to discuss
measures to eliminate the sale of alcohol to underage persons, general security and retail
crime related issues.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council approve the liquor license application.
AGENDA ITEM K-3
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Patrick Kelly and Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney's Office
SUBJECT: County Road D Realignment Improvements (West of TH 61 to Highridge Court),
City Project 02-08 -
a. Resolution Approving Exchange Agreement with Trout Land, LLC
b. Resolution Authorizing Proceeding Subsequent Action for Old Highway 61
Property
DATE: February 17, 2004
Introduction
The County Road D (West) Realignment Improvements, Project 02-08, requires the exchange of
property though a legal proceeding to accomplish the necessary right of way acquisition.
Approval of two resolutions is needed for this process.
Background
On November 10, 2003, the city council received a petition from Trout Land, LLC, who
purchased the former Frattalone property north of Gulden's restaurant. Trout Land, LLC also has
a purchase agreement with the Prokosch family on the north end of the project, making Trout
Land, LLC the owner of 95 percent of the project area. They requested that the city proceed with
the improvements for realignment of County Road D. The council conducted a public hearing on
February 9, 2004, and ordered the project to be constructed.
An agreement is proposed with Trout Land, LLC, also known as the Kami property ownership
group. Kami has agreed to dedicate the right of way for the County Road D alignment at no
charge to the city. In exchange, the city will agree to remove its interest in the property between
the frontage road and TH 61, just north of Guldens. The proceeding necessary to allow this to
occur is called a Proceeding Subsequent. This tract of land has been encumbered for roadway
purposes since the 1930s. When the Highway Department realigned TH 61 in the 1950s, the
adjacent ownership became further clouded. The acquisition of the roadway rights was such that
the underlying property owner has not been identified since that point. Because the property has
had a roadway function since then, there has been little, if any, need to clarify ownership,
although records indicate that no one has paid property taxes on the land since the 1930s. With
the realigned roadway, the frontage road can be abandoned and the property becomes valuable
land to the adjacent property owner. The Exchange Agreement between Kami and the city will
accomplish this task. The acreage of the proceeding subsequent area is 2.69 acres. The
acreage of the right of way and frontage road area to be conveyed to the city is 2.77 acres.
Other considerations given by the developer make the Exchange Agreement advantageous to
the city. Other development agreements will be necessary between the city and Kami for right of
way on the Prokosch property (the northern portion of the site), and for easement acquisition,
grading agreements and drainage acquisition costs.
City Council Agenda Background
Trout Land Exchange Agreement
February 23, 2004
Page Two
Budget Impact
The expense to litigate the issues is described and estimated in the attached memorandum from
Patrick Kelly and Sarah Sonsalla. They estimate the proceeding subsequent dealings to cost
$10,000, which will be paid by Trout Land, LLC. The city will acquire more property from Trout
Land, LLC for right of way than it will vacate interest in. There is no expense for right of way on
this portion of the project. Additionally, the proceeding subsequent property was not owned by
the city and thus could not be sold for development. Trout Land also agrees to the assessments
as identified within the preliminary report. All costs are consistent with the assumptions within
the preliminary report.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving the
Exchange Agreement with Trout Land, LLC, and approving authorization for proceeding
subsequent action for the Old Trunk Highway 61 Property.
1w
Attachments: Resolutions (2)
Location Map
Exchange Agreement with Trout Land LLC
Memorandum on Proceeding Subsequent Action from City Attorney
RESOLUTION
APPROVING EXCHANGE AGREEMENT WITH TROUT LAND, LLC
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution of the council adopted February 9, 2004, the City
Council ordered the construction of the County Road D Realignment Improvements (West of TH
61 to Highridge Court), City Project 02-08, and authorized the acquisition of the necessary right
of way for the making of said improvement,
WHEREAS, the City Attorney and City Engineer have prepared an agreement, called
Exchange Agreement, with Trout Land, LLC for the exchange of property for the purpose of the
necessary right of way for a portion of said improvement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA, as follows:
1. Said Exchange Agreement is hereby adopted and approved. The Mayor and City
Manager are authorized to execute the agreement signifying the City of Maplewood's approval.
2. Approval is contingent upon payment of proceeding subsequent costs by Trout
Land, LLC for all attorney and staff costs, estimated at $12,000.
Approved this 23rd day of February 2004.
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION No.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PROCEEDING SUBSEQUENT ACTION FOR OLD HIGHWAY 61
PROPERTY
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota has quit claimed its easement interest to the old Highway 61 property to the
City of Maplewood, said easement interest has encumbered the City's project, Project No. 02-08 for public benefit;
WHEREAS, fee title to the Property is needed for orderly development within the City and forpublic health, safety
and welfare;
WHEREAS, the City is in the process of acquiring right-of--way necessary for its County Road D Realignment
project, Project No. 02-08;
WHEREAS, Trout Land, LLC is the fee owner ofproperty that is necessary forright-of--way in order to complete
Project No. 02-08;
WHEREAS, Trout Land, LLC and the City have agreed to enter into an Exchange Agreement which provides for
the necessary and proper construction of County Road D, where Trout Land, LLC will convey to the City requiredright-of-
way in exchange for fee title to the old Highway 61 property;
WHEREAS, the exchange between Trout Land, LLC and the City represents a fair market exchange ofproperty
and is in lieu of eminent domain proceedings pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 117.01, et. al. of Trout Land, LLC's
property; and
THAT:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
The City shall authorize the City Attorney to initiate the proceeding subsequent action in Ramsey County District Court
required to obtain fee title to the old Highway 61 property.
Adopted by the City Council of Maplewood this day of , 2004.
Robert Cardinal, Mayor
AYES:
NAYS:
ATTEST:
Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
~I~
~ID~f ~
-` ~
~ v
- -~
_~
at' bI71f'ViG7M rA
-------
~ 1
o `
- - ---~
Lx1+t8ir ~'~`'
I I ~ ~ ~ i
1 I I 1
I na'raa ex~sr>NdII iI
~L ~ __ E
-1
i ~ ~-_~
., i i - ~
;~ i ;
1 ` ~~ i
.o y
~ ~._~
~~ ~ , .~ -
r
~~ ~ ~ _ ~~
~I
i~
~- --~ ~
~~
c~ -~i
~~
a m
xxc in
~~~
i i ~
i ~ ~ ~
~ ~ i
r (
f
I
1 1 ~
j r j ~ 1
r
,~
1 ~ r i
,~ I
i
i .+' ~~'
~ ~ i
II
' ~
~
---------~ i ~
~
~ ~ ; ~ I % ~ CityolMal
~~
~ ~~ ~~ ~ i i ~ ~ ~
~ DEPARTMEA7' OF
i i
i
~ ~ ~ ENGINEERINi
~m rr ca.
' ~ i i i IaD ~~o-um nun
~I ~lrr ~ I
r i ~7
~`~ ~~
A ` I ! I ~'' ~F~l~
,~ ~ , ~«n ~asm
s~r~-t€rtr sip
~` ~ ~ ' ~ CIl'Y P;70JEc
1 ~ ; ~ ~ ~ CITI' Pl~OJEs
I r ~; ~~ EXH16lT 8
~ r -
t. ~ 1
{
~v ~ ..~, - ~, ~ ..
i t .c.
3i' .. ~:r RiD
ti
~. s .a
Y
1 •l Lea ~ L 'a~~ ~r }•!a •{ L' ~{•..• :M1} ~ ~ ~ _ •L r { {1 }~
+h v: l/ 'Jr. ~• :li.L •:1 :M1•h •.wl Sr ~I} S,•M1'-L: ~•
'i{:. .-ti.-~~-: lip s+,.'a _ _ ~• ~• s .~hr ~ ~'~_-L "'r - .L• .•
! ~4, ~ q ~
1~GM1. r { y
r i~~MM'1.~•: {C :1:~ raa •J•i ~a ~ {} .•L Y - 'J i~J•
i
}~ ~
~{:} .{L..,r -`k. ~}. _•]_
: 5-.: }}
- l•
i:h :.c
y5 L :,
'. L,.
L~,r
{.. J.
}
' .
.
_
_ ~
ri }'•r - } ~1 '1 :1+Y~ LJ
} •` '+ - +
F- Y
.}•• L' _
L- !1
' :Y .
•1'
4 'f~~
~L ~7'~~?j~~, ~ L
L '
f
~~
~:
~~
1 F ~
1.
{ yFy, yFy. Soy' yFy, yFy, yFy, yFy,
~I
i
yFy, Soy' Soy' Soy' Soy' Soy' Soy'
~ _
i.~..
"~k ~ ~
~~. ~r_ 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chuck Ahl, Director of Public Works
FROM: Patrick Kelly and Sarah Sonsalla, Kelly & Fawcett
RE: City of Maplewood -Highway 61
DATE: February 13, 2004
History of the Old Highway 61 Property
The old Highway 61 property (located on the westerly side of the current Highway 61, between
Gulden's and Sparkle Auto) was acquired by the State of Minnesota for highway purposes through
condemnation proceedings in 1935. In these proceedings, the State acquired an easement interest over the
property for public right-of-way purposes. In 1957, the State acquired additional property for the current
Highway 61 through condemnation proceedings. After the current Highway 61 was constructed, the old
Highway 61 property was no longer of use to the State. The State turned the property back to the City of
Maplewood in 1988 through a quit claim deed. The City researched the deed and determined that the transfer
was not fee title. Therefore, the property cannot be utilized or developed for any purpose.
Recommendation
The following is our recommendation of an approach, which would allow the City to acquire fee title to
the old Highway 61 property and exchange it for necessary right-of-way for the new County Road D. It is an
alternative to the City instituting condemnation proceedings on the new County Road Dright-of-way. Although it
is a unique and unusual approach, these factors are balanced with the potential cost savings to the public.
Exchange Agreement
The City currently holds the State's easement interest on the old Highway 61 property. It is our
information that Trout Land, LLC owns the abutting property to a large portion of the old Highway 61 propertyon
the west side of Highway 61. The City would like to acquire property from Trout Land, LLC in orderto complete
its project for a better designed County Road D. In exchange for the property to be used for new County Road
D, the City and Trout Land, LLC have agreed that the City would obtain fee title to the old Highway 61 property
and convey it to Trout Land, LLC. This exchange has been outlined in the Exchange Agreement to be executed
by the City and Trout Land, LLC.
Proceeding Subsequent
In order to accomplish this exchange, the City and Trout Land, LLC have agreed to initiate a proceeding
subsequent in Ramsey County District Court. The City has agreed to assist Trout Land, LLC in this process
pursuant to the terms in the Exchange Agreement. The proceeding subsequent requests thatthe Courtordera
new certificate of title for the old Highway 61 property in Trout Land, LLC's name as the abutting landowner.
Interested parties must be notified of this proceeding and a hearing must be held with the Examiner of Titles
before a new certificate of title can be ordered by the Court.
In order to effectuate the issuance of a new certificate of title in Trout Land, LLC's name, the underlying
fee owners of the old Highway 61 property (the heirs of Rufus Jefferson in Hillsborough County, Florida) must
be notified of the proceeding subsequent. The City has contacted Hillsborough County Court in Florida and
made a request for any probate files on Rufus Jefferson's children. If such probate files exist, Trout Land, LLC
will be required to name the children as defendants in its proceeding subsequent and serve them. If there are
not any probate files, Trout Land, LLC will only need to serve the underlying fee owners by publication.
The landowners on the east side of the current Highway 61 must also be notified of the proceeding
subsequent since they may have an interest in the old Highway 61 property as abutting landowners. In order to
resolve this issue, the City has met with the abutting landowners (Kline Volvo and Lexus of Maplewood),
explained the process and requested a quitclaim deed from them. The City has obtained a quitclaim deed from
Lexus of Maplewood, which quit claims, any interest that it would have in the old Highway 61 property. The City
is also in the process of obtaining a quitclaim deed from Kline Volvo. Therefore, the abutting landowners on the
easterly side of the new Highway 61 will not be bringing any claim to the old Highway 61 property at the
proceeding subsequent.
After the underlying property owners and abutting landowners are served, the proceeding subsequent
would be heard by the Ramsey County Examiner of Titles. If no objections are brought by any named parties,
the Examiner of Titles would then issue court order to issue a certificate of title in Trout Land, LLC's name for
the old Highway 61 property. After Trout Land, LLC receives this certificate of title, it will convey to the City the
property necessary to construct the new County Road D. The City wil I then vacate its easement interest on the
old Highway 61 property. Trout Land, LLC will then have title to the old Highway 61 property without it being
subject to the City's easement interest and the property could then be developed.
Costs
We estimate the legal fees and costs from this dayforward of bringing the proceeding subsequent not
to exceed $10,000.00, provided that no issues are raised by the underlying fee owners of the property. As
always, we will try to keep the fees and costs under budget.
AGENDA NO. K-4
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager
FROM: Finance Director
RE: Preliminary Approval for Issuance of Refunding Bonds
DATE: February 13, 2004
Bonds are proposed to be issued to refinance the General Obligation
Improvement Bonds Series 1995A and the General Obligation Fire Safety Bonds
Series 2000A. Issuance of the refunding bonds will allow the city to take
advantage of interest rates that are lower than when the 1995 and 2000 bonds
were issued. As a result the city will save approximately $255,279 of interest and
the present value of this savings is $129,362. The attached 15-page report
prepared by Springsted Inc. provides additional information. It also suggests a
bid award on the bond sale at a special Council meeting at 5:00 p.m. on
Thursday, March 18 which is the same date as the regular pre-agenda meeting.
It is recommended that the City Council (A) schedule a special Council meeting at
5:00 p.m. on Thursday, March 18 for a bid award on the bond issue and (B) adopt
the attached resolution which provides preliminary approval for the sale of the
bonds and authorizes Springsted to solicit bids.
P:\FINANCE\WORD\PERM\04BONDS1.DOC
85 E. SEVENTH PLACE, SUITE 100
SAINT PAUL, MN 55101-2887
651-223-3000 FAX:651-223-3002
E-MAIL: advisors(~springsted.com
S rhg
February 13, 2004
Mr. Dan Faust, Finance Director
City of Maplewood
1830 East Gounty Road B
Maplewood, MN 55109-2797
Re: Recommendations for the Issuance of $2,930,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds,
Series 2004A
Dear Mr. Faust:
We have enclosed one electronic copy of our recommendations for the above-captioned issue
for distribution to Council members and City staff prior to your meeting on Monday,
February 23, 2004.
If you should have any questions pertaining to the enclosed documents, or if you require
additional copies, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Christine M. Hogan
Project Manager
mb
Enclosures
Recommendations
For
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
$2,930,000
General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A
Presented to:
Mayor Robert Cardinal
Members, City Council
Mr. Richard Fursman, City Manager
Mr. Dan Faust, Finance Director
City of Maplewood
1830 East County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55109-2797
Study No.: M140812
SPRINGSTED Incorporated
February 13, 2004
SPRINGSTED
Advisors to the Public Sector
RECOMMENDATIONS
Re: Recommendations for the Issuance of:
$2,930,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A
(the "Bonds" or the "Issue")
We respectfully request your consideration of our recommendations for the above-named
Issue. Bond proceeds will be used to refund (i) the February 1, 2006 through 2016 maturities of
the Gity's General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1995A, (the "Series 1995A Bonds")
dated September 1, 1995 and; (ii) the February 1, 2010 through 2021 maturities of the City's
General Obligation Fire Safety Bonds, Series 2000A, (the "Series 2000A Bonds") dated June 1,
2000. The Series 1995A Bonds and the Series 2000A Bonds are hereinafter together referred
to as the "Refunded Bonds". The refunding is being undertaken to achieve interest cost
savings.
We recommend the following for the Bonds:
Action Requested
2.
3
4.
5.
6
Sale Date and Time
Authority for the Bond Issues
Principal Amount of Offerings
To establish the date and time of receiving bids
and establish the terms and conditions of the
offering.
Thursday, March 18, 2004 at 10:00 A.M., with
consideration for award by the City Council at
5:00 P.M. that same day.
The Bonds are being issued pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 475 and 429.
$2,930,000
Included in the Terms of Proposal for the Bonds
is a provision that permits the City to increase or
reduce the principal amount of the Bonds in any
of the maturities. This allows for any necessary
adjustments required based on final interest
rates, issuance costs and the final investment
rate for the escrow account.
Repayment Terms The Bonds will mature annually February 1, 2006
through 2021. Interest will be payable semi-
annually each February 1 and August 1,
commencing August 1, 2004.
Term Bonds We have included a provision that permits the
underwriters to combine multiple maturity years
into a term bond, subject to mandatory
redemption on the same maturity schedule
provided in the Terms of Proposal. The
advantage to the underwriter is that it provides
large blocks of bonds, which are more attractive
to bond funds, and certain pension funds, which
deal only with large blocks of bonds. This in turn
is a benefit to the City since selling larger blocks
of bonds reduces the risk to the underwriter,
allowing them to lower their costs and the
interest coupons. Since the Bonds are being
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
February 13, 2004
7. Security and Source of Payment
(a) Security
8
9
10
(b) Source of Payment
offered on a competitive bid basis and awarded
on the lowest true interest cost, the City will
award the Bands to the best bid regardless of
whether term bonds are chosen or not.
The Bonds will be general obligations of the City.
The Bonds will be repaid with ad valorem
property taxes. In addition, special assessments
originally pledged to the Series 1995A Bonds will
also be used.
Prepayment Provisions The City may elect on February 1, 2014, and on
any date thereafter, to prepay the Bonds due on
or after February 1, 2015, at a price of par plus
accrued interest.
Credit Rating Comments
An application will be made to Moody's Investors
Service for a rating on the Bonds. The City's
current general obligation credit rating is "Aa2".
Federal Treasury Regulations Concerning
Tax-Exempt Obligations
(a) Bank Qualification Under Federal Tax Law, financial institutions
cannot deduct from .income for federal income
tax purposes, expense that is allocable to
carrying and acquiring tax-exempt bonds. There
is an exemption to this for "bank qualified" bonds,
which can be so designated if the issuer does
not issue more than $10 million of tax exempt
bonds in a calendar year. Issues that are bank
qualified generally receive slightly lower interest
rates than issues that are not bank qualified.
Since the City expects to issue more than $10
million of tax-exempt obligations in 2004 this
Issue will be designated as nat bank qualified.
(b) Rebate Requirements
All tax-exempt issues are subject to the federal
arbitrage and rebate requirements, which require
all excess earnings created by the financing to
be rebated to the U.S. Treasury. The
requirements generally cover two categories:
bond proceeds and debt service funds. There
are exemptions from rebate in both of these
categories.
The proceeds of the Bonds will be placed in an
escrow account and invested at a yield no
greater than the yield on the Refunding Bonds.
Therefore, the Bonds will not generate any
arbitrage.
Page 2
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
February 13, 2004
(c) Bona Fide Debt Service Fund
The City must maintain a bona fide debt service
fund for the Bonds or be subject to yield
restriction. This requires restricting the
investments held in the debt service fund to the
yield on the Bonds and/or paying back excess
investment earnings in the debt service fund to
the federal government. A bona fide debt
service fund is a fund for which there is an equal
matching of revenue to debt service expense,
with carry over permitted equal to the greater of
the investment earnings in the fund during that
year or 1/12 the debt service of that year.
(d) Economic Life The average life of the Bonds cannot exceed
120% of the economic life of the projects
originally financed by the Refunded Bonds.
Since the average life of the Bonds is less than
the average life of the Refunded Bonds, the
Bonds are within the economic life requirement.
11. Continuing Disclosure The Bonds are subject to continuing disclosure
requirements set forth by the Securities and
Exchange Commission. The SEC rules require
the City to undertake an annual update of certain
Official Statement information and report any
material events to the national repositories. In
the past, the City has indicated that it will
manage its own continuing disclosure matters.
We understand that the City will continue that
practice with this Issue.
12. Attachments Refunding Schedules
• Terms of Proposals
DISCUSSION
The proceeds of the Bonds, together with a city contribution of $284,000, will be used to refund
(i) the February 1, 2006 through 2016 maturities of the Series 1995A Bonds and (ii) the
February 1, 2010 through 2021 of the Series 2000A Bonds (collectively referred to as the
"Refunding Bonds"). This refunding is being undertaken to allow the City to take advantage of
lower interest rates and achieve interest cost savings.
The issuance of the Bonds is being conducted as a crossover refunding, in which the proceeds
of the Bonds (new issue) are placed in an escrow account with a major bank and invested in
government securities. These securities and their earnings are structured to pay interest on the
new bonds until the first optional prepayment date (call date) of the Refunded Bonds (old
issue), at which time the escrow account will crossover and prepay the remaining principal of
the Refunding Bonds. The City will continue to pay the originally scheduled debt service on the
Refunded Bonds until the call dates of February 1, 2005 for the Series 1995A Bonds and
February 1, 2009 for the Series 2000A Bonds. After their respective call dates, the City will
cross over and begin making debt service payments on the Bonds, taking advantage of the
lower interest rates.
Page 3
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
February 13, 2004
Based on current interest rate estimates, the refunding is projected to result in the City realizing
cash flow savings that will average approximately $43,800 annually for years 2006 through
2016 and $11,000 annually for the remaining five years. After deducting the cash contribution
by the City, this results in future value savings of approximately $255,300, with a net present
value benefit to the City of approximately $129,400. These estimates are net of all costs of
issuance associated with the Bonds.
The attached refunding analysis assumes the Escrow Fund is invested in State and Local
Government Series (SLG's). After discussion with City staff it was suggested that Springsted
should explore investing the Escrow fund for the Bonds in a Guaranteed Investment Contract
(GIC) in an effort to maximize savings resulting from the refunding. If it is determined that a
GIC is the appropriate investment option, in order to increase savings, Springsted staff would
facilitate the purchase of a GIC at the City's direction.
Based on information provided to us by the City, we have recalculated the assessment income
from the projects financed by the Series 1995A Bands for the purpose of estimating the City's
future levy requirements for the Bonds. See page 10.
We have attached a set of schedules that summarize the refunding statistics and the projected
savings resulting from the sale of the Bonds. These schedules include the following information
about the Bonds:
• Preliminary Feasibility Summary: indicates the sizing of the Bonds, savings data and bond
data -page 5
• Prior Original Debt Service: shows the existing debt service requirements on the
Refunded Bonds without arefunding -pages 6 and 7
• Debt Service to Maturity and to Call: shows the Refunded Bonds' remaining debt service
to maturity and to the call date -pages 8 and 9
• Net Debt Service Schedule: shows (i) the new debt service on the Bonds, based on
current estimated interest rates; (ii) the scheduled debt service due on the Refunded
Bonds; (iii) the current projection of assessment income; and (iv) the projected net levy
requirements for the Bonds -page 10
• Debt Service Comparison: shows the debt service comparison and the projected annual
cash flow savings of the Bonds to the Refunded Bonds -page 11
The success of a refunding transaction is dependent upon the interest rate market. We will
continue to monitor this transaction between now and the time the Bonds are offered for sale.
Springsted Incorporated is pleased to again be of service to the City of Maplewood.
Respectfully submitted,
a ~. ', ~.,
~l - -~ - _ °°` r`
SI'RINGST~ Incorpo
mb
Page 4
Preliminary
2,9~a,aaa
Gity of Maplewood, Minnesota
General obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 20t:?4A
Crossover Refunding of Series 1995A and 2000A
Preliminary Feasibility Summary
Dated 04/01/2004 i Delivered t)4115/2t?04
Refund Refund Issue
1995A 2000A Summary
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Par Amount of Bonds .......................................................................... $220,004.00 $2,710,000.00 $2,930,000.00
Planned Issuer Equity contribution ...................................................... 284,000.00 - 284,000.00
Accrued Interest from 0410112004 to 04115/2004 ................................ 242.67 3,939.44 4,182.11
TOTAL. SOURGES .............................................................................. $504,242,67 $2,713,939.44 53,218,182.11
USES OF FUNDS
Deposit to Grossover Escrow Fund ..................................................... 495,543.57 2,654,411.98 3,149,955.55
Costs of Issuance ................................................................................ 2,584.16 31,585.84 34,150.00
Total Underwriter's Discount (1.1Q0%) ............................................... 2,420.00 29,810.00 32,230.00
RoundingAmOUnt ................................................................................ 3,714.94 {1,868.38) 1,846.58
TOTAL USES ...................................................................................... 5504,242.67 52,713,939.44 $3,218,182.11
ISSUES REFUNDED AND CALL INFORMATION
Prior Issues' Call Prices ................................................................. 100.00°Jo 100.00%
Prior Issues' Call Dates .................................................................. 2!112005 2/1/2009
SAVINGS INFORMATION
Net Future Value Benefit ..................................................................... 5121,014.94 $134,264.12 $255,279.08
Net Present Value Benefit ................................................................... 539,498.06 $89,863.81 5129,361.87
Net PV Benefit i PV Refunded Debt Service ....................................... 7.502°!° 3.792°1° 4.466°f°
BOND STATISTICS
Average Life ........................................................ ................................ 6.833 Years 11.752 Years 11.383 Years
Average Coupon ................................................. ................................. 3.1875831°!° 3.8784421°k 3.8473015°l°
Net Interest Cost {NIC) ........................................ ................................ 3.3485588°l° 3.9720420°f° 3.9439383%
True Interest Gast {TIC} ...................................... ................................. 3.3484187°J° 3.9741984°l0 3.9437828%
All Inclusive Cost (AtC) ....................................... ................................. 3.5474878% 4.1027577°I° 4.0757018%
(The estimated savings results of the refundingare subject to market conditions.
Belles <".'J9 kef7995A 21X7 J Lxwe SUrrunvry 1 2f10/2004 J 71:38AA3
Page 5
Preliminary
915,000
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1995A
Prior Original Debt Service
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I
02/01!2005 45,000.00 5.000% 29,745.00 74,745.00
02/01/2006 45,000.00 5.100% 27,495.00 72,495.00
02/01 !2007 45,000.00 5.200% 25,200.00 70,200.00
02!01 /2008 45,000.00 5.300 % 22,860.00 67,860.00
02!0112009 45,000.00 5.400% 20,475.00 65,475.00
02/01!2010 45,000.00 5.500% 18,045.00 63,045.00
02!01 /2011 45,000.00 5.600% 15,570.00 60,570.00
02101 /2012 45,000.00 5.700% 13,050.00 58,050.00
02/01(2013 45,000.00 5.750 % 10,485.00 55,485.00
02/01/2014 45,000.00 5.800 % 7,897.50 52,897.50
02/01 /2015 45,000.00 5.850% 5,287.50 50,287.50
02(01 /2016 45,000.00 5.900% 2,655.00 47,655.00
Total $540,000.00 - $198,765.00 $738,765.00
Yield Statistics
Average Life .......................................................................................................................................................................... 6.333 Years
Weighted Average Maturity (Par Basis) ................................................................................................................................. 6.294 Years
Average Coupon ................................................................................................................................................................... 5.6668860%
Refunding Bond Information
Refunding Dated Date ........................................................................................................................................................... 4/01/2004
Refunding Delivery Date ....................................................................................................................................................... 4/15/2004
eerier I995A / SINGLEFURFO.cE / 2/10/ZD04 j 10.~49fttY1
Page 6
Preliminary
3,540,000.
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
General Obligation Fire Safety Bonds, Series 2000A
Prior Original Debt Service
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I
02/01 /2005 120,000.00 5.750% 180,705.00 300,705.00
02/01 /2006 125,000.00 5.500% 173,805.00 298,805.00
02/01 /2007 130,000.00 5.750% 166,930.00 296,930.00
02/01 /2008 140,000.00 5.500% 159,455.00 299,455.00
02!01!2009 150,000.00 5.500 % 151,755.00 301,755.00
02/01 /2010 155,000.00 5.500% 143,505:00 298,505.00
02/01 /2011 165,000.00 5.500% 134,980.00 299,980.00
02/01 /2012 175,000.00 5.500% 125,905.00 300,905.00
02101 /2013 185,000.00 5.500% 116,280.00 301,280.00
02/01 /2014 195,000.00 5.500% 106,105.00 301,105.00
02/01/2015 205,000.00 5.500% 95,380.00 300,380.00
02/01 /2016 215, 000.00 5.550% 84,105.00 299,105.00
02/01/2017 225,000.00 5.600% 72,172.50 297,172.50
02/01 /2018 240,000.00 5.650% 59,572.50 299,572.50
02/01 /2019 255,000.00 5.700% 46,012.50 301,012.50
02/01 /2020 265,000.00 5.750% 31,477.50 296,477.50
02/01 /2021 280,000.00 5.800% 16,240.00 296,240.00
Total $3,225,000.00 - $1,864,385.00 $5,089,385.00
Yield Statistics
Average Life ........................................................................................................................................................................ 10.102 Years
Weighted Average Maturity (Par Basis) .............................................................................................................................. 10.063 Years
Average Coupon ................................................................................................................................................................. 5.6304735%
Refunding Bond Information
Refunding Dated Date ........................................................................................................................................................ 4/01/2004
Refunding Delivery Date ..................................................................................................................................................... 4!15!2004
Seeie.~Z000A ~ FINGLEFVRPOSE ~ 2/10/2004 / J0;45AM
SP~i~ l<~ €s.^~"€~ A
::~,~,,,.:. ,~ne5r., s. co.
Page 7
Preliminary
915,000
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1995A
Debt Service To Maturity And To Call
Date Refunded Interest to
Bonds Call D/S To Call Principal Coupon Interest Refunded D/S
08/01/2004 - 13,747.50 13,747.50 - - 13,747.50 13,747.50
02/01/2005 495,000.00 13,747.50 508,747.50 - 5.000% 13,747.50 13,747.50
08/01/2005 - - - - - 13,747.50 13,747.50
02/01/2006 - - - 45,000.00 5.100% 13,747.50 58,747.50
08(01!2006 - - - - - 12,600.00 12,600.00
02/01/2007 - - - 45,000.00 5.200% 12,600.00 57,600.00
08/01 /2007 - - - - - 11,430.00 11,430.00
02/01/2008 - - - 45,000.00 5.300% 11,430.00 56,430.00
08/01/2008 - - - - - 10,237.50 10,237.50
02/01/2009 - - - 45,000.00 5.400% 10,237.50 55,237.50
08/01/2009 - - - - - 9,022.50 9,022.50
02!01!2010 - - - 45,000.00 5.500% 9,022.50 54,022.50
08/01/2010 - - - - - 7,785.00 7,785.00
02/01/2011 - - - 45,000.00 5.600% 7,785.00 52,785.00
08/01/2011 - - - - - 6,525.00 6,525.00
02/01/2012 - - - 45,000.00 5.700% 6,525.00 51,525.00
08/01/2012 - - - - - 5,242.50 5,242.50
02/01/2013 - - - 45,000.00 5.750% 5,242.50 50,242.50
08/01/2013 - - - - - 3,948.75 3,948.75
02101!2014 - - - 45,000.00 5.800% 3,948.75 48,948.75
08!01!2014 - - - - - 2,643.75 2,643.75
02/01{2015 - - - 45,000.00 5.850% 2,643.75 47,643.75
08!01 /2015 - - - - - 1,327.50 1,327.50
02/01/2016 - - - 45,000.00 5.900% 1,327.50 46,327.50
Total $495,000.00 $27,495.00 $522,495.00 $495,000.00 - $196,515.00 $691,515.00
Yield Statistics
Average Life ........................................................................................................... ............................................................. 6.833 Years
Weighted Average Maturity (Par Basis) .................................................................. ............................................................. 6.794 Years
Average Coupon .................................................................................................... .............................................................. 5.6742794%
Refunding Bond Information
Refunding Dated Date ............................................................................................ ............................................................. 4/01/2004
Refunding Delivery Date ........................................................................................ .............................................................. 4/15/2004
Series 1995A / fINGLEPURF'Ot~' ~ 3/)O_~Z0~4 1 7D; 4u^9~YF
:: ~~~i~~e ~~~~~~t~
dErirnr. a~ r;,c Mdac >~ssc.
Page 8
Preliminary
3,540,000
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
General Obligation Fire Safety Bands, Series 2000A
Debt Service To Maturity And To Call
Date Refunded
Bonds Interest to
CaII D/S To Call Principal Coupon Interest Refunded D/S
08101 /2004 - 71,752.50 71,752.50 - - 71,752.50 71,752.50
02/01 /2005 - 71,752.50 71,752.50 - 5.750% 71,752.50 71,752.50
08/01 /2005 - 71,752.50 71,752.50 - - 71,752.50 71,752.50
02/01/2006 - 71,752.50 71,752.50 - 5.500% 71,752.50 71,752.50
08/01 /2006 - 71,752.50 71,752.50 - - 71,752.50 71,752.50
02/01/2007 - 71,752.50 71,752.50 - 5.750% 71,752.50 71,752.50
08101/2007 - 71,752.50 71,752.50 - - 71,752.50 71,752.50
02/01/2008 - 71,752.50 71,752.50 - 5.500% 71,752.50 71,752.50
08101 /2008 - 71,752.50 71,752.50 - - 71,752.50 71,752.50
02/01/2009 2,560,000.00 71,752.50 2,631,752.50 - 5.500% 71,752.50 71,752.50
08101 /2009 - - - - - 71,752.50 71,752.50
02/01/2010 - - - 155,000.00 5.500% 71,752.50 226,752.50
08/01/2010 - - - - - 67,490.00 67,490.00
02/01/2011 - - - 165,000.00 5.500% 67,490.00 232,490.00
08/01/2011 - - - - - 62,952.50 62,952.50
02/01/2012 - - - 175,000.00 5.500% 62,952.50 237,952.50
08/01/2012 - - - - - 58,140.00 58,140.00
02/01/2013 - - - 185,000.00 5.500% 58,140.00 243,140.00
08/01/2013 - - - - - 53,052.50 53,052.50
02/01/2014 - - - 195,000.00 5.500% 53,052.50 248,052.50
08/01!2014 - - - - - 47,690.00 47,690.00
02/01!2015 - - - 205,000.00 5.500% 47,690.00 252,690.00
08!01!2015 - - - - - 42,052.50 42,052.50
02!01/2016 - - - 215,000.00 5.550% 42,052.50 257,052.50
08/01/2016 - - - - - 36,086.25 36,086.25
02!01/2017 - - - 225,000.00 5.600% 36,086.25 261,086.25
08/01/2017 - - - - - 29,786.25 29,786.25
02/01/2018 - - - 240,000.00 5.650% 29,786.25 269,786.25
08/01/2018 - - - - - 23,006.25 23,006.25
02101!2019 - - - 255,000.00 5.700% 23,006.25 278,006.25
08/01/2019 - - - - - 15,738.75 15,738.75
02/0112020 - - - 265,000.00 5.750% 15,738.75 280,738.75
08/01/2020 - - - - - 8,120.00 8,120.00
02(01/2021 - - - 280,000.00 5.800% 8,120.00 288,120.00
Total $2,560,000.00 $717,525.00 $3,277,525.00 $2,560,000.00 - $1,749,260.00 $4,309,260.00
Yield Statistics
Average Life ...................................................................................................................................................................... 11.960 Years
Weighted Average Maturity (Par Basis) ............................................................................................................................. 11.921 Years
Average Coupon ................................................................................................................................................................ 5.6349981%
Refunding Bond Information
Refunding Dated Date ....................................................................................................................................................... 4/01/2004
Refunding Delivery Date .................................................................................................................................................... 4/15/2004
Series ZOOOA / SLYGL£, f'U17POSE / 2/l0/L-004 / 70.~4.~tLYI
o`~ ~~fl ~lt~da'~~~t:J`~
dlraa_ .~ m.~§Pa Szavr
Page 9
'L'
C
.~
.~
d
~'
o °a
c~ a
N
O N -~
~ ~
~ ~N t0
~ ~ ~
f
N
.~ ~ Q~
C
„' _Q ~
w ~ ~
~, ~' C
c~l O ~
~i -
~~
.~ o v
fJ ~ N
Q 0
'Q~ ~`
W
_ ______
~p CS? V 4) M M CO 6f n O O 00 ~ M M O_
Q1 oD n t0 C O CO N M M O V M O M n '- til
QI'M V NO ~{ c+itrin neirM~tMO o~
~~ M V O N N~ GO O O 0) N M O~ 7 N CO O
~ Gp Mtt3N (0 M~-tnnCO Gfl <^ray O.-M tt
N O c0 M n n O~ N O~ CD N N M n n
~ 00 M N M M N N 0 0 0 to O V'
y~ M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M N M ~Y
tf)
J ~
N N r d' V to V' f0 M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ GO
tp t!i V M N O O) aD n Cp GD N
d
C nW tM m GD tC) n ~ <t ~ GOO O ~ ~'
£, M O'~ t(') O CD N n M O C~ V' GD
~ ~--OOO6~610Dmn nn(p ~
M
Q
O~ O O to 0~ LL) u7 tf) M M O GO M M M GO
U) N O h N O N N N n ~- +- O M n ~- CD M
~ N n C n 61 ~n~pp N O n CO V O M ~# M O M
~ N N_ O M N~ Gb GMO n n t00 ~ O~ 0 0 M_ N
O ~F' p M CO t!'> tSi n 0 t0 N N N M n ~
p V M V tl' N N N N M N N O O O OS O ~
w M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M N M tf)
in il'1
fJ KJ
r
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
~ O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O~ 4[? O t() O~~ ~
~ Ottj Otty to OtC)tt~U?tnNNOntt)NN n
to tl' aD to N M V V O M) r M O 6) t0
V O GO O O m V V: ~- N c0 to B O O n
tri by N «7 to O O V N V <- r n GO GO M CO Ci
n N N N N O W OD GD GD a0 M
M M M M M M M M M M M M N N N N N N
Z ~
N °o ~ oo °o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
N GO N N N GOD cb
W N ~
h O O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n
CO O O O O O
'3' P O 0 0 O cD
4 [D M M M M M
w ey O
'N ~OOO~ ~
"~ v M
W
J
W
V
W
U
W
M~
W
w
W
Z
n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n
tD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t!') iA 0 11') O tt> t[) .-
(O O O O O O tfJ O M tf) N N O n~ N N CT1
t to O n CD V V O tC) .- M O 62 (O ~
d Cp ~ N 07 cr O> V' V .- N a0 to to O O
O r n fD (O O O 7 N V r IM1 h~ W W M f0 M
p Gp .N- P N ~ O oD GO GD GD M
M M M M M M M N N N N N N
h ~ et
Ffl
n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n
000000oooo~n~no~c~au~~n .-
cp O O O O O~ tc') tf3 to N N O n th N N (A
H C M O s W 'b' R O to +- M O Cfl (O ~
y cp u~N Cr V_Oa v_ V ~-_N C0~OO6~
i G7i n n GU t0 O O <t ti O'i N CY c'M cM M ~- C'i
,.m,, 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q~ GD n n GO t!') ~Y M N .- N
~ ~ r r r r-
K3
~ ~ o ~ 0 0 0 a ~ a o 0 0 0 0 o a o
p O C7 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a, u~ ~n ~ ~ a o o ~ o u~ u~ ~n u> ~n ~
~ rY n ~- C n O N V' ~n n GD 6f O ~- N M
V .- .- N N N M M M M M M M C' C V V
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a o ci o 0 o ci d o co ci o o ci o 0
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o r~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 u3 0 o ui u~ o u'i uS ui ~ o ui
~ NNNNO NNM V' V'M C'~t0n
N N N N N N N N N N N N
a`
~nconcorno.-NM V U~cono~rno ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N F-
Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
{V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (~ N
O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'O O O
0 0 0 ~ a
A o 0 0 0 0
S
O
61 ~ ~ N V M aD N
} ?-
H M
M
m M M O ~
V
O
O In A
V' V a0 ~ M GAD ~ ~ W O D M
G
~ i+'i M M M et M ~
N ~ O
~
O r
~
O
:a -c
~ ~ ..fir
~ N
w+ ¢
Z H
m ~
m ~
w Q o~ `~ o p o
~i~ f ~~ ~ U oU cpU y .3
D ~-
~~ ~ r ~rn
t6 ~ c?-~
C ~ ~~
~
~ ~ N _
d ~ N tU ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ 4
~oii ?- mQ4 Z i-mQ ~Z~$
~~
Page 10
Preliminary
2,930,000
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2OO4A
Crossover Refunding of Series 1995A and 2OO0A
Debt Service Comparison
Date Total P+i Escrow Existing D!S Net New D/S Old Net D/S Savings
02/01/2005 89,616.67 (584,616.67) 870,450.00 375,450.00 375,450.00 -
02/01/2006 127,540.00 (101,300.00} 298,805.00 325,045.00 371,300.00 46,255.00
02101/2007 127,250.00 (101,300.00} 296,930.00 322,880.00 367,130.00 44,250.00
02/01/2008 126,900.00 (101,300.00} 299,455.00 325,055.00 367,315.00 42,260.00
02!01/2009 126,470.00 (2,661,300.00) 2,861,755.00 326,925.00 367,230.00 40,305.00
02/0112010 310,980.00 - - 310,980.00 361,550.00 50,570.00
02/01/2011 310,445.00 - - 310,445.00 360,550.00 50,105.00
02/0112012 314,145.00 - - 314,145.00 358,955.00 44,810.00
02101/2013 312,105.00 - - 312,105.00 356,765.00 44,660.00
02101(2014 314,455.00 - - 314,455.00 354,002.50 39,547.50
02!0112015 311,112.50 - - 311,112.50 350,667.50 39,555.00
02/01/2016 307,232.50 - - 307,232.50 346,760.00 39,527.50
02/01/2017 287,800.00 - - 287,800.00 297,172.50 9,372.50
02/01/2018 288,517.50 - - 288,517.50 299,572.50 11,055.00
02/01/2019 288,595.00 - - 288,595.00 301,012.50 12,417.50
02!01!2020 283,012.50 - - 283,012.50 296,477.50 13,465.00
02101!2021 286,962.50 - - 286,962.50 296,240.00 9,277.50
Total $4,213,139.17 (3,549,816.67) $4,627,395.00 $5,290,717.50 $5,828,150.00 $537,432.50
PV Analysis Summary (Net to Net}
Net FV Cashflow Savings ................................................................................................................................................... 537,432.50
Gross PV Debt Service Savings ......................................................................................................................................... 411,515.31
Net PV Cashflow Savings @ 3.821%{Bond Yield) ............................................................................................................ 411,515.31
Total Cash contribution ...................................................................................................................................................... {284,000.00)
Contingency or Rounding Amount ...................................................................................................................................... 1,846.56
Net Future Value Benefit .................................................................................................................................................... $255,279.06
Net Present Value Benefit .................................................................................................................................................. $129,361.87
Net PV Benefit / $867,034.36 PV Refunded Interest .......................................................................................................... 14.920%
Net PV Benefit 1$2,896,633.78 PV Refunded debt Service ............................................................................................... 4.466°~
Net PV Benefit / $3,055,000 Refunded Principal ............................................................................................................... 4.234°I°
Net PV Benefit / $2,930,000 Refunding PrincipaL ............................................................................................................. 4.415%
Refunding Bond Infonnation
Refunding Dated Date ................:....................................................................................................................................... 4/01/2004
Refunding Delivery Date .................................................................................................................................................... 4/15!2004
(The estimated savings results ofthe refunding are subject to market conditions.
Series 2004 Ref 1995A 200 J Issue Summary / 2/70/2004 J 11:36 AM
Page 11
THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE
ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS:
TERMS OF PROPOSAL
$2,930,000*
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004A
(BOOK ENTRY ONLY)
Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Thursday, March 18, 2004, until 10:00 A.M., Central
Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul,
Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the
Bonds will be by the City Council at 5:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day.
SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS
Proposals may be submitted in a sealed envelope or by fax (651) 223-3046 to Springsted.
Signed Proposals, without final price or coupons, may be submitted to Springsted prior to the
time of sale. The bidder shall be responsible for submitting to Springsted the final Proposal
price and coupons, by telephone (651 } 223-3000 or fax (651) 223-3046 for inclusion in the
submitted Proposal. Springsted will assume no liability for the inability of the bidder to reach
Springsted prior to the time of sale specified above. All bidders are advised that each Proposal
shall be deemed to constitute a contract between the bidder and the City to purchase the Bonds
regardless of the manner in which the Proposal is submitted.
DETAILS OF THE BONDS
The Bonds will be dated April 1, 2004, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest
payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 2004. Interest will
be computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months.
The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
2006 $20,000 2010 $205,000 2014 $235,000 2018 $245,000
2007 $20,000 2011 $210,000 2015 $240,000 2019 $255,000
2008 $20,000 2012 $220,000 2016 $245,000 2020 $260,000
2009 $20,000 2013 $225,000 2017 $235,000 2021 $275,000
The City reserves the right, after proposals are opened and prior to award, to increase or reduce the
principal amount of the Bonds offered for sate. Any such increase or reduction will be made in
multiples of $5,000 in any of the maturities. In the event the principal amount of the Bonds is
increased or reduced, any premium offered or any discount taken by the successful bidder will be
increased or reduced by a percentage equal to the percentage by which the principal amount of the
Bonds is increased or reduced.
Proposals for the Bonds may contain a maturity schedule providing for a combination of serial
bonds and term bonds. All term bonds shall be subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption
and must conform to the maturity schedule set forth above at a price of par plus accrued
interest to the date of redemption. In order to designate term bonds, the proposal must specify
"Years of Term Maturities" in the spaces provided on the Proposal Form.
Page 12
BOOK ENTRY SYSTEM
The Bonds will be issued by means of a book entry system with no physical distribution of
Bonds made to the public. The Bonds will be issued in fully registered form and one Bond,
representing the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds maturing in each year, will be
registered in the name of Cede & Co. as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"),
New York, New York, which will act as securities depository of the Bonds. Individual purchases
of the Bonds may be made in the principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof of a single
maturity through book entries made on the books and records of DTC and its participants.
Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to DTC or its nominee as registered owner of
the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of DTC will be the
responsibility of DTC; transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial owners by
participants will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of beneficial
owners. The purchaser, as a condition of delivery of the Bonds, will be required to deposit the
Bonds with DTC.
REGISTRAR
The City will name the registrar that shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City
will pay for the services of the registrar.
OPTIONAL REDEMPTION
The City may elect on February 1, 2014, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due an or
after February 1, 2015. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part at the option of the
City and in such manner as the City shall determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are
called for redemption, the City will notify DTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be
prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to
be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in
such maturity to be redeemed. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
SECURITY AND PURPOSE
The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and
credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge special
assessments against benefited properties. The proceeds will be used to refund the (i)
February 1, 2006 through February 1, 2016 maturities of the City's General Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 1995A, dated September 1, 1995, and the (ii) February 1, 2010
through February 1, 2021 maturities. of the City's General Obligation Fire Safety Bonds,
Series 2000A, dated June 1, 2000.
TYPE OF PROPOSALS
Proposals shall be for not less than $2,897,770 and accrued interest on the total principal
~~
amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit (Deposit) in
the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $29,300,
payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany the proposal. If a
Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a
bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to
Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must
identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the
Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is
required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's
check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central
Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that
time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement.
Page 13
The Deposit received from the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement
and no interest will accrue to the purchaser, will be deposited by the City. In the event the
purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City.
No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the
meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to
another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral
multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1%. Rates must be in level or ascending order. Bonds of the same
maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No
conditional proposals will be accepted.
AWRRD
The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true
interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in
accordance with customary practice, will be controlling.
The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non-substantive informalities of any proposal or of
matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals
without cause, and (iii) reject any proposal that the City determines to have failed to comply with
the terms herein.
BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION
If the Bonds qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment
therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the
issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sale option and expense of the purchaser of
the Bonds. Any increased costs of issuance of the Bonds resulting from such purchase of
insurance shall be paid by the purchaser; except that, if the City has requested and received a
rating on the Bonds from a rating agency, the City will pay that rating fee. Any other rating
agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser.
Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Bands have been awarded to the
purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on
the Bands,
CUSIP NUMBERS.
If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the
Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect
thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the
Bands. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers
shall be paid by the purchaser.
SETTLEMENT
Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the
purchaser through DTC in New York, New York. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the
purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association, of
Saint Paul and Minneapolis, Minnesota, and of customary closing papers, including a no-
litigation certificate. On the date of settlement, payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal,
or equivalent, funds that shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than
12:00 Noon, Central Time. Unless compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds has
been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the
City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non-compliance with said
terms for payment.
Page 14
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE
On the date of actual issuance and delivery of the Bonds, the City will execute and deliver a
Continuing Disclosure Undertaking (the "Undertaking") whereunder the City will covenant for
the benefit of the owners of the Bonds to provide certain financial and other information about
the City and notices of certain occurrences to information repositories as specified in and
required by SEC Rule 15c2-12(b)(5).
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent
information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly final Official
Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any
prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated,
85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (651) 223-3000.
The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the
maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other
information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect
to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2-12. By awarding the Bonds to any
underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no
more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the
senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 120 copies of
the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates
the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent
for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating
Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby
that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall
enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes
of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement.
Dated February 23, 2004
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
/s/ Karen Guilfoile
City Clerk
Page 15
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
HELD: February 23, 2004
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota, was duly held at the City Hall, in said City
on the 23rd day of February, 2004 at 7:00 P.M. for the purpose in part of authorizing the
competitive negotiated sale of the $2,930,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series
2004A of said City.
The following members were present:
and the following were absent:
adoption:
Member
introduced the following resolution and moved its
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATED
SALE OF $2,930,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004A
A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the
"City"), has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue its $2,930,000
General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A (the "Bonds") to refund the (i) February 1,
2006 through February 1, 2016 maturities of the City's General Obligation Improvement Bonds,
Series 1995A, dated September 1, 1995 and (ii) February 1, 2010 through February 1, 2021
maturities of the City's General Obligation Fire Safety Bonds, Series 2000A dated June 1, 2000;
and
B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Springsted Incorporated, in Saint Paul,
Minnesota ("Springsted"), as its independent financial advisor and Briggs and Morgan,
Professional Association ("Briggs"), as its bond counsel and Springsted is therefore authorized to
sell these obligations by a competitive negotiated sale in accordance with Minnesota Statutes,
Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9); and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Maplewood, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Authorization; Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes Springsted
to solicit bids for the competitive negotiated sale of the Bonds.
1617694v1
2. Meetin,~; Bid Opening. This City Council shall meet at the time and place
specified in the Terms of Proposal attached hereto as Exhibit A for the purpose of considering
sealed bids for, and awarding the sale of, the Bonds. The City Clerk or her designee, shall open
bids at the time and place specified in such Terms of Proposal.
3. Terms of Proposal. The terms and conditions of the Bonds and the
negotiation thereof are fully set forth in the Terms of Proposal attached hereto as Exhibit A and
hereby approved and made a part hereof.
4. Official Statement. In connection with said competitive negotiated sale,
the City Clerk, Mayor and other officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to
cooperate with Springsted and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the
Bonds, and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken
thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
1617694v1 2
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City Clerk of the City of
Maplewood, Minnesota, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have compared the attached and
foregoing extract of minutes with the original thereof on file in my office, and that the same is a
full, true and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the City Council of said City,
duly called and held on the date therein indicated, insofar as such minutes relate to the City's
$2,930,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A.
WITNESS my hand this day of , 2004.
City Clerk
1617694v1
EXHIBIT A
TERMS OF PROPOSAL
~2,930,000*
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004A
(BOOK ENTRY ONLY)
Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Thursday, March 18, 2004, until 10:00 A.M.,
Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint
Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of
the Bonds will be by the City Council at 5:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day.
SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS
Proposals may be submitted in a sealed envelope or by fax (651) 223-3046 to Springsted.
Signed Proposals, without final price or coupons, maybe submitted to Springsted prior to the
time of sale. The bidder shall be responsible for submitting to Springsted the final Proposal price
and coupons, by telephone (651) 223-3000 or fax (651) 223-3046 for inclusion in the submitted
Proposal. Springsted will assume no liability for the inability of the bidder to reach Springsted
prior to the time of sale specified above. All bidders are advised that each Proposal shall be
deemed to constitute a contract between the bidder and the City to purchase the Bonds regardless
of the manner in which the Proposal is submitted.
DETAILS OF THE BONDS
The Bonds will be dated April 1, 2004, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest
payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 2004. Interest will be
computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months.
The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
2006 $20,000 2010 $205,000 2014 $235,000 2018 $245,000
2007 $20,000 2011 $210,000 2015 $240,000 2019 $255,000
2008 $20,000 2012 $220,000 2016 $245,000 2020 $260,000
2009 $20,000 2013 $225,000 2017 $235,000 2021 $275,000
* The City reserves the right, after proposals are opened and prior to award, to increase or
reduce the principal amount of the Bonds offered for sale. Any such increase or reduction
will be made in multiples of $S, 000 in any of the maturities. In the event the principal
amount of the Bonds is increased or reduced, any premium offered or any discount taken by
the successful bidder will be increased or reduced by a percentage equal to the percentage
by which the principal amount of the Bonds is increased or reduced.
1617694v1
Proposals for the Bonds may contain a maturity schedule providing for a combination of serial
bonds and term bonds. All term bonds shall be subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption
and must conform to the maturity schedule set forth above at a price of par plus accrued interest
to the date of redemption. In order to designate term bonds, the proposal must specify "Years of
Term Maturities" in the spaces provided on the Proposal Form.
BOOK ENTRY SYSTEM
The Bonds will be issued by means of a book entry system with no physical distribution of
Bonds made to the public. The Bonds will be issued in fully registered form and one Bond,
representing the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds maturing in each year, will be
registered in the name of Cede & Co. as nominee of The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"),
New York, New York, which will act as securities depository of the Bonds. Individual
purchases of the Bonds may be made in the principal amount of $5,000 or any multiple thereof
of a single maturity through book entries made on the books and records of DTC and its
participants. Principal and interest are payable by the registrar to DTC or its nominee as
registered owner of the Bonds. Transfer of principal and interest payments to participants of
DTC will be the responsibility of DTC; transfer of principal and interest payments to beneficial
owners by participants will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of
beneficial owners. The purchaser, as a condition of delivery of the Bonds, will be required to
deposit the Bonds with DTC.
REGISTRAR
The City will name the registrar that shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City
will pay for the services of the registrar.
OPTIONAL REDEMPTION
The City may elect on February 1, 2014, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or
after February 1, 2015. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part at the option of the
City and in such manner as the City shall determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are
called for redemption, the City will notify DTC of the particular amount of such maturity to be
prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to
be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in
such maturity to be redeemed. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
SECURITY AND PURPOSE
The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and
credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge special
assessments against benefited properties. The proceeds will be used to refund the (i)
February 1, 2006 through February 1, 2016 maturities of the City's General Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 1995A, dated September 1, 1995, and the (ii) February 1, 2010
through February 1, 2021 maturities of the City's General Obligation Fire Safety Bonds,
Series 2000A, dated June 1, 2000.
1617694v1 A-2
TYPE OF PROPOSALS
Proposals shall be for not less than $2,897,770 and accrued interest on the total principal amount
of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ("Deposit") in the form
of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $29,300, payable to
the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany the proposal If a Financial Surety
Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of
Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted
Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify
each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are
awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to
submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire
transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the
next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the
Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The
Deposit received from the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no
interest will accrue to the purchaser, will be deposited by the City. In the event the purchaser
fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No
proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the
meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to
another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples
of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1%. Rates must be in level or ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity
shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional
proposals will be accepted.
AWARD
The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true
interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in
accordance with customary practice, will be controlling.
The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non-substantive informalities of any proposal or of
matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals
without cause, and (iii) reject any proposal that the City determines to have failed to comply with
the terms herein.
BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION
If the Bonds qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment
therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the
issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the
Bonds. Any increased costs of issuance of the Bonds resulting from such purchase of insurance
shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the City has requested and received a rating on the
Bonds from a rating agency, the City will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall
be the responsibility of the purchaser.
1617694v1 A-3
Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Bonds have been awarded to the
purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on
the Bonds.
CUSIP NUMBERS
If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the
Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect
thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the
Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers
shall be paid by the purchaser.
SETTLEMENT
Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the
purchaser through DTC in New York, New York. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the
purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association, of
Saint Paul and Minneapolis, Minnesota, and of customary closing papers, including a no-
litigation certificate. On the date of settlement, payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal,
or equivalent, funds that shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than
12:00 Noon, Central Time. Unless compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds has
been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City
for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non-compliance with said terms for
payment.
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE
On the date of actual issuance and delivery of the Bonds, the City will execute and deliver a
Continuing Disclosure Undertaking (the "Undertaking") whereunder the City will covenant for
the benefit of the owners of the Bonds to provide certain financial and other information about
the City and notices of certain occurrences to information repositories as specified in and
required by SEC Rule 15c2-12(b)(5).
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information
relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly final Official Statement
within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of
the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser
is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place,
Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (651) 223-3000.
The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the
maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other
information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect
to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2-12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter
or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than
seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior
1617694v 1 A-4
managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 120 copies of the
Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the
senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for
purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter.
Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its
proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a
contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring
the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement.
Dated February 23, 2004
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
/s/ Karen Guilfoile
City Clerk
1617694v1 11-5
Agenda #K5
MEMORANDUM
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Shann Finwall, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Development Moratorium -Gladstone Neighborhood
DATE: February 13, 2004
INTRODUCTION
The Gladstone Neighborhood is thought of by many to be the heart of Maplewood. The city
council has recognized this importance by the establishment of the 2003/2004 city council goals,
which includes the redevelopment and revitalization of the Gladstone Neighbofiood. As part of the
revitalization, the city council authorized the construction of the city's first roundabout and
subsequent streetscaping at the comer of Frost Avenue and English Street. In addition, the city
council has established streetscape improvements as part of the 2005 capital improvements plan.
DISCUSSION
City staff has applied for, and received, an $8,000 matching grant from the Metropolitan Council to
continue the revitalization process by creating a strategic plan for the Gladstone Neighborhood.
With these funds, city staff has contracted with Rich McLaughlin, of Architecture and Town Planning,
to evaluate and create a design plan for the Gladstone Neighborhood. This process will include
feedback from the city council, city staff, city boards, and Gladstone businesses and residents in the
form of workshops, open houses, and presentations.
At the end of the study, Mr. McLaughlin will present to the city council a strategic development plan
(SDP) for the Gladstone Neighborhood. The SDP will be a set of drawings and design standards
the city can use, along with city ordinances, to achieve a sustainable, livable center for this
neighborhood. In addition to the SDP, the city's zoning ordinances, zoning map, and
comprehensive plan may need to be revised to reflect these changes. The SDP will be presented to
the city council on May 10, 2004, with any needed land use changes following soon after.
In order to ensure adequate time in which to create and implement the SDP and land use changes,
city staff is proposing a moratorium on development within the Gladstone Neighborhood. The
moratorium would ensure that all future development in the Gladstone Neighborhood meet the new
vision for the area.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution on pages 2 through 5. This resolution approves a development moratorium for
the Gladstone Neighborhood, which will preclude any future development within the Gladstone
strategic planning study area until the adoption of the SDP and land use changes by the city council,
or within one year, whichever comes first.
p:gladstone/gladstone moratorium memorandum
Attachment: Gladstone Neighborhood Development Moratorium Resolution
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING THE PLANNING
PROCESS AND DEVELOPING BUILDING AND DESIGN STANDARDS FOR
THE GLADSTONE NEIGHBORHOOD
The area under consideration (hereinafter "Gladstone Neighborhood") includes land
generally located along Frost Avenue and English Street in Maplewood as follows:
properties south of the Gateway Trail, properties north of Frisbee Avenue, properties
east of Phalen Place North, and properties west of Ide Street North (refer to Gladstone
Neighborhood Strategic Planning Study Area map attached for exact location).
The Maplewood City Council ordains:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE
1.01 The City of Maplewood is conducting a strategic planning study that includes land
use planning components for the Gladstone Neighborhood.
1.02 The objective of the study is to design a strategic development plan including
drawings and design standards the city can use, along with city ordinances, to
achieve a sustainable, livable center for this neighborhood.
1.03 In addition to the study, the city's zoning ordinance, zoning map, and
comprehensive plan may need to be revised to reflect the following issues:
- Land use
- Building setbacks
- Building height
- Design standards for buildings
- Pedestrian flow and safety
- Parking
- Streetscaping
- Signage
- Lighting
- Landscaping
- Housing density
1.04 There is a need for this study to be conducted so that the city can adopt changes
to the city's zoning ordinance, zoning map, comprehensive plan, and design
standards for the redevelopment of the Gladstone Neighborhood.
2
SECTION 2. STRATEGIC PLANNING STUDY; MORATORIUM
2.01 The study is authorized by the city. City staff shall coordinate this study with the
Metropolitan Council, hired consultants, Gladstone property and business owners,
interested citizens, city council, and various city commissions and boards.
2.02 Upon completion of the study, it shall be presented to the planning commission
and community design review board for their review and recommendation to the
city council.
2.03 A moratorium on development in the Gladstone Neighborhood is adopted pending
adoption of the study and any amendments to the city's zoning ordinance, zoning
map, or comprehensive plan as deemed necessary as a result of the study by the
city council. The city will not approve any subdivision, building permit for the
exterior construction of new buildings or additions, and freestanding signs during
the moratorium period.
SECTION 3. TERM
3.01 The term of this ordinance shall be for one year or until such time as the city
council adopts the study and any amendments to the city's zoning ordinance,
zoning map, or comprehensive plan as deemed necessary as a result of the study.
SECTION 4. VARIANCES
4.01 Variances from this ordinance may be granted by the city council based upon a
determination that a proposed subdivision or development would be compatible
with proposed land use and zoning, and that such proposals would keep with the
spirit and intent of this ordinance. The procedures to be followed in applying for a
variance from this ordinance shall be in accordance with state law on findings for
variances and shall include the following:
a. The applicant shall file a completed application form, together with
required exhibits, to the Community Development Department.
b. The application for a variance shall set forth special circumstances or
conditions which the applicant alleges to exist, and shall demonstrate that
the proposed subdivision or development is compatible with existing or
proposed land use and zoning.
c. The application shall be submitted to the planning commission for their
review and recommendation to the city council.
d. The city council may in its discretion set a public hearing prior to making a
final determination on the requested variance.
e. The city council may impose such restrictions upon the proposed
subdivision or development as may be necessary to comply with the
purpose and intent of this ordinance.
3
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE
5.01 This ordinance shall take effect after the city publishes it in the official newspaper.
The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on , 2004.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
4
0 -Study Area
•.. .~ .^.
Gladstone Neighborhood
"E Strategic Planning Study Area
s
5
Keller Golf Course
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: Parkway Lift Station Removal Improvements, Project 02-14 -Resolutions for:
1. Directing Modification of Existing Construction Contract (CO 4)
2. Acceptance of Project
DATE: February 16, 2004
Introduction/Summary
The attached Change Order No. 2 has been reviewed by staff, yet requires approval by the
city council before final payment to the contractor can be authorized. The construction
contract for the Parkway Lift Station Removal Improvements is complete and the project is
ready to be accepted.
The city council will consider approving the attached resolutions: Directing the Modification of
the Existing Construction Contract (Change Order No. 2) and Acceptance of Project.
Background
The attached Change Order No. 2 is for additional work required to be done as a result of
unanticipated poor soils that were encountered during construction, as well as a modification
to an existing sewer service reconnection. These items have been reviewed and are attached
for approval consideration.
The project is final and complete and ready for final payment. The final construction cost, and
the amount to be paid to the contractor, is $459,834.55.
Budget Impact
The project budget and final costs have been reviewed. The final project cost is estimated at
$596,000. This includes all construction and engineering and administrative costs associated
with the project. The original project budget was $608,000.
No revision to the project budget is required.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the city council approve the two attached resolutions for the
Parkway Lift Station Removal Improvements, City Project 02-14: Directing the
Modification of the Existing Construction Contract (Change Order No 2) and Acceptance
of Project.
CMC
JW
Attachments: Resolutions (2)
Change Order No. 2
Location Map
RESOLUTION
DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made
Improvement Project 02-14, Parkway Lift Station Removal Improvements, and has let a
construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and
WHEREAS, it is now necessary that said final contract be modified and designated as
Improvement Project 02-14, Change Order No. 2.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA that the mayor and city clerk are hereby authorized and directed to modify the
existing contract by executing said Change Order No. 2 in the amount of $33,145.00. The final
contract amount is $459,902.60.
No revision to the project budget is required.
RESOLUTION
ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT
WHEREAS, the city engineer for the City of Maplewood has determined that the
Parkway Lift Station Improvements, City Project 02-14, are complete and recommends
acceptance of the project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA, that City Project 02-14 is complete and maintenance of these improvements is
accepted by the city. Release of any retainage or escrow is hereby authorized.
Page 1 of 1
CHANGE ORDER
CITY OF l~L4PLEWOOD
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
PROJECT NAME: Parkway Lift Station Removal Improvements
PROJECT NO: City Project 02-14
CONTRACTOR: Forest Lake Contracting, Inc.
CHANGE ORDER NO.: Two (2)
DATE: December 22, 2003
The following changes shall be made in the contract documents:
BID SCHEDULE F -CHANGE ORDER NO. Z
I#em Unit
No. Item Description Unit Quantity Price Amount
1 Granular Foundation Ton 160.00 $20.00 $3,200.00
2 6"PVC Service Pipe, Schedule 40 LF 142.00 $35.00 $4,970.00
3 Subgrade Excavation CY 1,004.00 $5.00 $5,000.00
4 Select Granular Borrow (CY) CY 1,100.00 $5.00 $5,500.00
5 Concrete Pavement, Irregular Width SY 130.00 $50.00 $6,500.00
6 6" Concrete Driveway Pavement SY 115.00 $45.00 $5,175.00
7 Soddins, Twe Lawn SY 700.00 $4.00 $2,800.00
TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 $33,145.40
CONTRACT STATUS:
Original Contract: $412,760.00
Net Change of Prior Change: $13,997.60
(Change Order No. 1)
Change this Change Order: $33,145.00
Revised Contract: $459,902.60
Recommended By: Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc.
f 7
~/ ~ j /~ /~
By:.~Z-T~~.. J' /~ =7tik l;~. Date: / Z -- 2 ? -~, 3
Agreed to By: Forest Lake Contracting, Inc.
By: .~-~
Approved By: City of Maplewood
By:
Date: ~ z- z 3 - o~
Date:
Mayor
i
By: ~~~ ~~ Date: -'~ iL~ G'~~
_ City Engineer
1
i ~
i
v~
00 ~_
4
BEAM AVE, Af
O ~^ K `~'
ON[MA
U
a ~6~0? /~ Ko
Gervais /
i~ lake
J
y
~y2a~ a.
PALM ~
~, CIR.
CT. PA
N~
CONNOR CCN AVE
CT. DEMONT
~j rw-T N
P~O~` V ^ ~ BR~KS
LOCATION ~"e<<ea L
io
Pkwy.
poo
Lake
~ r rr~~ ca n~,a~a
SCHWA DR. v~i l ~ ~~
Kelle /
I LARK AVE. ~ ~ ? ~ VIKING ~ Lake /
LAUR IE RO. ~ °'y~ w a °p ~ ~~`II
2 ~ ¢ z 3 LAURIE CT. ~ /
2 ~ 4 w
in ~ y~ o~ ~ a Y ~ /
COUNTY RD. B F: ~. N COUNTY ~ ~ RD. B BURKE AV apx~...~ /
~f J ELD RIDGE AV E, p ~~~ .
S ndy ~j a z ~ ~ Oehrllne in
~ Lake p = aQ RELMONT LN. ~ Loke BELMONT [A,
n~ `~„ ~, '_~ ~ N SKILLMAN N AVE. I / SKILLMAN AV. KENW OOD KE
~ `c .-
y SKILLMAN AVE. ~ fn c~i Y ~ w ~ ~" LN.
~__~ ~ a ~ u~i ~ a w 3 2,
~ ~ F. EAT. VERNON = ~ 0 3 w m N z p
sl ,~ "~- DOWNS AVE. aJ ~ ~ MT~YERNON AV r~ i W w
~ v ~ ~ D~ "ea.prn P rye ® a U O
~ ~•:sr' N °a I ro-x ROSELP.wN
p ° BELLW000 AVE. BELL W00~1 o AVE. BELLWOOo AVE.
OO ~ '^ a SUMMER AVE. N ~ ~ N SUMMER 3 a °0 4
w ~ CT.NV wn°w 3
~ FENTON AVE. ~~ ~ u ~ a w m N x ° -' w l3
we 'em O ~ ~ g < Y ~~
,-~ ~ N AD O "' ~ AVE. o RIPLEY AVE. m ~,
~ KWG570N z "' ~~ u, N i ~ KINGSTONagVE. ao ~~a ~ ~ l1l
~ ~ i z j " a O~ a 10 w AVE.3 N N PRICE SAVE. ~.ti t'
~ ~ a ~ LAUPE NTEUR ¢ _ ~ a AVE. - WI a Q ~\
~ m ,~ i ~ _ ~ ~~~
,0 35 s,~rNr ~~~~~
^~~ Kimley-Horn CITY OF MAPLEWOOD LOCATION MAP
~ and Associates, inc. PARKWAY LEFT 8TATION REMOVAL
s% a~:~Mri' ssni w' s°""~5N Fer Na, (csi)cu-si'e CITY PROJECT 02-74 EX!'!!B!T i
AGENDA ITEM K-7
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Erin Laberee, Staff Engineer
SUBJECT: Carlton Street Improvements, City Project 03-22
1. Resolution Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids
2. Resolution Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll
DATE: February 17t", 2004
Introduction
Final plans and specifications for the above referenced project have been completed and are ready to
be advertised for bids. The proposed bid opening for this project is scheduled for 10:00 a.m., Friday,
March 26, 2004. Award of bids would be considered by the city council at the April 12, 2004, city
council meeting.
Following the approval to advertise for bids, the next step in the improvement process is to prepare
the assessment roll.
Background
Staff has come to an agreement with 3M with regards to their concern for additional traffic lanes.
Staff has proposed to construct 4 lanes from Conway to 3M's west entrance road. From there, it will
taper down to two lanes until it reaches Minnehaha. Aright-turn lane will be constructed on Carlton
at Minnehaha.
Final negotiations are taking place with regards to the pond and ponding easement that will be
necessary to acquire from 3M. Staff is exploring the option to participate in additional landscaping
work around the pond instead of a direct monetary contribution to 3M. They seem to be receptive to
the idea.
The assessment roll may now be prepared as costs are not directly dependent on the actual amount
of the bid, rather on a predetermined assessment rate established in the city's pavement
management policy. The method of assessment will be the same as was outlined in the feasibility
study, with the exception of the single-family properties. During the preparation of the assessment
roll, the single family residential properties will automatically be recommended for an undeveloped
property deferment as was discussed during the public hearing. The calculated assessment roll will
be brought back to the city council at the March 8, 2004, council meeting.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolutions for the Carlton Street
Improvement, Project 03-22: Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids and Ordering the
Preparation of the Assessment Roll.
JW
Attachments
1. Resolution Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids
2. Resolution Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll
3. Location Map
EML
RESOLUTION
APPROVING PLANS
ADVERTISING FOR BIDS
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the city council on November 10t", 2003, plans
and specifications for Carlton Street Improvement, Project 03-22, have been prepared by (or under
the direction of) the city engineer, who has presented such plans and specifications to the council for
approval,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA:
1. Such plans and specifications, 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 10:00 a.m. on the 26t" day of March, 2004, at the
city hall and that no bids shall be considered unless sealed and filed with the clerk and accompanied
by a certified check or bid bond, payable to the City of Maplewood, Minnesota for five percent of the
amount of such bid.
3. The city clerk and city engineer are hereby authorized and instructed to receive, open,
and read aloud bids received at the time and place herein noted, and to tabulate the bids received.
The council will consider the bids, and the award of a contract, at the regular city council meeting of
April 12t", 2004.
RESOLUTION
ORDERING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL
WHEREAS, the city clerk and city engineer will receive bids for the Carlton Street
Improvements, City Project 03-22.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA that the city clerk and city engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be
specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land
abutting on the streets affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and they shall
file a copy of such proposed assessment in the city office for inspection.
FURTHER, the clerk and city engineer shall, upon completion of such proposed assessment
notify the council thereof.
AGENDA ITEM K-8
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: Legacy Parkway Improvements, Hazelwood to Kennard, City Project 03-26 -Resolution
Accepting Report and Calling for Public Hearing
DATE: February 16, 2004
Introduction/Summary
The city's consulting engineer, Kimley-Horn and Associates, has completed the preliminary report for
Legacy Parkway Improvements (Hazelwood St. to Kennard St.). The next step of consideration is
calling for a public hearing to be held on March 22, 2004.
Background
On September 8, 2003, the city council approved the preliminary plat for the Hartford Legacy Village
development, as well as ordered the extension of Legacy Parkway to the east between Kennard Street
and Southlawn Drive. The segment of Legacy Parkway to the west, between Kennard Street and
Hazelwood Street, had not been proposed as this area of the plat was simply platted as an outlot, later
to be proposed as Heritage Square.
On December 8, 2003, the city council approved the preliminary plat for Heritage Square, which
included the public right-of-way for the section of Legacy Parkway between Hazelwood and their west
property line. On January 12, 2004, the city council received a petition for public improvement from
Town & Country Homes and authorized the preparation of a feasibility study to construct Legacy
Parkway from Kennard Street to Hazelwood Street.
It is proposed that this project will be added to the first segment of Legacy Parkway that was ordered on
September 8, 2003. As part of the overall site improvements, the city will provide design and
construction inspection services, as well as award a construction contract for the improvement of
Legacy Parkway. Cost of the improvement will be borne mainly by the site developer. In addition, costs
will be recovered from a potential developer of the existing single-family properties along Hazelwood.
The city is still negotiating with the two remaining property owners along Hazelwood Street. Acquisition
of their properties would be necessary to extend Legacy Parkway out to Hazelwood Street. With the
completion of the roadway between Hazelwood and Southlawn, it will provide access east and west
across the Legacy development, as well as provide an internal roadway reliever to avoid directing
internal traffic out to Beam Avenue or County Road D.
This project would consist of approximately 0.25 miles of street construction, as well as storm sewer,
sanitary sewer, and water main improvements. Attached is an executive summary of the report. A
complete electronic report has been provided with the agenda and has been posted on the city's
website. A hard copy of the report may be viewed at the office of the city engineer.
The estimated cost of the improvements is $1,115,500. Assessments to the developers (Town and
Country Homes and the potential developer of the Hazelwood properties) are estimated at $688,130,
with a small amount of the costs from utility funds and the remaining share of the project to be paid
from the city funds that will be generated by the property taxes from the site improvements at Legacy
Village.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the city council approve the attached resolution accepting the Preliminary
Report for the Legacy Parkway Improvements (Hazelwood Street to Kennard Street), Project 03-
26, and calling a Public Hearing for 7:00 pm on March 22, 2004.
Attachment: Resolution
Executive Summary
Location Map
Preliminary Report (electronic attachment)
RESOLUTION
ACCEPTING REPORT
CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution of the council adopted January 12, 2004, a report
has been prepared under the direction of the city engineer with reference to the improvement
of Legacy Parkway (Hazelwood to Kennard), City Project 03-26, and this report was received
by the council on February 23, 2004, and
WHEREAS, the report provides information regarding whether the proposed project is
necessary, cost-effective, and feasible,
WHEREAS, the first segment of Legacy Parkway (Kennard to Southlawn) was ordered
following a public hearing on September 8, 2003, and
WHEREAS, the current proposed second segment of Legacy Parkway (Hazelwood to
Kennard) will be included as part of one larger project if ordered following a public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
The council will consider the improvement of such street and utilities in accordance
with the report and the assessment of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost
of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 at an estimated total
cost for the improvement of $1,115,500.
2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 22nd day of
March 2004 in the council chambers of city hall at 7:00 p.m., and the clerk shall give
mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law.
Approved this 23nd day of February 2004.
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
LEGACY PARKWAY IMPROVEMENTS
(HAZELWOOD STREET TO KENNARD STREET)
CITY PROJECT 03-26
EXECZITIVE SUMMARY
This Feasibility Study and Report has been prepared for the Legacy Parl~vay Improvements (Hazelwood Street to
Kennard Street), City Project 03-26. The proposed project includes the following improvements:
• Construction of Legacy Parl~vay between Hazelwood Street and Kennard Street. This segment of Legacy
Parl~vay is proposed to be constructed as a part of the proposed Town & Country Homes Heritage Square at
Legacy Village development.
• Installation of gravity sanitary sewer main along Legacy Parl~vay.
• Installation of watermain along Legacy Parl~vay.
• Installation of drainage improvements to collect runoff and to provide storm water treatment and storage.
The estimated costs for the proposed improvements are detailed below. These costs include a 10% construction cost
contingency and a 31.5 % allowance for indirect costs.
Proposed Improvement Estimated Cost
Street Improvements $ 481,400
Storm Sewer Improvements $ 237,100
Sanitary Sewer Improvements $ 131,400
Watermain Improvements $ 120,600
Kennard Street Parking $ 45,000
Subtotal Project Costs $1,015,500
Right-of--Way/Easement Acquisition Costs $ 100,000
Total Project Cost $1,115,500
The improvements are proposed to be financed through a combination of special assessments to benefiting
properties along with City funds. The following is a summary of the estimated funding amounts from each of the
proposed financing sources:
Financing Source Amount
Assessments $ 688,130
City of Maplewood Funds $ 413,570
SPRWS Funds $ 13,800
Total $1,115,500
The following is a proposed schedule for the project if the City Council votes to proceed.
Feasibility Study Accepted, Call Public Hearing February 23, 2004
Public Hearing/Authorize Preparation of Plans & Specs March 22, 2004
Approve Plans and Specifications April 12, 2004
Bid Opening May 14, 2004
Assessment Hearing/Award Contract May 24, 2004
Construction Start June 7, 2004
Construction Complete November 26, 2004
Based upon the analysis completed as a part of this report, the proposed Legacy Parl~vay Improvements (Hazelwood
Street to Kennard Street), City Project 03-26 are feasible, necessary and cost effective and would benefit the City of
Maplewood.
~.,~ -
AGENDA ITEM K-9
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: County Road D Realignment Improvements (West of TH 61 to Highridge Court),
City Project 02-08--Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Authorizing
Receipt of Bids for TH 61 Frontage Road and Utility Improvements
DATE: February 17, 2004
Introduction
The public hearing for the County Road D (West) Realignment Improvements, Project 02-08, was
held on February 9, 2004. The first set of plans for that project is complete and ready to be
processed for bidding. Council approval is recommended.
Background
On November 10, 2003, the city council received a petition from Trout Land, LLC, who
purchased the former Frattalone property north of Gulden's restaurant. Trout Land, LLC also has
a purchase agreement with the Prokosch family on the north end of the project, making Trout
Land, LLC the owner of 95 percent of the project area. They requested that the city proceed with
the improvements for realignment of County Road D. The council held the public hearing on
February 9, 2004, and ordered the project to be constructed. The preliminary report for the
project identified that the best approach for the improvement would be to divide the project into
two construction contracts. The total estimated cost of all improvements is $2,321,400.
Approximately 50 percent of the project cost is proposed to be paid with assessments, with the
remainder paid by Municipal State Aid Street (MBAs) funds and through a contribution from
Ramsey County.
As part of the right of way and relocation agreements, Venburg Tire will be moving their business
to the west side of TH 61 to the Gulden's restaurant site. The existing Gulden's restaurant site is
approximately 4.31 acres in size. Gulden's will be subdividing their lot to create a 1.71-acre
parcel on the north side of the property for Venburg Tire. Gulden's Restaurant will continue to
operate on a 2.50-acre parcel on the south side of the property. The city will acquire a 0.10-acre
portion of the property for the construction of County Road D. It is also planned that a 0.25 acre
portion of the Kami property north of Gulden's will be acquired by Gulden's/Venburg.
City improvements are proposed to accommodate the Venburg Tire relocation to the Gulden's
site. The city will be constructing County Road D west of TH 61 along the northern portion of the
Gulden's property as part of a bid package to be approved in April 2004. This improvement will
include the construction of a frontage road along the west side of TH 61 to include the following:
Provide access to Guldens, the proposed Venburg Tire site, and the adjacent vacant
LaMettry property from the new County Road D alignment.
Allow for the closure of an existing Gulden's driveway access to TH 61 south of the
proposed County Road D intersection.
Provide a continuation of the existing frontage road on the LaMettry property south of the
Gulden's site.
City Council Agenda Background
County Road D, West of TH 61 -Plan Approval
Page Two
The frontage road would be constructed as a part of the County Road D improvements, but
would be owned and maintained by the property owners. Cross easements have been
negotiated among the property owners to allow joint usage of the frontage road. The cross
easements are required as a part of the approval of the lot subdivision plan. The frontage road,
while accommodating access to the existing restaurant and the new Venburg Tire site, has a
public purpose in that closure of the driveway to Gulden's restaurant and the revision to Gulden's
restaurant are compensable items related to right of way acquisition. The frontage road also
provides for an improved intersection operation on County Road D. Finally, the frontage road
assures access to the area properties for benefiting improvement costs.
The city will also be constructing and acquiring regional storm drainage facilities for the project
area as a part of the public improvements. These storm drainage facilities will accommodate the
storm water storage and treatment requirements for the Gulden'sNenburg site as well as all
property north to County Road D. No on-site storm water ponding is proposed as a part of the
Gulden'sNenburg site plan. The regional storm pond was constructed by the Toyota-LeMettry
improvements and is currently on property owned jointly by Steve McDaniel of Maplewood Toyota
and Richard LeMettry of LeMettry Auto Body.
An agreement has been reached with Mr. McDaniel and Mr. LeMettry that allows the city to
acquire the regional ponds for the roadway and development improvements, while keeping their
property in compliance with the Shoreland Ordinance. Two agreements have tentatively been
reached involving the property owned by Mr. McDaniel and Mr. LeMettry. First, they will sell the
back portion of the property behind Gulden's restaurant to the Kami Corporation. The city will
purchase a portion of the regional pond on the back portion of this parcel. The remainder of the
pond will be dedicated to the city for $1. In exchange, Mr. McDaniel and Mr. LeMettry will:
• Provide the city with right of access for the frontage road construction.
• Sign an agreement for the closure and relocation of the access to TH 61.
• Provide an easement agreement for construction and installation of a storm water pipe
across the remainder of their land.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached resolution approving the
plans and specifications for Phase 1 of the County Road D Realignment Improvements
(West of TH 61 to Highridge Court), City Project 02-08, and authorizing receipt of bids on
March 31, 2004 at 10:00 am.
1W
Attachments: Resolution
Location Map
RESOLUTION
APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
ADVERTISING FOR BIDS
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the city council on February 9, 2004, plans
and specifications for County Road D Realignment Improvements -Frontage Road and Utilities
(TH 61 to Highridge Court), 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 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 10:00 a.m. on the 31st day of March,
2004, at the city hall and that no bids shall be considered unless sealed and filed with the clerk
and accompanied by a certified check or bid bond, payable to the City of Maplewood, Minnesota
for five percent of the amount of such bid.
3. The city clerk and city engineer are hereby authorized and instructed to
receive, open, and read aloud bids received at the time and place herein noted, and to tabulate
the bids received. The council will consider the bids, and the award of a contract, at the regular
city council meeting of April 12, 2004.
Approved this 23rd day of February 2004.
~~ ~ i ~
> > ~ 1 i ~
~ I
1 ~~~~ ~
~- -~ - _ - -
__a.~.
- -
` ~ -~-~-- ~- ~---r--- ~ --- ~-- -,
~ ~ ~
~~ ~,~
L
~/ ~~ ~ ~
,~ / ~
~' 1 ~ ~ _ /
~~\~ S
/! ~
$ ~ - ~ /
~~ / f
_ / /
~r~~~
1
~r~
~~ -- -- -- / ~ ; r
~~ w `
i i
~ i ~
~ s ~!
i r 1 ~
~ ~ ~ ~
b' 39[it/9hiN6 PA ~ ~ r ~ ~
/ sr ~ ~ `
r
/ ' '
/ar ~ I! ri i~','~
~lr !'1
Di' r rJ ~ r~
~ ~ 1
/ ~ 1 r ~+ r~+ r t
~_ -------- f ~~-------- r i I r~~'
------ , , ~ r ~ r
~_ _ I ~ i ~~ ' i ~ ~ f ~ ~ City otMa~
`}f , ~ ~ , r r ~ DEPARTMENT OF
1 , E u ~ i; r ~? _ ENGINEERINI
~ ~ j ~ r ~ r p te~o rat ~.
F \ + ~ 11 ; r ; ; feel) ~re_.teeo rroc
W ~ \ ~ ~~i ~r ~~rlI
`\ ~ i I I ~ I r i~ i
` `~ ~ ~; 1 ; ,' ~~
~ , ~ ~ i ~
\` ~ 1 ,~r ~~rr
r
~~_ ~ ~ ~~
~ ~ II ~ ~ ~ ,'~ I ' C,OI,WT'f !~~
''~ ~ ,i
` ~ `
] I 'rf I' II'~ ~i.Lii ~i7~~ f~r
I' I ~ ~ -----~ ~ ~ !r~ r` ~ ~~ ~~ / EXHIBIT. 8
AGENDA ITEM K-10
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: County Road D Extension (Hazelwood to TH 61), City Project 02-07--
Resolution Approving Joint Powers Agreement with Cities of Vadnais Heights, Gem
Lake, White Bear Lake and White Bear Township, Ramsey County and State of
Minnesota for Alternative Transformer Route for Xcel Energy
DATE: February 17, 2004
Introduction
The County Road D realignment project between Hazelwood Street and TH 61 requires the
removal of the old rail line between Beam Avenue and I-694. The rail line's only purpose is to
provide access to the Xcel Energy substation in the event a transformer needs replacement. An
alternative overland route has been developed that makes the rail line unnecessary. Approval of a
joint powers agreement with the agencies affected by the revised route is necessary.
Background
On December 9, 2002, the city council approved a resolution to proceed with a project to realign
County Road D from Hazelwood Street to TH 61. That resolution was the culmination of many
hours of discussion and debate with staff, agencies, other communities and property owners that
occurred over many years. On May 12, 2003, the city council selected a final alignment for the
new roadway and authorized preparation of a preliminary report on the improvement. Following a
public hearing on September 8, 2003, the city council approved the realignment of County Road D
between Hazelwood and TH 61. The city council approved the first phase of construction with the
award of bid on November 10, 2003. Construction began in December for soil correction and
wetland creation, along with the correction of poor soils on the Countryview Golf Course property.
The next phase of construction will require the abandonment of the rail line. This rail line exists
only for the purpose of rail access to Xcel Energy's transformer site. An agreement has been
reached (see next item on the agenda) that allows Xcel to abandon the rail shipment, instead
providing for an overland shipment to a rail line in northern White Bear Township. The overland
truck route will cross property in Vadnais Heights, Gem Lake, White Bear Lake, and White Bear
Township, along with right of way under the jurisdiction of Ramsey County and MnDOT. The
attached agreement has been negotiated with each of these agencies over the past nine months
and is now ready for final approval by the City of Maplewood. The result of the agreement will
allow for the abandonment of the rail line, acquisition of the line by the Ramsey County Regional
Rail Authority and extension of the Bruce Vento Regional Trail (by Ramsey Count y Parks)
northerly from Beam Avenue to north of I-694. Agreements for these proceedings will be
forthcoming upon approval of the rail abandonment. The railroad, Burlington Northern, and the rail
operator, Minnesota Commercial Railway, are not opposed to this agreement. Approval is
recommended.
City Council Agenda Background
County Road DExtension-Xcel Joint Powers Agreement
Page Two
Budget Impact and Discussion
Right-of-way acquisition is included in the approved project budget. The proposed action to
approve the Joint Powers Agreement has been the subject of discussion and attempted by the
City of Maplewood, Ramsey County and the City of White Bear Lake for over 12 years.
Maplewood has spent over $10,000 in engineering and legal fees in negotiating this agreement,
but has the most to gain in that the rail line has precluded the construction/extension of County
Road D for 20+ years. The intent of this agreement is to clear the way for abandonment of the
railroad line by Burlington Northern (which they have agreed to), purchase of the railroad right of
way by the Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority (who plan to explore long-term transit
opportunities), and finally, a grant of an easement to the City of Maplewood for the County Road D
right of way through the rail alignment. The roadway will require removal of the railroad
embankment. The project budget includes an allocation of $125,000 for the easement acquisition
process.
Without this agreement, the only alternative for the city to consider would have been a realignment
of the trackage into the Xcel Energy site. The estimated cost of that construction was $750,000.
That expense will no longer be necessary if this agreement is approved.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Joint
Powers Agreement with the Cities of Vadnais Heights, Gem Lake and White Bear Lake, the
Township of White Bear, Ramsey County and the State of Minnesota for an Alternative
Transformer Haul Route.
RCA
Jw
Attachment: Resolution
Joint Powers Agreement including Map showing Project and Haul Route
Project Location Map
RESOLUTION
APPROVING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH
CITIES OF WHITE BEAR LAKE, VADNAIS HEIGHTS AND GEM LAKE
WHITE BEAR TOWNSHIP
RAMSEY COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
FOR
ALTERNATIVE TRANSFORMER HAUL ROUTE FOR XCEL ENERGY
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood is proposing to complete the County Road D Realignment
(Hazelwood Street to TH 61), City Project 02-07 ("Project"). The Project includes the reconstruction
and realignment of County Road D between Hazelwood Street and TH 61. The proposed
improvements are further detailed in the attached Figure 1, County Road D Realignment (Council
Approved Alignment 5-12-03); and
WHEREAS, the Project will require the removal of a portion of the existing railroad track in the
area south of I-694. It is the City of Maplewood's understanding, based upon information and belief,
that the existing railroad track is owned by Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) which also
has a lease agreement with Minnesota Commercial Railroad for a portion of the line; and
WHEREAS, the portion of the existing railroad track to be removed currently serves only the
Xcel Energy substation site along the west side of the railroad south of existing County Road D. Rail
access is provided to the substation site for the delivery of transformer units in the event of the need
for the installation of additional transformers or the replacement of failed transformers; and
WHEREAS, a Joint Powers Agreement has been prepared and negotiated with the Cities of
Vadnais Heights, Gem Lake, and White Bear Lake, the Township of White Bear, Ramsey County and
the State of Minnesota for an Alternative Transformer Haul Route for Xcel Energy.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
1. Said Joint Powers Agreement is herby approved and the Mayor and City Manager are
hereby authorized to sign said agreement signifying the City of Maplewood approval.
Approved this 23rd day of February 2004.
~. f
Y ... ~~
-~
-~
~~. - -
- - - _ , . F~ ..~.
~~_"i
~?;
y
N' .J
- - - - - _ - ~-~~ s- -
n
~_
1 i
. .~zr.=.r-i.~x~rs.^°x~xc~;,rzx ,e,~x-~
.k
I
,btir. , .~ . _ ,. ~
I! ~ :S k. ~4Yh~~N7S Y~'i5J4~1' IS ~ ~.
:,
f ,~ ,.rr~ . , -nr. ,. ,. ,. ,. .
•.
~.
i
j
it tl h u
_ r
~, a a R ti
4
"' ,- ., , . r-rrr . , ter., . , r -
..
~:.
_. .
r�
yA F:!"41c,y
ufi
ti
t: ,K� _ �. ¢•. ."y. ,�y fir.: .P:r,:.7.Y �11�' ;✓6.¢.2� y � � :.v.. k.' �'
?'4,.�+::{:y, �.: :; :a r�s�.'•i �' .'S: �uAb�''za� �� aa,
4
puy , S gy
Pf yM�
a~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ S~ ~~ ~ ~\
~ e'
~~~ ~ ~i_
i ~~ ~0 1.
~~_ ~.
~~ ':~ ~~~~~ ~` x
,. rs ~.
} '
7~, ~ ~ ~'
\ ~ ~..•~ . ', ~ n~ ',
~ 1
o~nrlr
zoaza
owi3o3
a~ N ~ F ~
O Z O 4- a
~ (~ O ~ ~
T QUH~~
~~O~aZ
O ~ ~ m
U d O
Y w
U O
a 8
~ ~
! 1
8 i
7 a
0
s
,o~
~ ~
~~1a
~
~
~,
~
~
1 ~ ~,z;
1-~1
ti,~~
11 \
~,~~~ ~~ ,,fir
~
1
~
c s' \
c ~ <~
\ ~
o ~ ~~
~
\
~ 1,i~E
i
~ ~° ~
~ ,
\ a{e
~
a~
\
~' / ~
~
\ \
\ ae
~o
~
~q~~r
~~mg
m0.€~a
~W
F
o
Q
~
~~ z;ia
U ~ ~"~~
~
4
Q
~~
AGENDA ITEM K-11
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager
FROM: Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: County Road D Extension (Hazelwood to TH 61)-City Project 02-07
Resolution Approving Memorandum of Agreement with Xcel Energy for Alternative
Transformer Haul Route
DATE: February 17, 2004
Introduction
The County Road D realignment project between Hazelwood Street and TH 61 requires the
removal of the old rail line between Beam Avenue and I-694. The rail line's only purpose is to
provide access to the Xcel Energy substation in the event a transformer needs replacement. An
alternative overland route has been developed that makes the rail line unnecessary. Approval of
a memorandum of agreement with Xcel Energy for the revised route is necessary.
Background
Approval of the Joint Powers Agreement with Vadnais Heights, Gem Lake, White Bear Lake,
White Bear Township, along with Ramsey County and MnDOT, will allow for the abandonment of
the rail line, acquisition of the line by the Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority and extension of
the Bruce Vento Regional Trail (by Ramsey Count y Parks) northerly from Beam Avenue to north
of I-694. The attached memorandum of agreement establishes Maplewood as the facilitator of
the Joint Powers Agreement. Because Xcel Energy is not a political subdivision, they cannot
enter into a Joint Powers Agreement with the other communities. The two agreements go
together and are binding on all parties.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the
Memorandum of Agreement with Xcel Energy for an Alternative Transformer Haul Route.
RCA
Jw
Attachment: Resolution
Memorandum of Agreement
Project Location Map
RESOLUTION
APPROVING MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
WITH
XCEL ENERGY CORPORATION
FOR
ALTERNATIVE TRANSFORMER HAUL ROUTE
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood is proposing to complete the County Road D Realignment
(Hazelwood Street to TH 61), City Project 02-07 ("Project"). The Project includes the reconstruction
and realignment of County Road D between Hazelwood Street and TH 61. The proposed
improvements are further detailed in the attached Figure 1, County Road D Realignment (Council
Approved Alignment 5-12-03); and
WHEREAS, the Project will require the removal of a portion of the existing railroad track in
the area south of I-694. It is the City of Maplewood's understanding, based upon information and
belief, that the existing railroad track is owned by Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF)
which also has a lease agreement with Minnesota Commercial Railroad for a portion of the line; and
WHEREAS, the portion of the existing railroad track to be removed currently serves only the
Xcel Energy substation site along the west side of the railroad south of existing County Road D. Rail
access is provided to the substation site for the delivery of transformer units in the event of the need
for the installation of additional transformers or the replacement of failed transformers; and
WHEREAS, a Memorandum of Agreement has been prepared and negotiated with the Xcel
Energy to provide for an Alternative Transformer Haul Route through a Joint Powers Agreement
previously approved by City Council resolution on February 23, 2004.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
1. Said Memorandum of Agreement with Xcel Energy is hereby approved and the Mayor and
City Manager are hereby authorized to sign said agreement signifying the City of
Maplewood approval.
Approved this 23rd day of February 2004.
'l
` f=.:~ .v
7_
'~v5
;-~n ~ Ali 't rR ~
_ ~II'I, ~~,~ II I'-
+{
'r. - ~
- ~ -
, _ - - - -
.. ., . .,_ n _~I n
4 ~~ - : ti~ ' „a ..fir
ti
r
IV
r .f! iP.. .. ,. Sa ~
~~ _ _
A _ } - -
N _ _I _
Y
r
{~ ~'~
i _ ~
1 Y
.ti ~ y S ..
~.rs~
~ _
'\
- _
4
~r
}
Y
ra..
la
_ _ _
4
t
- - - - - ~
..
<-
ix.,
o~nrlr N
zoaza
sN3o3 _
°
a
ozo~;,~a
in
~c~
Q
~ w
TQUH~~
~~o~'az
O ~ ~ m
U d
O
Y w
F N
U O
a
a
8
¢ ~
C
~
\~
~
8
o ~ ~~
k'
~ /,
'~
~
J~ Z}i
°r \ ~s~b ~ ~ ~ ~~
.
rs
.~ ~ ~~
1 ~ ~ \
~~
1 ~
.
awl
: s
~~1 a 1'~~ ,~ ~,~~ \
1-~1
ti,~~
11 \
~,~~~ ~~ ,,fir
~
1
~
c s' \
c ~ <~
\ ~
o ~ ~~
~
\
~ 1,i~E
i
~ ~° ~
~ ,
\ a{e
~
a~
~
y
~\
\
,.
~
\ \
\ ae
~o
~
~q~~r
~~mg
m0.€~a
~W
F
o
Q
~
i
~
a
z;
~
~"~~
U
~
~
4
Q
~~