Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 06-28 City Council PacketAGENDA MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M. Monday, June 28, 2004 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 04-13 A. CALL TO ORDER B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE C. ROLL CALL D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Minutes from the CounciUManager Workshop-June 14, 2004 2. Minutes from City Council Meeting-June 14, 2004 E. APPROVAL OF AGENDA F. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS G. CONSENT AGENDA All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. If a member of the City Council wishes to discuss an item, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and will be considered separately. 1. Approval of Claims 2. Conditional Use Permit Review - A-Gem Auto Sales (2720 Maplewood Drive) 3. Conditional Use Permit Review -Beaver Lake Townhomes (Maryland Avenue and Lakewood Drive) 4. Big Brothers Big Sisters -Temporary Food Permit -Fee Waiver 5. Parks and Recreation -Firework and Noise Control Permit 6. Approval of Program Supervisor Position-Maplewood Community Center H. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 7:00 p.m. Existing County Road D Realignment, Walter Street to T.H. 61, Project 04-06 -Public Hearing and Resolution Ordering Project and Authorizing Preparation of Plans and Specifications 2. 7:15 p.m. Code Amendment -Public Hearings (First Reading) 3. 7:30 p.m. Code Amendment -Commission Chairperson Appointments (First Reading) 4. 7:45 p.m. Heritage Square Second Addition (Legacy Village -Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway) Planned Unit Development Revision Preliminary Plat Design Approval I. AWARD OF BIDS 1. County Road D Realignment (East), T.H. 61 to Southlawn Drive, Project 02-07 - Resolution for Award of Bids J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. County Road D Realignment (East), T.H. 61 to Southlawn Drive, Project 02-07 - Resolution for Adoption of Assessment Roll K. NEW BUSINESS County Road D Realignment (West), Walter Street to T.H. 61, Project 02-08 - Resolutions for: a. Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids b. Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll 2. English Street Improvements, Frost to Cope, Project 01-14 -Approve Settlement Agreement with William Diesslin, 2115 English Street 3. Kennard Street Improvements, Beam to County Road D, Project 03-04 -Approve Engineering Agreement for Streetlight Study and Authorize Project Funds 4. Trunk Highway 61 Improvements, Beam to I-694, Project 03-07 -Resolution Authorizing Preparation of Preliminary Report and Approving Agreement with Kline Volvo 5. White Bear Avenue Improvements, Radatz to Buerkle Road, Project 02-21--Authorize Funding for Engineering Expenditures L. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS O. ADJOURNMENT Sign language interpreters for hearing impaired persons are available for public hearings upon request. The request for this service must be made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk's Office at (651) 249- 2001 to make arrangements. Assisted Listening Devices are also available. Please check with the City Clerk for availability. RULES OF CIVILITYFOR OUR COMMUNITY Following are Borne rules of civility the City of Maplewood expects of everyone appearing at Council Meetings - elected officials, staff and citizens. It is hoped that by following these simple rules, everyone's opinions can be heard and understood in a reasonable manner. We appreciate the fact that when appearing at Council meetings, it is understood that everyone will follow these principles: Show respect for each other, actively listen to one another; keep emotions in check and use respectful language. MINUTES CITY COUNCIL/MANAGER WORKSHOP Monday, June 14, 2004 Council Chambers, City Hall 5:30 p.m. A. CALL TO ORDER B. ROLL CALL Robert Cardinal, Mayor Present Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present Marvin Koppen, Councilmember Present Jackie Monahan-Junek, Councilmember Present Will Rossbach, Councilmember Present Others Present: City Manager Fursman Assistant City Manager Coleman City Clerk Guilfoile Police Chief Thomalla Fire Chief Lukin Human Resource Director Le Ramsey County Project Manager Kirkwald Communications Manager Marsha Pacolt C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the agenda as presented. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All D. NEW BUSINESS 1. 800 MHz Update Fire Chief Lukin and Police Chief Thomalla presented an in-depth report on 800 MHz. E. FUTURE TOPICS None F. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Juenemann moved to adjourn at 7:00 p.m. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All City Council/Manager Workshop 06-14-04 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:12 P.M. Monday, June 14, 2004 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 04-12 A. B. C. D. CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the City Council was held in the Council Chambers, at the Municipal Building, and was called to order at 7:12 P.M. by Mayor Cardinal. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Cardinal recognized Matthew Hyatt-Delta with the National Guard Infantry who will be serving in Afghanistan for 18 months. ROLL CALL Robert Cardinal, Mayor Present Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present Marvin Koppen, Councilmember Present Jackie Monahan-Junek, Councilmember Present Will Rossbach, Councilmember Present APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Minutes from the May 24, 2004 CounciUManager Workshop Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the minutes from the May 24, 2004 City CounciUMana,~er workshop as presented. Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All 2. Minutes from the May 24, 2004 City Council Meeting Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the minutes from the May 24, 2004 City Council Meeting as amended. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All E. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ml . Set Special Meeting M2. NEST M3. Status of a Property M4. Advisory Board Appointments M5. National Night Out M6. Special Announcement-Police Officer Councilmember Koppen moved to a~rove the a,~enda as amended. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All F. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS Resolution of Appreciation Gordon "Gordy" Heininger -Human Relations Commission a. City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. Mayor Cardinal recognized Mr. Heininger's years of service on the Human Relations Committee. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION 04-06-113 Gordon "Gordy" Heininger Human Relations Commission WHEREAS, Gordon "Gordy" Heininger has been a member of the Maplewood Human Relations Commission since January, 1991 and has served faithfully in that capacity to the present time; and WHEREAS, the Human Relations 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 Gordon "Gordy" Heininger is hereby extended our heartfelt gratitude and appreciation for his dedicated service, and we wish him continued success in the future. 2. Environmental Advisory Committee Appointments a. City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. Assistant City Manager Coleman presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Juenemann moved to anoint the following members to serve on the Environmental Committee: 1. Jeff Connell-3 year term 2. Cammy Johnson-3 year term 3. Jason Bailey-3 year term 4. Gerald Moran-3 year term 5. Shelly McVicker-2 year term 6. Dale Trippler-2 year term City Council Meeting 06-14-04 G. 7. Hans Neve-2 year term Seconded by Councilmember Koppen CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Claims ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: $ 3,000.00 Checks # 63913 dated 05/20/04 $ 221,251.59 Checks #63914 thru # 63972 dated 05/21/04 thru 05/25/04 $ 89,938.29 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 05/14/04 thru 05/20/04 $ 359,096.96 Checks # 63973 thru # 64028 dated 6/1/04 $ 310,172.10 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 5/21/04 thru 5/27/04 $ 363,010.33 Checks # 64029 thru # 64077 dated 6/08/04 $ 148,591.34 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 5/28/04 thru 6/3/04 $ 1,495,060.61 Total Accounts Payable $ 406,331.27 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 05/21/04 $ 4,530.27 Payroll Deduction check # 97528 thru # 97530 dated 05/21/04 $ 413,992.98 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 6/4/04 $ 6,128.41 Payroll Deduction check # 97638 thru # 97642 dated 6/4/04 $ 830,982.93 Total Payroll City Council Meeting 06-14-04 Ayes-All 3 $ 2,326,043.54 GRAND TOTAL 2. Parade Permit -White Bear Avenue Business Association -Fee Waiver Approved the Miscellaneous Permit to conduct a parade for the White Bear Avenue Business Association and waive the fee. Temporary Beer -Aldrich Arena -Rice Street Boxing & Fitness Association Approved the temporary 3.2% beer permit for the Rice Street Boxing and Fitness Association, 661 Western Avenue, St. Paul for Aldrich Arena, 1850 White Bear Avenue, on June 18, 2004 from 7:30 to approximately 11:30 p.m. 4. Resolution of Pay Ranges and Job Classifications for Temp/Seasonal & Casual Part-time Employees Approved the following resolution to replace the existing resolution establishing pay rates for temporary, seasonal, and casual part-time employees with only a couple changes from 2003: RESOLUTION 04-06-104 WHEREAS, according to the Minnesota Public Employees Labor Relations act, part- time employees who do not work more than 14 hour per week and temporary/seasonal employees who work in positions that do not exceed 67 days in a calendar year, or 100 days for full-time students, are not public employees and are therefore not eligible for membership in a public employee union. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the following pay ranges and job classifications are hereby established for temporary/seasonal and casual part-time (14 hours or fewer/wk) employees effective June 1, 2004, upon Council approval. Accountant $10.00-29.00 per hour Accounting Technician $9.00-22.00 per hour Administrative Assistant $9.00-20.00 per hour Background Investigator $25.00-35.00 per hour Building Inspector $14.00-35.00 per hour Building Attendant $6.00-12.00 per hour Clerk $6.50-11.00 per hour Clerk-Typist $8.50-15.00 per hour Customer Service Assistant $6.00-10.00 per hour CSO $8.00-16.00 per hour CSO/Paramedic $12.00-20.00 per hour Data Entry Operator $8.00-12.00 per hour Dispatcher $15.00-20.00 per hour Election Judge $6.50-12.00 per hour Election Precinct Chair $7.50-14.00 per hour Engineering Aide $7.00-11.00 per hour Engineering Technician $10.00-16.00 per hour Fire Department Custodian $575-690 per quarter City Council Meeting 06-14-04 Fire Inspector $9.00-15.00 per hour Intern $6.50-20.00 per hour IT Technician $15.00-20.00 per hour Laborer $6.50-12.00 per hour Lifeguard $6.00-14.00 per hour Receptionist $7.50-11.00 per hour Recreation Instructor/Leader $6.00-30.00 per hour Recreation Official $7.00-25.00 per hour Recreation Worker $6.00-18.00 per hour Secretary $9.00-18.00 per hour Theater Technician $20.00-30.00 per hour Vehicle Technician $9.00-15.00 per hour Video Coordinator* $11.00-19.00 per hour Video Technician* $10.00-18.00 per hour Water Safety Instructor (WSI) $7.50-14.00 per hour WSI & Head Lifeguard Differential $1.00 per hour (Lifeguards or WSIs working as Head Lifeguards; Lifeguards working as WSIs) *Video positions shall be paid a guaranteed minimum flat fee of $50 for 4 hours or less. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Manager shall have the authority to set the pay rate within the above ranges. Final Plat -Towns of New Century Third Addition (New Century Boulevard and Highwood Ave.) Approved the final plat for the Towns of New Century Third Addition date-stamped February 17, 2004. This approval is subject o the county recording the deeds, deed restrictions and covenants required by the city and the developer meeting all the conditions of the city engineer. 6. Copier Replacement-Main Copier in City Hall Approved the replacement of City Hall's current high volume copier with a new model from Metro Sales, Inc. and authorized a 3 year lease agreement. 7. Purchase of RecWare Software Approved the purchase of the RecWare Safari software package with the monies to be allocated from the data processing fund not to exceed $59,000. Purchase of Software Enterprise Agreement-LT. Department Gave authority to the Finance Director to make the appropriate budget adjustments for purchase of a software Enterprise Agreement by moving the first year cost of $31,963.20 into fund 703- 118-000-4430. 9. Purchase of Snowplow and Wing City Council Meeting 06-14-04 Approved the purchase and contract with Ziegler Inc. under State Contract 432521 for the purchase of a Henke plow and wing attachment for $37,533.24. 10. Holloway Avenue, North St. Paul Road to McKnight Road-Resolution Accepting Road Turnback from Ramsey County Adopted the following resolution approving the jurisdictional transfer of Holloway Avenue (North St. Paul Road to Century Avenue) from Ramsey County to the Cities of North St. Paul and Maplewood: RESOLUTION 04-06-103 APPROVING JURISDICTIONAL TRANSFER OF COUNTY ROAD TO CITY WHEREAS, The 1991 Minnesota Legislature established a Ramsey County Local Government Services Study Commission to report on the advantages and disadvantages of sharing, cooperating, restructuring, or consolidating activities in areas of public service including public works; and WHEREAS, The consolidation plan provides for reclassification of roadways and corresponding changes in jurisdiction including the transfer of local and State Aid roadways between the County and municipalities; and WHEREAS, Holloway Avenue (County Road 119) from North St. Paul Road to Century Avenue, located in the City of Maplewood, is presently under the jurisdiction of Ramsey County as a County Road; and WHEREAS, This roadway has been determined to serve a local function only; and WHEREAS, Revocation of County Road status maybe accomplished by resolution of the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 163.11; and WHEREAS, The consolidation plan stipulates that Ramsey County shall improve the roadway to acceptable levels prior to transferring jurisdiction over roadway segments from Ramsey County to municipalities, and the Ramsey County Capital Improvement Program provides funding for these improvements; and WHEREAS, The City of Maplewood desires Ramsey County to mill and overlay Holloway Avenue from North St. Paul Road to Furness Street and from McKnight Road to Century Avenue, and to contribute financially to the reconstruction of Holloway Avenue from Furness Street to McKnight Road, and fund the improvement projects with up to $300,000 from Capital Improvement Funds for Ramsey County Roadway Consolidation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, The Ramsey County Board of Commissioners hereby revokes County Road status of Holloway Avenue (County Road 119) from North St. Paul Road to Century Avenue; and transfers jurisdiction over this roadway to the City of Maplewood, effective after the Ramsey County Office of Budgeting and Accounting has encumbered the funds necessary to fund this recycle and overlay project, and after the County is in receipt of an adopted resolution from the City of Maplewood concurring with the County revoking the County Road status of Holloway Avenue from North St. Paul Road to Century Avenue; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That as just compensation for this jurisdiction transfer the County will mill and overlay Holloway Avenue from North St. Paul Road to Furness Street and from McKnight Road to Century Avenue, and contribute $56,000 towards the reconstruction of Holloway Avenue from Furness Street to McKnight Road, and fund the improvement projects at an estimated total cost of $300,000; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, The Ramsey County Engineer is authorized within the limits of this resolution to take actions necessary to have the identified jurisdiction change executed. City Council Meeting 06-14-04 11. Hazelwood Street Improvement, Project 01-16-Resolution for Modification of Existing Construction Contract Adopted the following resolution for Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $27,565.15 with Park Construction for Hazelwood Street Improvements, Project 01-16: RESOLUTION 04-06-105 DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made Improvement Project 01-16, Hazelwood Street Improvements, and has let a construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and WHEREAS, it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designated as Improvement Project 01-16, Change Order No. 1. 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. 1 in the amount of $27,565.15. The revised contract amount is $699,974.10 No revisions to the project budget are proposed at this time, as these changes fall within the original project budget. 12. Miscellaneous Permit -Farmer's Market-Maplewood Mall Approved the Miscellaneous Permit for Karl Oliver for the farmers market at Maplewood Mall. The market will run from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Friday through Sunday beginning June 18tH through October 17, 2004. Mr. Oliver is anticipating approximately 30 to 50 vendors. Councilmember Juenemann moved to a~rove Consent Agenda Items 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, and 11. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to a~rove Consent Agenda Item 3. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All Councilmember Juenemann moved to a~rove Consent A,~enda Item 4. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All Councilmember Juenemann moved to a~rove Consent Agenda Item 5. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All Councilmember Koppen moved to a~rove Consent Agenda Item 8. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-Mayor Cardinal, Councilmembers Koppen and Rossbach Nays-Councilmembers Juenemann and Monahan-Junek Councilmember Rossbach moved to a~rove Consent Agenda Item 10. City Council Meeting 06-14-04 Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All Councilmember Koppen moved to approve Consent Agenda Item 12. Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All H. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:35 p.m. Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Tax-Exempt Financing Request (550 Roselawn Avenue) City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. Associate Planner Roberts presented specifics from the report. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following person was heard: Greg Baumberger, Facility Administrator at Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan d. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing. Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the followin,~ tax-exempt financin,~ resolution. This resolution is for Maplewood ig vin hg ost a~roval for up to $2.1 million in tax-exempt revenue financing for the Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society for the Good Samaritan Center at 550 Roselawn Avenue: RESOLUTION NO. 04-06-106 RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS BY THE COLORADO HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY ON BEHALF OF THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY BE IT RESOLVED by the Maplewood City Council (the "City"), as follows: SECTION 1 Recitals 1.1 The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society (the "Society")has advised this Council of its desire to (i) refinance the costs previously incurred in the connection with the acquisition, construction, improvement and equipping of 117 bed nursing care center, 23 bed sub-acute care center, (ii) fund a reserve fund and (iii) pay certain costs of issuing the bonds at the Maplewood Good Samaritan Center, located at 550 Roselawn Avenue in the City (the "Project"). 1.2 The Society has represented to the City that the Project will assist the Society in improving its facilities in the City, for the benefit of the residents of the City and surrounding area; that the issuance of tax-exempt revenue bonds is essential to the successful completion of the Project; and that the Colorado Health Facilities Authority has evidenced a willingness to issue tax-exempt revenue bonds and loan the proceeds thereof to the Society to finance the proposed Project. City Council Meeting 06-14-04 1.3 In order to facilitate the financing of the Proj ect by the Society, the City wants the Colorado Health Facilities Authority to issue its Health Facilities Revenue Bonds (The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society Project) to finance the Project, among other things. 1.4 The city published a public hearing notice on May 26, 2004, in the Maplewood Review. Pursuant to such notice, the city held a public hearing before the City Council on the proposal of the Society to finance the Project through the issuance of revenue bonds by the Colorado Health Facilities Authority. The city allowed all those who desired to speak at the hearing to be heard, and in connection with which written comments were taken in advance. SECTION 2 Consent to Issuance 2.1 On the basis of the information given to the City to date, the City hereby consents to the issuance by the Colorado Health Facilities Authority of approximately $2,040,000 of its revenue bonds, and the loan of the proceeds thereof to the Society to finance the Project. The adoption of this resolution shall not be deemed, however, to establish a legal obligation on the part of the City, its Council or the Colorado Health Facilities Authority to issue or to cause the issuance of such bonds. The bonds, if issued by the Colorado Health Facilities Authority, shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City or the Colorado Health Facilities Authority. The bonds shall be payable solely from said revenues and property of the Society specifically pledged to the payment thereof, and shall not constitute a debt or pecuniary liability of the City or the Colorado Health Facilities Authority within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All 2. 7:47 p.m. Rygwalski (2086 Edgerton Street) Land Use Plan Change - NC (Neighborhood Commercial) to R-2 (Double Dwelling) (4 votes) Zoning Map Change - NC (Neighborhood Commercial to R-2 (Double Dwellings) City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. Associate Planner Roberts presented specifics from the report. c. Commissioner Dierich presented the Planning Commission Report. d. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following person was heard: Ronald Rygwalski, applicant e. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing. Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the following resolution approving a comprehensive land use plan and zoning chan,~e for 2086 Ed,~erton Street from Nei,~hborhood Commercial (NCB to Double Dwellin,~ Residential (R-2~ COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION 04-06-107 City Council Meeting 06-14-04 WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood proposes to change the city's land use plan from Neighborhood Commercial (NC) to Double Dwelling Residential (R-2) for a property located at 2086 Edgerton Street. WHEREAS, the legal description for the property located at 2086 Edgerton Street is Lot 12, Thiede's Edgerton Villas, Section 17, Township 29, Range 22. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: On May 17, 2004, the planning commission discussed the land use plan changes and recommended that the city council approve the plan amendments. 2. On June 17, 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 land use plan change because the proposal will meet the following city comprehensive plan goals and policies: Provide for orderly development. 2. Minimize conflicts between land uses. 3. Protect neighborhoods from activities that produce excessive noise, dirt, odors or which generate heavy traffic. 4. Protect neighborhoods from encroachment or intrusion of incompatible land uses by adequate buffering and separation. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All 7:55 p.m. County Road D Realignment (East), T.H. 61 to Southlawn Drive, Project 02-07-Assessment Hearing and Resolution for Adoption of Assessment Roll City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following person was heard: Eric Palmer, 1645 East County Road D, Maplewood d. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing. Councilmember Juenemann moved to table the resolution for the adoption of the assessment roll for the County Road D Realignment (East) T.H. 61 to Southlawn Drive, Project 02-07. City Council Meeting 06-14-04 10 Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All I. 4. 8:05 p.m. Trout Land (west of Highway 61 and new County Road D) Comprehensive Plan Changes a. Land Use Plan Changes - R-1 and M-1 to R-3(M) (4 votes) b. Collector Street Designation -County Road D (4 votes) Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plat a. City Manager Fursman presented the report. Councilmember Juenemann moved table this item to the July 12~ City Council meeting per the request of the developer. Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All 5. 8:07 p.m. Heritage Square Second Addition (Legacy Village -Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway) Planned Unit Development Revision Preliminary Plat Design Approval a. City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. Assistant City Manger Coleman presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Juenemann moved to table this item until the June 28~ City Council Meeting. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All Due to public hearing schedule and published times Award of Bids was moved up on the agenda. AWARD OF BIDS 1. Roof Replacement-Fire Stations 1 & 3 a. City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. Fire Chief Lukin presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Juenemann moved to accept the low bid from United Roofing of $82,775 for the re-roofing of Fire Stations 1 and 3. Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All K. NEW BUSINESS 2. Electric Franchise Fee City Council Meeting 06-14-04 11 City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. Assistant Finance Director Bauman presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Juenemann moved to table this item until the July 12~ City Council Meeting so staff can gather additional information for the Council including what other cities collect franchise fees_ Seconded by Councilmember Monahan-Junek Ayes-All H. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6. 8:30 p.m. Olivia Gardens (2329 and 2335 Stillwater Road) Land Use Plan Change - R-1 (single dwellings) to R-2 (double dwellings) (4 votes) Zoning Map Change (R-1 to R-2) Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plat City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. Associate Planner Roberts presented specifics from the report. Commissioner Dierich presented the Planning Commission Report. d. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following persons were heard: Kelly Conlin, applicant Michael Green, 2321 Stillwater Road, Maplewood Julie LaFleur, 2322 Stillwater Road, Maplewood Kelly Conlin, second appearance Julie LaFleur, second appearance e. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing. A five-minute break was taken so that council could read an e-mail submitted by Ms. LaFleur. Kelly Colin, third appearance Councilmember Koppen moved to ,rant the a~licant a thirty-day continuance for further consideration of desi ng changes. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None City Council Meeting 06-14-04 12 K. NEW BUSINESS 1. Preliminary Approval for Issuance of Bonds City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. Assistant Finance Director Bauman presented specifics from the report. c. Barry Fick, a representative from Briggs and Morgan provided further specifics. Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution ap~rovin tg he improvement bonds totaling $13,010,000 which will finance eight projects that have special assessments that total at least 20% of the project costs. Annual tax levies of $236,707-$241,614 payable 2006- 2024 will be required to finance the unassessed project costs: RESOLUTION 04-06-109 PROVIDING FOR THE COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATED SALE OF $13,010,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2004B A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the "City"), has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue $13,010,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2004B (the "Bonds"), to finance various improvement projects within the City; and B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Springsted Incorporated, in Saint Paul, Minnesota ("Springsted"), as its independent financial advisor and 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. The City Council hereby authorizes Springsted to solicit proposals for the competitive negotiated sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting; Proposals. 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 proposals for, and awarding the sale of, the Bonds, which proposals were submitted 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 the 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. City Council Meeting 06-14-04 13 EXHIBIT A TERMS OF PROPOSAL X13,010,000 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2004B (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Thursday, July 22, 2004. 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 Electronic proposals only for the Bonds will be received on Grant Street Group's MuniAuction web site located at www.GrantStreet.com ("MuniAuction") between 9:45 AM and 10:00 AM Central Time, unless extended by the Two-Minute Rule as more fully described in "Extension Of The Auction" herein. The use of Grant Street Group's MuniAuction web site shall be at the risk of the bidder, and neither the City nor Springsted shall have any liability with respect thereto. 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 adivsed that each electronic proposal shall be deemed to constitute a contract between the bidder and the City for the purchase of the Bonds. Re,~istration and Admission to Proposal: To make a proposal, proposal makers must first visit the MuniAuction website where, if they have never registered with MuniAuction, they can register and then request admission to make a proposal on all of the Bonds. Proposal makers will be notified prior to the scheduled proposal making time of their eligibility to make a proposal. Only NASD registered broker-dealers and dealer banks with DTC clearing arrangements will be eligible to make a proposal. Rules of MuniAuction: The "Rules of MuniAuction" can be viewed on MuniAuction and are incorporated herein by reference. Proposal makers must comply with the Rules of MuniAuction in addition to the requirements of this Terms of Bond Sale. Proposal Details: All proposals must be submitted on the MuniAuction website at "www.MuniAuction.com." No telephone, telefax, telegraph or personal delivery proposals will be accepted. Proposal makers are permitted to submit proposals for the Bonds only in the All-or-None ("AON") auction during the auction. Proposal makers may change and submit proposals as many times as they wish during the auction; provided, however, each and any proposal submitted subsequent to a proposal maker's initial proposal must result in a lower true interest cost ("TIC"). In the event that the revised proposal does not produce a lower TIC, the initial proposal will remain valid. During the making of a proposal, no proposal maker will see any other proposal maker's proposal, but each proposal maker will see whether their proposal is a leading proposal relative to other proposals. On the auction page, proposal makers will be able to see whether any proposal has been submitted. Extension of the Auction: If any proposal becomes a leading proposal two minutes prior to the scheduled end of the auction, the time period for submission of proposals will be automatically City Council Meeting 06-14-04 14 extended by two (2) minutes from the time such new leading proposal was received by MuniAuction (the "Two-Minute Rule"). The Two-Minute Rule will remain in effect as long as proposals received by MuniAuction meet the requirements of the Two-Minute Rule described above. Verification: Proposal makers should verify the accuracy of their final proposals and compare them to the winning proposals reported on the MuniAuction Observation Page immediately after the auction. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated August 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, 2005. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months. The Bonds will mature August 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 2005 $1,000,00 2006 $ 835,000 2007 $ 825,000 2008 $ 810,000 2009 $ 800,000 2010 $795,000 2011 $790,000 2012 $785,000 2013 $785,000 2014 $785,000 2015 $785,000 2016 $785,000 2017 $790,000 2018 $795,000 2019 $665,000 2020 $180,000 2021 $185,000 2022 $195,000 2023 $205,000 2024 $215,000 City Council Meeting 06-14-04 15 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 maybe 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 August 1, 2015, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after August 1, 2016. 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 finance various improvement projects within the City. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall be for not less than $12,879,900 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 $130,100, 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 City Council Meering 06-14-04 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 maybe 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. 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 CUSIl' 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 CUSIl' 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 managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 250 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. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution approving the tax abatement bonds totalin,~ $5,025,000 which will finance the Legacy Villa,~e and Hazelwood Redevelopment projects. The Legacy Village project includes $2,888,000 to acquire land in conjunction with the Hartford Company development, $450,000 for a ci . sculpture park and $150,000 for a city tot lot park. The first tax levy on this bond issue will be delayed until 2005 payable 2006 to allow time for some of the new construction to be added to the city's tax base Annual tax levies of $47,140-$581,312 payable 26- 2020 will be required to financed the debt service costs: RESOLUTION 04-06-110 PROVIDING FOR THE COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATED SALE OF $5,025,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX ABATEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2004C A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the "City"), has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue $5,025,000 General Obligation Tax Abatement Bonds, Series 2004C (the "Bonds"), to finance the acquisition of land; right of way; street, utility and drainage improvements; and park improvement projects within the City; and B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Springsted Incorporated, in Saint Paul, Minnesota ("Springsted"), as its independent financial advisor and 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. The City Council hereby authorizes Springsted to solicit proposals for the competitive negotiated sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting; Proposal 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 proposals for, and awarding the sale of, the Bonds. The City Clerk or designee, shall open proposals 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 the 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. F.XHTRTT A TERMS OF PROPOSAL X5,025,000 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX ABATEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2004C (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Thursday, August 5, 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 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. (a) Sealed Bidding: Proposals maybe 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. OR (b) Electronic Bidding: Notice is hereby given that electronic proposals will be received via PARITY®. For purposes of the electronic bidding process, the time as maintained by PARITY° shall constitute the official time with respect to all Bids submitted to PARITY®. Each bidder shall be solely responsible for making necessary arrangements to access PARITY° for purposes of submitting its electronic Bid in a timely manner and in compliance with the requirements of the Terms of Proposal. Neither the City, its agents nor PARITY® shall have any duty or obligation to undertake registration to bid for any prospective bidder or to provide or ensure electronic access to any qualified prospective bidder, and neither the City, its agents nor PARITY® shall be responsible for a bidder's failure to register to bid or for any failure in the proper operation of, or have any liability for any delays or interruptions of or any damages caused by the services of PARITY®. The City is using the services of PARITY® solely as a communication mechanism to conduct the electronic bidding for the Bonds, and PARITY® is not an agent of the City. If any provisions of this Terms of Proposal conflict with information provided by PARITY®, this Terms of Proposal shall control. Further information about PARITY®, including any fee charged, may be obtained from: PARITY®, 40 West 23rd Street, 5~ Floor, New York City, New York 10010, Customer Support, (212) 404-8102. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated August 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, 2005. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months. The Bonds will mature August 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 2007 $50,000 2008 $150,000 2009 $285,000 2010 $290,000 2011 $350,000 2012 $365,000 2013 $380,000 2014 $395,000 2015 $410,000 2016 $430,000 2017 $445,000 2018 $470,000 2019 $490,000 2020 $515,000 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 maybe 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 August 1, 2015, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after August 1, 2016. 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 available tax abatement revenue. The proceeds will be used to finance the acquisition of land; right of way; street, utility and drainage improvements; and park improvements within the City. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall be for not less than $4,964,700 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 $50,250, 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. 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 CUSIl' 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 CUSIl' 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 managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 200 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. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution a~provin tg he Capital Improvement Plan Bonds totalin,~ $700,00 which will finance part of the costs for the Public Works buildin,~ addition project. Annual tax levies of $52,138-$56,785 payable 2005-2024 will be required to finance the debt service costs RESOLUTION 04-06-111 PROVIDING FOR THE COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATED SALE OF $700,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS, SERIES 2004D A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the "City"), has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue $700,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2004D (the "Bonds"), to finance an addition to the City's public works building; and B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Springsted Incorporated, in Saint Paul, Minnesota ("Springsted"), as its independent financial advisor and 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. The City Council hereby authorizes Springsted to solicit proposals for the competitive negotiated sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting; Proposal 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 proposals for, and awarding the sale of, the Bonds. The City Clerk or designee, shall open proposals 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 the 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. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All EXHIBIT A TERMS OF PROPOSAL $700,000 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS, SERIES 2004D (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Thursday, August 5, 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 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. (a) Sealed Bidding: Proposals maybe 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. OR (b) Electronic Bidding: Notice is hereby given that electronic proposals will be received via PARITY®. For purposes of the electronic bidding process, the time as maintained by PARITY° shall constitute the official time with respect to all Bids submitted to PARITY®. Each bidder shall be solely responsible for making necessary arrangements to access PARITY° for purposes of submitting its electronic Bid in a timely manner and in compliance with the requirements of the Terms of Proposal. Neither the City, its agents nor PARITY® shall have any duty or obligation to undertake registration to bid for any prospective bidder or to provide or ensure electronic access to any qualified prospective bidder, and neither the City, its agents nor PARITY® shall be responsible for a bidder's failure to register to bid or for any failure in the proper operation of, or have any liability for any delays or interruptions of or any damages caused by the services of PARITY®. The City is using the services of PARITY® solely as a communication mechanism to conduct the electronic bidding for the Bonds, and PARITY® is not an agent of the City. If any provisions of this Terms of Proposal conflict with information provided by PARITY®, this Terms of Proposal shall control. Further information about PARITY®, including any fee charged, may be obtained from: PARITY®, 40 West 23rd Street, 5~ Floor, New York City, New York 10010, Customer Support, (212) 404-8102. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated August 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, 2005. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months. The Bonds will mature August 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 2005 $25,000 2007 $25,000 2009 $25,000 2011 $30,000 2006 $25,000 2008 $25,000 2010 $30,000 2012 $30,000 2013 $30,000 2016 $35,000 2019 $40,000 2022 $45,000 2014 $35,000 2017 $35,000 2020 $45,000 2023 $50,000 2015 $35,000 2018 $40,000 2021 $45,000 2024 $50,000 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 maybe 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 August 1, 2015, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after August 1, 2016. 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. The proceeds will be used to finance an addition to the City's public works building. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall be for not less than $687,400 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 $7,000, 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. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIl' 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 CUSIl' 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 managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 50 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. Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution approving the State Aid Street Bonds totalin,~ $5,355,000 which will finance three projects. The Bonds need to be issued to finance construction costs that will be incurred prior to receipt of state aid. No tax levies are required for these bonds as annual state street aid will be sufficient to finance the debt service costs over the next 20 .. e RESOLUTION 04-06-112 PROVIDING FOR THE COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATED SALE OF $5,355,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION STATE-AID STREET BONDS, SERIES 2004E A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota (the "City"), has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue $5,355,000 General Obligation State-Aid Street Bonds, Series 2004E (the "Bonds"), to finance the construction of various state-aid street projects within the City; and B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Springsted Incorporated, in Saint Paul, Minnesota ("Springsted"), as its independent financial advisor and 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. The City Council hereby authorizes Springsted to solicit proposals for the competitive negotiated sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting; Proposal 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 proposals for, and awarding the sale of, the Bonds. The City Clerk or designee, shall open proposals 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 the 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. TERMS OF PROPOSAL $5,355,000 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION STATE-AID STREET BONDS, SERIES 2004E (BOOK ENTRY ONLY) Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Thursday, August 5, 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 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. (a) Sealed Bidding: Proposals maybe 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. OR (b) Electronic Bidding: Notice is hereby given that electronic proposals will be received via PARITY®. For purposes of the electronic bidding process, the time as maintained by PARITY° shall constitute the official time with respect to all Bids submitted to PARITY®. Each bidder shall be solely responsible for making necessary arrangements to access PARITY° for purposes of submitting its electronic Bid in a timely manner and in compliance with the requirements of the Terms of Proposal. Neither the City, its agents nor PARITY® shall have any duty or obligation to undertake registration to bid for any prospective bidder or to provide or ensure electronic access to any qualified prospective bidder, and neither the City, its agents nor PARITY® shall be responsible for a bidder's failure to register to bid or for any failure in the proper operation of, or have any liability for any delays or interruptions of or any damages caused by the services of PARITY®. The City is using the services of PARITY® solely as a communication mechanism to conduct the electronic bidding for the Bonds, and PARITY® is not an agent of the City. If any provisions of this Terms of Proposal conflict with information provided by PARITY®, this Terms of Proposal shall control. Further information about PARITY®, including any fee charged, may be obtained from: PARITY®, 40 West 23rd Street, 5~ Floor, New York City, New York 10010, Customer Support, (212) 404-8102. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated August 1, 2004, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on April 1 and October 1 of each year, commencing April 1, 2005. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months. The Bonds will mature April 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 2005 $270,000 2010 $270,000 2015 $270,000 2020 $265,000 2006 $270,000 2011 $270,000 2016 $265,000 2021 $265,000 2007 $270,000 2012 $270,000 2017 $265,000 2022 $265,000 2008 $270,000 2013 $270,000 2018 $265,000 2023 $265,000 2009 $270,000 2014 $270,000 2019 $265,000 2024 $265,000 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 maybe 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 April 1, 2015, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after April 1, 2016. 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 annual State-aid allotments from the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The proceeds will be used to finance the cost of constructing various State-aid street projects within the City. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall be for not less than $5,290,740 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 $53,550, 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. 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 CUSIl' 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 CUSIl' 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 managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 215 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. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All Existing County Road D Improvements, Walter Street to T.H. 61, Project 04-06, Resolution Accepting Report and Calling for Public Hearing City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Monahan-Junek moved to adopt the following resolutions for the Coun . Road D Reali,~nment (West), Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 02-08: A~provin,~ Plans and Advertisin,~ for Bids and Orderin,~ the Preparation of the Assessment Roll: Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All 4. County Road D Realignment (West), Walter Street to T.H. 61, Project 02-08, Resolutions for: a. Approving plans and Advertising for Bids b. Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Juenemann moved to table this item until the June 28, 2004 city council meeting. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All Municipal State Aid Street System: Resolution Approving Authorizations to Advance Municipal State Aid Street Funds a. City Manager Fursman presented the report. b. City Engineer Ahl presented specifics from the report. Councilmember Juenemann moved to adopt the following resolution requesting an advance encumbrance of up to $1,661,298 to the Maplewood Municipal State Aid Account: RESOLUTION 04-06-108 MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREET FUNDS ADVANCE WHEREAS, the Municipality of Maplewood is planning to implement Municipal State Aid Street Projects in 2004 which will require State Aid funds in excess of those available in its State Aid Construction Account, and WHEREAS, said municipality is prepared to proceed with the construction of said projects through the use of an advance from the Municipal State Aid Street Fund to supplement the available funds in their State Aid Construction Account, and WHEREAS, the advance is based on the following determination of estimated expenditures: Account Balance as of June 1, 2004 $7,513 Less estimated disbursements: Project 138-105-O1 $884,322 Project 138-010-Oll $447,435 Project Finals $337,054 Total Estimated Disbursements $1,668,811 Advance Amount $1,661,298 WHEREAS, repayment of the funds so advanced will be made in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 162.14, Subd. 6 and Minnesota Rules, Chapter 8820.1500, Subp. lOb, and WHEREAS, the Municipality acknowledges advance funds are released on a first-come- first-serve basis and this resolution does not guarantee the availability of funds. NOW, THEREFORE, Be It Resolved: That the Commissioner of Transportation be and is hereby requested to approve this advance for financing approved Municipal State Aid Street Projects of the Municipality of Maplewood in an amount up to $1,676,324. I hereby authorize repayments from subsequent accruals to the Municipal State Aid Street Construction Account of said Municipality in accordance with the schedule herein indicated: Repayment in 5 equal annual installments Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All 6. 800 MHz City Council Meeting 06-14-04 37 a. City Manager Fursman presented the report. Mayor Cardinal moved to participate in 800 MHz with Ramsey County and future development and to hold a public hearin,~ on the matter within 60 days. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All L. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Diana Longrie-Kline requested visitor presentations be moved to the beginning of the agenda. She also thanked council for their attention on the Olivia Gardens project and commented on the process of commission chair appointments. M. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS 1. Set Special Meeting-Fire/EMS Presentation-Monday, July 12, 2004 at 5:30 p.m. 2. NEST-Councilmember Rossbach discussed the future rate increases that are being proposed by NEST. Mayor Cardinal moved to support the NEST proposals. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All 3. Condemned Properties-City Attorney Kelly updated council on a condemned Maplewood property. 4. Advisory Board Policy-This item will be on the June 28~ City Council Meeting. 5. National Night Out-Councilmember Juenemann encouraged everyone to participate on Tuesday August 3rd 6. Torch Run-Councilmember Juenemann announced that officer Joe Tran will be running the torch run for Special Olympics from Moorhead to the Twin Cities. 7. Councilmember Rossbach was approached by members of the fireman's reserve fund and asked him to consider attending their meeting. N. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS None O. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Juenemann moved to adjourn the meetin,~ at 10:31 p.m. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach Ayes-All City Council Meeting 06-14-04 38 AGENDA NO. G-1 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council FROM: Finance Director RE: APPROVAL OF CLAIMS DATE: June 28, 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: $ 471,766.90 Checks # 64078 thru # 64129 dated 6/15/04 $ 276,704.77 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 6/04/04 thru 6/10/04 $ 211,040.70 Checks # 64130 thru # 64187 dated 6/22/04 $ 127,660.25 $ 1,087,172.62 PAYROLL $ 429,698.03 $ 4,481.77 $ 434,179.80 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 6/11/04 thru 6/17/04 Total Accounts Payable Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 6/18/04 Payroll Deduction check # 97763 thru # 97766 dated 6/18/04 Total Payroll $ 1,521,352.42 GRAND TOTAL Attached is a detailed listing of these claims. Please call me at 651-249-2902 if you have any question on the attached listing. This will allow me to check the supporting documentation on file if necessary. ds attachments c:\My Documents\Excel\Miscellaneous\04-AprClms 06-11, 06-18 1 Check Register City of Maplewood vchlist 06/11/2004 10:42:11 AM Check Date Vendor Description/Account Amount 64078 6/15/2004 02347 10,000 LAKES CHAPTER 10,000 LAKES CHAPTER CONF - 2 180.00 64079 6/15/2004 00014 A T & T MANAGED INTERNET SRVS -MAY 1,013.60 64080 6/15/2004 01908 ADMINISTRATION, DEPT OF WIDE AREA NETWORK -APR 392.00 64081 6/15/2004 03089 ADVANTAGE CONCRETE CONST INC REPAIR FLOOR DRAINS - STA 3 & 7 12,830.00 64082 6/15/2004 03092 AMERICAN ACCOUNTS & ADV INC COLLECTION AGENCY FEE 403.13 64083 6/15/2004 00171 BEHAN, JAMES REIMB BOILER LIC & MILEAGE 1/26-5/19 73.93 64084 6/15/2004 01936 BERGO, CHAD REIMB PHONE & INTERNET 4/17 - 5/13 28.12 CABLE INTERNET SERVICE -JUN 7.49 64085 6/15/2004 00240 C.S.C. CREDIT SERVICES APPLICANT BACKGROUND CHECKS 50.00 64086 6/15/2004 02114 CARL BOLANDER & SONS CO. AFTON HEIGHTS PARK THRU 5/31/04 246,945.85 64087 6/15/2004 00338 CRABTREE COMPANIES INC. LASER FICHE SOFTWARE MAINT 2,036.60 LASER FISCHE SOFTWARE MAINT 4,222.95 64088 6/15/2004 00340 CRAMER BUILDING SERVICES REPAIR MCC EQUIPMENT 2,419.75 REPAIR CHILLER 18,119.79 64089 6/15/2004 02816 DAYTON'S COMMERCIAL INTERIORS WORKSTATION -DESK, CREDENZA, FILE 1,616.02 CHAIR 393.04 WORKSTATION -DESK, CREDENZA, FILE 1,050.71 64090 6/15/2004 00449 EDEN SYSTEMS INC CITIZEN SVS SOFTWARE SUPPORT 4,155.30 64091 6/15/2004 00532 FRANK MADDEN & ASSOCIATES LEGAL SERVICES -MAY 1,089.00 64092 6/15/2004 02547 HARTLAND FUEL PRODUCTS LLC INC UNL MID-GRADE (89 OCTANE) GASOLINE 11,548.35 64093 6/15/2004 00691 HURLEY, STEVE REIMB MEALS, TAXI & PRKG 4/27 - 5/1 89.83 64094 6/15/2004 03115 ICPC ATS REGISTRAR CONF REGISTRATION 180.00 64095 6/15/2004 02778 JUST JUMP INC INFLATABLE EQUIP SUPPLIER 7/4 1,075.65 64096 6/15/2004 00785 KAMCOM TECHNOLOGIES PC'S AS QUOTED - 2.8 GHZ PROCESSOR, 1GB 12,971.53 64097 6/15/2004 01894 KELLY & FAWCETT PA PROSECUTION SRVS -MAY 9,825.00 LEGAL SERVICES -MAY 17,407.33 64098 6/15/2004 02607 KINNICKINNIC NATIVES LLC FLOWERS 28.25 64099 6/15/2004 02188 MARRS, SCOTT ALL STAR KICKOFF ENTERTAINMENT 510.00 64100 6/15/2004 00945 MASYS CORP STRATUS MAINT - JUL 738.68 64101 6/15/2004 03023 MELANDER, JON VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL 100.00 64102 6/15/2004 02978 METRO MEDIC ALS BAGS ALS EQUIPMENT BAGS (4 POLICE, 2 FIRE) 3,290.85 64103 6/15/2004 00986 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MONTHLY SAC -MAY 1,336.50 64104 6/15/2004 01022 MN CITY COUNTY MGMT ASSN MEMBERSHIP DUES 5/1 - 4/30/05 114.00 64105 6/15/2004 01051 MN OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS 555.00 64106 6/15/2004 01110 MOST DEPENDABLE FOUNTAINS STRAINER SS 77.00 64107 6/15/2004 01202 NYSTROM PUBLISHING CO INC CITY NEWSLETTER -JUN 2,320.00 SELF-GUIDED TOUR BROCHURE 904.19 64108 6/15/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF CAROL MORTENSEN -AMB 04000081 218.95 64109 6/15/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF VERN SIMPSON -MCC CLASS 180.00 64110 6/15/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF JMERTEN -AMB 02022391 168.00 64111 6/15/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF SHARYL OLSEN -REC PROGRAMS 79.00 64112 6/15/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF TONI NGERI -MCC PROGRAM 49.00 64113 6/15/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF AVIS WEGNER -MEMBERSHIP 18.75 64114 6/15/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF M FINLAY -DAMAGED SWIMSUIT 14.00 64115 6/15/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF BEVERLY SCOTT -TENNIS 10.00 64116 6/15/2004 01863 PACKER, ROGER VOLLEYBALL OFFICIAL - 32 640.00 64117 6/15/2004 00396 PUBLIC SAFETY, DEPT OF TRAINING REGISTRATION FEE 100.00 64118 6/15/2004 02500 ROWEKAMP ASSOCIATES INC TECHNICAL CONSULTING -MAR & APR 605.00 64119 6/15/2004 01463 SISTER ROSALIND GEFRE MASSAGES -MAY 1,946.00 64120 6/15/2004 01504 ST PAUL, CITY OF ASPHALT MIX -MAY 1,063.33 64121 6/15/2004 01523 STATE BOARD OF ELECTRICITY ELECTRIC STATE FORM BOOKS 100.00 64122 6/15/2004 01537 STREAMLINE DESIGN INC. T-SHIRTS 70.80 64123 6/15/2004 01572 SYSTEMS SUPPLY, INC. INK CARTRIDGES 160.90 64124 6/15/2004 01574 T.A. SCHIFSKY & SONS, INC VARIOUS BITUMINOUS- 17.19 VARIOUS BITUMINOUS- 1,195.87 64125 6/15/2004 03116 THENG, KIM SORN REF GRADING ESC - 2534 MONTANA AVE 5,578.68 64126 6/15/2004 01637 TRAFFIC CONTROL CORPORATION LED 12" RED BALL 48,903.75 64127 6/15/2004 03101 VRUNO & WILLIAMS CONST INC ASBESTOS ABATEMENT 3004 HAZELWOOD 10,480.00 64128 6/15/2004 01734 WALSH, WILLIAM P. COMMERCIAL PLUMBING INSP 152.00 COMMERCIAL PLUMBING INSP 136.60 64129 6/15/2004 01190 XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY UTIL -STMT DATE 6/3/04 39,779.64 52 Checks in this report Total checks : 471,766.90 2 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Disbursements via Debits to Checking account Transmitted Settlement Date Date Payee 06/03/04 06/04/04 06/04/04 06/04/04 06/04/04 06/04/04 06/04/04 06/04/04 06/07/04 06/04/04 06/04/04 06/08/04 06/09/04 06/07/04 06/04/04 06/04/04 06/07/04 06/07/04 06/07/04 06/07/04 06/07/04 06/07/04 06/08/04 06/08/04 06/08/04 06/09/04 06/ 10/04 06/ 10/04 MN State Treasurer ICMA (Vantagepointe) MN State Treasurer U.S. Treasurer P.E.R.A. MN Dept of Natural Resources Pitney Bowes Orchard Trust MN State Treasurer MN State Treasurer Federal Reserve Bank MN State Treasurer MN State Treasurer ARC Administration TOTAL Description Drivers License/Deputy Registrar Deferred Compensation Drivers License/Deputy Registrar Federal Payroll Tax P.E.R.A. DNR electronic licenses Postage Deferred Compensation Drivers License/Deputy Registrar State Payroll Tax Savings Bonds Drivers License/Deputy Registrar Drivers License/Deputy Registrar DCRP & Flex plan payments Amount 18,807.15 8,066.59 18,203.90 86,166.81 47,708.61 1,639.00 2,985.00 21,665.78 21,986.43 16,383.40 200.00 17,596.25 13,321.79 1,974.06 L/(~,/U4.// 3 Check Register City of Maplewood vchlist 06/78/2004 70:37:00 AM Check Date Vendor Description/Account Amount 64130 6/22/2004 00111 ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES INC PATROL & BOARDING FEES 5/26 - 6/4 1,046.96 64131 6/22/2004 00162 BAUMAN, GAYLE REIMB FOR MILEAGE 5/19 & 6/16 15.00 64132 6/22/2004 03120 BAUMEN, MIKE FUNDRAISER WATER FOR FIRE SCENES 108.00 64133 6/22/2004 01811 BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC MERCH FOR RESALE 39.00 MERCH FOR RESALE 78.00 MERCH FOR RESALE 234.00 64134 6/22/2004 00330 COPY SERVICE CORP. COPIER SRV 229.17 64135 6/22/2004 00338 CRABTREE COMPANIES INC. LASERFICHE SYSTEM CREDIT -369.72 LASER FISCHE MAINT CONTRACT 4,266.76 64136 6/22/2004 00384 DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SRVS COPIER SRV 326.54 64137 6/22/2004 00413 DON MARTY'S LANDSCAPING PREPARE & SOD AREA PARKS BLDG 950.00 64138 6/22/2004 00417 DON'S RODENTS PROGRAM SUPPLIES 14.64 64139 6/22/2004 00463 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT REPAIR ENGINE 2 3,265.09 REPAIR RESCUE 7 840.89 REPAIR AMBULANCE 4,676.14 64140 6/22/2004 00487 F.M. FRATTALONE EXC INC PROJ 02-07 CTY RD D THRU 4/30 57,821.08 64141 6/22/2004 02860 FEDERAL SIGNAL CORP WARNING SIRENS - 3 NEW & 2 UPGRADED 37,109.50 64142 6/22/2004 00531 FRA-DOR BLACK DIRT & RECYCLE BLACK DIRT 801.41 64143 6/22/2004 02873 GARDEN & ASSOCIATES INC INTERPRETIVE SRVS FOR INV 57.00 64144 6/22/2004 00585 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL LOCATE TICKETS -APR 825.70 LOCATE TICKETS -MAY 763.60 64145 6/22/2004 03121 HAYLAND WOODS RAINWATER GARDEN PLANTS 315.45 64146 6/22/2004 02945 HEALTHEAST VEHICLE SERVICES OVERHAUL REAR BUMPER 496.53 BUILD NEW SQUAD #942 4,301.65 REPAIR SQUAD 943 189.49 REPAIR GUN LOCKS 168.41 64147 6/22/2004 00687 HUGO'S TREE CARE REMOVE TREE & STUMP 575.10 64148 6/22/2004 01605 IFP TEST SERVICES INC PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMS 700.00 64149 6/22/2004 00721 INDEPENDENT SPORTS NETWORK SOFTBALL UMPIRING SRV 5/17 - 6/13 3,898.00 64150 6/22/2004 01971 JACKSON, MARY REIMB MEALS/LODGING/MILEAGE 6/8 - 10 345.32 64151 6/22/2004 00771 JOHNSON, RICK DEER PICKUP -MAY 300.00 64152 6/22/2004 00856 LE, SHERRIE L REIMB FOR AIRFARE 6/12 - 6/13 326.20 64153 6/22/2004 03119 LIND, TERESA NEBY MUSICAL ENTERTAINMENT 6/19 300.00 64154 6/22/2004 00875 LOFFLER BUSINESS SYSTEMS DATAWORX AUDIOWORX DP SYSTEM-- 7,441.16 64155 6/22/2004 00898 M F A P C MEMBERSHIP DUES 35.00 64156 6/22/2004 00906 M P E L R A CONF REGISTRATION 195.00 64157 6/22/2004 00922 MAILE ENTERPRISES INC YELLOW HD MARKERS 1,287.46 64158 6/22/2004 02523 MED COMPASS MEDICAL TESTING PROG -COMP PHYSICAL 8,761.00 64159 6/22/2004 03122 MEDPRO MIDWEST GROUP PREVENTATIVE MAINT SRV -COTS 665.00 64160 6/22/2004 00993 MID-AMERICA BUSINESS SYSTEMS REPAIR MINOLTA READER PRINTER 186.99 64161 6/22/2004 01175 NORTH ST PAUL, CITY OF MONTHLY UTIL -BILL DATE 6/15/04 2,143.30 64162 6/22/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF JANICE ANDERSON - NC PROGRAMS 80.00 64163 6/22/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF DUALL SRVS -PRMT 04-00869 79.80 64164 6/22/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF SO SIDE ELECTRIC -PRMT 03-03490 56.50 64165 6/22/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF TIM O'KEEFE -SOCCER 45.00 64166 6/22/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF BLIA VANG -PARKS &REC PROG 42.00 64167 6/22/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF BRYAN FISHER -GRASS SEED 41.49 64168 6/22/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF MARY ELLIOTT -PARKS &REC PROG 40.00 64169 6/22/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF SUSAN HUTCHENS -GRASS SEED 28.66 64170 6/22/2004 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REF ERIC & LORI AHLNESS -GRASS SEED 27.66 64171 6/22/2004 02903 PARK CONSTRUCTION CO PROJ 01-16 HAZELWOOD ST PYMT#4 49,646.11 64172 6/22/2004 01254 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY MERCH FOR RESALE 325.00 64173 6/22/2004 00069 RISK MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES COLLECTION AGENCY FEE 15.00 64174 6/22/2004 01613 ROCKIN' HOLLYWOODS, THE JULY 4TH ENTERTAINMENT 1,350.00 64175 6/22/2004 02001 ROSEVILLE, CITY OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT -JUN 625.00 64176 6/22/2004 02118 SCHMIDT, RUSSELL REIMB FOR TUITION 837.74 REIMB FOR TUITION 823.70 64177 6/22/2004 01478 SMOKE EATER FF SUBSCRIPTIONS - 85 467.50 64178 6/22/2004 01504 ST PAUL, CITY OF RADIO SRV &MAINT -MAY 1,388.01 Check 64179 64180 64181 64182 64183 64184 64185 64186 64187 Date Vendor 6/22/2004 01538 STRETCHER'S 6/22/2004 01574 T.A. SCHIFSi<Y & SONS, INC 6/22/2004 03086 TAHO SPORTSWEAR 6/22/2004 01580 TSE, INC. 6/22/2004 02069 ULTIMATE DRAIN SERVICES INC 6/22/2004 01750 WATSON CO INC, THE 6/22/2004 02410 WELLS FARGO LEASING INC 6/22/2004 02462 WEMYSS, SCOTT D 6/22/2004 03123 WOODBURYS 58 Checks in this report Description/Account Amount HELMET DECAL -6.34 TACTICAL OUTER CARRIER 109.95 CREDIT -RANGE SUPPLIES -877.03 MIRROR BEAMS -330.10 MIRROR BEAMS 228.92 CREDIT -TACTICAL OUTER CARRIER -109.95 RANGE SUPPLIES 3,429.30 BELT 69.12 TACTICAL OUTER CARRIER 129.95 RECYCLED BASE ASPHALT 56.40 VARIOUS BITUMINOUS-- 293.29 VARIOUS BITUMINOUS-- 616.57 NYLON BAGS 205.00 T-SHIRTS 33.99 T-SHIRTS 47.32 CUSTODIAL SRVS 4/19 - 5/28 1,388.60 PROJ 03-18 TELEVISE MAIN LINE 310.00 PROJ 02-08 TELEVISE MAIN LINE 195.00 MERCH FOR RESALE 208.01 COPIER LEASE -JUN 1,420.71 NAM ETAGS 13.00 CERAMIC TILE STATION 2 1,960.00 Total checks : 277,040.70 5 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Disbursements via Debits to Checking account Transmitted Settlement Date Date Payee Description Amount 06/10/04 06/11/04 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 18,695.31 06/10/04 06/11/04 MN Dept of Natural Resources DNR electronic licenses 908.00 06/11/04 06/14/04 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 18,405.29 06/14/04 06/15/04 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 18,749.00 06/15/04 06/16/04 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 13,176.88 06/16/04 06/17/04 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar 11,141.27 06/11/04 06/17/04 Elan Financial Services* Purchasing card items 46,584.50 TOTAL 127,660.25 *Detailed listings of Elan purchasing card items are attached. 6 Transaction Review For Transactions posted between 05/29/2004 to 06/04/2004 Post Date Vendor Name Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 05/31/2004 05/31/2004 05/31/2004 05/31/2004 05/31/2004 05/31/2004 05/31/2004 05/31/2004 06/04/2004 06/04/2004 06/02/2004 06/03/2004 06/04/2004 06/03/2004 06/04/2004 05/31/2004 06/02/2004 06/04/2004 06/03/2004 05/31/2004 06/02/2004 06/04/2004 06/04/2004 05/31/2004 06/03/2004 06/03/2004 06/03/2004 05/31/2004 06/01/2004 06/04/2004 05/31/2004 06/02/2004 05/31/2004 06/02/2004 06/03/2004 06/01/2004 06/01/2004 06/03/2004 06/03/2004 05/31/2004 05/31/2004 05/31/2004 05/31/2004 06/02/2004 06/03/2004 06/03/2004 06/03/2004 05/31/2004 06/04/2004 05/31/2004 06/03/2004 06/03/2004 STREICHERS POLICE EQUIPM TOUSLEY FORD I27200021 NWA AIR 0122103295507 NWA AIR 0122103295508 NWA AIR 0122103295822 NWA AIR 0122103295823 NWA AIR 0122103295824 NWA AIR 0122103295825 MN PHOTO DAMS LOCK AND SAFE CONTINENTAL RESEARCH HORIZON POOL SUPPLY ALL MAIN STREET ELEC CUB FOODS-SUN RAY MICHAELS #9401 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 VERIZON DIRECTORIES EPSON STORE NEXTEL WIRELESS SVCS THE STAR TRIBUNE-CIRCULAT GE CAPITAL SUN TURF METRO POWER FRANKLIN COVEY #7069 CRAMER BLDG SERVICES INC THE HOME DEPOT 2801 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE SPRINTPCS AUTOPYMT RC1 MENARDS 3089 THE HOME DEPOT #4935 LANDSCAPE ALTERNATIVES IN THE WEED WRENCH CO CUB FOODS, INC. KINKO'S #0617 PARTY AMERICA 1008 RAINBOW FOODS 1-886 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE OFFICE MAX 00002204 XPEDX S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS NORTHERN TOOL EQUIPMNT THE HOME DEPOT 2801 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE BEST BUY 00000109 ADT SECURITY SERVICES SILHOUETTE IMAGING CORP KNOWLAN'S SPRMKT.#2 SPRI PRODUCTS COMO PARK ANIMAL HOSPT UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC GANDER MOUNTAIN UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 46.75 SCOTT ANDREWS 174.82 JOHN BANICK 166.40 JOHN BANICK 166.40 JOHN BANICK 214.19 JOHN BANICK 214.19 JOHN BANICK 214.19 JOHN BANICK 214.19 JOHN BANICK 38.98 JOHN BANICK 6.39 JOHN BANICK 145.34 JIM BEHAN 467.75 JIM BEHAN 397.50 JIM BEHAN 13.23 OAKLEY BIESANZ 25.29 OAKLEY BIESANZ 63.80 ROGER BREHEIM 40.50 HEIDI CAREY 219.45 HEIDI CAREY 138.23 CHRISTOPHER CAVETT 52.65 LINDA CROSSON 149.10 LINDA CROSSON 159.75 DOUG EDGE 30.59 THOMAS G EKSTRAND 80.00 DAVID FISHER 91.39 MYCHAL FOWLDS 5.14 RONALD FREBERG 119.81 RICHARD FURSMAN 47.87 VIRGINIA GAYNOR 21.07 VIRGINIA GAYNOR 183.45 VIRGINIA GAYNOR 310.00 CAROLE GERNES 9.02 CAROLE GERNES 56.97 JEAN GLASS 8.90 KAREN E GUILFOILE 15.99 KAREN E GUILFOILE 2.44 JODI HALWEG 21.28 JODI HALWEG 2,354.00 LORI HANSEN 66.22 LORI HANSON 40.46 MICHAEL HEMQUIST -26.19 RON HORWATH 19.01 RON HORWATH 95.84 RON HORWATH 155.57 STEVE HURLEY 190.64 STEVE HURLEY 12.36 ANN E HUTCHINSON 217.70 MARY B KOEHNEN 79.80 HEATHER KOS 12.25 BRETT KROLL 52.76 DAVID KVAM 31.95 DANIEL CARSON 49.60 DANIEL CARSON 6/8/2004 7 Post Date Vendor Name 06/04/2004 VERIZON WRLS I2KW RE3 05/31/2004 NORTHERN TOOL EQUIP-MN 06/02/2004 LTG POWER EQUIPMENT 06/04/2004 MENARDS 3022 06/02/2004 ICI-DULUX-PAINTS #0092 06/03/2004 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE 05/31/2004 JOHNSON PLASTICS 05/31/2004 GRUBERS POWER EQUIPMENT 06/04/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 05/31/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 06/04/2004 GEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO 06/04/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 05/31/2004 MERIT CHEVROLET 05/31/2004 MTI DISTRIBUTING, INC.-PL 05/31/2004 SUNRAY BTB 06/02/2004 KATH AUTO PARTS 06/02/2004 KATH AUTO PARTS 06/04/2004 BAUER BULT TRE33200023 06/04/2004 SUNRAY BTB 05/31/2004 AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES 05/31/2004 NEXTEL WIRELESS SVGS 05/31/2004 PIONEER PRESS ADVERTISIN 06/04/2004 THE STAR TRIBUNE-ADVERTIS 06/02/2004 CUB FOODS, INC. 06/03/2004 WALGREEN 00029363 06/02/2004 MENARDS 3022 06/03/2004 MENARDS 3022 06/03/2004 CURTIS 1000 05/31/2004 T-MOBILE 06/03/2004 T-MOBILE 05/31/2004 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PROD 06/02/2004 METRO FIRE 06/03/2004 TRUCK UTILITES INC 06/04/2004 VIKING ELECTRIC-ST. PAUL 06/04/2004 HIRSHFIELD'S MAPLEWOOD 05/31/2004 T-MOBILE 06/04/2004 OFFICE SOLUTIO00000018 06/04/2004 QWESTCOMM TN651 06/04/2004 QWESTCOMM TN651 05/31/2004 TRI STATE BOBCAT 06/03/2004 INTL ASSN OF CHIEF OF POL 05/31/2004 AFFORDABLE ENGRAVING 06/04/2004 QUILL CORPORATION Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 39.91 SHERYL L LE 19.16 MICHAEL LIDBERG 956.38 DENNIS LINDORFF 25.37 DENNIS LINDORFF 1,145.09 MARK MARUSKA 54.98 MARK MARUSKA 141.83 BRYAN NAGEL 30.87 JOHN NAUGHTON 40.43 JEAN NELSON 117.01 AMY NIVEN 652.45 ERICK OSWALD 315.21 STEVEN PALMA 87.11 STEVEN PRIEM 68.21 STEVEN PRIEM 33.29 STEVEN PRIEM 71.92 STEVEN PRIEM 153.39 STEVEN PRIEM 558.17 STEVEN PRIEM 13.91 STEVEN PRIEM 147.00 KEVIN RABBETT 1,955.70 KEVIN RABBETT 418.00 TERRIE RAMEAUX 863.25 TERRIE RAMEAUX 42.59 AUDRA ROBBINS 6.39 AUDRA ROBBINS 38.08 JAMES SCHINDELDECKER 137.09 JAMES SCHINDELDECKER 54.89 DEB SCHMIDT 20.99 SCOTT SCHULTZ 31.35 ANDREA SINDT 34.39 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 26.63 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 80.00 LYLE SWANSON 86.90 LYLE SWANSON 166.87 LYLE SWANSON 104.62 DOUGLAS J TAUBMAN 941.46 DOUGLAS J TAUBMAN 0.44 JUDY TETZLAFF 60.43 JUDY TETZLAFF 13.36 TODD TEVLIN 325.00 DAVID J THOMALLA 10.12 SUSAN ZWIEG -212.99 SUSAN ZWIEG 17,562.23 8 Transaction Review For Transactions posted between 06/05/2004 to 06/11/2004 Post Date Vendor Name 06/10/2004 VERIZON WRLS I2KW RE3 06/09/2004 G & K SERVICES 006 06/09/2004 G & K SERVICES 006 06/09/2004 G & K SERVICES 006 06/08/2004 JOANN ETC #1970 06/07/2004 AIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL 154 06/10/2004 WEBER & TROSETH INC 06/11/2004 SHRED IT 06/07/2004 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE 06/09/2004 MUSKA LIGHTING CENTER 06/08/2004 PETSMART 00004614 06/11/2004 BARNES & NOBLE #2502 06/11/2004 PETLAND 06/11/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 06/10/2004 KMART 00071068 06/10/2004 SEARS ROEBUCK 1122 06/11/2004 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE 06/11/2004 SEARS ROEBUCK 1122 06/11/2004 TARGET 00012443 06/10/2004 ORIENTAL TRADE NON-PROFIT 06/10/2004 KINKO'S #0617 06/11/2004 ANDON INC. 06/08/2004 CUB FOODS, INC. 06/08/2004 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SVC 06/11/2004 NORTH METRO AUTOMOTIVE 06/09/2004 TARGET 00011858 06/09/2004 G & K SERVICES 006 06/09/2004 G & K SERVICES 006 06/09/2004 ONYX SPECIAL SERVICES-PO 06/11/2004 WASTE MANAGEMENT 06/11/2004 WASTE MANAGEMENT 06/10/2004 BEST BUY 00000109 06/11/2004 COMPUSA #197 06/07/2004 MOGREN BROTHERS 06/07/2004 MOGREN BROTHERS 06/07/2004 SUN TURF METRO POWER 06/07/2004 BORDERS BOOKS 01005693 06/10/2004 ST THOMAS BOOKSTORE 06/10/2004 LANDSCAPE ALTERNATIVES IN 06/07/2004 GANDER MOUNTAIN 06/10/2004 LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWSP 06/11/2004 REED BUS INFO ACCT REC 06/10/2004 LTG POWER EQUIPMENT 06/07/2004 TARGET 00011858 06/07/2004 TARGET 00011858 06/07/2004 TARGET 00011858 06/11/2004 OFFICE MAX 00002204 06/07/2004 NEXTEL WIRELESS SVCS 06/08/2004 CABLING SERVICES CORPORAT 06/10/2004 CIRCUIT CITY SS #3137 06/10/2004 PC FURNITURE STORE LLC 06/10/2004 HP DIRECT - SMB 6/15/2004 Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 62.13 R CHARLES AHL 795.54 BRUCE K ANDERSON 209.92 BRUCE K ANDERSON 171.04 BRUCE K ANDERSON 34.43 MANDY ANZALDI 795.30 JOHN BANICK 97.95 JOHN BANICK 123.21 JOHN BANICK 18.66 JIM BEHAN 239.50 JIM BEHAN 13.26 OAKLEY BIESANZ 61.50 OAKLEY BIESANZ 6.40 OAKLEY BIESANZ 92.67 JOHN BOHL 11.03 RON BOURQUIN 106.87 ROGER BREHEIM 6.58 ROGER BREHEIM 11.70 ROGER BREHEIM 54.29 ROGER BREHEIM 374.85 HEIDI CAREY 89.42 HEIDI CAREY 19.17 LINDA CROSSON 52.89 ROBERTA DARST 199.00 ROBERTA DARST 96.75 ROBERT J DOLLERSCHELL 12.12 ANDREW ENGSTROM 275.50 DAVID FISHER 744.18 DAVID FISHER 293.59 DAVID FISHER 327.39 DAVID FISHER 328.39 DAVID FISHER 189.54 MYCHAL FOWLDS 308.83 MYCHAL FOWLDS 20.02 RONALD FREBERG 30.04 RONALD FREBERG 83.56 RONALD FREBERG 21.25 RICHARD FURSMAN 157.95 RICHARD FURSMAN 383.04 JANET M GREW HAYMAN 15.92 JODI HALWEG 1,865.94 LORI HANSON 840.40 LORI HANSON 628.92 GARY HINNENKAMP 14.84 RON HORWATH 25.69 RON HORWATH 78.36 RON HORWATH 20.94 RON HORWATH 175.12 STEVE HURLEY 621.53 STEVE HURLEY 53.24 STEVE HURLEY 319.83 STEVE HURLEY 1,468.64 STEVE HURLEY 9 Post Date Vendor Name Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 06/07/2004 BLUE RIBBON BAIT & TACKLE 14.64 KEVIN JOHNSON 06/07/2004 CUB FOODS, INC. 63.68 KEVIN JOHNSON 06/07/2004 DENT WIZARD 100.00 FLINT KARIS 06/10/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 26.09 FLINT KARIS 06/09/2004 CUB FOODS, INC. 21.05 HEATHER KOS 06/07/2004 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 319.13 DAVID KVAM 06/11/2004 PWP TRAINING PROD 54.16 DAVID KVAM 06/07/2004 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 575.14 MICHAEL LIDBERG 06/07/2004 THE HOME DEPOT 2810 183.33 MICHAEL LIDBERG 06/11/2004 WASTE MANAGEMENT 236.30 STEVE LUKIN 06/07/2004 ON SITE SANITATION, IN 127.80 MARK MARUSKA 06/07/2004 LTG POWER EQUIPMENT 239.09 MARK MARUSKA 06/07/2004 KATH AUTO PARTS 77.69 MARK MARUSKA 06/08/2004 HUNT ELECTRIC CORPORATION 164.00 MARK MARUSKA 06/09/2004 G & K SERVICES 006 478.74 MARK MARUSKA 06/11/2004 ON SITE SANITATION, IN 1,133.07 MARK MARUSKA 06/11/2004 WASTE MANAGEMENT 723.88 MARK MARUSKA 06/07/2004 OFFICE MAX 00002204 138.44 ED NADEAU 06/09/2004 G & K SERVICES 006 244.20 AMY NNEN 06/09/2004 G & K SERVICES 006 449.15 AMY NNEN 06/09/2004 G & K SERVICES 006 129.36 AMY NNEN 06/10/2004 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS 310.07 AMY NNEN 06/09/2004 CENTURY COMM & TECH 1,072.40 ROBERT PETERSON 06/10/2004 ABRAHAM TECHNICAL SVS 132.29 PHILIP F POWELL 06/07/2004 BAUER BULT TRE33200023 177.64 STEVEN PRIEM 06/08/2004 MTI DISTRIBUTING, INC.-PL 118.94 STEVEN PRIEM 06/08/2004 MTI DISTRIBUTING, INC.-PL 118.94 STEVEN PRIEM 06/08/2004 MTI DISTRIBUTING, INC.-PL -118.94 STEVEN PRIEM 06/09/2004 WINGFOOT CTS 567.39 STEVEN PRIEM 06/10/2004 BAUER BULT TRE33200023 79.88 STEVEN PRIEM 06/11/2004 BOYER TRUCKS-PARTS 60.59 STEVEN PRIEM 06/11/2004 KATH AUTO PARTS 31.63 STEVEN PRIEM 06/09/2004 SPARTAN PROMOTIONAL GRP 280.01 KEVIN RABBETT 06/10/2004 THE TAPE COMPANY 171.00 KEVIN RABBETT 06/11/2004 VARDA COMPANY 191.38 KEVIN RABBETT 06/11/2004 THE STAR TRIBUNE-ADVERTIS 741.45 TERRIE RAMEAUX 06/07/2004 MICHAELS #2744 55.85 AUDRA ROBBINS 06/07/2004 AMOCO OIL 07847502 36.66 AUDRA ROBBINS 06/08/2004 TARGET 00011858 64.78 AUDRA ROBBINS 06/09/2004 RAINBOW FOODS 1-886 32.11 AUDRA ROBBINS 06/10/2004 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 13.90 AUDRA ROBBINS 06/11/2004 FLAHERTY'S ARDEN BOWL 465.00 AUDRA ROBBINS 06/11/2004 ORIENTAL TRADE NON-PROFIT 117.54 AUDRA ROBBINS 06/11/2004 CUB FOODS, INC. 38.38 AUDRA ROBBINS 06/11/2004 MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY CNTR 17.20 AUDRA ROBBINS 06/11/2004 S S S ARTS CRAFT 96.96 AUDRA ROBBINS 06/09/2004 MENARDS 3022 86.65 JAMES SCHINDELDECKER 06/10/2004 MENARDS 3022 135.04 JAMES SCHINDELDECKER 06/09/2004 ARAMARK REF SVS #6013- 332.00 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT 06/10/2004 DRUGSTORE COM 51.44 RUSSELL L SCHMIDT 06/09/2004 G & K SERVICES 006 331.13 GERALD SEEGER 06/07/2004 ROWS VIRTUE PRINTI 252.23 ANDREA SINDT 06/10/2004 WINROC CORP-OAKDALE 1,918.02 PAULINE STAPLES 06/11/2004 PRECISION BUSINESS SYS 324.87 JOANNE M SVENDSEN 06/10/2004 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 3.72 RONALD SVENDSEN 06/08/2004 ASPEN MILLS 8005717343 128.90 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 10 Post Date Vendor Name 06/11/2004 CENTURY COMM & TECH 06/11/2004 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 06/11/2004 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC 06/11/2004 WW GRAINGER 497 06/11/2004 UHL COMPANY INC 06/07/2004 QWESTCOMM TN612 06/07/2004 QWESTCOMM TN612 06/07/2004 QWESTCOMM TN612 06/07/2004 QWESTCOMM TN612 06/07/2004 QWESTCOMM TN612 06/07/2004 QWESTCOMM TN612 06/07/2004 QWESTCOMM TN612 06/07/2004 QWESTCOMM TN612 06/07/2004 QWESTCOMM TN612 06/07/2004 QWESTCOMM TN612 06/07/2004 QWESTCOMM TN612 06/11/2004 SHRED IT 06/11/2004 MENARDS 3059 06/11/2004 BEADSALE Settlement Amt Cardholder Name 339.42 RUSTIN SVENDSEN 53.97 LYLE SWANSON -184.07 LYLE SWANSON 13.22 LYLE SWANSON 315.88 LYLE SWANSON 57.51 JUDY TETZLAFF 57.51 JUDY TETZLAFF 57.51 JUDY TETZLAFF 86.27 JUDY TETZLAFF 86.27 JUDY TETZLAFF 86.27 JUDY TETZLAFF 86.27 JUDY TETZLAFF 115.02 JUDY TETZLAFF 138.45 JUDY TETZLAFF 236.80 JUDY TETZLAFF 367.84 JUDY TETZLAFF 16.65 JUDY TETZLAFF 36.10 TODD TEVLIN 70.56 SUSAN ZWIEG 29,022.27 11 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 06/18/04 CARDINAL, ROBERT 406.78 dd 06/18/04 JUENEMANN, KATHLEEN 358.00 dd 06/18/04 KOPPEN, MARVIN 358.00 dd 06/18/04 MONAHAN-JUNEK, JACQUELINE 358.00 dd 06/18/04 ROSSBACH, WILLIAM 358.00 dd 06/18/04 COLEMAN, MELINDA 3,792.87 dd 06/18/04 DARST, ROBERTA 1,499.68 dd 06/18/04 FURSMAN, RICHARD 4,629.25 dd 06/18/04 SWANSON, LYLE 1,731.93 dd 06/18/04 LE, SHERYL 3,699.76 dd 06/18/04 RAMEAUX, THERESE 2,197.61 dd 06/18/04 FAUST, DANIEL 3,857.97 dd 06/18/04 SCHMIDT, DEBORAH 1,348.44 dd 06/18/04 ANDERSON, CAROLE 972.21 dd 06/18/04 BAUMAN, GAYLE 3,072.70 dd 06/18/04 JACKSON, MARY 1,766.84 dd 06/18/04 KELSEY, CONNIE 755.55 dd 06/18/04 TETZLAFF, JUDY 1,766.84 dd 06/18/04 FRY, PATRICIA 1,639.65 dd 06/18/04 GUILFOILE, KAREN 2,701.07 dd 06/18/04 OSTER, ANDREA 1,713.07 dd 06/18/04 CARLE, JEANETTE 1,613.10 dd 06/18/04 FIGG, SHERRIE 1,201.67 dd 06/18/04 JAGOE, CAROL 1,677.97 dd 06/18/04 JOHNSON, BONNIE 901.19 dd 06/18/04 OLSON, SANDRA 393.18 dd 06/18/04 SCHACHT, BARBARA 1,027.37 dd 06/18/04 WEAVER, KRISTINE 1,715.76 dd 06/18/04 BANICK, JOHN 3,445.97 dd 06/18/04 CORCORAN, THERESA 1,749.46 dd 06/18/04 POWELL, PHILIP 2,156.41 dd 06/18/04 SPANGLER, EDNA 357.50 dd 06/18/04 THOMALLA, DAVID 3,817.59 dd 06/18/04 ABEL, GLINT 2,002.32 dd 06/18/04 ALDRIDGE, MARK 3,201.30 dd 06/18/04 ANDREWS, SCOTT 3,347.90 dd 06/18/04 BAKKE, LONN 2,346.62 dd 06/18/04 BELDE, STANLEY 2,519.43 dd 06/18/04 BIERDEMAN, BRIAN 2,434.35 dd 06/18/04 BOHL, JOHN 3,145.56 dd 06/18/04 BUSACK, DANIEL 2,212.31 dd 06/18/04 COFFEY, KEVIN 2,875.11 dd 06/18/04 GROTTY, KERRY 2,537.35 dd 06/18/04 DOBLAR, RICHARD 2,748.39 dd 06/18/04 HEINZ, STEPHEN 2,485.18 dd 06/18/04 HIEBERT, STEVEN 2,840.86 dd 06/18/04 JOHNSON, KEVIN 3,516.48 dd 06/18/04 KARIS, FLINT 3,373.17 dd 06/18/04 KONG, TOMMY 2,233.11 dd 06/18/04 KROLL, BRETT 1,911.42 dd 06/18/04 KVAM, DAVID 2,917.78 12 CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 06/18/04 CARSON, DANIEL 2,361.27 dd 06/18/04 LU, JOHNNIE 3,152.16 dd 06/18/04 MARINO, JASON 2,347.74 dd 06/18/04 MARTIN, JERROLD 2,222.49 dd 06/18/04 MCCARTY, GLEN 2,020.80 dd 06/18/04 METRY, ALESIA 1,956.87 dd 06/18/04 OLSON, JULIE 2,274.72 dd 06/18/04 PIKE, GARY 2,181.10 dd 06/18/04 RABBETT, KEVIN 3,124.61 dd 06/18/04 STEFFEN, SCOTT 3,267.71 dd 06/18/04 SZCZEPANSKI, THOMAS 2,349.59 dd 06/18/04 THIENES, PAUL 2,388.54 dd 06/18/04 TRAN, JOSEPH 2,087.04 dd 06/18/04 WENZEL, JAY 2,361.27 dd 06/18/04 XIONG, KAO 1,911.42 dd 06/18/04 BARTZ, PAUL 2,740.84 dd 06/18/04 BERGERON, JOSEPH 3,215.44 dd 06/18/04 DUGAS, MICHAEL 2,139.84 dd 06/18/04 DUNN, ALICE 2,388.54 dd 06/18/04 ERICKSON, VIRGINIA 2,430.03 dd 06/18/04 EVERSON, PAUL 2,631.94 dd 06/18/04 FLOR, TIMOTHY 2,609.01 dd 06/18/04 FRASER, JOHN 2,464.87 dd 06/18/04 HALWEG, JODI 2,026.44 dd 06/18/04 KATZMAN, BARBARA 1,821.90 dd 06/18/04 L'ALLIER, DANIEL 1,519.93 dd 06/18/04 LANGNER, SCOTT 1,660.10 dd 06/18/04 PALMA, STEVEN 2,471.52 dd 06/18/04 PARSONS, KURT 2,366.47 dd 06/18/04 DAWSON, RICHARD 1,895.20 dd 06/18/04 DUELLMAN, KIRK 1,842.82 dd 06/18/04 JOHNSON, DOUGLAS 1,803.54 dd 06/18/04 NOVAK, JEROME 1,882.11 dd 06/18/04 PETERSON, ROBERT 1,935.82 dd 06/18/04 SVENDSEN, RONALD 1,894.79 dd 06/18/04 GERVAIS-JR, CLARENCE 2,575.00 dd 06/18/04 FEHR, JOSEPH 2,756.69 dd 06/18/04 FLAUGHER, JAYME 1,984.84 dd 06/18/04 HERMANSON, CHAD 748.00 dd 06/18/04 JACKSON, LINDA 1,519.32 dd 06/18/04 LAFFERTY, WALTER 2,624.37 dd 06/18/04 LINK, BRYAN 2,246.07 dd 06/18/04 PACOLT, MARSHA 2,142.40 dd 06/18/04 RABINE, JANET 2,756.69 dd 06/18/04 SCHREIER, JENNIFER 204.00 dd 06/18/04 STAHNKE, JULIE 2,425.89 dd 06/18/04 LUKIN, STEVEN 3,353.68 dd 06/18/04 SVENDSEN, RUSTIN 2,678.00 dd 06/18/04 ZWIEG, SUSAN 1,710.85 dd 06/18/04 DOLLERSCHELL, ROBERT 266.30 dd 06/18/04 AHL, R. CHARLES 4,045.84 dd 06/18/04 NIVEN, AMY 1,147.53 dd 06/18/04 PRIEFER, WILLIAM 2,462.94 dd 06/18/04 WEGWERTH, JUDITH 1,715.29 dd 06/18/04 BRINK, TROY 1,546.84 dd 06/18/04 DEBILZAN, THOMAS 2,151.19 13 CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 06/18/04 EDGE, DOUGLAS 1,786.04 dd 06/18/04 JONES, DONALD 2,047.30 dd 06/18/04 KANE, MICHAEL 2,722.50 dd 06/18/04 LUTZ, DAVID 1,792.50 dd 06/18/04 MEYER, GERALD 1,857.33 dd 06/18/04 NAGEL, BRYAN 2,011.87 dd 06/18/04 OSWALD, ERICK 2,249.15 dd 06/18/04 TEVLIN, TODD 1,823.93 dd 06/18/04 CAVETT, CHRISTOPHER 3,056.22 dd 06/18/04 DUCHARME, JOHN 2,230.85 dd 06/18/04 ENGSTROM, ANDREW 1,545.71 dd 06/18/04 JACOBSON, SCOTT 1,585.34 dd 06/18/04 LABEREE, ERIN 2,464.39 dd 06/18/04 LINDBLOM, RANDAL 2,474.63 dd 06/18/04 MURRA, AARON 1,065.81 dd 06/18/04 PECK, DENNIS 2,492.83 dd 06/18/04 PRIEBE, WILLIAM 2,697.49 dd 06/18/04 VERMEERSCH, CHARLES 2,065.24 dd 06/18/04 ANDERSON, BRUCE 3,764.03 dd 06/18/04 CAREY, HEIDI 1,902.04 dd 06/18/04 HALL, KATHLEEN 1,715.29 dd 06/18/04 BORGLUM, DUSTIN 792.00 dd 06/18/04 GERVAIS, DAVID 720.00 dd 06/18/04 MARUSKA, MARK 2,513.20 dd 06/18/04 NAUGHTON, JOHN 1,622.04 dd 06/18/04 SCHINDELDECKER, JAMES 1,788.27 dd 06/18/04 BIESANZ, OAKLEY 1,970.72 dd 06/18/04 HAYMAN, JANET 1,551.63 dd 06/18/04 HUTCHINSON, ANN 2,092.14 dd 06/18/04 KOS, HEATHER 424.00 dd 06/18/04 NELSON, JEAN 1,115.10 dd 06/18/04 SEEGER, GERALD 525.47 dd 06/18/04 GAYNOR, VIRGINIA 2,585.51 dd 06/18/04 MULHOLLAND, NANCY 1,099.00 dd 06/18/04 EKSTRAND, THOMAS 2,740.62 dd 06/18/04 KROLL, LISA 1,096.68 dd 06/18/04 LIVINGSTON, JOYCE 873.68 dd 06/18/04 SINDT, ANDREA 1,554.04 dd 06/18/04 THOMPSON, DEBRA 690.48 dd 06/18/04 YOUNG, TAMELA 1,370.84 dd 06/18/04 FINWALL, SHANN 2,126.04 dd 06/18/04 ROBERTS, KENNETH 2,473.51 dd 06/18/04 CARVER, NICHOLAS 2,561.82 dd 06/18/04 FISHER, DAVID 3,022.43 dd 06/18/04 MENNENGA, JOHN 825.50 dd 06/18/04 RICE, MICHAEL 1,456.44 dd 06/18/04 SWAN, DAVID 1,810.04 dd 06/18/04 KONEWKO, DUWAYNE 2,548.44 dd 06/18/04 ANZALDI, MANDY 714.00 dd 06/18/04 BJORK, ALICIA 106.00 dd 06/18/04 BJORK, BRANDON 631.76 dd 06/18/04 FINN, GREGORY 2,011.89 dd 06/18/04 GRAF, MICHAEL 1,728.26 dd 06/18/04 HADDAD, JULIE 58.50 dd 06/18/04 KELLY, LISA 1,349.90 dd 06/18/04 OHLHAUSER, MEGHAN 596.25 14 CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 06/18/04 ROBBINS, AUDRA 1,872.13 dd 06/18/04 SHERRILL, CAITLIN 132.75 dd 06/18/04 TAUBMAN, DOUGLAS 2,639.27 dd 06/18/04 WERNER, KATIE 267.75 dd 06/18/04 ZIELINSKI, JOSEPH 33.00 dd 06/18/04 BREHEIM, ROGER 1,790.49 dd 06/18/04 NORDQUIST, RICHARD 1,829.59 dd 06/18/04 SCHULTZ, SCOTT 1,959.65 dd 06/18/04 CROSSON, LINDA 2,338.51 dd 06/18/04 FONTAINE, ANTHONY 793.38 dd 06/18/04 MOY, PAMELA 409.57 dd 06/18/04 PELOQUIN, PENNYE 441.24 dd 06/18/04 SCHMIDT, RUSSELL 1,778.19 dd 06/18/04 STAPLES, PAULINE 2,720.85 dd 06/18/04 ABRAHAMSON, DANIEL 164.75 dd 06/18/04 ABRAHAMSON, REBECCA 45.84 dd 06/18/04 BENDTSEN, LISA 29.20 dd 06/18/04 BRENEMAN, NEIL 418.77 dd 06/18/04 CORNER, AMY 22.40 dd 06/18/04 CRONIN, CHAD 34.00 dd 06/18/04 EDSON, JAMIE 42.19 dd 06/18/04 ERICKSON, CAROL 21.25 dd 06/18/04 GREDVIG, ANDERS 66.00 dd 06/18/04 GUZIK, JENNIFER 245.18 dd 06/18/04 HALEY, BROOKE 177.68 dd 06/18/04 HORWATH, RONALD 1,783.14 dd 06/18/04 IRISH, GRACE 21.00 dd 06/18/04 IRISH, KARL 507.70 dd 06/18/04 JONES, LACEY 25.00 dd 06/18/04 KOEHNEN, AMY 64.05 dd 06/18/04 KOEHNEN, MARY 913.87 dd 06/18/04 KRONHOLM, KATHRYN 463.54 dd 06/18/04 LAWSON, JOSHUA 31.50 dd 06/18/04 LINDSTROM, AMANDA 47.95 dd 06/18/04 MARUSKA, ERICA 82.40 dd 06/18/04 OVERBY, ANNA 18.65 dd 06/18/04 SCHAEFER, ROB 371.19 dd 06/18/04 SCHULTZ, PETER 109.60 dd 06/18/04 SHAW, KRISTINA 28.60 dd 06/18/04 TUPY, HEIDE 101.85 dd 06/18/04 TUPY, MARCUS 251.27 dd 06/18/04 WILHELM, MELISSA 30.20 dd 06/18/04 GROPPOLI, LINDA 326.25 dd 06/18/04 KURKOSKI, STEPHANIE 98.00 dd 06/18/04 BEHAN, JAMES 1,727.48 dd 06/18/04 CRAWFORD - JR, RAYMOND 645.35 dd 06/18/04 LONETTI, JAMES 959.73 dd 06/18/04 MILES, LAURA 232.75 dd 06/18/04 PATTERSON, ALBERT 1,058.46 dd 06/18/04 PRINS, KELLY 915.33 dd 06/18/04 REILLY, MICHAEL 1,505.24 dd 06/18/04 STEINHORST, JEFFREY 130.20 dd 06/18/04 AICHELE, CRAIG 1,819.48 dd 06/18/04 PRIEM, STEVEN 2,008.44 dd 06/18/04 BERGO, CHAD 2,071.54 dd 06/18/04 FOWLDS, MYCHAL 1,850.70 15 CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT dd 06/18/04 HURLEY, STEPHEN 2,991.94 dd 06/18/04 ARNOLD, DAVID 0 dd 06/18/04 BECKER, RONALD 0 dd 06/18/04 BURKE, MYLES 0 dd 06/18/04 CAHANES, ANTHONY 0 dd 06/18/04 CLAUSON, DALE 0 dd 06/18/04 DREGER, RICHARD 0 dd 06/18/04 ELIAS, JAMES 0 dd 06/18/04 EMBERTSON, JAMES 0 dd 06/18/04 HALWEG, KEVIN 0 dd 06/18/04 MARTINSON, CAROL 0 dd 06/18/04 MEEHAN, JAMES 0 dd 06/18/04 MELANDER, JON 0 dd 06/18/04 MOESCHTER, RICHARD 0 dd 06/18/04 MORELLI, RAYMOND 0 dd 06/18/04 NELSON, CAROL 0 dd 06/18/04 OSTROM, MARJORIE 0 dd 06/18/04 ROSSMAN, DAVID 0 dd 06/18/04 RYAN, MICHAEL 0 dd 06/18/04 SKALMAN, DON 0 dd 06/18/04 STAFNE, GREG 0 dd 06/18/04 STOCKTON, DERRELL 0 dd 06/18/04 SVENDSEN, BRANDON 0 dd 06/18/04 URBANSKI, HOLLY 0 dd 06/18/04 VIETOR, LORRAINE 0 dd 06/18/04 VORWERK, ROBERT 0 dd 06/18/04 WINGER, DONALD 0 wf 97652 06/18/04 KARSTENS, BRAD 50.00 wf 97653 06/18/04 KLINE, MARY 50.00 wf 97654 06/18/04 JAHN, DAVID 1,545.87 wf 97655 06/18/04 MALDONADO, JUANA 561.38 wf 97656 06/18/04 MORIN, TROY 203.75 wf 97657 06/18/04 MATHEYS, ALANA 1,847.41 wf 97658 06/18/04 GENNOW, PAMELA 630.50 wf 97659 06/18/04 HANSEN, LORI 1,646.04 wf 97660 06/18/04 PALANK, MARY 1,755.02 wf 97661 06/18/04 RICHIE, CAROLE 1,629.74 wf 97662 06/18/04 SVENDSEN, JOANNE 1,781.95 wf 97663 06/18/04 SHORTREED, MICHAEL 3,584.57 wf 97664 06/18/04 STEINER, JOSEPH 453.00 wf 97664 06/18/04 STEINER, JOSEPH 396.00 wf 97665 06/18/04 WELCHLIN, CABOT 2,349.59 wf 97666 06/18/04 ESTREM, LYNNETTE 330.00 wf 97667 06/18/04 FREBERG, RONALD 2,093.99 wf 97668 06/18/04 HAAG, ROBERT 400.00 wf 97669 06/18/04 STEWART, RYAN 400.00 wf 97670 06/18/04 JAROSCH, JONATHAN 905.26 wf 97671 06/18/04 SMITH III, DONAVAN 276.00 wf 97672 06/18/04 EDSON, DAVID 1,820.09 wf 97673 06/18/04 HELEY, ROLAND 1,822.31 wf 97674 06/18/04 HINNENKAMP, GARY 1,796.84 wf 97675 06/18/04 LINDORFF, DENNIS 1,790.49 wf 97676 06/18/04 NAUGHTON, RYAN 648.00 wf 97677 06/18/04 NOVAK, MICHAEL 1,669.24 wf 97678 06/18/04 BERGREN, KIRSTEN 56.25 wf 97679 06/18/04 GERNES, CAROLE 238.50 16 CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT wf 97680 06/18/04 SOUTTER, CHRISTINE 405.63 wf 97681 06/18/04 ANZALDI, KALI 706.75 wf 97682 06/18/04 FREYBERGER, RACHEL 152.00 wf 97683 06/18/04 GEBHARD, JILLIAN 420.00 wf 97684 06/18/04 GEBHARD, MADELINE 360.00 wf 97685 06/18/04 GOODRICH, CHAD 530.70 wf 97686 06/18/04 GRAF, ASHLEY 56.00 wf 97687 06/18/04 HAGSTROM, LINDSEY 51.00 wf 97688 06/18/04 HJELMGREN, NICOLE 114.76 wf 97689 06/18/04 KYRK, ASHLEY 183.00 wf 97690 06/18/04 OHLHAUSER, MOLLY 125.00 wf 97691 06/18/04 UNGAR, KRISTOPHER 30.00 wf 97692 06/18/04 GERMAIN, DAVID 1,794.93 wf 97693 06/18/04 HAAG, MARK 1,669.24 wf 97694 06/18/04 NADEAU, EDWARD 2,722.50 wf 97695 06/18/04 BROWN, LAURIE 376.00 wf 97696 06/18/04 DISKERUD, HEATHER 114.00 wf 97697 06/18/04 GLASS, JEAN 1,677.66 wf 97698 06/18/04 SCHULZE, BRIAN 593.50 wf 97699 06/18/04 TOLBERT, FRANCINE 278.00 wf 97700 06/18/04 LINGER, MARGARET 520.17 wf 97701 06/18/04 WEISMANN, JENNIFER 401.63 wf 97702 06/18/04 ANDERSON, CALEB 346.78 wf 97703 06/18/04 BACHMAN, NICOLE 106.40 wf 97704 06/18/04 BOTHWELL, KRISTIN 74.98 wf 97705 06/18/04 BRENEMAN, SEAN 280.96 wf 97706 06/18/04 BRIN, LAUREN 100.75 wf 97707 06/18/04 DEMPSEY, BETH 67.20 wf 97708 06/18/04 DUNN, RYAN 232.18 wf 97709 06/18/04 ESTRADA, KIEL 210.00 wf 97710 06/18/04 FENGER, JUSTIN 72.45 wf 97711 06/18/04 FONTAINE, KIM 501.30 wf 97712 06/18/04 GRANT, MELISSA 215.25 wf 97713 06/18/04 GRUENHAGEN, LINDA 368.20 wf 97714 06/18/04 HOLMGREN, LEAH 636.75 wf 97715 06/18/04 HOULE, DENISE 22.30 wf 97716 06/18/04 HUPPERT, ERIN 13.73 wf 97717 06/18/04 JOHNSON, ROBERT 361.00 wf 97718 06/18/04 JOHNSON, STETSON 246.00 wf 97719 06/18/04 JOYER, MARTI 78.23 wf 97720 06/18/04 KERSCHNER, JOLENE 982.50 wf 97721 06/18/04 MCMAHON, MELISSA 568.22 wf 97722 06/18/04 MILLS, ANNE 134.10 wf 97723 06/18/04 OLSON, ABIGAIL 15.30 wf 97724 06/18/04 OLSON, MARGRET 61.20 wf 97725 06/18/04 PEHOSKI, JOEL 385.35 wf 97726 06/18/04 PROESCH, ANDY 299.07 wf 97727 06/18/04 RODEN, JASON 85.10 wf 97728 06/18/04 SCHOENECKER, SAMANTHA 172.25 wf 97729 06/18/04 SMITLEY, SHARON 230.00 wf 97730 06/18/04 STAHNKE, AMY 178.75 wf 97731 06/18/04 WARNER, CAROLYN 115.00 wf 97732 06/18/04 WEDES, CARYL 112.25 wf 97733 06/18/04 WELTER, ELIZABETH 178.45 wf 97734 06/18/04 WHITE, NICOLE 79.54 wf 97735 06/18/04 WOODMAN, ALICE 103.50 17 CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT wf 97736 06/18/04 BOSLEY, CAROL 140.25 wf 97737 06/18/04 HAGSTROM, EMILY 36.00 wf 97738 06/18/04 HANSEN, ANNA 95.63 wf 97739 06/18/04 KELLY, MICHAEL 63.00 wf 97740 06/18/04 ODDEN, JESSICA 144.63 wf 97741 06/18/04 OIE, REBECCA 37.38 wf 97742 06/18/04 QUINN, KELLY 18.00 wf 97743 06/18/04 SATTLER, MELINDA 33.00 wf 97744 06/18/04 VAN HALE, PAULA 88.80 wf 97745 06/18/04 COLLINS, ASHLEY 51.80 wf 97746 06/18/04 DOUGLASS, TOM 1,108.66 wf 97747 06/18/04 HER, CHONG 170.10 wf 97748 06/18/04 NAGEL, BROOKE 26.60 wf 97749 06/18/04 NEWCOMB, GENNA 69.85 wf 97750 06/18/04 O'GRADY, ZACHARY 126.35 wf 97751 06/18/04 RHODE, ERIC 187.20 wf 97752 06/18/04 RICHTER, MICHAEL 38.10 wf 97753 06/18/04 RYDEEN, ARIEL 188.91 wf 97754 06/18/04 SIMPSON, KIMBERLYN 50.80 wf 97755 06/18/04 THEESFELD, CALEB 25.40 wf 97756 06/18/04 VANG, CIA 50.80 wf 97757 06/18/04 VERDELL, TRAQUEZ 26.60 wf 97758 06/18/04 WAGNER, KEVIN 101.60 wf 97759 06/18/04 WILLIAMS, NICK 50.80 wf 97760 06/18/04 ZIEMER, NICOLE 237.78 wf 97761 06/18/04 MULVANEY, DENNIS 1,967.73 wf 97762 06/18/04 FRANZEN, NICHOLAS 450.00 429, 698.03 18 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: DATE: INTRODUCTION Richard Fursman, City Manager Shann Finwall, Planner A-Gem Auto Sales Joseph and Kathleen Yankovec 2720 Maplewood Drive June 21, 2004 Agenda #G2 Joseph and Kathleen Yankovec's conditional use permit (CUP) for A-Gem Auto Sales is due for review. A-Gem is located at 2720 Maplewood Drive in a small strip mall located on the northeast corner of Kohlman Avenue and Mapelwood Drive (Highway 61). The CUP allows for the sale of used automobiles by appointment only. BACKGROUND August 13, 1990: The city council approved a CUP for used automobile sales subject to the following: 1. Obtain a license to sell used cars. 2. Cars for sale shall only be brought to the site for a specific buyer. There shall be no more than two cars for sale at any one time. 3. Eleven (11) parking spaces in front shall be striped and include one (1 ), 12-foot-wide handicap parking stall and ten (10), 10-foot-wide parking stalls. 4. No overnight parking of cars for sale. 5. All vehicles being sold, except when on a test drive, shall be clearly identified as being "For Sale." August 12, 1991: The city council reviewed the CUP and requested review again in six months. March 23, 1992 and April 12, 1993: The city council reviewed the CUP and requested a review again in one year. April 11, 1994 and April 1999: The city council reviewed the CUP and requested a review again in five years. DISCUSSION On inspection of the site, city staff found two unlicensed automobiles (one on top of a trailer) stored in the north parking lot of the site. Kathleen Yankovec explained during a telephone conversation with city staff that the two unlicensed automobiles belong to the owner of the property, John Kliethermes, of whom they lease space. She explained that she and her husband rarely have their used automobiles on site for the A-Gem business. City staff is working with Mr. Kliethermes on ensuring the unlicensed automobiles are removed, as well as clearing up other outstanding building permit issues from a second story addition Mr. Kliethermes began in 2001. On inspection of the A-Gem files, city staff found no concerns or complaints received regarding the business within the last five years. In addition, the Yankovecs have a current used auto license from the city. It appears that the Yankovecs are meeting all of the conditions of the CUP. RECOMMENDATION Review the conditional use permit for A-Gem Used Auto Dealers at 2720 Maplewood Drive again only if problems arise or changes are proposed. P:\Com-Dev\Sec 4W-Gem Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map A-Gem Auto Sales 2 June 21, 2004 Attachment 1 VADNAIS HEIGHTS bi Q COUNTY RD. D z Q ~ ~ ~ U W 3 4. 'L J ~ ~ ~' ~ ST. JOFM i. ~ . suMrraT cr. eLw. ~ 2. COUNift1MEW CIR. BEAM AVE~J ~. 3. ~ ~ 4. LYDIA VE ~ iii BEAM ~ koy 3 AVE m ~ ° ~ /1 ~~ ~~/~ Marld ~o,~ Kohirta~ ~ \~L°~ 1 Laks ~J KOHLMAN AVE ~ ~ ~ ~ In z v, s S J ~~ COUNTY ROAD C ~ S PAW . CT. p/J~ qR. ~ ~ z ~~`,~~ s ~ ~ ~ ~FNIl R "~' ~ A~ ~ DEMONT AVE ~ DEM~T ~ ~ BROOKS r/- ~ AVE. ~n BROOKS AVE. CT. ~ ~ ~ SEX TA ~ ~ ~ Far ® ANT AVE. ~ ~ ` ~. GERVAIS AVE. ~ GERVNS ~ ~ ~ (N GRANDVIEW AVE. Pte' VIKING DR. ~n rn COPE SFIERR~1 AVE. ~~ _ _, Laks A~ . K~~~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ AVE. ~ \~-Js ~ ~ ~ AVE ~~ ~ CO. < RD. ~ ~ LAURIE RD. ~9Mr~iroe~l LAURIE RD `\~ iI & LELAND RD. t~ ~ URA, ~ ~ AVE. V ~~ ~ / / C ~ ~~ NC'T10N AVE. ~ t~ B iii Z5 $ OO. RD. ~~ ~ t', sT ~ ~1 AVE ®~ BURKE AVE. ® ~ BURKE AVE. ~ni Av 3 ~ - ~: ~ na rx~' AVE. ~ ~++~ a«w LOCATION MAP 3 "I ~N. Attachment 2 ~ ~_ . ` ~ Tit a l 1l.6 Dec w N ATIdN AL GATTlR~ DR OADC AfTINC C~ Q ,~ ~~% • ,, ` .~ I/ _~ OO ~~, ~ _ - ~ "~ . '4 goo ~ ~ ~ ,, ~ a.l~.~. s, ~ ,~ ~ L --~ N. 6. D. CO. ~ . eq ~ . L _ \\]L '~ ~ -IMPORT ialle <7.`t ~~ 205.95--' --- -- -- ~ ~.~ ' 1 •~!!ac 3~. a . ~~ (3sl o ~ •u .c I ~ ' ~ y w~.~.:r; Q ~ :: ~' 2.76 '~ac .~ ~ ~ ~ ;: 711 i , i ~ .- _ . 94 e c y ,r C.. ! b. ~ ' ~3~~ 0 '~ N ~ i~ ` T ~ loo ) :~ i • 0 . N ~. ,~ -1 741 .~po ~ ~.` '.J, L3~.4S~ ~~ ~'f~ ~. M ,~ pis •7. Ii ./c~ ~ ~ Y. ~ A ~~ R I `o ~ .:~~ PROPERTY LINE / ZONING MAP 4 N U MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Review LOCATION: Maryland Avenue and Lakewood Drive PROJECT: Beaver Lake Town Houses DATE: June 16, 2004 INTRODUCTION Agenda #G3 The conditional use permit (CUP) for the planned unit development (PUD) for the Beaver Lake Town Houses is due for review. This is a residential development under construction on the south side of Maryland Avenue, east of Lakewood Drive. (See the maps on pages 3 through 5 and the city council minutes starting on page 6.) BACKGROUND On May 28, 2002, the city council made several approvals for the Beaver Lake Town Houses. These included: 1. A conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) fora 148-unit housing development. The applicant requested the CUP because Section 36-566(a) of the city code (shoreland district regulations) requires a PUD for developments with buildings having more than four units when the site is in the shoreland district of a lake. In this case, the site is in the shoreland district of Beaver Lake and will have a mix of housing with 40 single-family detached townhomes and 108 rental units in 11 8-unit and 5 4-unit buildings. In addition, having a PUD gives the city and developer a chance to be more flexible with site design and development details (such as setbacks and street right-of-way and pavement widths) than the standard city requirements would normally allow. (See the approved site plan on page 5.) 2. Street right-of-way and easement vacations. These would be for the unused street right-of- ways and easements on the site. 3. A preliminary plat to create the lots in the development. 4. Authorization for city staff to spend city open space funds and to use a $150,000 DNR grant to buy about 8.9 acres of the project site for park and open space purposes. (See the city council minutes starting on page 6.) On July 9, 2002, the community design review board (CDRB) approved the proposed design plans (architectural, landscaping, etc.) for the development. Mr. Emmerich appealed to the city council a part of the CDRB's approval about brick on the exteriors of the four and eight-unit buildings. On August 12, 2002, the city council approved Mr. Emmerich's appeal of the CDRB's condition about adding more brick to the four and eight-unit buildings within the site. (That is, the city will not be requiring Mr. Emmerich to add more brick to the buildings as the CDRB required.) On August 26, 2002, the city council awarded the contract for the construction of the Beaver Lake sanitary sewer improvement project to Barbarosoa and Sons, Inc. They completed this sewer project in December 2002. On November 13, 2002, the city council approved the first final plat for the Beaver Lake Townhomes. This plat created six lots for detached town houses along Maryland Avenue, several outlots for future phases of the development and the park area along the creek in the center of the site. On March 31, 2003, the city council approved the second final plat for the Beaver Lake Townhomes. This plat created 16 lots for detached town houses in the area west of Sterling Street and south of the creek corridor. On June 9, 2003, the city council reviewed the conditional use permit (CUP) for the planned unit development (PUD) for this development and agreed to review it again in one year. On September 8, 2003, the city council approved the Beaver Lake Townhomes Third Addition final plat. This plat created 18 lots for detached town houses in the area west of the creek and east of Lakewood Drive. DISCUSSION The developer and contractor continue to progress with the building of the detached town houses and the overall site work in this development. However, the developer and contractor have much to do to finish the project. The city council should review this CUP again in one year to ensure that the developer and contractor are meeting all the city conditions as the project construction continues. RECOMMENDATION Review the conditional use permit for the planned unit development for the Beaver Lake Town Houses at Maryland Avenue and Lakewood Drive again in one year. Kr/p:sec25/beaver Lake TH CUP review 2004.doc Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line2oning Map 3. Site Plan 4. May 28, 2002 City Council Minutes 2 Attachment 1 U ~ ~ W O n MCXNIGI{r W ~ a ~ mW = ~ LARPENTEUR AVE W ~ ~ C7 j N ~ o ~ ~ IDAHO AVE. U W O J } y~j ~ W ~ S ~ ~ 7 HOYT AVE. MONTANA AVE ~~ MONTANA TEVIJN (~R. AVE U ~ NEBRASKA ~ p ~ ~~ ~' ~' ~ 2 3 4 1440N "°~ °~~~ ~•..• "" ~tl.l N ~ ~ N~ ~ fi'd' QiuaeLL cr W ~-, qy .ar,~; ~NC~tA cr U ~ ~rm..r ~~ 5 8 7 4 G• ~; g a a,wEnlrr w ' /~i IN DR ~ ~ AVE ~ ~ ~ ~ TI AVE ~ COYOTE 2 A~RMG'K 1JYV Z ~ ~ E z CT. 3 2 ~BEV ~LE~ RD G ~ ~ C t 3 5 LN HAYYTHORNE AVE E D 4 5 o A 1200N ~ rrROSE .$ ~ +~M o Ate- ~ 2 u~i G~ P ,~ : -~---,.~ '`~ i ~ ~ OUA AVE ~ AVM f~ %/ ~ ~ z ~\dd 9 60 N ~ S ~ "'~°~ A~ i CASE AVE.J ~ ~ ~° ~ ~ LLWp'c~ ~ ~ ~ BRAD 4gC~.~,El W. ~ BRAND AVE. °~ Pe.~ ~ 1 0 7th sT. 7th sT. z L1nbr i ~ ~ ~ ~y BusHN '~ ~, 5~~ AVE ~ ~ m MINNEHAHA AVE 720N N MARGARET AVE - v~i °~''3M _~`` ` _ ~ !-~ 5th w AVE. Q O 1 MICFiAE7. pR 3 PMETREE ~ + etRCHInEw DR s ~ t>t~ ntt B 9RCtMEW DR 7 ROWNG HILLS DR 8 LOCATION MAP 3 N attachment 2 ""bb r cz7> ^ 1 77.CIti 'J 14 V ~H) _J ~ ' + /~ 444 90) ~ (~ ~ I l3i) ~ ~ ~ $ 3 ~ \ }-cz~)" T w ~ I~,. 1 ~ooo, ~ 19 z m o ta2) a• S czsJ ` • pR ~ (, , ' I ~,, 21.p) 'al, ~ i2~;' _ .~ ti ~ _ •.S,F . R3 m ~ I N ` N I . :~ ,:'~ ~ I aI :~~C~~ I 0 ~~ I CSJ I~,JL: BEAVER LAKE MANUFACTURED I TT 23aa. I K 1 \ ~r, ~~) F 1 1 54 J 8 S 1 • I X451 ~ , :1 I 1 '-*~ ~ i - - -MARYLAND AVENUE .~ Isle. f _...~ 2645. ea 277• ___ ,~~~~ ~ ; ~ i ~ !I ~ ~ ~ ROSEWOOD ESTATES ~I HOME PARK Cpl .- i o b. ~8, L . t3 ~ 6 9 ~~o i I - .u _ s7 . ~ PROJECT SITE ~ i zao.i ~ ~ .. ~. l/ , 330 i _ _ "ry8p' R AN I U M AVE. =VACATED 4-2'•ao~:: °ei~ ~ SOO 3 S x'326.24 321,?4. W (d ~ I a. "' a Z O 344 ac. I '+•' J IN ~ ~ I ~~_S°~r'z.' _' ~ I ~ W IN ~ O \ d I •.~. ~ay,~I _ A Doc. 1171367 L~_~r ~ TOTAL 1^ - ' i.5 i~ u -s - ~ B 11.91 affil lw.s3 w.n .au ia.q iaq }~ ~. 9' n w ° I ~a s ae s X12 ~u _ ~ U•) ' cap) pil cai) tud (arl CaN u _ x;10 ial 0 71 . .Ki • • a~ ;2 3~~i 7110 11 ~~14 I: . •a~14a 6a~lia f,. 5 1 ~ROSEo.. AVE.~a_.~RO nip r u iJt d ii - - GERANIUM ~~~ - ~ 115- , ~ . X17 s I 33 i ~ ~o~ PROJECT SITE P` I~ (161) I' I 11„ 1 ~ ~ ° 1 (9) I ~3) y 17 1 t'1 ~ I ' _ ~ R " ~ 1085 ~') ~ 1083 ..i 1084 3B G .! ~ ~ 321 I I ~'~ ~~~SD ^I~ I .jOh~ 1 .82x. '~ ~ 1 Go (%~) a Ili 1 fi /' I ~ ~ [ 1~ i6 (79)1 :y~ 14 ~I) Ij "~ I ~I ' i ~ a {{~~ ~~ /~ioo' $ 1010 (72) " '' l3 ] 31.9 Fla. II ~SCa700t~ DiST. ol~l~(~) lL ~ -.c '~ ~~. 1 (7e)n I4 ~ <>: ~~1)IS (z) ~~ I~ A N°: 622 1~ ~ v ".~a a.~ ..3 Ca) ~ W 106$ he) a >, .f 1 ~,N) 1 ! (=•7 ~ .~ r p (I.u..) = ~ (I.eoa~ /' .r ~ s I to Ij t- € Is I h _ ' Q Il 2~-1 o6t~J.95 171) y w ~`~. O I ( I!!fi ~ Gi) 9 I f'10 ~ 1 ~ Q ~_ 44F$'• 97a•~EO. S.....Ea:-F ~' R K)19 12 W . 17 ~~IU I I _- Le1..is' V 0 ~~^ « m Iii.! ~ " 1 + --[7E.'!Y~- sa O d G.94 ti. - p T• I (3l)2O I I(i. ~/i 1N) 1$ ~5) 9 I. (I.IO~~ . ~/ Y ~ g (73) 1 cy21 ID ~ ~I•) ID (i) b r o'e° 1 a "I _ // u ~ ~4~ ~ ~ L_ I i_. 1 I ` ~ 1 I -i (1]/~ 21 (1] Ter PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 4 N Attachment 3 ' ' .~ ~ . .. I' ' 1' \ EXCEP t 1pN " ., ' ~~ - ... ~ ~ a - S i pn'::: ~.~:~.:::: .. ~ ..... _. ~ .............. 1 ' ` ..: . ~` ~ - i I ROSEWOOD ESTATES ~ ~ '`~ } I ~I ~ .. ! I ~ , ... 7 1. ~ ~,- ~ ~I >, I i ~ I t ~, ' -_° i ~ II _ ~ W 4a ~ `y e t I n J. ~ ~; ..- ~ S + - 111---"'--- I ~~ - ~ ;~ ~ . 1 , • .L/ m ~ rI' rIT ~ ~ ~.- ____ f ~_ ______i '___ lv '.. ~~_~ ____-e ___.. o _ ~_~ ~ 1 ! ~ ~ ~ ,1 ~ y el ' ~~ "' ~ ~ 1Y i Q a ~•~ ~i ~ a --- , -~- . ~,_ ~ ~ , I , .--_ -I~ ~ ---- ~ j ~ ----- ' ~-- ~-~ I MARYLAND AVENUE I I Y 1 i :I I. -I 6~ i iM 1 ~. I ~ ~J 1'i e. `G I ~ ~~ ,QT+y~•I ~ I 1 - A +_"' I; I ~1 1 ~. ,~, .. i~;~ I __ ~ ~ 1 1 1 __ .1 l«____ _________ __~ _ 1~ -- ~ ~ MACNOLG AVENUE ~_ ~` (m~pen eAJ n.. `STREET SECTON 'A' xm ~o uwc ~ STREET~SECTIOR 'e' .m m sc.4 1 ~I b r~ _ EAST ROS AVENUE ~r-- r ~ ----- ~ ~~ I ~'_ r ~ of x'------ ,m...... .~~... _. ~.,~.._.. g o,` I aTS COwycmu sEw. ,~;~~_,,,,,~,, ,~~_ ~MOMCR, wl. ~]SW .rya uw ~o..vvw1 ITisl sus-ilil S1TE PLAN BEAVER LAKE TOWNHOMES 5 3 /z-aZ 4 N SINGEf l~YMY IONNNOYf DCi k Attachment .~ 4. 9:33 Beaver Lake Townhomes (Lakewood Drive and Maryland Avenue) A. Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) B. Street Right-Of--Way and Easement Vacations C. Preliminary Plat a. Assistant City Manager Coleman presented the report. b. Associate Planner Roberts presented the specifics of the report. Commissioner Rossbach presented the Planning Commission report. Councilmember Collins moved to extend the meeting until all agenda items are addressed. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All d. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following persons were heard: Laurence Olson, LSJ Engineering, Representing the Developer of Beaver Lake Townhomes Mark Dorling, 1115 Sterling-Street North, Maplewood Kay Peterson, 1085 Mary Street, Maplewood Margaret Lutfey, 1076 Mary Street, Maplewood Bob Zick, 1880 E. Shore Drive, Maplewood Kevin Berglund, 1929 Kingston Avenue, Maplewood ~- ~ - Joan Dorling, 1115 Sterling Street North, Maplewood Will Rossbach, 1386 E. County Road C, Maplewood , Kay Peterson, Second Appearance . Mark Dorling, Second Appearance Bob Zick, Second Appearance Kevin Berglund, Second Appearance e. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing. Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution approving a conditional use permit for a planned unit development for the Beaver Lake Townhome development on the south side of Maryland Avenue between Sterling Street and Lakewood Drive: RESOLUTION 02-OS-098 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Mr. Tony Emmerich, representing the AJE Companies, applied for a conditional use permit (CUP) for the Beaver Lake Townhomes residential planned unit development (PUD). WHEREAS, this permit applies to undeveloped property for the Beaver Lake Townhomes PUD south of Maryland Avenue between Sterling Street and Lakewood Drive in Section 25, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota. (PINS 25-29-22-21-0010 and 25-29-22-21-0011.) City Council Meeting OS-28-02 13 6 WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On April 15, 2002, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. 2. On May 28, 2002, 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. The council tabled action on the development request until May 14, 2001. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described conditional use permit, because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and 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 run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped March 12, 2002 except for the following changes: a. Revising the grading and site plans to show: (1) No grading or ground disturbance in the park dedication area and in the wetland and stream buffer areas except: (a) As allowed by the watershed district. (b) For the utilities, trails and footbridge. City Council Meeting OS-23-02 14 (2) The required trails and sidewalks. (3) 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. (4) The developer minimizing the loss or removal of natural vegetation including keeping and protecting the grove of coniferous trees (pines) (an area of natural significance) that is in and near the south side of the stream corridor near the rear of proposed buildings 26-34. (5) All driveways at least 20 feet wide. If the developer wants to have parking on one side of a driveway, then that driveway must be at least 28 feet wide. (6) All parking stalls with a width of at least nine feet and a length of at least 18 feet. b. The developer deeding the area labeled "Park Dedication" on the plans to the City of Maplewood. This dedication is to help protect the most sensitive natural features on the site and would protect this part of the site from building, fences, mowing, cutting, filling, grading, dumping or other ground disturbances. This dedication also would help ensure the natural linear or corridor aspect of the site (primarily around the stream) main as it is now. The Parks and Recreation Director shall approve the land or the area(s) for dedication to the city. The city shall use the Greenways grant from the DNR, while matching the state dollars with city open space money, (as is required) to buy the protected area along the stream and wetlands labeled as Park Dedication on the plan dated March 12,.2002. "'The-city council may approve major changes to the plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 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: a. Include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, streets, trails, sidewalks, tree, driveway and parking lot plans. b. Show no grading or ground disturbance (except where utilities or trails are installed) in the: (1) Required wetland and stream buffer areas. (2) Park Dedication area. This land will be for city park and open space purposes. The developer and contractors shall protect the park dedication area, including the grove of coniferous trees (pines) (an area of natural significance) that is in and near the south side of the stream corridor, from encroachment from equipment, grading or filling. City-required trails are allowed in the buffer and park dedication areas. c. Include a storm water management plan for the proposal. City Councii Meeting OS-23-02 15 8 d. Include a coordinated plan with the public works department for the design and installation of the sanitary sewer lines or for the repair or realignment of the existing sanitary sewer line that runs through the site. 4. The design of the 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. c. Install permanent signs around the edge of the wetland buffer easements. These signs shall mark the edge of the easements and shall state there shall be no mowing, vegetation cutting, filling or dumping. d. Install survey monuments along the wetland boundaries. e. Remove any debris, junk or fill from the wetlands, stream comdor, park dedication area and site. f. Install asix-foot-wide concrete sidewalk along the south side of Maryland Avenue between Sterling Street and the west property line of the site. The developer's engineer shall show this sidewalk on the grading and construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the defiails of-these plans. g. Construct an eight-foot-wide paved public walkway and two-rail split-rail fencing in the following locations: (1) From Private Driveway A in the west side of the site between Lots S and 9 to near the stream in the center of the site. (2) From Private Driveway D in the east side of the site, between Lots 21 and 22 to near the stream in the center of the site. The trail must have a surface that is not impervious when the trail is in a wetland or stream buffer area. The developer's engineer shall design the trails to follow the existing property contours and proposed utility corridors to save as many trees as possible and to minimize the amount of grading necessary to install the trails. h. Restore all disturbed areas within the stream corridor and park dedication area with a native seed mix approved by the watershed district and by the city engineer. 6.* The developer shall give the city wetland easements over the wetlands and the stream. The easements shall cover the wetlands and any land within 50 feet surrounding a wetland. The easements also shall cover the stream and any land within 50 feet of the top of the stream bank. These easements shall prohibit any building, mowing, cutting, filling or dumping within fifty feet of the wetland and the stream or within the wetland itself. The purpose of this easement is to protect City Council Meeting OS-28-02 16 9 the water quality of the wetlands and the stream from fertilizer and to protect the wetland and stream habitat from encroachment. 7. The approved setbacks for the principal structures in the Beaver Lake Townhome PUD shall be: a. Front-yard setback (from a private driveway): minimum - 20 feet, maximum - 35 feet b. Front-yard setback (public side street): minimum - 25 feet, maximum - 40 feet Rear-yard setback: none d. Side-yard setback (town houses): minimum - 5 feet to a property line and 10 feet minimum between buildings Side yard setbacks (apartments): 20 feet minimum between buildings This approval does not include the design approval for the townhomes or for the apartments. 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. The buildings in the shoreland district shall have a maximum height of 25 feet (unless the city council approves taller structures). The developer shall design the structures to reduce their visibility from the lake. This shall include using vegetation, topography, increased setbacks, color or other means to accomplish the screening. The city may require additional vegetation to help screen these facilities. d. 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 shall be posted for no parking on one side. e. Showing all changes required by the city as part of the conditional use permit for the planned unit development (PUD). 9. 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 for any outlot in the preliminary plat before the city will issue a building permit. 10. The developer paying the city $94,000 in Park Availability Charges (PAC fees) for this development. City Council Meeting OS-28-02 17 10 1 1. The city council shall review this permit in one year. Seconded by Councilmember Wasiluk Ayes-All Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution approving a street right-of-way and easement vacations for the Beaver Lake Townhomes (Lakewood Drive and Maryland Avenue): RESOLUTION 02-OS-099 STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Mr. Tony Emmerich, representing the AJE Companies, applied for the vacation of the following described street right-of--ways: That part of the Sterling Street right-of--way as a roadway easement according to the document filed with Ramsey County lying within the West 25 feet of the East 58 feet of Lot 5, Block 2, Beaver Lake Addition. 2. That part of Magnolia Avenue (formerly known as Cherry Avemie) as platted in Beaver Lake Addition lying between the east right-of--way line of Lakewood Drive (the west line of Lot 8, Block 2, Beaver Lake Addition extended south) and the east property line of Lot 7, Block 2, Beaver Lake Addition extended south. All in Section 25, Township 29, Range 22 in Ramsey County. WHEREAS, the history of these vacations is as follows: On April 15, 2002, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve these street vacations. 2. On May 28, 2002, the city council held a public hearing. City staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the abutting property owners. The Council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission. The council tabled action on the development request until May 14, 2001. WHEREAS, after the city approves this vacation, public interest in the property will go to the following abutting properties: 1. Lot 5, Block 2, Beaver Lake Addition (PIN 25-29-22-21-0010) 2. Lots 7 and 8, Block 2, Beaver Lake Addition (PIN 25-29-22-21-0011) The North 161.83 feet of the West 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 (subject to roads) of Section 25, Township 29, Range 22 (1070 Lakewood Drive North) (PIN 25-29-22-24-0072) 4. Except the North 290.66 feet of the West 1/2 North 677.06 feet of the West 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 (Subject to roads and easement) in SEC 25, TN 29, RN 22 (PIN 25-29-22-24-0073) All in Section 25, Township 29, Range 22, Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota. City Council Meeting OS-28-02 18 11 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approved the above-described vacation since it is in the public interest based on the following reasons: 1. The adjacent properties have adequate street access. 2. These right-of--ways are not needed for the public purpose of street construction. 3. The developer will be building private streets and driveways in the project. RESOLUTION 02-OS-100 EASEMENT VACATION RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Mr. Tony Emmerich, representing the AJE Companies, applied for the vacation of the following- described easements: That part of the following sanitary sewer easement according to document number 1504484 lying within Lots 7 and 8, Block 2, Beaver Lake Addition, described as follows: Beginning on the West line of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 25, Township 29, Range 22, a distance of 603 feet South of the Northwest corner of said Northeast quarter of Northwest quarter; thence East 153 feet; thence South 185 feet; thence South 85 degrees, 03 minutes East 172.9 feet; thence South 1 degree 38 minutes 30 seconds West a distance of 80 feet; thence South 88 degrees 21 minutes, 30 seconds East a distance of 170.25 feet more or less to a point on the. West line of the 50 foot sewer easement hereinafter described, all of the foregoing being over Lot 8, Block 1 and Lots 7 and 8, Block 2, Beaver Lake Addition. All lying south of Maryland Avenue and between Lakewood Drive and Sterling Street in Section 25, Township 29, Range 22, Maplewood, Minnesota: - - WHEREAS, the history of this vacation is as follows: 1. On April 15, 2002, the planning commission recommended that the city council approve these vacations. 2. On May 28, 2002, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a notice in the Maplewood Review and sent a notice to the abutting property owners. The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations from the city staff and planning commission. The council tabled action on the development request until May 14, 2001. WHEREAS, after the city approves these vacations, public interest in the property will go to the following abutting property: Lot 8, Block 1, Beaver Lake Addition and Lots 7 and 8, Block 2, Beaver Lake Addition (PIN 25-29-22-21- 0011) All in Section 25, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described vacations for the following reasons: It is in the public interest. City Council Meeting OS-23-02 19 12 2. The city and the adjacent property owners have no plans to build a street or utilities in these locations. 3. The adjacent properties have access to public streets and utilities. Seconded by Councilmember Collins Ayes-All Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the preliminary plat for Beaver Lake Townhome development on the south side of Maryland Avenue between Sterling Street and Lakewood Drive. 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 at least 15 locations -primarily at street and driveway intersections and street or driveway curves. The exact style and location shall be subject to the city engineer's approval. d. Pay the city for the cost oftraffic-control, street identification and no parking signs. LL- e: Provide all required and necessary easements. - f. Cap, seal and abandon any wells that maybe on the site, subject to Minnesota rules and guidelines. g. Complete and replace as necessary all curb and gutter on Sterling Street and on Maryland Avenue. This is to replace the existing driveways and driveway aprons on these streets. This shall include the repair of the pavement and the restoration and sodding of the boulevards. h. For the trails and sidewalks, complete the following: (1) Construct aneight-foot-wide paved public walkway and two-rail split-rail fencing in the following locations: a. From Private Drive A in the west side of the site between Lots 8 and 9 to near the stream in the center of the site. b. From Private Drive D in the east side of the site, between Lots 21 and 22 to near the stream. All trails between lots shall be in a publicly-owned pedestrian way or outlot. (2) The developer also shall build asix-foot-wide sidewallc along the south side of Maryland Avenue between Sterling Street and the west property line of the site. City Council Meeting OS-28-02 20 13 (3) The developer shall install atwo-rail split-rail fence on both sides of each trail and posts at the end of the trails to prevent motorized vehicles from using the trail. (4) The developer shall build the trails, sidewalks and fencing with the driveways and streets before the city approves a final plat. (5) The city engineer must approve these plans. Install permanent signs around the edge of the wetland and stream buffer easements. These signs shall mark the edge of the easements and shall state there shall be no mowing, vegetation cutting, filling, 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. j. Install survey monuments along the wetland boundaries. k. Install survey monuments and signs along the edges of the area labeled "Park Dedication." These signs shall explain that the area beyond the signs is a public park 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 before the city issues building permits in this plat. 1. Install signs where the driveways for the apartments and for the town houses intersect the public streets indicating that they are private driveways. 2.* Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, tree, trail, sidewalk, driveway 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 site where the developer can save large trees. 21 City Council Meeting OS-28-02 14 (4) The street, driveway and trail 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. These 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) Additional information for the property south of the project site. This shall include elevations of the existing ditch, culverts and catch basins and enough information about the storm water flow path from the proposed ponds. (10) Emergency overflows between Lots 8 and 9, Lots 21 and 22 and south of proposed building 42 (out of proposed ponds 1, 3 and 4). The overflow swales shall be protected with permanent soil-stabilization blankets. (11) Restoration in the stream corridor and park dedication area being done with native seed mix or vegetation as approved by the city engineer and by the watershed district. c.* 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. 22 City Council Meeting OS-28-02 15 (3) Show the size, species and location of the replacement and screening trees. The deciduous trees shall be at least two and one half (2 %) 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, pazk dedication areas or beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (5) Include for city staff a detailed tree planting plan and material list. (6) Group the new trees together. These planting areas shall be: (a) near the ponding areas (b) on the slopes (c) along the trails (d) along the east side of Lakewood Drive to screen the proposed buildings from Beaver Lake (e) along the south side of the site (west of Sterling Street) to screen the development from the existing house to the south The developer may use the tree groupings to separate the different types of residences. (7) Show the planting of at least 270 trees after the site grading is done. d. The street, trail, sidewalk and utility plans shall show: (1) An eight-foot-wide paved public walkway and two-rail split-rail fencing in the following locations: a. From Private Drive A in the west side of the site between Lots 8 and 9 to near the stream in the center of the site. b. From Private Drive D in the east side of the site, between Lots 21 and 22 to near the stream. The parks and recreation director shall approve their locations and design. (2) The public streets and driveways shall be a 9-ton design with a maximum street grade of eight percent and the maximum street grade within 75 feet of all intersections at two percent. 23 City Council Meeting OS-28-02 16 (3) All the streets, parking areas and driveways with continuous concrete curb and gutter except where the city engineer decides that it is not needed for drainage purposes. (4) The removal of the unused driveways and driveway aprons and the completion of the curb and gutter on Sterling Street and on Maryland Avenue and the restoration and sodding of the boulevards. (5) The coordination of the water main locations, 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. (6) 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. (7) The plan and profiles of the proposed utilities. (8) Details of the ponds and the pond outlets. The outlets shall be protected to prevent erosion. (9) A coordinated sewer realignment and reconstruction plan. The city engineer must approve the sanitary sewer realignment plans. (10) Asix-foot-wide concrete sidewalk along the south side of Maryland Avenue between Sterling Street and the west property line of the site. e. 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) Have the city engineer verify the drainage design calculations. 3. Pay the costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans. 4. Change the plat as follows: a. 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. b. Show the wetland boundaries on the final plat as approved by the watershed district. 24 City Council Meeting OS-28-02 17 c. Show the park dedication boundary and area on the final plat. d. Make as many of the property lines as is reasonably possible radial to the cul-de-sacs or perpendicular to the driveways and street right-of--ways. e. Show street names for the driveways as follows: (1) Private Driveway A in the west one-half of the site shall be called "Beaver Creek Parkway." (2) Private Driveway B in the west one-half of the site shall be called "Beaver Creek Lane." (3) Private Driveway D in the east one-half of the site shall be called "Sterling Circle." (4) Private Driveway E in the east one-half of the site shall be called "Sterling Lane." f. Show the existing pipelines and pipeline easements on the final plat. g. If necessary, increase the lot widths for the lots next to the pipeline to ensure that the building pads will be at least 100 feet away from the pipeline. (code requirement) h. Label the common areas as outlots. i. Show the trails in publicly owned property or easements. j. Show the area between buildings 8 and 9 and buildings 21 and 22 as separate outlots and dedicate each of these to the city. 5. Secure and provide all required easements for the development. These shall include: a. Any off-site drainage and utility easements. b. Wetland and stream easements over the wetlands and any land within 50 feet surrounding a wetland and a stream. The easement shall prohibit any building or structures within 50 feet of the wetland or stream or any mowing, cutting, filling, grading or dumping within 50 feet of the stream, wetland or within the wetland itself. c. A stream buffer easement that is at least 50 feet wide on each side of the stream that crosses the site. The easement shall prohibit any building, structures or any mowing, filling, cutting, grading or dumping within 50 feet of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the stream. 25 City Council Meeting OS-28-02 18 The purpose of these easements is to protect the water quality of the stream and wetlands from fertilizer and runoff. They also are to protect the stream and wetland habitat from encroachment. d. Any easements the city needs for the realignment of the sanitary sewer through the site. 6. 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. Provide for the repair of Lakewood Drive, Maryland Avenue and Sterling Street (street, curb and gutter and boulevard) after the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the driveways. d. Work with the city as necessary for the realignment of the sanitary sewer through the site. This sewer project also will require an assessment agreement between the developer and the city to compensate the city for the benefit that the developer receives from the city sewer construction. 7. Record the following with the final plat: a. All homeowners' association documents. b. A covenant or deed restriction that prohibits any additional driveways (besides the one new driveway shown on the project plans) from going onto Lakewood Drive and onto Maryland Avenue. c. A deed restriction prohibiting the construction of a dwelling or its attachments within 100 feet of the Williams Brothers pipeline. This affects Lots 1 through 3, Lots 19 through 24 and buildings 41 and 42 of the proposed preliminary plan the city received on March 12, 2002. The developer also shall notify the purchasers of the pipeline location. d. A deed dedicating a stream buffer easement (50 feet from the top of each stream bank) for the stream that crosses the site. e. Deeds for the stream and wetland buffer easements surrounding the stream and the wetlands. 26 City Council Meeting OS-28-02 19 f. 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. g. A deed that transfers the ownership of the park dedication area to Maplewood. h. Deeds that transfer the ownership of the outlots between buildings 8 and 9 and buildings 21 and 22 to the city. The applicant shall submit the language for these dedications and restrictions to the city for approval before recording. 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 private utilities, driveways and structures. 9. Show the wetland boundaries on the plat as approved by the Watershed District. A trained and qualified person must delineate the wetlands. This person shall prepare a wetland delineation report. The developer shall submit this wetland information to the Watershed District office. The Watershed District must approve this information before the city approves a final plat. If needed, the developer shall change the plat to meet wetland regulations. 10. 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. 11. Obtain a permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District for grading. 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. Seconded by Councilmember Collins Ayes-Mayor Cardinal, Councilmembers Collins, Koppen, Wasiluk Nays-Councilmember Juenemann Councilmember Koppen moved to adopt the following resolution approving the on street parking standards for the Beaver Lake Townhome development: RESOLUTION 02-05-101 NO PARKING RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Maplewood has approved a residential PUD and preliminary plat known as Beaver Lake Townhomes. WHEREAS, the developer wants to have reduced street right-of--way widths, reduced street pavement widths and reduced private driveway widths in this development. City Council Meeting OS-28-02 27 20 WHEREAS, the city has approved reduced street right-of--way widths, reduced street pavement widths and reduced driveway widths in the development, subject to on-street parking restrictions. WHEREAS, Section 29-52(b) of the city code allows variations from the city code standards if they do not affect the general purpose of the city code. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that Maplewood prohibits the parking of motor vehicles on both sides of all public streets and driveways less than 28 feet wide and prohibits parking on one side of the public streets and driveways that are 28 feet to 32 feet wide in the Beaver Lake Townhome PUD south of Maryland Avenue between Sterling Street and Lakewood Drive in Section 25-29-22. Seconded by Councilmember Collins Ayes-Mayor Cardinal, Councilmembers Collins, Wasiluk, Koppen Nays-Councilmember Juenemann Councilmember Koppen moved to authorize city staff to spend up to $400,000 of the open space funds for the 8.9 acres which would include the $150,00 matching grant form the DNR Greenways Program. Staff was also directed to make the developer aware that the city would like to see his participation in the open space proeram. Seconded by Councilmember Collins Ayes-All I. AWARD OF BIDS None J. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None K. NEW BU 1. Intoxicating Liqu icense-Nico Kotsopoulos-Mama Mia' -3094 White Bear Avenue a. Assistant City Manager Co an presented the staf eport. b. City Clerk Guilfoile presented the s ifics he report. c. The following person was heard: Nico Kotsopoulos, Owner, Mama Mi ' , 3094 White Bear A ue, Maplewood Joanne Kotsopoulos, Mama Mia's 94 White Bear Avenue, Ma ewood Councilmember Koppen m ed to a rove the intoxicatin and Sunda or li Nico Kotso oulos for a Mia's located at 3094 White Bear Avenue. Seconded by C cilmember Wasiluk Ayes-All City Council Meeting OS-28-02 for 28 21 Agenda #G4 AGENDA REPORT TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk DATE: June 21, 2004 RE: Food Permit Waiver of Fee Tntrndnctinn Big Brothers Big Sisters, anon-profit group, were issued a temporary food sales permit for June 19, 2004, for the two Cub Food Stores located in Maplewood at 2390 White Bear Avenue and 100 West County Road B. All items for the "Turkey Grill Out" were donated by Jennie-O Turkey and all proceeds from the event will be donated to the Big Brothers Big Sisters. The miscellaneous food permit fee is $47.00 per day. Big Brothers Big Sisters has requested the fee for the miscellaneous permit be waived after the fact, as it has been in past years. Recommendation It is recommended that Council waive the $47.00 per day permit fee. Agenda #GS AGENDA REPORT TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk DATE: June 21, 2004 RE: Miscellaneous Permit-Fireworks Introduction Mike Graf, on behalf of the Parks and Recreation Department, has submitted an application for a Fireworks Permit and a Noise Control Waiver for the July 4, 2004 City celebration. The event will last from 8:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. and will be held at Hazelwood Park. We have obtained the proper insurance paperwork from Bay Fireworks who will be conducting the fireworks and Fire Marshall Gervais will also do an inspection. A rain date has been set for July 5, 2004 from 6:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. There will also be food served and music before the fireworks begin. Recommendation It is recommended that Council approve the permits for fireworks and noise control for the City Parks and Recreation Department. Agenda #G6 AGENDA REPORT TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Director Parks and Recreation DATE: June 22, for the June 28, 2004 City Council Meeting RE: MCC Program Supervisor Introduction The MCC has been operating with one less full time administrative position since December 2003. During the past seven (7) months we have been evaluating and monitoring work loads, staff assignments and management goals and objectives. It has become apparent that with the internal promotion of Linda Crosson to MCC Manager, her workload has become unmanageable. Linda was responsible (and still is) for birthday parties, fitness programs, aquatics center and group reservations in addition to her new duties as MCC Manager.. A$er analyzing our current work production and staff demands, we have come to the conclusion that the existing temporary position of Birthday Party Coordinator needs to be `upgraded' to a regular part-time position. Attached is a job description, which has been developed to meet this objective. The up graded position will be responsible for all groups (150 groups/year), birthday parties (500/year or 4,500 people/year) and child care (5,000 registrant/year) to include staff hiring, supervision, registration and overall program content. The position will report to the MCC Manager and become effective July 1, 2004. There are adequate funds available for the position with the `savings' from the elimination of one full time administrative position at the MCC. Recommendation Authorize the hiring and creation of one regular part-time position at the MCC entitled Program Supervisor. The pay range has been established by the Union and City Council at $11.89 - $15.00/hour for 20 to 32 hours per week with the position budgeted out of the MCC enterprise fund. POSITION PROFILE Effective Date: Position Title: Department• Accountable to: June 2004 Program Supervisor ~tatnc_ Exempt Parks & Recreation Community Center Manager Auuroved• Primary Objectives Performs entry-level supervisory and para-professional work to develop, implement and oversee Community Center programs. Coordinates and oversees program operations, activities and staff; performs related duties as required. Supervision Received Works under the general and technical supervision of the Community Center Manager. Supervision Exercised Provides general and technical supervision to temporary, casual part-time and seasonal staff assigned to the programs. MAJOR AREAS OF ACCOUNTABILITY * 1. Ensures adequate staff coverage for operational hours and covers for absences; certain positions require acting as group fitness instructor, fitness specialist and personal trainer or childcare provider. * 2. Monitors operations to ensure a positive and safe environment for staff and participants. * 3. Ensures policies, procedures and building rules are followed by staff and users, recommends revisions or new policies as needed. * 4. Works with maintenance/custodial staffto ensure a safe and clean environment and works with Recreation Program Supervisor to ensure adequate staffing for group events as needed. * 5. Maintains inventory of equipment and supplies and ensures equipment is maintained and in proper working condition. 6. Coordinates, schedules and assists in promoting programs and activities for the Community Center to ensure a quality program; may assist with special events programming. 7. Administers and coordinates daily operations of assigned programs including developing, coordinating, and overseeing activities and programs; prepares program evaluations. 8. Recruits and hires temporary, seasonal and part time staff and monitors operations to ensure a positive and safe environment. 9. Provides supervision to part time staff including recruiting, hiring, scheduling, training, evaluating performance, assigning and reviewing work, and recommending discipline and reward. 10. May act as liaison between instructors and participants on program content and teaching methods or concerns. 11. Prepares program budgets and supporting materials for submission to Community Center Manager. 12. Purchases equipment and supplies as authorized. 13. Oversees and assists in record keeping and program documentation. 14. Performs other duties as needed or assigned. KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND ABILITIES * - Considerable knowledge of fitness programs and teaching methods if assigned to those programs. * - Working knowledge of birthday party, childcare, and group policies and procedures if assigned to those programs. * - Working knowledge of community center facilities, policies, procedures and rules of operations. - Working knowledge of basic accounting, cash handling, inventory control and record keeping. - Working knowledge of customer service methods and supervisory practices. * - Considerable skill in scheduling, coordinating and monitoring staff and activities. * - Considerable ability to deal effectively with the public and to promote programs and facilities. * - Considerable ability to hear and speak to converse with patrons in person and by phone. * - Considerable ability to operate a telephone and communicate effectively both orally and in writing. * - Considerable ability to resolve issues and concerns for facility users in a tactful, positive manner. * - Considerable ability to maintain accurate records. - Working ability to use large and fine motor skills and manual dexterity to set up equipment; occasionally requiring lifting and carrying of objects weighing up to 50 pounds. * - Working ability to supervise and motivate staff and fill in as needed in program area. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS Depending on the position, this job requires either: One year of fitness instruction experience involving regular public contact OR one year of experience leading or coordinating recreation or leisure activities. * Note: Asterisked items are essential to the job. Program Supervisor Page 2 of 2 June 2004 AGENDA ITEM H-1 AGENDA REPORT TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director/City Engineer Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Existing County Road D Improvements, Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 04-06: 1. 7:00 p.m. Public Hearing 2. Resolution Authorizing the Preparation of Plans and Specifications DATE: June 22, 2004 Introduction The realignment of County Road D, west of TH 61, requires improvements to the existing sections of County Road D between Walter Street and TH 61 as a joint project with Vadnais Heights and Ramsey County. A preliminary report has been prepared identifying the necessary improvements and a financing plan for the project. The public hearing for the Existing County Road D Improvements, Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 04-06, has been set for 7:00 p.m., June 28, 2004. Public notices have been published and mailed to the effected property owners. The city council should conduct the public hearing and consider approving the resolution authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications Background The realignment of County Road D on the west side of TH 61, south from existing County Road D at Highridge Court, has necessitated the improvement of the existing roadway. The road is currently a County State Aid Highway (CSAH) that is jointly within the cities of Vadnais Heights and Maplewood. It is also a utility corridor for each city's water utilities. The new alignment has created a segment of roadway, east of the new road, that will no longer meet the criteria of a CSAH roadway and will become a joint city street. Additionally, the intersection of Highridge Court and County Road D was identified as needing improvements for site distance as part of the public hearing process for the realignment. All these improvements are identified in the preliminary report which was distributed to the city council prior to the June 14, 2004, city council meeting. The improvements have been divided into two segments: one west of the location where the roadway will be realigned to the south, which will remain on the CSAH system and under Ramsey County's jurisdiction; and a second, east of the new alignment, that will be turned back to Vadnais Heights and Maplewood once a cul-de-sac is constructed as required for the TH 61 improvements funded by MnDOT. Additionally, water main extensions are required by Vadnais Heights to serve their residents and by Maplewood, jointly through the St. Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS). Currently, assessments are proposed only for those properties on the turn back segment of County Road D east of the new alignment, as this segment will be reconstructed. The west segment is proposed to be overlaid as a temporary fix until County Road D is reconstructed after Mn/Dot completes work on the "Unweave the weave" I-694 project in 5 or 6 years. Resident involvement/Notification On Thursday, June 16, 2004, the Cities of Vadnais Heights and Maplewood held a joint open house meeting at the Vadnais Heights City Hall to give area residents an opportunity to review the work proposed for the area west of Highway 61. There were approximately a dozen property owners present from both communities. Invitations to this meeting were sent to every property along County Road D, as well as within the Highridge Court Development and those along Duluth Street, whose properties abut the Troutland development. From a legal standpoint, there were only four property owners along the Maplewood side of County Road D that required legal notification. Yet notice of the public hearing and a description of the proposed project was sent to all residents living along County Road D. Budget Impacts Following are the estimated costs of each segment: Western Portion (New Cty Rd D to Walter St.) Roadway Improvements: (Highridge Ct. to Walter St.) _ $ 80,160.17 Vadnais Heights Water Main = $ 83,873.50 Total Segment 1 $164,033.67 Eastern Portion (TH 61 to new Cty Rd D) Roadway Improvements = $217,608.44 Maplewood Water Improvements = $ 47,416.27 Vadnais Heights Water Improvements = $ 62,042.63 Total Segment 2 $327,067.34 Total Estimated Project Cost = $491,101.01 Project Financing Funding for this project will be from a number of joint sources: Ramsey County CSAH Funds $150,000.00 Ramsey County Turnback Funds $ 64,099.62 MnDOT Cooperative Agreement Funds $ 25,000.00 City of Vadnais Heights (through Joint Powers Agreement) $145,916.13 Maplewood Property Assessments $ 73,324.76 Maplewood General Levy Debt Service Funds $ 32,760.50 Total Project Financing $491,101.01 Recommendation It is recommended that the city council conduct the public hearing and then approve the attached resolution authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications for the Existing County Road D Improvements, Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 04-06. CMC Attachments 1. Resolution Accepting Report and Calling Public Hearing 2. Location Map RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution of the council adopted May 12, 2003, a report has been prepared under the direction of the city engineer with reference to the improvement of Existing County Road D Improvements, Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 04-06, and this report was received by the council on June 14, 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 14t" day of June 2004, fixed a date for a council hearing on the proposed street improvements Existing County Road D, Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 04-06, and WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was duly held on June 28, 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 make improvements to Existing County Road D, Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 04-06. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the council resolution adopted the 28t" day of June 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 necessary financial transfers to implement the financing plans as follows: Ramsey County CSAH Funds Ramsey County Turnback Funds MnDOT Cooperative Agreement Funds City of Vadnais Heights (through Joint Powers Agreement) Maplewood Property Assessments Maplewood General Levy Debt Service Funds Total Project Financing $150,000.00 $ 64,099.62 $ 25,000.00 $145,916.13 $ 73,324.76 $ 32,760.50 $491,101.01 Approved this 28t" day of June 2004. UO Agenda #H2 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner SUBJECT: City Code Amendments -Public Hearings DATE: June 8, 2004 INTRODUCTION Request Staff is proposing that the city council amend various sections of the city code about public hearings. There are several sections of the code that now say the city council will hold a public hearing when the city is considering a land use, planning or rezoning proposal. To be consistent with the recent direction of the city council, the city needs to change the code to say that the planning commission will hold such hearings. Reasons for this Request There are several parts of the current city code that are not consistent with the recent directive of the city council. The council must change the code to make it consistent with the new policy. BACKGROUND Council's Directive On May 3, 2004, the city council held a joint work session with the planning commission about public hearings. Based on the discussion during this meeting, the council decided that the planning commission should start holding the public hearings for land use or planning proposals. DISCUSSION As I have noted above, there are several sections of the code that the city council needs to change to meet their directive about public hearings. I have listed each of them in the proposed ordinance amendment. COMMISSION ACTION On June 7, 2004, the planning commission recommended approval of the proposed code changes about public hearings. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the proposed ordinance amendment about public hearings starting on page two. P:com_dvmt\ord\public hearings code amend. - 2004 Attachment: Public Hearings Code Amendment Attachment 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE MAPLEWOOD CITY CODE ABOUT PUBLIC HEARINGS The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances: Section 1. This amendment changes Section 12-310 (f)(1). Variances. (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): (f) Variances. Procedures for granting variances from this section are as follows: (1) The city council may approve variances to the requirements in this section. Before the city council acts on a variance, the planning commission shall hold a public hearing and shall make a recommendation to the city council. . The city staff shall notify the property owners within 500 ~ feet of the buffer at least ten days before the hearing. The city may require the applicant to mitigate any buffer alteration. Section 2. This amendment changes Section 14-57. License application approval procedure. (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec. 14-57. License application approval procedure. An application for a home occupation shall be filed with the director of community development. Upon receipt of a complete application, the director of community development or his or her designee, shall prepare a resort and recommendation to send to the planning commission. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing for each home occupation license request. The city shall mail a notice to all property owners within 500 feet of the proposed home occupation at least 10 days before the hearing. The city also shall publish the public hearing notice in the official newspaper at least ten days before the hearing. The planning commission will consider the proposal and then shall make a recommendation. The planning commission's recommendation shall be forwarded to the city council. The city council will make the final decision about all home occupation license requests. . (Code 1982, §17-22) Section 3. This amendment changes Section 34-5(c). (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): 2 Sec. 345. Preliminary plat procedure. (c) The director of community development shall deliver to the finance director for deposit any moneys received as fees required in this chapter with each preliminary plan. The finance director shall credit the money to the general fund of the city. All moneys so received shall be used to defray the expenses of processing the application. The director of community development shall prepare a report and recommendation. This report shall then be forwarded to the planning commission. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing about the proposal and then shall forward a recommendation to the city council. t#~s~a~lisatie~~ The hearing shall be held following publication of notice of the time and place thereof in the official newspaper at least ten days before the day of the hearing. The applicant, property owner, and all other property owners within 500 SbA feet of the property to be subdivided shall be notified by mail at least ten days before the day of the hearing. When a division or subdivision to which this chapter does not apply is presented to the city, the city Gerk shall with in ten days certify that this chapter does not apply to the particular division. If the city fails to preliminarily approve or disapprove an application within the review period, the application shall be deemed preliminary approved, and upon demand the city shall execute a certificate to that effect. Section 4. This amendment changes Section 44-10. Zoning map. (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec. 4410. honing map. (a) Generally. The boundaries of the districts designated in section 449 will be shown on a map, and the map is hereby made part of this chapter, which map shall be known as the zoning map of the City of Maplewood. The map shall include any zoning changes recommended by the planning commission er-and adopted by the city council. pes#ed-qet~ The planning commission shall hold a public hearing to consider all zoning map changes and shall make a recommendation about such changes to the city council. The city shall notify all property owners within 500 feet of the proposed zoning map change about the public hearing and shall publish a public hearing notice in the official newspaper at least ten days before the public hearing. ~s~rarat . All interested persons shall be heard at the hearing or any adjournment thereof. After the hearing, the planning commission shall forward a recommendation to the city council. The f#re ccitty council shall adopt the zonin map and any changes to it; and all notations, references and data shown thereon are hereby incorporated by reference into this chapter and shall be as much a part of this chapter as if all were fully described. The map shall be kept up to date as provided in subsection (c) of this section. Section 5. This amendment changes Section 44-1093(c). (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): (c} the development shall conform to the plan as filed with the city. Any substantive changes in the plan shall require a recommendation by the planning commission after they hold a public hearing and requires the approval ~ of the city council. Section 6. This amendment changes Section 44-1096(b). (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec. 44-1096. Procedure. (b) The plannina commission si#~seeesil shall hold at least one public hearing on each application for a conditional use permit. . The director of community development shall have a notice of the hearing published in the official newspaper at least ten days before the hearing. The director shall also cause a notice to be mailed to each of the owners of property within 500 ~bA feet of the boundary lines of the property upon which such use has been requested, which notices are to be mailed to the last known address of such owners at least ten days before the date of the hearing. Such notice shall include the date, time and place of the hearing and shall describe the conditional use request. Failure of property owners to receive notice shall not invalidate any of the proceedings in this section. Section 7. This amendment changes Section 441240(b). (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec. 44-1240(b). (b) The city shall send a copy of approved amendments, subdivisions, variances or conditional uses under this article to the commissioner. The city shall mail all such approvals within ten days of final action. When the city approves a variance after the commissioner has recommended denial, the notification of the approved variance shall include the eit~-sibs minutes of the public hearing and of the city council's action. 4 Section 8. This amendment changes Section 44-1283(a). (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec. 44-1283. Permit termination. (a) The material extraction permit may be terminated for violation of this article of any conditions of the permit. No permit may be terminated until the sit~seansil planning commission has held a public hearing and the city council has determined whether the permit shall be terminated, at which time the operator shall be afforded an opportunity to contest the termination. The city council may establish certain conditions which, if not complied with by the operator, will result in immediate suspension of operations until the planning commission holds a public hearing and the city council considers terminating the permit san-fie i. Section 9. This ordinance shall take effect after publishing in the official newspaper. The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on , 2004. Attest: City Clerk Mayor 5 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, JUNE 7, 2004 V. PUBLIC HEARING b. Code Amendment -Public Hearings Mr. Roberts said staff is proposing that the city council amend various sections of the city code about public hearings. There are several sections of the code that now say the city council will hold a public hearing when the city is considering a land use, planning or rezoning proposal. To be consistent with the recent direction of the city council, the city needs to change the code to say that the planning commission will hold such hearings. There are several parts of the current city code that are not consistent with the recent directive of the city council. The council must change the code to make it consistent with the new policy. Commissioner Trippler said on page 5 of the staff report, under permit termination, on the second to the last line it says suspension of operations until the city holds a public hearing. He asked who is the "city"? Mr. Roberts said the way that is written it could mean the planning commission or the city council could hold the public hearing. If the city had to shut down an operation in Maplewood, he isn't comfortable having the planning commission hold the public hearing verses the city council. Because in the end the council will be making the final decision and then there would be two public hearings. He said if the planning commission had a strong feeling one way or the other, the wording could be changed. Commissioner Dierich recommended writing "either" the planning commission and/or city council. Commissioner Pearson said if the planning commission does the public hearing and a violation occurred it would have to be heard by the city council anyway for the final decision. If there was a cease and desist situation having the planning commission and the city council hold public hearings would delay the process even longer. Mr. Roberts said he would agree with Commissioner Pearson. Chairperson Fischer said she understood this to mean that the planning commission would be holding the public hearing but in the end the final decision is still to be made by the city council. Mr. Roberts said correct. Chairperson Fischer asked if it is necessary for the planning commissioners to receive some additional training on how to hold public hearings? Mr. Roberts said if the commission felt it was necessary staff could invite the City Attorney and Melinda Coleman to come in and speak on the do's and don'ts of holding a public hearing. Chairperson Fischer said the city council has had the added advantage of having the City Attorney at the hearings as well, which is an advantage that the planning commissioners don't have. Commissioner Pearson moved to adopt the proposed ordinance amendment about public hearings starting on page two of the staff report. Commissioner Trippler wanted the word "city" changed to planning commission on page 5., item a. Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes - Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Lee, Mueller, Pearson, Trippler The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on June 28, 2004. Agenda #H3 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Ken Roberts, Planner SUBJECT: City Code Amendments -Planning Commission and Community Design Review Board DATE: June 18, 2004 INTRODUCTION Request Staff is proposing that the city council amend several sections of the city code about the planning commission and the community design review board (CDRB). There are several sections of the code with language about the duties and chairpersons of the planning commission and CDRB. These code sections now say that the respective commission or board will elect or appoint the chairperson. To be consistent with the recent direction of the city council, the city needs to change the code to say that the city council will make such appointments. In addition, the planning commission and the CDRB should revise their respective rules of procedure to reflect the new policy of the city council. Reasons for this Request There are several parts of the city code that are not consistent with the directive of the city council. The council must change the code to make it consistent with their recent policy change. BACKGROUND Council's Directive On March 22, 2004, the city council reviewed the proposed policy for the appointment to commissions and boards. As part of the council's review of the appointment process and policy, the council reviewed the appointment practices of five other nearby cities. (See the information below.) The council made minor revisions and suggestions to the proposed policy to put them into effect. Here are the results from the five cities that staff surveyed. Woodbury I spoke to Gary Berg in the planning office and got information from the city web site. In Woodbury, they advertise for commission and board applicants every fall. The city council makes the appointments by December of each year so the members start their 3-year terms in January. The city council does the interviews and makes the appointments with no commission input. In addition, the city council appoints the chair and the vice chair for each commission. Oakdale Brent Brommer told me that the boards and commissions have no input in the appointment process in Oakdale. The city council does the interviews and makes the appointments to the commissions for their city. The commission elects their own chair and vice-chair in Oakdale. Roseville I talked to Dennis Welch, Roseville Community Development Director, about the interview and appointment process in Roseville. As in Oakdale, he told me that the boards and commissions have no input in the appointment process in Roseville. The city council does the interviews and makes the appointments to the boards and commissions. Mr. Welch told me that all the boards and commissions appoint their own chairperson in Roseville, except for the planning commission. The city council in Roseville picks the chairperson of the planning commission each year. White Bear Lake According to Cory Vadnais of the White Bear Lake City Manager's office, the mayor makes the appointments to the boards and commissions in their city. In fact, then: is not any formal board or council input in the appointment process in White Bear Lake. The commissions in White Bear Lake pick their own chairpersons. Shoreview Kathy Nordine of the Shoreview Planning Office told me that the city council does the interviews, with the commission chair sitting in for vacancies on their boards and commissions. After the interviews, the city council makes the appointments to the commissions in Shoreview. Ms. Nordine also told me that the planning commission in Shoreview selects their chairperson and vice- chairperson and then staff sends those selections to the city council for ratification. DISCUSSION As I have noted above, there are several sections of the code that the city council needs to change to meet their directive about the appointment of the board chairpersons. I have listed each of these sections in the proposed ordinance amendment. I also have proposed changes to the rules of procedure for the CDRB and the planning commission to reflect the policy change of the city council. COMMISSION ACTIONS On June 7, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council not approve the proposed code changes about the appointment process for the chairperson of the boards and commissions. On June 8, 2004, the community design review board recommended that the city council not approve the proposed code changes about the appointment process for the chairperson of the boards and commissions. 2 RECOMMENDATIONS A. Adopt the proposed code amendments about the planning commission and community design review board starting on page four. B. For the Community Design Review Board (CDRB), adopt the proposed revision to their Rules of Procedure on page six. C. For the Planning Commission, adopt the proposed revision to their Rules of Procedure on page seven. P:com_dvmt\ord\PC and CDRB Code amend. - 2004 Attachments: 1. Proposed Code Amendment Ordinance 2. Proposed Revision to CDRB Rules of Procedure 3. Proposed Revision to the PC Rules of Procedure Attachment 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE MAPLEWOOD CITY CODE ABOUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of Ordinances: Section 1. This amendment changes Section Z-249. Chairperson and vice-chairperson. (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec 2.249 Chairperson and vice-chairperson. The planning commission shall submit iwo names for nomination as chairperson to the city council every two years. The city council will select the chairperson for the planning commission from the names submitted to them by the planning commission. The planning commission shall elect avice-chairperson at the second planning commission meeting in January each year. The chairperson shall be responsible for calling and presiding at meetings and shall have an equal vote with other members of the commission. If the chairperson is not at a meeting, the vice-chairperson shall assume the duties of the chairperson for that meeting. If the chairperson resigns from or is otherwise no longer on the planning commission, the vice-chairperson shall become the acting chairperson until the city council can appoint a new chairperson. Section 2. This amendment changes Section 2-251(a) (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec. 2-251. Officers; meetings; rules of procedure. (a) The planning commission shall elect its own officers, except for the chaimerson, establish meeting times, and adopt its own rules of procedure to be reviewed and approved by the city council. Section 3. This amendment changes Section 2-252 (9) (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec. 2-252. Duties and responsibilities. (9) Accept such other and further duties as may, from time to time, be directed by the city council, ' Section 4. This amendment changes Section 2-254. Responsibilities of community development director. (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Sec. 2-254. Responsibilities of community development director. Subject to the direction of the city manager, the planning commission and its chairperson, the community development director or his/her designee shall: (Numbers 1-6 remain unchanged). 4 Section 5. This amendment changes Section 2-284.Officers; quorum; changes to rules of procedure. (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): (a) Chairperson, vice-chairperson. Every two years, at the A~eye~~ second meeting in January, the community design review board shall select two names for nomination as chairperson to submit to the city council. The city council will select the chairperson for the community design review board from the names submitted by the board. The community design review board shall elect avice-chairperson at their second meeting of the year. Section 6. This ordinance shall take effect after publishing in the official newspaper. The Maplewood City Council approved this ordinance on , 2004. Attest: Mayor City Clerk Attachment 2 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (CDRB) RULES OF PROCEDURE (The additions are underlined and the deletions are crossed out): IV. ELECTION OF OFFICERS A. The ~~r~, vice chairperson and such officers as the board may decide are needed, shall be appointed by the board at the second meeting of each calendar year and will serve until their successors have been duly elected and qualified. The city council will select the chairperson for the board. The Community Design Review Board adopted this revision on June , 2004. 6 Attachment 3 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMSSION (PC) RULES OF PROCEDURE (The additions are underlined and the deletions are crossed out): D. ELECTION OF OFFICERS 1. A sbair~eFSeR, vice chairperson shall be elected by the commission at the second meeting of each calendar year and will serve until his or her successor has been elected. The city council will select the chairperson for the planning commission. The planning commission adopted this revision on June , 2004. 7 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, JUNE 7, 2004 V. PUBLIC HEARING b. Code Amendment -Planning Commission and CDRB Mr. Roberts said staff is proposing that the city council amend several sections of the city code about the planning commission and the community design review board (CDRB). There are several actions of the code with language about the duties and chairpersons of the planning commission and CDRB. These code sections now say that the respective commission or board will elect or appoint the chairperson. To be consistent with the recent direction of the city council, the city needs to change the code to say that the city council will make such appointments. In addition, the planning commission and CDRB should revise their respective rules of procedure to reflect the new policy of the city council. (additions and changes are in bold deletions are stricken) Commissioner Dierich asked if councilmember Rossbach could address this item with the commission? Mr. Will Rossbach, City councilmember, residing at 1386 County Road C, Maplewood, addressed the commission. His understanding of this change was to allow a procedure to be in place so if a person wanted to pursue being a chairperson for their commission they had a way to do that. As an example in the 14 years he served on the planning commission there were times he would have liked to be the chairperson but he felt the historical precedence that was in place with Lorraine Fischer as chairperson she would continue as chairperson. He felt it wasn't appropriate for him to put his name out as chairperson nor did anybody volunteer his name as chairperson. There were always commissioners with more seniority on the commission and it did not seem appropriate for him to put his name in the process as long as the chair wanted to continue being the chairperson. This policy was not proposed because of what happened to him. However, all the commissions and boards tend to act the same way, if there is a chair in place they tend to stay there unless they decide to step aside or retire. This proposed policy was put in place so if there was another person that was interested in being a chair it could be a way to become chairperson. He believes the city council is a reasonable group of people and for example the planning commission was unanimously set on having Lorraine Fischer remain the chairperson and didn't submit another name he believed the city council would accept that. The code amendment document says you "shall" submit two names to the city council. He believes if the commission submitted one name it would be agreeable to the city council, however, he would have to check on that. The change is not being made so the city council can make sure the commission rotates chairs but it would allow for change to be made. It would allow somebody who wanted to become chair to have that opportunity. Especially if a chairperson was not performing to the extent that they should, Commissioner Dierich said this situation is unusual because typically when you serve on a board or commission you are allowed to choose your own chairperson. She asked what would happen if the city council picked a chair and the planning commission did not care to have that person as the chair. Would the city council be speaking to the planning commissioners before they made a chairperson change? Chairperson Fischer said for many of the years she was on the planning commission the city council named the chairperson. That was not true of the other commissions but it happened for the planning commission. Somewhere along the line the city council decided they had not chosen the chairperson for the other commissions or boards so they asked why were they choosing the chairperson for the planning commission? Mr. Rossbach said in a study of the cities that surround Maplewood the City of Maplewood is the only city that allows the commissions to choose their own chairperson. Making this change would align Maplewood with other cities' common practice. The commission can use their council contact person, which is Mr. Rossbach, to voice their questions and or concerns and he would bring those back to the city council. Commissioner Dierich said this process seems a bit like high school where you put the peoples name in and the politically correct thing to do is to select the most popular person. Mr. Rossbach said the difference is that the commissioners are to write down two people's names that they feel are qualified to serve as the chairperson and those two people want to serve as chairperson. Commissioner Trippler said he had called Mr. Rossbach on Sunday June 6, 2004, to discuss this issue as the contact person for the planning commission. He sees the planning commission's primary goal as being an advisory group to the city council and he would hope that as an advisory group they would be free to give their advice without worrying about political implications. By having the city council have the authority to choose who chairs the group, there may come a time when the city council could decide they don't like the choice the planning commission made and they could pick somebody else which could give a direct implication by the selection of the new chair. As he read the proposal on chair and vice chair it says "the planning commission shall submit two names for nomination as chairperson to the city council every two years. The city council will elect the chairperson for the planning commission". It doesn't say they will select a chairperson from the two names that were submitted. It says "the planning commission may submit two names" he read that to mean the city council could select somebody from the two names but they could decide to select a different chairperson for the commission. Mr. Rossbach said that is certainly possible, although he doesn't believe that is the intent of the city council. Commissioner Trippler said he didn't think that was the intent either but it's a concern of his that as an advisory group the city council will give direction to the commission of how to move ahead while trying to do their business. He thinks it's counter productive, which doesn't serve the city council very well. Mr. Rossbach said he has never known the planning commission to feel stifled in their ability to give comments so he's not too concerned about that. The city council is looking for the commissions to be more involved in the process. By holding the public hearing earlier in the process means that issues could be addressed ahead of time before getting to the city council for the final decision when it's too late to make changes. Mr. Rossbach said the most common complaint by Maplewood residents has been why are they there to speak at a public hearing when it's too late to make changes or address the issue when the city council is to vote tonight on the final decision. The city also wants to make sure the residents feel the public hearing was done right and that they had the chance to speak on the issue and possibly get the issue resolved. Mr. Rossbach said he doesn't believe the proposed code amendment change is for the city council to remove people from the boards or commissions. He believes the city council would like to rotate chairs and allow others to have an opportunity to become chair if they would so choose. The council could ask to meet with someone or even ask them to step down if they for example missed several meetings, did not speak at the meetings, or were difficult to work with. This would be referred to as being removed from cause. Commissioner Desai said in the time he has served on the planning commission he hasn't seen the chairperson's position as being influential in any decision making process for any subject matter. He sees the chairperson's role as the person that keeps the process moving along and in order. He doesn't see the driving force in making this code amendment change. The planning commission just voted for the chairperson and vice chair in January and he didn't hear anybody say they wanted to be chairperson so the commission voted to reelect Lorraine Fischer as chairperson. Commissioner Pearson said he will be voting against this change. He doesn't see where this is coming from. He doesn't feel anybody is afraid to speak out if they wanted to be the chair or vice chair. He said Mr. Rossbach was not timid about the issues or his opinions at the meetings and he shouldn't have been timid about speaking out regarding becoming the chairperson. He said Mr. Rossbach certainly wasn't timid about seeking a spot on the city council. He personally has nominated Lorraine as chairperson for the last two elections because she does a fine job and has been very sensitive to residents in the community, especially during public hearings and has a hard time finding where the displeasure is with the city council. Mr. Rossbach was the vice chair the last two times and he handled some meetings when Lorraine was out and did a fine job as acting chair. He thinks this change will become political and he will not be voting for this. Mr. Rossbach said he appreciates Mr. Pearson's comments and believes Mr. Pearson should vote his conscience. The point about him not being shy regarding the issues and his opinion is true; however, he said he still felt inhibited about the historical precedence set so he never felt it was appropriate for him to put his name out there as chair. Commissioner Dierich said she doesn't necessarily see this as a bad thing, however, she could see it being manipulated by the city council. She sees both points. Suppose somebody is a chairperson for a few years and then another person is the chairperson for a few more years. And there is no connection between the vice chair and the chairperson. You can lose a lot of continuity. The boards that she has been involved with for organizations have groomed the vice chair to move into the role of chairperson. The two chair's work together and when it comes time to change chair's the vice chair moves into the chairperson role and a new person becomes the vice chair to begin the process of working together all over again. This would make more sense than what the city council has proposed. She believes the idea is to get new blood in and this is the best way to move people around by preparing them for their new role. Commissioner Dierich said she would hate to lose the continuity that the planning commission and other commissions have with the history or knowledge the chairs have serving time. As liaison between the commissions and boards, Mr. Rossbach may need to sit down with the city council and state the issues that planning commissioners have. Commissioner Grover asked if someone would review for Commissioner Lee and himself how the process of becoming the chair and vice chair? Chairperson Fischer reviewed the current procedure of voting during the second meeting in January for the chairperson and vice chair therefore by writing names on a piece of paper to nominate them and if those people are willing to serve a vote is taken and agreed upon. Commissioner Trippler said he can understand the concern the city council may have for individuals that are serving on a board or commission that are not performing adequately. He thinks that is one of the things the city council should be looking at to make sure good people are serving on commissions and boards. He disagrees with the manner in which the city council has approached this. Abetter mechanism of doing this is to look at when terms come due for renewal. After the three year term the city council should thank the member for their service and let them know it's time for them to move on. By giving the city council the authority to select the chair doesn't resolve issues like that. Mr. Roberts said the council added some language about reappointments which states "The council will not impose term limits, however, they will make annual or reappointments through an open or community wide process. Each year every commissioner seeking reappointment will reapply and possibly interview again with the city council along with other candidates." He believes the city council would get more people to apply for openings and in January interview candidates. If the members aren't reappointed there would be openings for the new applicants to interview for. Mr. Rossbach said to clarify that would only happen when the person's term was up. Everybody is not reviewed every year it is only when your individual term is up. Commissioner Dierich said to separate this from the political process, the city council could vote for the vice chair with the understanding that the vice chair would automatically move into the chairperson position after a three year term. Commissioner Mueller said the city council has the opportunity to have or not have the current board and commission members. He wasn't aware everyone had to be interviewed every three years. If the city council wants advice from the commissioners without any strings attached or fear associate, don't start appointing the chairs for the boards and commissions by telling them this person must be your leader. He said there may not be anything political with this but it could happen in the future. Mr. Rossbach said he knows the recording secretary is getting these comments down for the city council to review and then they will know how they feel about the proposed code amendment change. Commissioner Desai said regarding interviewing commissioners after their terms expire, maybe the city council should be working with the commissioners "while" they are serving their term to fit in as a commissioner. Waiting until their term expires when it is too late to make changes is a reactive way to handle the situation rather than proactive. Mr. Rossbach said while he was serving his time on the planning commission there were a few times he was coached by the city council and was told he wasn't following the protocol as he should have been and was asked to correct things. The council lets you know if there is a problem. This should not be viewed by the commissioners as a way of moving them out, it is more a way to get residents involved in applying for a position on a commission or board. The city council would like to be able to evaluate current members and interview new applicants to find the most qualified individual to serve the city in a role as a planning commissioner or board member. Mr. Rossbach said for instance, if there is an area of Maplewood that is not well represented on a commission or board and the opportunity arises to cover that area in the city that would be something for the city council to weigh. If a Maplewood resident spent their career as a planner and decided to apply for a spot on the commission, they would be an asset as well and something for the city council to consider. Other cities have higher participation rate on their boards and commissions with this particular open interview process. Historically Maplewood has had very little participation and has many of the same people on the commissions. This open interview process gives residents in other cities the feeling that they have a chance to serve on one of the commissions and this is what the city council has proposed for Maplewood as well. Commissioner Desai asked if the reason people haven't applied was because the city is discouraging people from applying or was there some other reason why residents aren't applying? Mr. Rossbach said people have not been discouraged from applying, people just haven't applied. Commissioner Pearson said the city has advertised openings over and over again so it hasn't been a matter of not advertising for openings. He asked how the city council planned on getting more applicants other than going out and actively seeking applicants from the various neighborhoods that don't have current representation. Mr. Rossbach said already this year the city has had more applications than they have had in previous years, so the process is already beginning. The city just finished interviews to fill an entirely new committee and has recently added a new board member and two new planning commissioners, the police civil service and the parks commission, so people are applying. Commissioner Desai asked if any thought has been given to limiting the number of terms a person can serve in order to have more opportunity for new members to serve the city? Mr. Rossbach said he hasn't heard any discussion of limiting terms of any board or commission. He said he has also never been in any meeting where the council has discussed any displeasure with the performance of a board or commission member. It's more about giving responsibility and input to the commissions and what are the things for the city council to consider if the council is going to do those things. Mr. Rossbach said the city council is trying to put some things in place to get the best performance from the people serving on the board and commissions. Mr. Rossbach said the commission is taking the wrong view if they think the city council's intent is to push people off the commission. Commissioner Desai said he meant if the intent was to get residents to apply for openings by limiting the number of terms people can serve as done with the President of the United States and other offices that have limited terms this would be one aspect to create more openings on the board or commission. Mr. Rossbach said one comment he heard by a city councilmember was this is an experiment and if it doesn't work out things can be changed. The city council believes this is going to work but they are very interested in hearing the board and commissions comments. Commissioner Lee said he hears the city council is going to be giving more responsibility to the boards and commissions but on the other hand he hears the council is going to be taking things away. Mr. Rossbach asked what the city council is taking away? Commissioner Lee said the city council is taking away the right to vote for their chairperson. He doesn't understand if things are running smoothly why take that right away? As the saying goes if it isn't broken why fix it? Mr. Rossbach said the comments will be reflected in the minutes but he would recommend that the commission forward their motion to the city council and the city council will consider it. Commissioner Trippler said he just wanted to point out that he has been spoken to by the city council as Mr. Rossbach was so the city council does coach the members before it is too late to make changes. Mr. Rossbach excused himself from the meeting so the planning commission could vote on this item in his absence. Chairperson Fischer said if the commission had the prerogative to submit two people's names and the council were limited to choose one of the two names, that may meet some of the concerns being expressed here. Commissioner Trippler said he spent some time as a rule writer for the State of Minnesota and in statutory language the word "shall" means must. So that means the commission must submit two names for chairperson. What would the planning commission do if only one person wanted to be chair? If the commission submitted one name then they would not be following the ordinance. To him the question is does the commission think it's a good idea to allow the city council to appoint the chair and do they want to relinquish that authority. Commissioner Dierich said the issue is that the city council wants to make this code amendment change and they will vote yes for this is whether the planning commission is displeased with it or not. She believes the planning commission should mold this ordinance so that it is palatable to the commission and then let the city council know this is something the planning commission can live with and something the city council can live with. Commissioner Dierich said if the city council vote for a chairperson and the planning commission is unhappy with the decision, you will have some displeased commissioners because of the city council's decision. Mr. Roberts reminded commissioners that the minutes will be forwarded to the city council and even though this policy change was adopted by the city council in March 2004, the city council may change their mind. Commissioner Pearson said if this gets changed you can be sure the amendment will be cast in stone. Commissioner Mueller said he is a volunteer and will speak his mind even if the city council has to appoint the chair. He would like the commission to be as free and honest as they want to be. When it boils down to it this is a political issue and it shouldn't be. The city council has the opportunity to keep or remove members when the council appoints members to the boards and commissions. If the city council is serious about this when your term is up for review he is not sure how that will all play out. If it all plays out that will be the time the council removes members or even the chairperson. He likes the way things work now and doesn't want to be politically savvy. Commissioner Pearson said it feels like the commission is losing a basic freedom or autonomy of this commission that was set up. Chairperson Fischer said she has been in both situations so she doesn't feel intimidated either way. At times she has felt intimated by the voting process held in January. When nobody else wants to put their name down for chairperson during the voting process she has felt intimidated. She realizes not everybody feels comfortable taking control of a meeting and serving as a chairperson. She has remained chairperson for a long time because nobody else has said they wanted the position. As Commissioner Dierich stated earlier you need some history of the city to carry forth as chair. Commissioner Mueller said maybe the term limit shouldn't be for the commission maybe it should be for the chairperson, which would require a rotation of chair people because the term limit was up. Commissioner Mueller moved to adept deny the proposed code amendments about the planning commission starting on page three of the staff report. For the Planning Commission, adept deny the proposed revision to their Rules of Procedure on page six. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes - Desai, Grover, Lee, Mueller, Pearson, Trippler Nay -Fischer Abstention -Dierich Chairperson Fischer asked how may commissioners would vote aye if the code amendment was reworded? Commissioners Dierich, Fischer and Grover said then they would have voted aye. The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on June 28, 2004. DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JUNE 8, 2004 VIII. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. CDRB Ordinance and Rules of Procedure Changes Ms. Finwall said on March 22, 2004, the city council revised the proposed policy for the appointment to commissions and boards. The council made minor revisions and suggestions to the proposed policy to put them into effect. The community design review board should revise their respective rules of procedure to reflect the new policy of the city council and make a recommendation to the city council as shown on page 4 of the staff report. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked staff if the planning commission reviewed this change and forwarded their recommendation to the city council? Ms. Finwall asked the recording secretary if she could give a recount of the planning commission meeting? Ms. Lisa Kroll, the recording secretary, said after a very lengthy discussion the planning commission reviewed the ordinance and rules of procedure change and the planning commission recommended denial of the ordinance and rules of procedure change. Board member Shankar said he thought staff stated this change was already decided upon on March 22, 2004, and therefore, the CDRB did not have a say in the change of the policy? Ms. Finwall said the city council did approve the policy change. However, according to city ordinance the planning commission needed to review and make recommendations to the ordinance change and the CDRB should make recommendations to the policy changes. This is procedural and it also gives the board the opportunity in a public forum to discuss the city council's decision to change these policies. Board member Olson said apparently the city council must have discussed this item in a workshop because this was not part of any city council meeting she saw rebroadcast on cable. If this is the case, she wants to know why the city council is removing the CDRB's opportunity to nominate their own chair and taking aheavy-handed approach to managing the board? Ms. Finwall said she doesn't have an answer to that question but she would speculate that the city council saw a need for a change in a particular commission or board chair where it wasn't happening internally. Ms. Kroll added that councilmember Rossbach was present at the planning commission meeting. He stated the city council discovered Maplewood was the only city of surrounding cities where the boards and commissions chose their own chairperson and vice chairperson. The city council wanted to follow suit with the procedures of the other surrounding cities. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said Mr. Rossbach had mentioned that fact to her as well. She then contacted the City of Roseville since they are also a plan B city, are organized the same way Maplewood is, share a common boundary with Maplewood, are similar in size, and are a first ring suburb. According to the assistant administrator at the City of Roseville, the planning commission is the only commission that doesn't elect the chair person. All of the other commissions within Roseville elect their own chair person. Because of the similarities between Roseville and Maplewood she telephoned the City of Roseville, however she did not check with any other cities. Board member Ledvina said according to the new policy the board is able to nominate two people they want on the chair and vice chair. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said according to the way the policy is written the city council does not have to select the two people's names that are written down by the board or commission. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said the wording in the policy states the board or commission "shall" give two names and that means the board or commission "must" have two names. If there is really only one person that wants to serve as chair than what is the validity for the process of providing two names to the city council? Board member Ledvina said he would recommend striking that terminology if the city council doesn't have to choose any of the names that have been written down for the city council, what is the validity of that? Ms. Kroll stated Chairperson Fischer asked planning commissioners if the ordinance were reworded would commissioners vote for the change? Two commissioners said they would vote "for" the ordinance if it were reworded. Board member Ledvina said the city council is elected and the boards and commissions are not. Board member Olson said the city council has taken away any opportunity the board has for input on board members so every member on this committee is appointed by the city council. There is no opportunity for feedback and she would think it would be to the city council's benefit to get opinions of the committee. She thinks the two combined procedural changes, besides the fact that the city council wants to select the chairperson, seem excessive. She believes the city council needs to be open to people that would like the opportunity for input and may have valid points of view. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said when she looks at this she sees the potential to open a can of worms. This could serve to politicize the selection of the committee members as well as the chairperson. She believes it is important for the boards and commissions to be as non-partisan as possible because they are volunteers and they make recommendations based upon their skills, knowledge, and backgrounds of being citizens and professionals in the community. In order to be on the CDRB there are criteria and safeguards as to who can be on the board. It is important for volunteers to feel like they have some self governance to pick their own chairperson. Since the board can't make recommendations as to who may appoint openings she thinks it is important to have some self governance. The board serves at the city council's pleasure. The board also has to feel they have some measure of accountability and responsibility within their own organization. She appreciated that she was elected to this position and she would hope that if her peers elect her again, and she was willing to serve again, the decision would come from her peers and not by the city council. The same holds true if they did not reelect her, she would appreciate it if that decision came from the board and not the city council. Board member Olson said she thinks the board should have the opportunity to rotate chairs. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she would agree. Board member Olson said any recommendation the board makes is only a recommendation and the city council does not have to follow the recommendation. The board is limited to what they can discuss during the review process. She believes the city council is going the wrong direction with this policy change. Board member Ledvina said he shares the same opinion as other members do. The board would like more autonomy than not, which is a natural tendency for just about everyone to have. Board member Ledvina moved to recommend denial of the proposed code amendments to the community design review board ordinance. Board member Ledvina moved to recommend denial of the proposed revision to the CDRB Rules of Procedure. Chairperson Longrie-Kline seconded Ayes -Driscoll, Ledvina, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar The motion carried. This item goes to the city council on June 28, 2004. Agenda H4 REPORT SUMMARY TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: INTRODUCTION City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Heritage Square Phase II County Road D and Kennard Street June 8, 2004 Town and Country Homes is proposing to build for-sale townhomes on the portion of the Legacy Village PUD (planned unit development) that was previously approved for rental townhomes and an executive office site. The applicant is proposing to build 178 townhomes. This site was previously approved for 198 rental townhomes and the office building The applicant is requesting that the city council approve the following: 1. A comprehensive plan amendment to build townhomes where the executive offices were previously approved. The applicant is, therefore, requesting a change from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential). 2. A revision of the Legacy Village PUD for the change in ownership/rental status as well as the change from the office site to townhomes. 3. A preliminary and final plat for the new lot line configuration. 4. Site, building and landscape plans. DISCUSSION Staff is in support of this proposal. There will now be 20 fewer units on this portion of Legacy Village as well as the deletion of the office site. The office was to serve as a rental office for the townhomes. This is no longer needed. The architectural design and landscaping is attractive and has been approved by the community design review board. The main point of discussion with the planning commission was to make sure that the applicant meets the visitor-parking requirements of this PUD. This was a condition of the original PUD and is still the recommendation by staff. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of these requests as stated in the attached staff report. p:sec 3\Heritage Square II CC Meeting Summary June `04 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: DATE: INTRODUCTION Project Description City Manager Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Heritage Square Phase II County Road D and Kennard Street June 8, 2004 Town and Country Homes is proposing to build for-sale townhomes on the portion of the Legacy Village PUD (planned unit development) that was previously approved for rental townhomes and an executive office site. The applicant is proposing to build 178 townhomes. This site was previously approved for 198 rental townhomes and the office building. Refer to the maps and narrative on pages 12-25. The applicant is requesting that the city council approve the following: 1. A comprehensive plan amendment to build townhomes where the executive offices were previously approved. The applicant is, therefore, requesting a change from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential). 2. A revision of the Legacy Village PUD for the change in ownership/rental status as well as the change from the office site to townhomes. 3. A preliminary and final plat for the new lot line configuration. 4. Site, building and landscape plans. BACKGROUND July 14, 2003: The city council approved the Legacy Village PUD, comprehensive plan amendment, tax-abatement plan and preliminary plat for Legacy Village. This plan included the site for the proposed Town & Country townhomes. Refer to the council minutes on pages 270. December 8, 2003: The city council approved the applicant's PUD, preliminary plat and design plans for Heritage Square. December 16, 2003: The CDRB reviewed and approved the applicant's revised architectural plans for Heritage Square. February 9, 2004: The city council approved the final plat for Heritage Square. April 26, 2004: The city council approved a revision to the development agreement for Legacy Village to permit the construction of `for sale" townhomes instead of "rental" townhomes in Heritage Square Phase II. DISCUSSION Land Use Plan Change The proposed land use plan change from BC to R3H is not a major revision. The area previously planned for the office building is 1.5 acres in size within this 20-acre site. The office, furthermore, would have been an accessory use to the townhomes if they were rentals. It would have served as a rental office. Although this office site also fit the "mixed-use" concept of the Legacy Village PUD, development of this parcel would be better suited as townhomes. Townhomes would certainly be compatible with the surrounding townhomes that were approved one year ago. Whereas the office, though acceptable in this "mixed-use" development, would not be as compatible as would the same type of development. Densi Density is not an issue since the number of units is decreasing by 20. PUD Revision For the same reason stated above, staff finds no problem with the PUD revision to substitute the office site with an extension of the townhome complex. For-sale units vs. rentals, likewise, would not pose any problem. The city, in fact, cannot regulate whether housing units are sold or rented. Nothing prevents a homeowner from renting their house, townhome or any form of housing unit, if they choose. Visitor Parking A major issue with the review of the rental townhomes last year was to require the provision of a sufficient amount of visitor parking spaces. In this review, staff applied the same visitor-parking ratio that the city applied during the original review. This requirement is that the applicant provide one visitor parking space for each two units, or one-half space for each unit. This totals 89 visitor parking spaces in addition to the driveway spaces in front of garage doors. Another requirement is that there be a group of at least five visitor parking spaces no more than a 200-foot distance from the front door of each unit. Revision of PUD Conditions Many of the original PUD conditions do not apply with this proposal. The applicant has complied with many of the previous requirements, so staff has deleted any that no longer apply. 2 Preliminary PlatlFinal Plat The applicant is requesting approval of the subdivision to sell the individual townhome lots. This is typical of such developments and staff does not find any unusual concerns with doing so beyond the usual requirements for platting which include the signing of a developer's agreement, the approval of final grading/drainage/erosion-control/utility plans and the dedication of any drainage and utility easements that the city engineer may require. Chris Cavett and Erin Laberee, of the city's engineering department, reviewed this proposal and had several comments. Refer to the memo on pages 423. Staff recommends that the city council require that the applicant comply with the statements in this memo as conditions of plat approval. In order to assist the applicant in expediting their closing on their purchase of this property, Town & Country Homes is requesting that the city council approve the final plat along with the preliminary plat. Normally, the final plat is considered after the applicant has complied with the requirements of the preliminary plat. In this case, staff is comfortable with combining the preliminary and final plats in one review because of our familiarity with this development. The proposed townhouse development is conceptually the same as the plan approved by the city last year. Design Review Site and Landscaping Considerations As stated above, there must be adequate visitor parking provided. The recommended conditions of approval should satisfy this need. The landscape plan is attractive and has been improved over the plan submitted last year. Staff's only suggestion is that the boulevard plantings along Kennard Street follow the Kennard Street planting plan that the city council has approved. Architectural The building design is attractive and the color scheme proposed would provide an appealing color variation. RamseyNVashington Metro Watershed District The applicant must obtain all necessary permits from the watershed district before starting construction. Building Official's Comments All applicable codes must be met. Police Department Comments Lieutenant Kevin Rabbett noted there are no significant public safety concems in the reduction in the number of the townhomes and a change to a "for sale" designation. COMMITTEE ACTIONS May 25, 2004: The community design review board reviewed the applicant's design plans and recommended approval with conditions. June 7, 2004: The planning commission recommended approval of the land use plan change, PUD revision and subdivision plat. The planning commission recommended two changes. One, that the sidewalk along the south side of County Road D be constructed, not just "if at all possible," and second, that there be at least 100 visitor- parking spaces provided. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Adopt the resolution on page 44 approving the comprehensive land use plan amendment from BC (business commercial} to R3H (high density residential) fora 1.5-acre parcel previously planned for an office building in Legacy Village at Maplewood. Approval of this change is because the proposed townhomes would be more compatible and in character with the adjacent townhome development than the previously approved commercial building. B. Adopt the resolution on pages 45-49 approving a revision to the Legacy Village planned unit development as it relates to the previously approved rental- townhomes and executive-office suites and clubhouse sites. Approval of this revision is based on the findings required by the ordinance and subject to the following conditions (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): The development shall follow the plans date-stamped April 30, 2004, except where the city requires changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 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. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. The applicant shall comply with the requirements in the Assistant City Engineer's report dated May 28, 2004. 5. The applicant shall sign a development agreement with the city before the issuance of a grading permit. 6. The applicant shall provide a copy of the homeowner's association documents to staff for approval. 7. €~e~a~Townhomes 4 The project will be constructed according to the plans from Town and Country Homes date-stamped April 30, 2004 #fena ' ,except as specifically modified by these conditions. b. c. Sidewalk connections will be added connecting the power line trail to the curb of Village Trail East (west of Kennard Street) in at least four locations and connecting the power line trail to the curb of Village Trail East (east of Kennard Street) in at least three locations to be approved by staff. d . , ~swe Nine~ail. e. Village Trail East (east of Kennard Street) ~ee~R and Flandrau Street East meet--C serving the townhomes will be constructed in their entirety with the townhomes, regardless of the status of the multi-family and commercial parcels to the east. f. Parking spaces will be provided at the ends of the driveways as shown on the plans and wherever else then may fit a#~e~ea~=e# ti~ ~ildinnc ~1 7 ~ .end ~ 4 G/a R 1 ~/7A 77 /77 .~nrl 7C./7R .end vwrtmr~vT~ ~r~ ~ rvr v, , g. , h. Asix-foot-wide sidewalk should be provided i~-at-~ess.ible on the south side of County Road D for the entire length of the project from Hazelwood Street wive to Southlawn Drive; r f + e r The grades of the power line trail and all ublic sidewalks will meet ADA guidelines for slope. k. The landscape plan is approved as proposed with the exception that the boulevard trees along Kennard Street shall be planted according to the approved Kennard Street Boulevard-Tree Planting Plan. I. m. n. The curve in the middle of Village Trail East (west of Kennard Street shall be flattened as much as possible to limit headlight lag re on aimed rots the front of the units. o. All setbacks are approved as shown. /nL ~hhr.~ ~~e r.nrl h~ ~ilrlinnc~ 4 A ~. 'I A 4 ~. 77 77 7Z 7A 7~ end e ~ P q. Visitor-parking spaces for the ~eAta1 townhomes will be added or modified as follows: 1) I~~ast-5-spaces: The applicant shall provide visitor-parking spaces at the minimum quantity of one-half space per townhome unit. This works out to a minimum of 89 visitor parking spaces required. Furthermore, the visitor-parking spaces must be placed such that the front door of no unit is more than 200 feet from a group of at least five spaces. • u n r s. An easement over the power line trail on this parcel will be provided to the city for access and maintenance. C. Approve the preliminary and final plat for Heritage Square Phase II, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the requirements in the assistant city engineer's report dated May 28, 2004. 7 2. The applicant shall sign a developer's agreement with the city engineer before the issuance of a grading permit. 3. The applicant shall dedicate any easements and provide any written agreements that the city engineer may require as part of this plat. 4. The applicant shall pay the city escrow for any documents, easements and agreements that the city engineer may require that may not be ready by the time of plat signing. D. Approve the plans date-stamped April 30, 2004, for the Heritage Square Second Addition, the second phase of Heritage Square TownHomes at Legacy Village. Approval is subject to the developer complying with the following conditions: 1. Obtaining city council approval of a comprehensive land use plan revision from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential) to build townhomes on the previously approved office site. 2. Obtaining city council approval of a revision to the previously approved planned unit development for this project. 3. Obtaining city council approval of the preliminary and final plat for this project. 4. All requirements of the fire marshal and building official must be met. 5. The applicant shall obtain all required permits from the Ramsey- Washington Metro Watershed District. 6. All driveways and parking lots shall have continuous concrete curbing. 7. All requirements of the city engineer, or his consultants working for the city, shall be met regarding grading, drainage, erosion control, utilities and the dedication of any easements found to be needed. 8. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project by that time. 9. Any identification signs for the project must meet the requirements of the city sign ordinance. 10. The setbacks are approved as proposed. 11. The applicant shall: • Install reflectorized stop signs at all driveway connections to Hazelwood Street, County Road D and Kennard Street. 8 • Install and maintain an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas. • Install all required trails, sidewalks and carriage walks. • Install any traffic signage within the site that may be required by staff. 12. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan for staff approval before getting the first building permit. 13. The applicant shall submit an address and traffic signage plan for staff approval. 14. The applicant shall provide the city with cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the exterior landscaping and site improvements prior to getting a building permit for the development. Staff shall determine the dollar amount of the escrow. 15. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 16. A temporary sales office shall be allowed until the time a model unit is available for use. Such a temporary building shall be subject to the requirements of the building official. 17. No end units facing County Road D or Hazelwood Street shall have utility rooms or exposed utility meters on that elevation. 18. The community design review board expressed concern that there should be some handicap-accessible units available in this complex. They referred this to the building official for compliance in case there are any applicable codes to this effect. 19. The applicant shall work with staff to propose suitable screening for outside utility meters. 20. The rock-face concrete block on the buildings shall be tan, not gray. 9 REFERENCE SITE DESCRIPTION Site Size: 20 acres Existing Use: Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USES North: County Road D, apartments and townhomes South: Heritage Square Town Homes under construction and a corporate office site East: Commercial and apartment sites West: Hazelwood Street PLANNING Land Use Plan Designation: Existing R3H and BC; Proposed all R3H Zoning: PUD Findings for PUD Approval City code requires that, to approve a planned unit development, the city council must base approval on the specific findings. Refer to the findings for approval in the resolution on pages 45-49. APPLICATION DATE We received the complete applications and plans for these requests on April 30, 2004. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications for a proposal. City council action is required on this proposal by June 29, 2004 unless the applicants agree to a time extension. 10 p:sec 3U-leritage Square II PUD Review June `04 Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Property Line/Zoning Map 3. Legacy Village PUD 4. Existing Land Use Plan Map 5. Proposed Land Use Plan Map 6. Proposed Subdivision 7. Proposed Landscaping 8. Building Elevations 9. Applicant's Narrative 10. Previous Legacy Village Rental Town House/office Plan 11. July 14, 2003 City Council Conditions of Approval 12. Approved Kennard Street/Legacy Parkway Boulevard Planting Plan 13. Memo from Chris Cavett and Erin Laberee dated May 28, 2004 14. Land Use Plan Resolution 15. Planned Unit Development Resolution 16. Plans date-stamped April 30, 2004 (separate attachment) 17. May 17, 2004 CDRB minutes 18. Preliminary/Final Plat date-stamped April 30, 2004 (separate attachment) 19. Colored Plan Booklet date-stamped May 25, 2004 (separate attachment) 11 Attachment 1 PROPOSED HERITAGE SQUARE SECOND ADDITION LEGACY VILLAGE ~i! ~i~;; i~~ ~ r i ~ ~ 4~ i i iii ! 1T{ I ~ ~ j l =~ '~~-~ ~ - == ~_ --- . ~ , ~ _- -, ~--i i. I+ I i '- g ~~f ~ i ~~~ ~~~ .I ~~ i ~~f '~~N~i `" ~ ~-; ~ F ~ ~ Y'T~ ~;- i_! '! ~-~ 12 LOCATION MAP TT ~ ~ ~ ` i -- r -j-`1~j ~ ~ i~ ~ I I ~~ iL i Attachment 2 PROPERTY LINE /ZONING MAP 13 4 N Beam Avenue Beam Attachment 3 G d ~ ~~ ~Fi~ ~ s ~~~j ' t~ I~ ZI ~ ~ ~~' j . ~~ c Ct 'i . o ® ~ i~271 1I ~ ~ ~ ~$ n~ W G ~ z N ~OVl~ J~ }W ~ ~~2l W~~S F~ H Q QlL 3 §sa' a ~ ~ $ ~ R O < J~ O~ ~~~7 y Z 55 ll ~~~ ~ i U ~ ~ ~ ~? 40 ~ T f ~d `~~~ ~l li Ii 1~ li I It I ® ...may: - ..._' 1 -y I -ai 1 I I: I: I, --K I I I I~ 11 ® ~ li )- 11 I II II I I l ~ ~'~r : I!NI I. 1 I! 11+;I I b IIS,I ~~~~ I II ;,~i ~, ~ ;. _.; , ~I 1 "I ~~ ~ I I' I ., .I I1 I: Y _:: ^ I ® II I I . 1 'I I I I I I ~ I I i i I , ~ '.i . '• ;_ _ ~ t ` _ ~ I. fl 1 I 1 ~ y i l I ~y'Lg1 ® ~ i l ~Tl l~ .. I, I ,\ . •o:,,. I:R ...~ 1' W z ~` J a- ~ ~ .~ U Q ~ J Z `~ J ^O Ii Q J ,i 14 9 Attachment 4 !!.. ;... ~~a :.k. i~ LS ~... ,:.,..:::.., . •- ~ .... LAND USE MAP EXISTING 4 N 15 Attachment 5 ~~~~~~ ~Y ~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~Y V' ®~~ ELIMINATION OF BC DESIGNATION -4-.-:.-~-:_.:.::.- ..................... ........... .z.==.~:. -{~-.--.:-F- - -------- LAND USE MAP PROPOSED 4 N 16 Attachment 6 ~- 3' a xs a al -~ e6 erefr jee .• rn a ., ~- Norae'eJ~r ~I r e ~ . W O ~ n ` sA 11 rrn -oreeNw t,rnr ./r/ ~ Ia e ~ M:E":'3ARv 11 ~rF~r~' _ u. erne'==' 1 ~, y «« ^T § ..)J.'oboN eror v~u s~srr .enrx~" - = '~ I I ., "S ~ 1~ ~~ :P~ c~ ' . Y ~Y ~ ~~ i ~ C ~ -~ ~ ~'~ I ~ ~ ^s C ~ O I ire ~'' ,~; ~ I _ O~~$ i ~ S I ~ 7i ~ .. . $ O cJ I (i ~~ ~ I .t ; ~ ii I ~ ,. C, a _ g ~ ~ 51{S e~9 e~ ~ < t T~ r1 Z > v I t~ s~ f e a I e A I y F O •' ~~ ><~ ~ ~ I rl O i.~r S el ~ ~ ~ ~ , {~A , .. I I - ~ a , i •I ` t .c. k %a ~ ; , eg I ~ en I J m i s a 6 ~a ~ ~" ~ ~ )a ~,/ '~ ~ ~ ;~ I ~{ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ sY g $1 1 „°4ea : it!'a v ~~ ~c _~ ~~ C ~e e~ ~ > ~" 1 c \~ < • e J ~ I I ~^ ILJ .f • e + ~ / N ~ 4A It S~ ~< :• ~~ M~ge o \ e ~/ 1~ ~~Il li p ~~ ;~ ~ F (_ ,/'e ~ « l ee.»-. e y p b j a / _ . ,z , r'~ p a,l ~ Ytlp ly !tS R¢ '' i ~ ~Ai~ a 92~S1t 9~~ ._ .. ....M.w.x.. „.«.,..1 17 '~ a aii is a_ ~~ omn iss.<ooav I -- ~ I I ~ I I 3 ~-}I ~ ~~ ~ I '' a - I-~ li I F 'D c; 39 A '< I ~~ I e~ I " ~, I s<'Ytt ' v, lo,voaas 1 1 ~_ r~- .~ I ~ _-- ' W I ~~ ~ ~~ I I Y epD x I Ip 1 I ~ ~ ,_ I CJ I a ~~ ~~ 1! I Fwd a I N ,¢ ~ ;~, i! ~ I~ z :~ O'~i ~ 4~~~~~1 Y -~ _` ~ C~ YI t°~ i- < I I (v~ j (j ~ `~ ~ I~ Q~1' j 4 ~1 ~ s ~I T ~ ~ ~ `C .n t la I }~ `= I nl ~ c~ ~ `' I I F ~ _ D~l I _ _ xorts'ei • ~I` I r xsgie.lov I sae ~ _' '~'~ t I li c':::~RC i xor¢a'ea'*~ 1 2 t ' ~ ~ ~ K g 1.8 /.'e~/eN OOOY9'Y L'Itf •~',~ ~ a ~~ Ix ~~ w' ~ ~: ggs ~ ~. 0 .I ~ ~ : ~,,E `a ~9 `~ y ~~ ~ ~a : ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ F~ ~e ~~ b~ ~• ~` 8,! $3 ~G 1~6~ ~aG I ~39~~ ~5 .~g4 ~~d:~ 18 Es ~ a. ~ ° ~~px~~~ ~ ~ aa~~ii~~~~397i~ tJ ~~~ ~ ~ a tl ~~ ~~ !! ~ ~~~~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ 1 a as as as as a sa3 ~ S a Attachment 7 II ~ : 1! ~~ ~ '}~ ~~ Fdwg w~~~~ ~~ ' ij; ! ~ ;; W ~ f_l V ~ ~ ~ ~j ~ i1! 8- ~~g"~~ Fa! ~ e $~ ~~~r~ 4 ~~'~r o~ 33~ '~Fa~e ~~~~~~ v Qo K a ~ !'~e~ Sn. E~ 2~ ~ ~ ~~ ~6• dd, ~ ~a~ ~~ § ~~ ~ er ~~ ~ 4~ ~a a ! ~~: ~~ ~~~ ~~ !~ #~ 3¢ ~~~~ ~~ ~g ;~~ ~° i A~~i ~a ~ !; g ~ ~~ k~e ~'~ ~~ ~a~~ ~ yea ~•g~ ~ ~ ~ e~ ~ ~ i g~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ +i ~! y ~~:~ a g a g al y!a d ~~ `3~ ~~ ~i ~s } a s~a ~ ;a ~d! ~ ~~gyg ~~ gg$ d. F $ ~ ~ 4j~g ~'~ ~•a ~~ ~ i lS( ~ ~8~ a~Fi ~i~ ~ y~~gg ~~e !! ` 3 ~~g9gge g ~!i z 'tl'~ ~ ¢@ Fl~~ ~~~; ¢ ~ ~ ~ 4 S~CF~ ~~~ }!~ ~3. ~ 3~ ~~ c ~3 9 ~ ~d~~ t~ ~El~ ~~~ C 3 a3 d~ 2~~~ I~ i v.. Y y .. w .. ~ ., e_ • • n ~ Y R" i ~ ~ 6~~L~ ~ ~~~~a ~ ~~ ~ g~ t ~a 9 g ! 5,, 8g~ ~d i5 3~ X ~ s ° 6e ~;~ ~~~ ~~~~~g U~ ~g ~ ~4~ 3 i ( ~ ~~ ~ a f g a e! g a ie $i ~ 3i ~ ~ ~ Y~ ~~ ga ~ ~~ fa d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~! s~ i i C~ ~r .. F ° '~ 6 Q§ '~ ~~ } k ~~ ~~ ~i~if~~~~ i~$~ 9Y i~ :~ s f~ 6 ~ ~ ~; !a a ~ c ~~f~~5~~~4~~~i~al~~~~~t ~t QQ © 0~~ ~ ~ ~ d e i 19 11 ~ 11 ~ k w w ~ 5 = i~l~~ ~ ~ (' ~. ~ ifi 11 ~ it I j D ~ ~., .~ d ~aaiii ° 1 ~~~;~!„ fie' ~ ~ l1 ! '~ E-~~g w- K~0 ~ a ~~ ii ii i~ P iii ~ ~ ~ ;~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ._a /tea ~ ~ ; 11;~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 d as di a8 e3 2 aa',3 = a ~ 1 ~~~ ~ ~ llil ~ ~.~ V/ ~ ~ ~ i ally ~ a~g~f ~~ya ~ ili~ ~' ~ . ~ ~~ ggla ~4~~ ~ ~ ie€' 6 i1t ~yy~ 1 a~~ i9~} R °~ ~a¢ ~er ai~b R j g kola o F~~~ ~~gli 5~ ~~li 'g~ ci ~ ~ ~~i ~~a ~~aR~ ~$ ~ ~e'p '' DD © ©~~ g ~ d e ~~ ~~~ ~ '~~~~~~ ~1 s~~$ ~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~ .~i s~b ~~ ~g.~~~~ ®$gg ~~~~ P ~~~~~ ~sa:ei I a ~~~ $ ~ ~~ i~al ~l ~H~ ~il ~l~ 'r 3~1 l~a~~i 11 ~l'l~}Q~x a ~°aqa~. ~~p~ 7~~ p~~~ 3 3SbS~ 12. ~7~ k~g~ !l~ 8~7~.~ ~S~. L~83 ~s8 ~4A~g ~! 7~~~~~~ 3ta ~~~8 ~l° .,3pg~l ~~~~~~ m Ice tllie §a -~ :~~~ I ~5~ ~~~ ~2d~1 3 I i ,_ ~ _ s 0 i . ~ .~ N. - `_ r ~I~ ^'' 8 a4 8 yYa, ~CEyl" ~~~ pF ~3~6a 2~ Attachment 8 LE-E---6(LS6Frd tt-E---6(LS6Y~gd s~oH°~xi~io~ ~ r~n~os 9M71d 1NaWd017~1Q N'7~B~G JJ~~ N01173~~p7 711s3f'V'W ; u ~ ~_ 21 O ~I W J W4 ZF , Z' tr LL _~ GfYE•N6(ZS6)~nd SSY[--Y6(iS6Y~gd MCSS FIIV'~P!ud n~Vd'OtI almg amrj tagam5 Si9L S~1i0H ~2I,LI~If100 ~ I~IMO,L ~\ 6M11d l1~Wd01L~1G N716~0 NO11O311OO O1183f"v'W 22 O Q w w1 4~ ~~ a ~ q~ a '~ `UI s~ ~- ~ M LCYE-YY6(LS6$rd SfYfY'-6(Zf6k>oo9d S~Y~tOH 1~?I.L~I110~ ~8I~I~AO,L U O 4 W J W w 0 ~? ~9~9 U~1 >' w J W w _~ '~ 4 f~ Qy ~g 8N41d 1WtJd01N1C N919iC NOIlO~'I~00 011631"C'W i ,, i~ ! ~{ ' i d ~ 7 i .~ 23 ~? ~~ .! ~! ~~ ~ a ~~~~~~~ aE~ggp~l~ It 9~ iii! i1 i9 {: i! ~~ 3# ! ~! Attachment 9 INTRODUCTION Town & Country Homes is requesting the following reviews for a new multiple-family community in Legacy Village called Heritage Square II: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application We are requesting that the northeast comer of Lot 1 Block 1 of the property be reguided from a Business Commercial land use (BC), to aHigh-Density Residential land use (R- 3H) to accommodate for a an attractive multi-family residential plan. PUD Application We are requesting to rezone the northeast corner of Lot 1 Block 1 from Business Commercial (BC) to High-Density Residential (R-3H), and request that the entire Heritage Square II community be zoned as a Planned Unit Development (PUD). Community Design Review Board Application Heritage Square II has many neo-traditional elements creating a unique community and emphasizing pedestrian traffic and the streetscape. The layout and product design naturally encourages residents to walk and socialize in common green space areas. The community is interconnected by a series of sidewalks, trails, wetlands, special green spaces and complimenting rain gardens. Front door entrances face the streets, making for a charming streetscape. The most substantial entrance is on the north central side of the community off County Road D, where it intersects with Kennard Street. Kennard Street is well dressed with decorative landscaping, street lighting, and a large roundabout located next to the entrance to our Heritage Square community currently under construction. The entrance on Kennard Street into Heritage Square II will have monuments similar to the stylish monuments planned for Heritage Square. All this makes for a very welcoming and eye- catching sense of amval into the community, and into Legacy Village as an exemplary and sophisticated mixed-use development. HOUSING STYLES • The Majestic Collection All 176 homes in Heritage Square II will be of our ground breaking Majestic Collection, a brand new row-style townhome that would make its debut in the Heritage Square II community. Conceptually, this Collection is similar in to our Hometown Collection that will be built in Heritage Square. The difference being that the Majestic Collection is a 3- level townhome with rear-loaded, tuck-under garages, front balconies, and evolution in size and architectural detail. Building the Majestic Collection in Heritage Square II carries on the smart and elegant concept of Legacy Village, and offers yet another option for homebuyers that is innovative in the marketplace. This collection contributes to a pedestrian-friendly, urban style streetscape with front entryways facing the streets. Some other features unique to the Majestic Collection are rooms located on the end units that hide meters and other equipment. A plan is attached to illustrate this nice element. Most of the striking architectural details accentuate the facades of the buildings that face PROJECT NARRATIVE HERITAGE SQUARE II - MAPLEWOOD, MN 3 24 the street, but the backsides have not been ignored. Different materials are used to break up monotony, such as vinyl shake accents, rock face block, varying rooflines, and windowed garage doors. Overhangs above the garage doors also provide undulation. There are three color packages chosen for the buildings. A matrix is included in this submittal, along with anAnti-Monotony Plan, that demonstrates the objective to provide variation in color schemes throughout the community. Preliminary Plat Application We request to re-plat three areas of the community to accommodate for requested zoning changes on the northeast corner of Lot 1 Block 1, modifications in the layout of the rental housing buildings on Lot 4 Block 2, and road alignment alterations on the western portion of Lot 1 Block 1, which leaves a 78,250 square foot open space identified as Outlot A This also signifies a formal request to review the platting of our entire proposed Heritage Square lI Community. Final Plat Application We request to have the final platting of Heritage Square II reviewed concurrently. HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION All private drives, sprinkler systems, monument signs, and common open space areas will be owned and maintained by one homeowner's association for the multiple family area. GUEST PARHING There are 2 parking spaces in all garages. The driveway areas for the Majestic Collection allow enough room to maneuver a vehicle, and deters guest parking. This design is meant to encourage guest parking along the street, by the front doors to enhance the character of the streetscape and common courtyards. Guest parking is designated on the private streets and driveways. Overnight guest parking will be available on private streets and parking bays. PHASING The project is proposed for site construction in a single phase. The Developer intends to develop the property as soon as all governmental approvals and permits are in place. UTILITIES The grading and utility plans illustrate the general layout of the proposed watennain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, rain garden and ponding areas. A central storm sewer system is planned to convey street runoff water to a storm scepter and treatment/sedimentation pond before it continues onto wetlands. Rain gardens with a superior underground infiltration system are located throughout the development. EXISTING POWER LINES There are power lines, towers, and an associated easement near the property. The lines are owned and operated by Centerpoint Energy (NSP). PROJECT NARRATIVE HERITAGE SQUARE II - MAPLEWOOD, MN 4 25 Attachment 10 PREVIOUSLY-APPROVED RENTAL-TOWN HOUSE AND OFFICE PLAN Legacy Village Townhome Buildings and Streets ~6 Attachment 11 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M., Monday, July 14, 2003 Council Chambers, Municipal Building Meeting No. 03-14 H. PUBLIC HEARINGS 8:27 P.M. Legacy Village PUD (County Road D and Southlawn Drive) Comprehensive Plan Amendment (4 Votes) Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plat Tax Abatement Plan a. City Manager Fursman presented the staff report. b. Assistant Community Development Director Ekstrand presented specifics from the report. Phil Carlson, of Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, a planning consultant for the city provided further specifics of the project. d. Commissioner Pearson presented the Planning Commission Report. e. William Griffith, attorney for the Hartford Group presented further details. f. Paul Steinman, Vice President of Springsted, spoke on the abatement analysis for the project. 9:33 p.m. Athree-minute break was taken. g. Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents. The following persons were heard: Gerald Peterson, 3016 Hazelwood Street North, Maplewood George Supan, 3050 Hazelwood Street North, Maplewood Kevin Berglund, 1929 Kingston Avenue East, Maplewood Bill Griffith, attorney for Hartford Group h. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing. Councilmember Wasiluk moved to adopt the following resolution approving a comprehensive land use plan amendment for the proposed Lecacy Village on the south side of County Road D between Southlawn Drive and Hazelwood Street: RESOLUTION 03-07-128 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Hartford Group Inc. applied for a change to the city's land use plan from BC (business commercial) to R-3H (high density residential) and P (park). 27 WHEREAS, this. change applies to the property located on the south side of County Road D between Southlawn Drive and Hazelwood Street. The legal description is: Dorle Park, Lots 1-8, 14, 15, 18, 29-36, Block 2 and Except the West 10 acres, the North'/z of the Northeast'/a in Section 3, Township 29, Range 22 (Subject to roads and easements). WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: On June 2, 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 tabled action on this proposal since the applicant was in the process of revising their plans. 2. On July 7, 2003, the planning commission continued discussion of this proposal and recommended that the city council approve this land use plan change. 3. On July 14, 2003, the city council discussed the land use plan change. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above described changes since they would be consistent with the comprehensive plan's goals and policies such as: 1. This project would promote economic development that will expand the property tax base, increase jobs and provide desirable services. 2. It would provide a wide variety of housing types. It would integrate development with open space areas, community facilities and significant natural features. 4. Adequate services would be provided such as for streets, utilities, drainage, parks and open space. 5. This project would provide attractive surroundings at which to shop, work and live. The land use plan changes described in this resolution refer to the following segments of the Legacy Village development as shown on their preliminary plat for this project: The following parcels on the Preliminary Plat would be changed to Park: a. Outlot F -public park; and b. Outlot I -public park. All other parcels on the Preliminary Plat except those noted above as Park or remaining BC would change to R-3H High Density Residential: c. Lot 1, Block 1 -rental townhomes, except for the office suites/clubhouse site; d. Lot 1, Block 2 -rental townhomes; 28 e. Lot 1, Block 3 -senior assisted living; f. Outlot B -multi-family; and g. Outlot H -for-sale townhomes; Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-Mayor Cardinal, Councilmembers Collins, Juenemann and Wasiluk Nays-Councilmember Koppen Councilmember Wasiluk moved to adopt the following resolution approving a conditional use Hermit for the vronosed Le~acv Village on the south side of County Road D between Southlawn Drive and Hazelwood Street: RESOLUTION 03-07-129 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Hartford Group, Inc. applied for a conditional use permit for a planned unit development to develop amulti-use development called Legacy Village. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property located on the south side of County Road D between Southlawn Drive and Hazelwood Street. The legal description is: Dorle Park, Lots 1-8, 14, 15, 18, 29-36, Block 2 and Except the West 10 acres, the North lh of the Northeast'/a in Section 3, Township 29, Range 22 (Subject to roads and easements). WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On July 7, 2003 the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. 2. The city council held a public hearing on July 14, 2003. City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. 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. The use would not depreciate property values. 4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of 29 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. 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 these code requirements: • All construction shall follow the site plan that the city stamped June 12, 2003. The Director of Community Development may approve minor changes. • The proposed construction must be substantially started or the proposed use utilized within one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. • The city council shall review this permit in one year. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: 1) Rental Townhomes and Office/Clubhouse: a. The project will be constructed according to the plans from Hartford Group dated 6/2/03 in all details, except as specifically modified by these conditions; b. A sidewalk will be provided continuously on the north or west side of Street A between Kennard Street and Hazelwood Drive, including the segment between the office/clubhouse parking lot and townhome buildings 11 and 12; c. Sidewalk connections will be added connecting the power line trail to the curb of Street A opposite townhome buildings 6 and 8; 30 d. The sidewalks serving the fronts of townhome buildings 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 will be extended south to connect with the power line trail; e. Street B and Street C serving the townhomes will be constructed in their entirety with the townhomes, regardless of the status of the multi-family and commercial parcels to the east; Parking spaces will be provided at the ends of the driveways at the rear of buildings 1, 2, 3 and 4; 15/16; 19/20; 21/22; and 25/26, and sidewalks will be provided from those parking spaces connecting to the front sidewalks of each of those buildings; g. The infiltration trenches on the south sides of buildings 13/14, 15/16, and 19/20 will be modified to accommodate a revised alignment for the power line trail, provided that reasonable grades are provided for the trail and any sidewalks connecting to it, and approval of the city engineer concerning the size and function of the trenches; h. A 6'-wide sidewalk should be provided if at all possible on the south side of County Road D for the entire length of the project from Hazelwood Drive to Southlawn Drive, through continued discussion between the city and Hartford, focusing on exact sidewalk width, location, and right-of-way needs for turn lanes and other features of the County Road D project; i. A sidewalk will be provided on the south side of County Road D and sidewalks will be provided out to that sidewalk from the north side of buildings 1, 4, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25, as well as to the clubhouse front entry and the clubhouse parking lot; j. The grades of the power line trail and all sidewalks will meet ADA guidelines for slope; k. Overstory trees will be planted along both sides of Street A at an average of 30'-40' on center instead of the average 70' spacing shown on the plans; Overstory trees will be planted along both sides of Street B and on the west side of Street C at an average of 30'-40' on center instead of the sometimes 100' spacing shown on the plans, such additional tree islands to be coordinated with modified parking bays that might be added to this street; m. Overstory trees will be planted along both sides of Kennard Street in front of the townhomes at an average of 30'-40' on center instead of the average 50'-80' spacing shown on the plans; n. The curve in the middle of Street A opposite buildings 10 and 12 will be flattened as much as possible to limit headlights aimed into the front of the units; o. Front building setbacks (clubhouse and buildings 1, 4, 5, 14, 15, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, and 26) to Hazelwood Drive, Kennard Street, and County Road D that are less than required by the Zoning Code are specifically approved within this PUD as shown on the site plan, down to a minimum of 5' for the clubhouse and 15' for the townhome buildings, in order to enhance the urban character of the streets and intersections; p. Side yard building setbacks for all buildings that are less than required by the Zoning 31 Code are specifically approved within this PUD as shown on the site plan; q. Visitor parking spaces for the rental townhomes will be added or modified as follows: Parking spaces will be added so there is a total of at least 48 spaces on the west side of Kennard and at least 51 spaces on the east side of Kennard, such that the front door of no unit is more than 200 feet from a group of at least 5 spaces. ii. Street A will be widened to 26' curb-to-curb and on-street parallel parking will be added along the north and west sides of the street except for within 100' of the pavement of Hazelwood Drive and Kennard Street. iii. The private drive immediately south of buildings 2 and 3 will be widened to 26' curb-to-curb and on-street parallel parking will be added along the north side of the drive. iv. Parking areas will be added behind buildings 1 and 4 where the driveway abuts the ponding area, consistent with the recommendation of the city engineer on providing adequate grading and functioning of the pond. v. Parking areas will be added behind buildings 15/16, 19/20, 21/22, and 25/26 to meet the parking and distance criteria cited here. vi. Street B will be widened to 26' curb-to-curb and parallel parking will be added along the north and west sides of the street, or additional angled parking will be added to meet the criteria for parking spaces cited here. r. The parking lot for the clubhouse/office building will be modified to add'"proof of parking" spaces in the green area north and east of the swimming pool, for a total of 91 spaces possible in the lot. Such spaces will only be constructed if the owner believes they are needed, or if they are needed in the future to address parking problems at the building in the opinion of the community development director, who can order the spaces to be constructed. Such spaces will maintain a sidewalk connection between the swimming pool and clubhouse building in an island in the middle of the parking bays as shown on the plans; An easement over the power line trail on this parcel will be provided to the city for access and maintenance. 2) Senior Assisted Living: a. Front building setbacks to Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway that are less than required by the Zoning Code are specifically approved within this PUD as shown on the site plan, down to a minimum of 5', in order to enhance the urban character of the streets and intersection; b. Emergency exits -two fronting Kennard Street and one fronting Legacy Parkway -will provide sidewalk connections to the sidewalks on the street; c. A sidewalk connection will be provided near the south side of the building connecting 32 Kennard Street to the path around the pond to the east; d. The entry at the far south end of the building will provide a sidewalk connection to the sidewalk noted above; e. The emergency exit on the southwest face of the building near the south end of the building will provide a sidewalk connection to the sidewalk noted above; f. The emergency exit on the south face of the northeastern leg of the building will provide a sidewalk connection south to the sidewalk abutting the parking lot; g. Overstory trees will be planted along the east side of Kennard Street and the south side of Legacy Parkway at an average of 30' -40' on center instead of the average 80' -100' spacing shown on the plans; h. Revise the site plan to show proof-of-parking to reduce the amount of surface parking. 3) Multi:Family Site (Outlot B): a. The multi-family site is planned in concept only within the PUD and will come in for design review and approval at a later date, but the use of the property is allowed as long as the provisions of the R-3A or R-3B zoning district (depending on the building size) and conditions outlined here are met; b. The multi-family site is approved for up to 50 units of housing; A building corner should be within 30' of the curb on the roundabout to maintain the character of the intersection; d. The building or buildings must be designed to continue the general pattern and sight lines of the townhomes to the west; e. Sidewalk connections must be provided to the power line trail on the south side of the parcel; Visitor parking must be provided at a ratio of 1/2 space per unit no more than 200' from the front door of any unit if townhomes are built, or the front entry of the apartment building if apartments are built; g. A play area or tot lot must be provided on site with easy access to the building entries and to the power line trail, within reasonable sight of as many of the units as possible; h. The architectural character and exterior building materials must be in keeping with the adjacent townhomes and other buildings if present; Overstory trees must be planted along the north side of the extension of Street B at an average of 30'-40' on center; j. An easement over the power line trail on this parcel will be provided to the city for access and maintenance. 33 4) Retail/Commercial (Outlot A): a. The retail/commercial site is planned in concept only within the PUD and will come in for design review and approval at a later date, but the use is allowed as long as the provisions of the BC zoning district and conditions outlined here are met; b. The building(s) on the retail/commercial site should be sited on the north side of the parcel within 15' of the County Road Dright-of-way with all parking to the south; The applicant shall submit a comprehensive sign plan. One criteria to be established, however, is that pylon signs shall not be allowed. Monument signs may be allowed, but shall not exceed 12 feet in height; d. The architectural character and exterior building materials must be in keeping with the adjacent townhomes and other buildings if present; e. Access to the site will be off the east leg of the roundabout and another access drive off Street C between the roundabout and County Road D; and to County Road D at a shared driveway with the adjacent furniture store site; All ground-mounted and roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened according to ordinance; g. Overstory trees must be planted along the south side of the extension of Street B at an average of 30'-40' on center. h. Adequate separation, buffering and screening must be provided for the multi-family residential units from the front doors, parking areas, loading areas, and mechanical equipment of this commercial building; 5) Furniture Store (Outlot C): a. The furniture store is planned in concept only within the PUD and will come in for design review and approval at a later date, but the use is allowed as long as the provisions of the BC zoning district and conditions outlined here are met; b. The building should be sited on the north side of the parcel within 15' of the County Road D and Southlawn Drive rights-of-way with all parking to the south. The design of the corner of the building should be such that reasonable and safe sight distances are maintained at County Road D and Southlawn; c. The applicant shall submit a comprehensive sign plan. One criteria to be established, however, is that pylon signs shall not be allowed. Monument signs maybe allowed, but shall not exceed 12 feet in height; d. The architectural character and exterior building materials must be in keeping with the adjacent townhomes and other buildings if present; e. Access to the site will be off the extension of the east leg of the roundabout, to County 34 Road D at a shared driveway with the adjacent retail/commercial site and up to two driveway accesses to Southlawn Drive at points to be approved by the city engineer; All ground-mounted and roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened according to ordinance; g. Overstory trees must be planted along the west side of Southlawn Drive at an average of 30' -40' on center. h. Adequate separation, buffering and screening must be provided for the multi-family residential units from the front doors, parking areas, loading areas, and mechanical equipment of this commercial building. 6) Commercial Site (Outlot D): a. The commercial site is planned in concept only within the PUD and will come in for design review and approval at a later date, but the use is allowed as long as the provisions of the BC zoning district and conditions outlined here are met; b. One of the buildings on the commercial site should be sited close to the corner of Southlawn Drive and Legacy Parkway, within 30' of the Southlawn Drive right-of-way; c. The applicant shall submit a comprehensive sign plan. One criteria to be established, however, is that pylon signs shall not be allowed. Monument signs may be allowed, but shall not exceed 12 feet in height; d. The architectural character and exterior building materials must be in keeping with the nearby senior assisted-living building, townhomes and other buildings if present; e. Access to the site will be off Legacy Parkway and onto Southlawn if approved by the city engineer; All ground-mounted and roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened according to ordinance; g. The parking lot on this site must provide through connections and cross parking easements with the parcel to the south (Outlot E); h. There must be sidewalks connecting entries to all buildings on site to Legacy Parkway, Southlawn Drive, the path around the pond to the west, and to Outlot E. Such sidewalks must be separated from the parking lot - at curb level, not parking lot level; i. Uses on the site are encouraged to take advantage of the park and trail system around the ponding area to the west by providing outdoor seating, plazas, overlooks or similar features; j. Overstory trees must be planted along the north side of Legacy Parkway and the west side of Southlawn Drive an average of 30'-40' on center. k. An easement over the power line trail on this parcel will be provided to the city for access 35 and maintenance. 7) Restaurant Site (Outlot E): a. The restaurant site is planned in concept only within the PUD and will come in for design review and approval at a later date, but the use is allowed as long as the provisions of the BC zoning district and conditions outlined here are met; b. The applicant shall submit a comprehensive sign plan. One criteria to be established, however, is that pylon signs shall not be allowed. Monument signs may be allowed, but shall not exceed 12 feet in height; The architectural character and exterior building materials must be in keeping with the nearby senior assisted-living building, townhomes and other buildings if present; d. Access to the site will be off a shared driveway with the shopping center property to the south, provided easements and agreements can be reached with that property owner to provide such access. Access will be provided onto Southlawn if approved by the city engineer; e. All ground-mounted and roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened according to the ordinance; f. The parking lot on this site must provide through connections and cross parking easements with the parcel to the north (Outlot D); g. There must be a sidewalk on the south side of the site connecting Southlawn Drive with the trail around the ponding area to the west. There must also be sidewalks connecting the building entry to the shared driveway on the south side, Southlawn Drive, and to Outlot D. Such sidewalks must be separated from the parking lot - at curb level, not parking lot level; h. Uses on the site are encouraged to take advantage of the park and trail system around the ponding area to the west by providing outdoor seating, plazas, overlooks or similar features; i. Overstory trees must be planted along the west side of Southlawn Drive and the north side of the driveway access on the south side of the site at an average of 30'-40' on center. 8) Corporate/Commercial Site (Outlot G): a. The corporate/commercial site is planned in concept only within the PUD and will come in for design review and approval at a later date, but the use is allowed as long as the provisions of the BC zoning district and conditions outlined here are met; b. The building must be sited close to the roundabout intersection on the corner of Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway, within 15' of both rights-of-way, to maintain the character of the intersection, with parking to the north and east of the building; c. The applicant shall submit a comprehensive sign plan. One criteria to be established, 36 however, is that pylon signs shall not be allowed. Monument signs may be allowed, but shall not exceed 12 feet in height; d. The architectural character and exterior building materials must be in keeping with the nearby senior assisted-living building, townhomes and other buildings if present; e. Access to the site will be off Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street. The driveway access to Kennard Street at the northwest corner of the site may move north if needed for the realignment of the power line trail and to align with the driveway entrance to the park on the west side of Kennard; All ground-mounted and roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened according to ordinance; g. There must be sidewalks connecting entries to all buildings on site to Legacy Parkway, Kennard Street, and through the parking lot to the power line trail; h. Uses on the site are encouraged to take advantage of the park and trail system around the ponding area to the west by providing outdoor seating, plazas, overlooks or similar features; i. Overstory trees must be planted along the east side of Kennard Street and the north side of Legacy Parkway at an average of 30'-40' on center. Adequate separation, buffering and screening must be provided for the multi-family residential units from the front doors, parking areas, loading areas, and mechanical equipment of this commercial building. 9) For-Sale Townhomes (Outlot H): a. The for-sale townhome site is planned in concept only within the PUD and will come in for design review and approval at a later date, but the use is allowed as long as the provisions of the R-3C zoning district and conditions outlined here are met; b. Townhome buildings must be sited close to the roundabout intersection on the corner of Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway, and close to Kennard Street, within 20' of both rights-of-way, to maintain the character of the intersection and the streetscape; c. The architectural character and exterior building materials must be in keeping with the nearby senior assisted-living building, townhomes and other buildings in the development; d. Access to the site will be off the west leg of the roundabout at Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street, plus another access to Kennard Street further south, most likely in a loop street through the site. If the properties west of Outlot H fronting Hazelwood Drive are likely to develop when Outlot H is proposed for development, then consideration will be given to a public through street connecting Kennard Street and Hazelwood Drive as an extension of Legacy Parkway; e. There must be sidewalks connecting entries to all buildings on site to Legacy Parkway, 37 Kennard Street, and the park and power line trail to the north. Such sidewalks must be designed within a clear system of open spaces and landscaping that serves all units more or less equally; f. Visitor parking must be provided at a ratio of 1/2 space per unit no more than 200' from the front door of any townhouse unit; g. Overstory trees must be planted along the west side of Kennard Street and along both sides of the major internal street(s) at an average of 30'-40' on center. 10) Public Park with Trail (Outlot F): a. The property will be deeded to the City as public park land, but will not be credited as land area in park dedication requirements. See Parks Director Bruce Anderson's memorandum (attached). b. Hartford will construct all the grading, ponding, and trails noted on the plans; c. Hartford will secure all necessary easements and agreements with the shopping center property owner to the south for grading and construction of the trail on the south side of the pond (and the extension of that trail west around the south side of the senior assisted living building noted previously). Once agreed to, an easement at least 5' wider than the trail surface will be dedicated to the city for access and maintenance of the trail. 11) Public Park (Outlot I): a. The property will be deeded to the City as public park land, but will not be credited as land area in park dedication requirements. See Parks Director Bruce Anderson's memorandum (attached). b. Hartford will construct all the grading, play fields, equipment, and parking noted on the plans or as negotiated with the city; c. The power line trail will be realigned to cross Kennard Street further north to accommodate sidewalk connections to the townhomes to the north; d. Sidewalk connections will be provided in several locations to the power line trail in reasonable locations to connect all major activity areas with the trail; e. Sidewalk connections will be provided in appropriate locations to the sidewalk and green space system of the townhome development to the south, at such time as that development is planned or in place; f. Hartford will secure easements and agreements with the property owner to the south for the trail on the south side of the pond (and the extension of that trail west around the south side of the senior assisted-living building noted previously). Once agreed to, an easement at least 5' wider than the trail surface will be dedicated to the city for access and maintenance of the trail. 12) The Legacy Village site as a whole: 38 a. The applicant shall dedicate wetland-protection buffers around each wetland within this development. The width of each buffer shall be according to each wetlands classification as determined by the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District. These buffers shall be dedicated to the City of Maplewood and shall be dedicated to the city prior to the issuance of the first building permit for this development. b. The applicant shall install wetland-protection buffer signs around each wetland buffer. These signs shall state "there shall be no mowing, cutting, filling or dumping beyond this point." c. The community design review board shall review the landscape plans using the criteria herein as a guide. d. The architectural plans for all buildings in Legacy Village are subject to the approval of the community design review board. e. The grading, drainage, erosion control, utility and roadway plans (public and private) are subject to the approval of the city engineer. The applicant shall meet the tree-replacement/tree-preservation requirements of the Maplewood Code of Ordinances. g. The city will be strictly enforcing the 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. no-noise requirement and strictly enforcing dust-control efforts for all phases of this development. h. The applicant shall coordinate the installation of the sidewalk along the County Road D alignment with the city engineer. Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-Mayor Cardinal, Councilmembers Collins, Juenemann and Wasiluk Nays-Councilmember Koppen Councilmember Wasiluk moved to approve the Qreliminar~plat date-stamped June 12 2003 subiect to the following conditions for the proposed Legacy Village on the south side of County Road D between Southlawn Drive and Hazelwood Street: 1) Public street right-of-way will be dedicated for County Road D, Kennard Street, Legacy Parkway and Southlawn Drive as recommended by city engineering consultant Jon Horn in his memorandum. In addition, the applicant shall dedicate the necessary right-of-way for a sidewalk along the County Road D alignment, subject to the city engineer's approval. 2) Outlot f and Outlot I will be dedicated to the city for public park purposes as recommended and approved by the city parks director; 3) An easement over the power line trail will be dedicated to the city as required by the city engineer and parks director, and as modified by conditions of approval for the PUD; 4) Wetland buffer easements shall be shown around the wetlands on the site. The applicant shall dedicate these wetland buffer easements to the City of Maplewood. 39 Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-Mayor Cardinal, Councilmembers Collins, Juenemann and Wasiluk Nays-Councilmember Koppen Councilmember Collins moved to authorize the preparation of a development agreement with the Hartford Group, Inc. providing tax abatement not to exceed a present value of $3.8 million dollars for the proposed Legacy Village on the south side of County Road D between Southlawn Drive and Hazelwood Street. Seconded by Mayor Cardinal Ayes-Mayor Cardinal, Councilmembers Collins, Juenemann and Wasiluk Nays-Councilmember Koppen 40 ~) ~ ~~ LJ lZTD ~ ~ O _ - ~ I O / \ r: 11 r.LUDNausE ~, ~.I, _ 1.~~.~uc~n ~ ILIL~ I~ / /C~ 0 G ~~; ~~~_ --- N ~\\\\ PARK KEY ®~ Hooey Ineust 0 liodm Cobmd Conaerc Pa°en ® Turf Gtau ® Shruh Rose Bed S¢ea Llghtttlg Colored Concrete Red Shrub Roses ~~_' I Medicos NUI' -~nul. v \ mT SI IL I I (IIT_;' IiITf(1, ?L ~ Eu.RVIl.RE 1;1iL II lLlll~~ ~ ~ sro~~E 'I; p ~ I Il (CL ~'i1TfTITIL _ ~ G~~1L_JLLL!IJ r~i_~_f lyy~I ~~` _ J Lam, i I`~ ~^ ~i 111. f = ~ ~. ; __ EIm Tten Planted in 17T1T(TiTTT((TTITIT(P.~iTfriTf(!?T(TifTll I ~ Bolile.udsAlongLegry__P~~~-_~1 ~ff~~.~~µ~~w~'~~~ ~~~~5¢~eetlL p°'~'m U I 1 I I I 111 I I I 'I I L/ ..~\>a~ Lll. I POND 1 1~11~ - Rnundahou[Plmtiog- CORPORAtE/ ]jnd~e undcsplan~ mj~ COMMCRCIAL SITE Pink sod Red Shrub Rnsa _ ~ Itt'AI, ~ \ ~_ I `~ iii{~~ CY1 / /' 4 / / W 1 ~, ~ $lil. JSENIDR 4TE ~ ` /~ ~+ "~ ~.~~t~ ASSISTED LINNG~ ( ~ \11\~~I~ \ ~~.w~..~ PUBLIC ?ARNI ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \\ (,~~r wln. /••• /1 'RAIL I /JI r ._._ ,_ '~ POND N'c TLAND 1- ~ J~ INfILr C BASN ` ~ / "i~ll'~~ ~5 ~~ wEnAND ~LLLLL1JJf~ (~~' I S ,J /~ O F U(Il X1'-7' J'T"'-'TL J I ,i, \, HE IAI_ J RAS~N \_~ C. ~ .} i 8 =~ ~ ~ I! _. =~--270 ~~a ~'-'-">"-~ ~ S I.indau and ranted with ~ -- htub Ansel Pick ana Red Turf Gras Panels rL ~ .. ' ' -.1 ~; . ; . bs d ConaetC C e o P'°" PLANT SCHEDIJI.E KENNARD MEDIANS QTY COMMON NAME/BOTAMCAL NAME SIZE ROOT SPACING DE®UOUS TAEFS ----~- ~ ----~-~- _ _ _ 29 I~ndm 20"CAL ~ BdcB 25'OC r1@1m Roses ~ ~_ Street~h ~ 658 Pink Rosa e #1 Gr +d 3' OC Conc Pact Bilging _ _._.._._ _ 65R Red Ao~es _ - _ #1 Gpdc_'. . _ __ OC - Conc 3' _-___... _ ___ , T1ut' Gras Bouk:varda _ ' I~NNARD BOULEVARDS QTY COMMON NAME/BOTANICAL NAME SIZE ROOT SPACING OUS TAEPS _ ;~ ___ L_ 152 I Hone,,Iausc_--- _ _.__-_ ~ 20"CAL', BhB _30'OC KENNARD ROUNDABOUT COMMON NAME/BOTAMCAL NAME QTY ~~ ROOT SPACING DECIDU OUS TREES _-___~ 10 I linden --- --~--~~~ - - - 20" CAL _ _ BdrB ~ -Per olsn SFOIVB ROSE4 I ' ~~~~~~~~ t55 ~. Pick Rosez .1_ Aed Roses 156~ I #1 Grade_ #] Gtadc_ Conc :__3'OC. Conc i 7~gC Pidt coil Aed htub Rmea _ _ .-__ _ .. .. .. LEGACY BOULEVARD QTY COMMONNAhffi/BOTANICAL NAME SIZE ROOT SPACING " " " " " nECrouous TREPS Cokated cnnetere Pa°er: \ r ~ ' E~ ' - z:o"~,ti -gore ~D~ o _ in the Medians I I v 1000 iJC \ 41 Attachment 13 Engineering Plan Review PROJECT: Heritage Square II PROJECT NO: REVIEWED BY: Erin Laberee and Chris Cavett Maplewood Engineering Dept. DATE: May 28, 2004 Town and Country Homes is proposing to develop for sale town homes on the Legacy Village planned unit development previously approved for rental town homes and an executive office site. The developer shall address the following issues. Grading & Erosion Control 1. The engineer shall provide an erosion control plan. 2. The developer must sign a maintenance agreement for the maintenance and annual cleaning of the rainwater gardens. 3. The engineer shall note the top and bottom elevations of the proposed retaining walls. A building permit will be required for the proposed retaining wall greater than four feet high. A plan and a specific soil stabilization detail for the wall design will be required as part of the building permit. 4. The proposed grades at the west end of the tunnel do not work. The proposed grades indicate a low point with no outlet, just west of Kennard Street, at the trail tunnel. The applicant shall revise the grades to eliminate the low point. The applicant shall coordinate grades for Outlot Tot Lot area with the city's plan and contractor. Utilities 1. Submit plans the Saint Paul Regional Water Services for their review. Drainage 1. The engineer shall provide drainage calculations in compliance with the storm water management plan for the Maplewood Mall Area Transportation Improvements. The engineer shall provide the "Enhanced Practices" worksheets. 2. The outlet structures in several rainwater gardens have rim elevations set at the bottom contour of the gardens. To maximize infiltration, the rim elevations of these structures shall be set approximately 0.5 feet or higher above the bottom contour elevation of the rainwater gardens. 3. Rainwater gardens typically include a rock sump. The sumps consist of 1.5" of clean, clear rock wrapped in Type 5 geotextile filter fabric, (felt). The contractor places the top of the rock infiltration sumps about 12 inches below the finished 42 bottom of the basin. If rock sumps are utilized within the proposed development, the project engineer shall provide a detail and description of how the contractor is to construct the sumps and the rainwater gardens. 4. Provide emergency overflow swales from the rainwater gardens and ponds. The overflow swales shall be lined with a permanent soil stabilization blanket, (Enkamat, NAG C350 or equal). Indicate emergency overflow elevations on the drawing. 5. The applicant shall obtain off-site drainage and utility easements. 6. The applicant shall obtain approval from the pipeline for the 27" storm sewer crossing. 7. The utility plan shows 27" HDPE being utilized. This size HDPE pipe is not manufactured. The next closest pipe sizes available in HDPE are 24" or 30". The engineer shall revise the storm sewer to reflect this. 8. The engineer shall provide storm sewer details. Landscaping 1. The applicant shall provide additional landscaping in and around the ponds and rainwater gardens. Include anative-grass seed mixture for upland and lowland areas around any rain gardens or ponds. Misc. 1. The applicant shall coordinate the Legacy trail alignment with the city and the city's consultant. 2. The applicant shall coordinate construction of Legacy trail with the city's contractor and provide the city with all of the necessary Right of Entry Agreements. 3. The developer will be required to enter into a developers agreement with the city. 43 Attachment 14 LAND USE PLAN CHANGE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Town and Country Homes applied for a change to the City's land use plan from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential). WHEREAS, this change applies to the property located at the southwest corner of County Road D East and Kennard Street. The legal description is: Lot 1, Block 1, Legacy Village of Maplewood. WHEREAS, the history of this change is as follows: On June 7, 2004, 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 approve the land use plan change. 2. On June 14, 2004, the City Council discussed the land use plan change. They considered reports and recommendations from the Planning Commission and City staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approve the above described change because the proposed townhomes would be more compatible and in character with the adjacent townhome development than the previously approved commercial building. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on 2004. 44 Attachment 15 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION RESOLUTION FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, Town and Country Homes applied for a conditional use permit to revise the Legacy Village planned unit development by eliminating a 1.5-acre commercial building site and propose townhomes instead and also to eliminate arental- housing component with for-sale townhome units. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the 20-acre site in Legacy Village lying south of County Road D East between Hazelwood Street and Southlawn Drive. The legal description is: Lot 1, block 1, lot 1, block 2 and lot 4 block 2 of Legacy Village of Maplewood. WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: On June 7, 2004 the planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. 2. The city council held a public hearing on June 14, 2004. City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. 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: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. 4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic conges#ion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 45 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 (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): The development shall follow the plans date-stamped April 30, 2004, except where the city requires changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 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. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. The applicant shall comply with the requirements in the Assistant City Engineer's report dated May 28, 2004. 5. The applicant shall sign a development agreement with the city before the issuance of a grading permit. 6. The applicant shall provide a copy of the homeowner's association documents to staff for approval. 7. #eAtal-Townhomes a. The project will be constructed according to the plans from Town and Country Homes date-stamped April 30, 2004 #Fe~ " ,except as specifically modified by these conditions. b. c. Sidewalk connections will be added connecting the power line trail to the curb of Village Trail East (west of Kennard Street) in at least four locations and connecting the power line trail to the curb of 46 Village Trail East (east of Kennard Street) in at least three locations to be approved by staff. d. ~ewe ~-lir~e~rail. e. Village Trail East (east of Kennard Street) ~tfee~B and Flandrau Street East ~tree~-6 serving the townhomes will be constructed in their entirety with the townhomes, regardless of the status of the multi-family and commercial parcels to the east. f. Parking spaces will be provided at the ends of the driveways as shown on the plans and wherever else thev may fit ,~,~iding~-r~~ aria 4; -~ b,-~9/~z~~a.,a-z'~5~'26~ 9 • , h. Asix-foot-wide sidewalk should be provided +€a~all-passible on the south side of County Road D for the entire length of the project from Hazelwood Street ire to Southlawn Drive; ~• The grades of the power line trail and all ublic sidewalks will meet ADA guidelines for slope. k. The landscape plan is approved as proposed with the exception that the boulevard trees along Kennard Street shall be planted according to the approved Kennard Street Boulevard-Tree Planting Plan. 47 m. n. The curve in the middle of Village Trail East (west of Kennard Street shall be flattened as much as possible to limit headlight lag re on aimed ir-te the front of the units. o. All setbacks are approved as shown. /nl~ ~hhi.~ ~~e ~nr) h~ ~ilrlinn~+ 'I A ~. 'I A 'I ~.m2r~d ~ ~ .~~ , t i i p• Visitor-parking spaces for the ~ta1 townhomes will be added or modified as follows: 1) IE~ast~-spase~ The applicant shall provide visitor-parking spaces at the minimum Quantity of one-half space per townhome unit. This works out to a minimum of 89 visitor parking spaces required. Furthermore, the visitor-parking spaces must be placed such that the front door of no unit is more than 200 feet from a group of at least five spaces. 48 ~~ s. An easement over the power line trail on this parcel will be provided to the city for access and maintenance. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on June , 2004. 49 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2004 V. DESIGN REVIEW a. Heritage Square Town House Development -Legacy Village Mr. Ekstrand said Town and Country Homes is proposing to build for-sale townhomes on the portion of the Legacy Village PUD (planned unit development) that was previously approved for rental townhomes and an executive office site. The office site was proposed on 1.5 acres of this 20-acre site. The applicant is proposing to build 178 townhomes. Mr. Ekstrand said this site was previously approved for 198 townhomes and the office building. This proposed change requires the following approves from the city council: 1. A revision of the Legacy Village PUD for the change in ownership/rental status as well as revision of the commercial site to residential use. 2. A comprehensive plan amendment to build townhomes where the executive offices were previously approved. This would be a change from BC (business commercial) to R-3H (high density residential). 3. A revised preliminary plat for the new lot line configuration. 4. A revised flat plat. 5. Site, building and landscape plan approvals. The planning commission will review the first four requests. Staff will review these in a separate report. At this time, the applicant is requesting that the community design review board review the site, building and landscape plans. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she couldn't tell by looking at the color renderings if there was any brick used on the building elevations so she asked if staff knew the answer? Mr. Ekstrand said the applicant could answer that when they have the opportunity to speak. The applicant brought a materials board for the board to see. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked staff if they knew how many proposals the board has required brick to be used in some form on the building elevations? Mr. Ekstrand said the city has had a record of requiring brick to be used at least as an accent material and often times used as a wainscot below to replace concrete block elements. The city requires brick to be used on the building elevation to a certain degree. Mr. Ekstrand said it wouldn't be out of line to require brick to be used in some form on the buildings. He didn't mention it in his report because he thought the buildings have a lot of design and character already. Board member Olson asked if these units would be rented or sold? Mr. Ekstrand said these units would be for sale. Board member Olson asked if Phase 1 for Legacy Village was for sale or rent? Mr. Ekstrand said those units are for sale as well. Board member Olson asked how much of the Legacy Village development is handicap accessible because it appears that the plans the board has reviewed so far have all been multi-level homes. Board member Olson said she didn't bring that issue up in Phase I because she thought Phase II would have accessible housing units but now she doesn't see any in this proposal either and this concerns her. Mr. Ekstrand said perhaps the applicant could address that. Board member Olson asked if there was a minimum percentage of handicap accessible housing that the city code requires for new developments? Mr. Ekstrand said no typically there isn't. It's something that can be considered but there is no code requirement stating there needs to be so many handicap accessible units. Board member Olson said that concerns her. She expected to see some handicap accessible housing somewhere in this Legacy Village development. Board member Shankar asked how the traffic would flow through the area. He asked if the traffic would go to Kennard Street or to County Road D and Highway 61 ? Mr. Ekstrand said the extension to Highway 61 for County Road D is under construction. Phase I for the Legacy development has begun and the roadway should be drivable by the end of this year. By the time the developer has a number of units to warrant traffic circulation the roadwork will be completed. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked what the square footage of this development would be? Mr. Ekstrand said he would ask the developer to answer that question. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked the applicant to address the board. Mr. Kevin Clark, Director of Land Development, Town & Country Homes, 7615 Smetana Lane, Suite 180, Eden Prairie, addressed the board. He said the grading has begun for Heritage Square and is close to completion. The County Road D grading should start at the end of June to early Juty and should be done by the end of the construction season. As soon as the ground dries up more they will start putting in the underground elements. They are going by the plans previously approved by the Hartford Group regarding accessibility. This is the first community they would be building the Majestic Collection product in. The approval of the site was not slatted for a one level building project, which is the reason they haven't proposed a one level building product for this project area. Board member Olson said she understands it's not his fault but she would like to severely scold whomever it is that dropped the ball on this. She can't see a development of this size without one-level handicapped accessible housing. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said the design review board doesn't have control over this particular aspect of development but they can voice their concerns. Board member Shankar said he believed the city code would require a certain amount of handicap accessible units for each development and before the building permit can be released the building official would require a certain number of units to be accessible. Board member Olson said the board hasn't had an opportunity to review these plans and she knows this is not his fault. She said to have this issue come up at this late of date really bothers her. Mr. Ekstrand said this is a valid point and the city should have been looking at the handicapped accessible housing issue over a year ago. The issue over a year ago was with housing affordability and the number of affordable units to have in the development. The first project they had to provide at least 50 affordable housing units and another development will have to provide 50 additional affordable housing units. Board member Olson asked if all affordable housing homeowners have to be able to walk stairs? Mr. Ekstrand said the CDRB minutes would reflect these concerns and staff would pass these on. He said he wasn't aware of a building code requirement for a certain number of handicapped accessible units. Board member Olson asked if there was any way the city could go back to Phase I and require handicapped accessible units? Mr. Ekstrand said no it's too late. Board member Olson said there is no Phase III so apparently it's too late to require handicapped accessible housing for this large development. Mr. Clark said there is additional housing to be built in Legacy Village, which would have handicapped accessibility as an element. Mr. Ekstrand said there is an apartment that is part of the Hartford's proposal that is 50 units that east of this project. If the apartment building is a multi-story building it would have an elevator, which gives accessibility to the floors. Board member Olson said she was thinking of high quality retirement housing. If there are stairs in every single multi-level unit, retired people would have a problem, which is a concern of hers. Mr. Clark said regarding the question about brick, they are introducing stone elements on the building, which is a split-faced block along the lower four feet of the building. Because of technology the color renderings didn't make it evident that split-faced block would be on the exterior. They had proposed to use a gray split-faced block but found the color gray washed into the siding color too much and prefer the appearance of the dark tan block instead. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said because of the color copies the colors tend not be the same as the actual building sample colors. That is another reason why the board really appreciates building samples as part of the review process. Mr. Clark said the question was asked earlier regarding square footage for these units. The units are going to be 1,800 square feet to 2,500 square feet with the basement finished. The price range for the Majestic Collection is proposed at a range of $225,000 to $245,000. Board member Shankar asked what landscaping would be used under the decks? Mr. Clark said they wouldn't be laying sod; they may use mulch of some sort and possibly some plantings. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she is assuming there would be an association for this development. Mr. Clark said they would use the same homeowner's association for both developments in Legacy Village. Chairperson Longrie-Kline asked if the applicant could discuss the room on the end of the units that would hold the utility meters? Mr. Clark introduced Mitch Littfin who would speak more on the utility rooms. Mr. Mitch Littfin, Regional Architect with Town and Country Homes, addressed the board. He said these buildings would have a fire suppression system in them so they need to put the system someplace where it can be accessible to the fire department. The can carry that stone element out and use landscaping and/or fencing to shield the gas meter, telephone and junction boxes. They can't put the gas meters in an enclosed area because there isn't enough ventilation. They are working on those dynamics with the fire life safety but understand the need to shield those meters. They will either extend the stone like a retaining wall off the edge or put a fence around that area to shield it. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said from her perspective the board wants to make sure the meters are enclosed some how and using the block elements seem consistent with what they are doing with the other enclosures. Board member Olson said she is concerned about the safety of these security boxes and how many keys would be out in the public. If a corner area is built she wants to ensure children would not hide there. Screening the meters is a priority so the meters wouldn't be visible from the street because that could attract vandalism. Mr. Clark said the fire marshal is the only person with the key for the fire suppression system. They are looking at the options of what boxes they can have on the interior and which ones have to be on the exterior. Such as cable boxes and telephone boxes so there is less stuff on the outside wall. There are certain space and distance requirements by both Xcel and the fire department so power and water is separated. The proximities of the electricity and water will dictate where the locations end up. Board member Olson said in the color handouts they received this evening there were four different color schemes to look at but she only sees three color schemes on the building materials board. Mr. Clark said there are only three colors to be used for the building materials. They aren't using the blue color scheme. The building materials board they brought this evening show the different combinations of color schemes that would be used on the buildings. Board member Shankar asked if there would be exterior lighting on the building? Mr. Clark said yes there would be entryway lighting and sensor lighting that would come on at dusk and shut off at dawn on the garage exterior. The units that have porches will also have an exterior light. Board member Driscoll asked for a clarification regarding the materials and color schemes to be used. It was hard to distinguish from the color renderings. She said it appears to be three different finishes but they show two in the color photos so she is confused. Mr. Lifftin pointed out for the front elevation the teal green color is used for the siding and is the base color and the tan color is the shake product and will offset the green. It is separated by a white band board and on some gable ends as well. Because of the shadowing effect it appears to be three finishes but really is two finishes. Board member Driscoll asked what the purpose of the retaining wall south of wetland F was and how high the wall would be? Mr. Clark said the purpose of the retaining wall is for the topography and grade of the site. Based on where the water from the site goes dictates how deep the pipes have to be. If they are able to dig the pipes deep enough will depend on the placement of the elevations. They have to work with the city engineering department on this. They also have to have the sidewalk at a certain elevation. As you move further away from the building the grade drops so the walls are holding the grade up in order to have the sidewalk in that location. In some cases they are creating the elevation and also trying to accommodate the elevation. Board member Driscoll asked if they had determined what the walls would be made of? Mr. Clark said they will use a modular retaining wall system because those types of walls allow engineering to tell you where the wall should go, what backfill is needed, and how long the fabric is that ties into the wall that holds them in. Boulder walls are not engineered. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said the rear of the property by the garage the building exterior appears to be all one-color siding. In the past the board has requested that the applicant extend the brick building material around the end of the building for added durability. Mr. Lifftin understood what the board was referring to. On the rear elevation they broke up the exterior by bringing the windows out, adding the gables, and boxing out the windows on the end units and awnings over the garages. They chose to use more architectural features to break up the back of the building rather than changing the texture or the color. To break up the middle units they chose to use a different window trim. They believe it's a nice combination of architectural details with fewer embellishments on the rear. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said in many of the developments approved by the board they have recommended that brick is added to the side and rear elevations for added durability. Board member Shankar said in previous developments the reason the board has recommended extending the brick was because they were using one color of siding and there wasn't much architectural detail on the building. In his opinion this development has more architectural enhancements and there is no need to require the extension of the block. Board member Olson said she thinks the applicant did an exceptional job with this development and it doesn't bother her that there isn't the stone element on the rear elevation. She likes the porches, overhangs and the attention to detail given to the front of the units and she is very happy with the presentation. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she thinks the enhancements are very nice as well. Board member Driscoll said she likes the architectural details and felt this was a nice plan. Mr. Ekstrand said the front elevations are nicely enhanced, he likes that the back elevation is hidden, the end elevations are highly visible and appear to be very plain. This is a concern of his because there are a lot of end units that are exposed to both County Road D and Hazelwood. Maybe some thought could be given to what can be done to solve this problem. Board member Olson said the board has approved less appealing end units than this proposal. She is very comfortable approving this development if there is appropriate landscape provided. Mr. Littfin said the appearance of the end units is also dependent on the location of the meter rooms. The meters could be located on either the end unit A or end unit C depending on where the utilities come through. Chairperson Longrie-Kline said she is concerned with the view people will have driving by this development and it's the board's responsibility to make sure this development is as appealing as possible. Board member Shankar moved to approve the plans date-stamped April 30, 2004, for the Heritage Square Second Addition, the second phase of Heritage Square Townhomes at Legacy Village. Approval is subject to the developer complying with the following conditions: (changes to the original motion are in bold.) 1. Obtaining city council approval of a comprehensive land use plan revision from BC (business commercial) to R-3H (high density residential) to build townhomes on the previously approved office site. 2. Obtaining city council approval of a revision to the previously approved planned unit development for this project. 3. Obtaining city council approval of the preliminary and final plat for this project. 4. Meeting the following site requirements from the Legacy Village PUD approval (these are subject to staff approval): ^ There shall be an east-west sidewalk provided between Hazelwood Street and Kennard Street on the north/northwest side of the main east-west drive. ^ There must be a sufficient number of convenient sidewalk connections from the buildings to the power line trail and from the buildings to the County Road D sidewalk. ^ The north-south driveway between the easterly edge of this site and the adjacent commercial property and apartments must be constructed in their entirety with the townhomes. ^ Parking spaces should be provided at the ends of driveways between buildings wherever possible. ^ The infiltration trenches should be placed in accordance with the city engineer's approval, taking into account proper placement to accommodate trails and sidewalks and the function of the trenches. ^ There must be a sidewalk to the south side of County Road D running from Hazelwood Street to the Southlawn Drive. ^ All trails must meet ADA requirements. ^ Over-story trees along Street A, Street B and the west side of Street C (as shown on the previous rental-housing plan) must be planted at an average of 30 feet to 40 feet on center. As an exception to this spacing requirement, the boulevard trees along Kennard Street shall be planted according to the approved planting plan. ^ The curve in the middle of Street A should be flattened as much as possible in an attempt to lessen headlight glare. ^ Building setbacks are allowed to be no less than 15 feet from a street right-of- way to enhance the urban character of this development. ^ There must be enough visitor parking spaces provided in groups of at least five that are no more than 200 feet form the front doors of all units. ^ The main private driveways within this development must be at least 26 feet wide. ^ Visitor parking areas must be installed in accordance with the city engineer's requirements of grading and drainage needs. ^ An easement over the power-line trail must be provided to the city for access and maintenance. 5. All requirements of the fire marshal and building official must be met. 6. The applicant shall obtain all required permits from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District. 7. All driveways and parking lots shall have continuous concrete curbing. 8. All requirements of the city engineer, or his consultants working for the city, shall be met regarding, grading, drainage, erosion control, utilities and the dedication of any easements found to be needed. 9. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project by that time. 10. Any identification signs for the project meet the requirements of the city sign ordinance. 11. The setbacks are approved as proposed. 12. The applicant shall: ^ Install reflectorized stop signs at all driveway connections to Hazelwood Street, County Road D and Kennard Street. ^ Install and maintain an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas. ^ Install all required trails, sidewalks and carriage walks. ^ Install any traffic signage within the site that may be required by staff. 13. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan for staff approval before getting the first building permit. 14. The applicant shall submit an address and traffic signage plan for staff approval. 15. The applicant shall provide the city with cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for the exterior landscaping and site improvements prior to getting a building permit for the development. Staff shall determine the dollar amount of the escrow. 16. All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 17. A temporary sales office shall be allowed until the time a model unit is available for use. Such a temporary building shall be subject to the requirements of the building official. 18. The applicant shall work with the city staff to shield the gas and electric meters and those units adjacent to Hazelwood Street and County Road D will not have the "meter room" attached to the side of the building facing Hazelwood Street and County Road D. 19. The board approved the use of the tan rock face stone in place of the originally specified gray color. 20. The Board is concerned about the lack of handicapped accessible units as part of the 178 units. The applicant shall provide accessible units if required by the building code. Board member Driscoll seconded. Ayes -Driscoll, Longrie-Kline, Olson, Shankar The motion passed. This item goes to the planning commission on June 7, 2004, and to the city council on June 14, 2004. MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, JUNE 7, 2004 V. PUBLIC HEARING a. Heritage Square Second Addition (Legacy Village -Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway) Mr. Ekstrand said Town and Country Homes is proposing to build for-sale townhomes on the portion of the Legacy Village PUD (planned unit development) that was previously approved for rental townhomes and an executive office site. The applicant is proposing to build 178 townhomes. This site was previously approved by the city for 198 rental townhomes and the office building. The applicant is requesting that the city council approve the following: A comprehensive plan amendment to build townhomes where the executive offices were previously approved. The applicant is, therefore, requesting a change from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential). 2. A revision of the Legacy Village PUD for the change in ownership/rental status as well as the change from the office site to townhomes. 3. A preliminary and final plat for the new lot line configuration. 4. Site, building and landscape plans. The community design review board (CDRB) reviewed these plans on May 25, 2004. The planning commission should review and take action on items 1 through 3. Commissioner Trippler said on page 2 of the staff report it states on April 26, 2004, the city council approved a revision from rental to for-sale townhomes. He asked if the city council had already approved this why was the planning commission reviewing this? Mr. Ekstrand said that was only a change to the development agreement and that was an element that had to take place before staff could go forward. Because the developer's agreement had denoted several specific items, one of which was that these be rental units. This had to be approved by city council to change the units from rental tofor-sale townhomes before it could be forwarded to the planning commission. Commissioner Trippler said he spent a lot of time researching the parking situation. It seems the parking doesn't meet the criteria required by staff. Staff asked for 87 visitor parking spaces, however, he only sees 50 public parking spaces and 53 private parking spaces, which equals 103 parking spaces. If the private parking spaces are to be designated for residents to park there then those spaces wouldn't be available for visitors to use. Staff wanted at least five additional parking spaces available within 200 feet of the front door of each unit. In using his compass he discovered there were a number of units that didn't meet the 200-foot criteria. For example, they didn't meet the criteria in block 1, lot 3, unit A, and block 1, lot 5, unit A, and block 2, lot 1, unit A. There are 5 spaces in Block 2, lot 15, unit A & B1 that are technically within 200 feet but in order for people to use those spaces people would have to cross Kennard Street and get on the other side of Kennard Street. Commissioner Trippler said hopefully we aren't asking people to walk 400 feet to get to those units. He said the applicant did a good job squeezing parking spaces in they still came up short in their calculation. Commissioner Trippler asked if the sidewalks mentioned on page 5, item b. and item i. in the staff report meant the sidewalks are required or were they removed from the plan completely? Mr. Ekstrand said the sidewalks are still in the recommendation but are shown on page 5, in item h. Changes were made in the motion because of the redundancy. Some of that wording came from the old Legacy Village conceptual plan and changes have been made. Commissioner Trippler said he just wanted to make sure there would be ample sidewalks for people to use without walking on the street. Mr. Ekstrand said regarding the parking shortage mentioned by Commissioner Trippler, Mr. Ekstrand said he would concur that the applicant doesn't meet the 200 foot distance requirement mentioned in the staff report. This needs to be met and the applicant would have to make some plan revisions to meet those criteria. The public street parking is intended to be used by visitors to visit residents and should be counted in the number of total visitor parking. Commissioner Trippler said he understood the blue highlighted parking spaces on the plans were public parking spaces but he didn't understand why there was a distinction between private and public parking spaces and he assumed the private parking spaces could be allocated to people that live there but have more than 2 cars and need more space. If the parking spaces were private the spots wouldn't be available if the additional parking spaces were spoken for by the residents who have additional cars. Mr. Ekstrand said that is something the applicant could address. However, it's his understanding that the spaces shown on the plan are intended to be visitor parking spaces. Mr. Roberts said he believes items listed under item b. and h. are covered under the city improvement projects for County Road D and Kennard Street and aren't needed as conditions. Commissioner Mueller said even if those items are covered under the city improvement project he would like the words if at all possible stricken on page 5, in condition h. A good friend of his lives in Woodbury and lives in a townhome development similar to this proposal. He said the driveways are so short you can't park in their driveway because your car sticks out into the street. When you have a gathering such as the graduation party he attended there is no parking and it's a problem for people visiting. Either the residents live with the problem or the planning commissioners have the opportunity to recommend changes be made to the plan now so additional parking is available. Before experiencing this parking problem at the graduation party he thought there was ample parking, but now he believes there isn't enough parking available. Commissioner Dierich asked how wide the streets would be in order for a car to turn into the driveway? Mr. Ekstrand said it's a narrow area at 36 feet wide and is similar to an alley. The normal width of a drive aisle for two-way traffic within a parking lot is 24 feet wide. This isn't going to be a high traffic situation but if a vehicle is parked in the driveway opposite your home it could be very tight to maneuver around. Mr. Ekstrand said this area will be posted no parking. Mr. Ekstrand said the applicant said they want people to pull into their garages; they don't want vehicles left out in the driveway. Commissioner Mueller said he didn't remember the planning commission approving 198 units for these previously for-rent units. After reading that the applicant had reduced the number of units from 198 down to 178 units and that the units are now owner occupied, he thought that was great but now he's thinking maybe the number of units should be reduced even more. He asked if the units increased in size when the units went from rental to for-sale units? Mr. Ekstrand said when the planning commission originally looked at this plan it was a conceptual plan. The plans did show more units but staff cannot compare the two because the plan wasn't officially proposed it was only a concept for density purposes. Commissioner Mueller asked how the density fit the city code in terms of acreage? Mr. Ekstand said it's a reduction in density because they reduced the units by 20 but it fits within the high density, which is what this was patterned after. Commissioner Mueller asked how much it was over for medium density? Mr. Ekstrand said he would have to calculate that out. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Ms. Krista Fleming, Land Acquisition Manager with Town & Country Homes, 7615 Smetana Lane, Suite 180, Eden Prairie, addressed the commission. She thanked the commission for the opportunity to present another development in Legacy Village. She said the first model home in Heritage Square should be ready in time for the fall Parade of Homes. Ms. Fleming went into some of the details regarding the appearance of the buildings and how they designed them to fit in with the Heritage Square development. The city council stated they were agreeable to either rental townhomes or owner occupied townhomes and decided to develop the owner occupied townhomes. These townhomes are called the Majestic Collection and fit into the overall planned unit development and provides another balance to the lifestyle people can have living in this community. These units will be 1,900 square feet with the option of adding additional livable square footage totaling 2,900 square feet. The price of these homes will be $220,000 to $240,000. They are trying to encourage the pedestrian friendly feeling in this development. The plan encourages people to drive their cars into the garage and be a part of their front entrance way and to their neighborhood by using the front decks and sidewalks. Everything is connected with a personal sidewalk to your home and a common sidewalk connects to your personal sidewalk and the general public sidewalk that runs throughout the development. The townhome development will be homeowner-association maintained. Town & Country Homes has built a similar development in Apple Valley and it's been selling very well. It's not the same product but the people in the City of Apple Valley have the same concept as the City of Maplewood does with a pedestrian friendly neighborhood. The private and public street parking was to determine where there are private areas set aside that are not on a street. The additional parking isn't set aside for somebody to have an extra parking space those are for the guests to park. Town & Country will work with the city to meet the requirement to have an appropriate number of parking spaces within 200 feet from the front door. Commissioner Trippler said he has a neighbor with six cars, and if he were to buy a home in this development he asked what the neighbor would do with his four other cars? Ms. Fleming said the focus market groups that typically buy these homes usually don't have many cars. They are usually single people, married couples with no children, married couples with one child, divorced parents with a child living with them, empty nesters, or retired individuals. They don't have a restriction that quantifies people's automobile usage. However, in the homeowner's association documents they regulate over night use of parking within these areas so the situation is monitored. In situations where this has been a problem they send notices out and identify areas where people need to park there car. This discussion is also brought up when the sale of the unit takes place. They state the homeowner has two parking spaces inside the garage and any other space that is needed they would have to find space off site someplace. Those additional parking spaces are for visitors only. Commissioner Trippler said he thought the idea of this development was to be community friendly but as he looks at the plan it appeared most of the units are facing the street and not facing each other. Four units along Kennard Street face the street instead of facing their neighbors. Ms. Fleming said that provides another aspect of the pedestrian friendly neighborhood. This is also the situation in Heritage Square I where they have on-street parking on Kennard Street. It's to satisfy the market that wants to have pedestrian activity on the street scene. People can park in front of the homes and walk up to the door and have a sense of community with people sitting on their decks in front of their home or people walking by your home giving a street presence. There are also units that will face each other and have a courtyard area so there will be both types of living situations available. Commissioner Desai asked if Hazelwood Street and Kennard Street would be no parking? Mr. Ekstrand said Kennard Street is a traffic mover but there will be on-street parking on the west side of Kennard Street. On the east side of Kennard Street will be the Senior Housing, which has not been reviewed yet. Hazelwood Street is a residential roadway and with the upcoming Southwinds townhome development which will go where the five residential homes are currently, there may be on-street parking. Commissioner Mueller said parking is always an issue in developments. He noticed on some of the ends of the alleyways show bump-outs but other areas don't. He asked if that was a setback issue or did the applicant decide not to put the bump-outs in those locations? Ms. Fleming said in most cases it's a setback issue. Other times it was because of a retaining wall because of the existing grade problems with the regional trail that goes through there and also because of the power line easement. She said they have placed parking and bump-outs in every possible location that they could and would have placed more parking in the development if there was space available. Commissioner Mueller said there are areas where it appears there could be more bump-outs but it may appear that way on the plan when really there is a legitimate reason there isn't abump-out on the plan. Ms. Fleming said they will take another look at the plan to be positive bump-outs are in every possible location. She said they want to make the customer happy and when you get into a certain price range of homes they would like to make sure they have used every possible location for increased parking for the future usage. Mr. Ekstrand said condition f. on page 5 of the staff report addresses that issue. Some areas abut wetlands and slopes that make it difficult or impossible to have additional bump-outs even though it appears on the plans that there's enough room. Commissioner Trippler asked if it was an economic reason for removing the office complex from the plan? He understood the reason to delete the rental office from the plan but it may be an attractive feature for a potential homeowner to have an office complex close to home so they could walk to work instead of driving. Ms. Fleming said economics played a part in that decision, however, there are still areas within the PUD that provide office space and maybe staff could offer more information. Chairperson Fischer asked if anybody in the audience wanted to address the commission? Mr. Travis Smith, 1663 County Road D East, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He is the President of the homeowner's association at the Emerald Townhomes. He said he moved to Maplewood two years ago but he didn't know the people in the townhomes would be assessed $1,000 for a development going in across the street. Town & Country Homes mentioned the price per unit would be $220,000 to $240,000. With a base price of $220,000 going up from there the units could be selling for a quarter of a million dollars ($250,000). He asked if this was the price for each unit then why were the current residents in the area being charged to pay for the road assessments and not the developer since this benefits them and not the current residents? Mr. Ekstrand said he isn't comfortable addressing assessment issues. He said assessments are levied where the improvements are found to be a benefit to property owners along the roadway. He said he would be happy to get Mr. Smith's phone number and pass it along to the Public Works/Engineering department and ask someone to call him back with more information. Ms. Erin Laberee, Staff Engineer for Maplewood, said she hasn't been very involved with the County Road D project but she is aware that assessments are for road and utility improvements. Mr. Smith said his property taxes for 2005 are now $2,100 fora 1,700 square foot townhome is outrageous. At that tax rate for the twelve townhome residents that comes to over $24,000, which is new money for the City of Maplewood. He asked why that money isn't being utilized for the street assessment? Mr. Roberts said to clarify the property taxes go to at least four different taxing groups. They include Ramsey County, the Watershed District, City of Maplewood, the Maplewood/North St. Paul/Oakdale school district, and the Met Council. The City of Maplewood's portion of the property tax is only about 18%. The largest portion of the property tax is for the school district and the next largest is for Ramsey County. The city's portion of Mr. Smith's property tax bill is only a small portion of his tax statement. Mr. Smith said Town & Country Homes should still have to pay for the street assessments since the assessment wasn't there when he moved in two years ago. As president of the association he is speaking on behalf of the other homeowners in the Emerald Townhome development as well. Granted he prefers to look townhomes rather than an office building. Now the homeowners have to pay from their pockets for somebody else's pleasure and that isn't right. Mr. Roberts said there is an upcoming assessment hearing for the County Road D project and the proposed assessments. This is the time to voice your objections and go through the process that is mandated by state law. The planning commission can't deal with this situation at their level. Mr. Smith said he is aware of the meeting on June 14, 2004. Mr. Smith left his name and number for Mr. Ekstrand to pass onto the proper department. Commissioner Dierich said Mr. Smith said he thought paying $2,100 for property taxes fora 1,700 square foot townhome is out of line but in reality there are other townhomes in the city with similar square footage that are paying close to $4,000 for their property taxes. She said when we live in a city all of the residents have to pay for roads and improvements whether we will directly benefit from them or not. These are huge improvements that will be done to County Road D. She likes the fact that these townhomes will be owner occupied rather than rental but she is concerned about the lack of parking. She believes adding more bump-outs could take care of the lack of parking in the development and the commission should request the developer to add more parking. Because the developer has already reduced the number of units from 198 to 178 she doesn't believe it would be appropriate to request another reduction of units. Commissioner Trippler said staff has already included that criteria in the conditions. The commission doesn't need to specify where to put the parking, the applicant just needs to include additional parking. Mr. Ekstrand said when Phil Carlson, the original city consultant for this project, included that as part of the recommendation, staff felt that was an important condition for reasons stated by Mr. Mueller with things such as graduation parties or gatherings that require additional parking spaces. Commissioner Dierich said 89 parking spaces for a development of this size seems too small and she would be more comfortable increasing the number. Commissioner Mueller said the plan says 103 parking spaces on the plan so the developer has already increased the parking spaces on the plan. To him the convenience of the parking is more important than the actual number of parking spaces. Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the resolution on page 44 of the staff report approving the comprehensive land use plan amendment from BC (business commercial) to R3H (high density residential) fora 1.5-acre parcel previously planned for an office building in Legacy Village at Maplewood. Approval of this change is because the proposed townhomes would be more compatible and in character with the adjacent townhome development than the previously approved commercial building. Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the resolution on pages 45-49 of the staff report approving a revision to the Legacy Village planned unit development as it relates to the previously approved rental townhomes and executive-office suites and clubhouse sites. Approval of this revision is based on the findings required by the ordinance and subject to the following conditions (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): 1. The development shall follow the plans date-stamped April 30, 2004, except where the city requires changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 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. The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4. The applicant shall comply with the requirements in the Assistant City Engineer's report dated May 28, 2004. 5. The applicant shall sign a development agreement with the city before the issuance of a grading permit. 6. The applicant shall provide a copy of the homeowner's association documents to staff for approval. 7. ~iental• Townhomes . a. The project will be constructed according to the plans from Town and Country Homes date-stamped April 30, 2004 ~ , except as specifically modified by these conditions. b. #~ie c. Sidewalk connections will be added connecting the power line trail to the curb of a~-~-in at least four locations and connecting the power fine trail to the curb of Village Trail East (east of Kennard Street) in at least three locations to be approved by staff. d. , e. Village Trail East (east of Kennard Street) S~ee~~ and Flandrau Street East west G serving the townhomes will be constructed in their entirety with the townhomes, regardless of the status of the multi-family and commercial parcels to the east. f. Parking spaces will be provided at the ends of the driveways as shown on the plans and wherever else they may fit ~"e~ea~e~-b~~~-~~3, and-4;-~,`~~ 4~~ h. Asix-foot-wide sidewalk should be provided+#~-a~-ail--pess+~le on the south side of County Road D for the entire length of the project from Hazelwood Street due to Southlawn Drive and witl ~. j. The grades of the power line trail and all sidewalks will meet ADA guidelines for slope. k. The landsc~e plan is approved as proposed with the exception that the boulevard trees along Kennard Street shall be planted according to the approved Kennard Street Boulevard-Tree Planting Plan. ~ I. m. n. The curve in the middle of Village Trail East (west of Kennard Street) ~ee~-A ' shall be flattened as much as possible to limit headlight lag re on a+me~ ++~te the front of the units. o. All setbacks are approved as shown. p. S+d,,~e,~~^a,.~d-f~g~e##asks~a~ad+r~}s~# ' set~'~.~~~,~~pn~•••••••J ...~~_~S DI If'1 c~ e.hn~~.n nr~ 4h~ cites r'~I~n TX. -RPM' ttyt7trylr ~--crv-ca-s-.sn'vRrr'vrrtrT~"". Visitor-parking spaces for the r°townhomes will be added or modified as follows: 1) . In addition to the parking spaces in front of each garage door the applicant shall provide additional visitor-parking spaces at the minimum quantity of one-half space per townhome unit. This works out to a minimum of ~9 100-visitor parking spaces required. Furthermore, the visitor-parking spaces must be placed such that the front door of no unit is more than 200 feet from a group of at least five spaces. S~c~6-A€~k-e-dr+~FA s. An easement over the power line trail on this parcel will be provided to the city for access and maintenance. Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the preliminary and final plat for Heritage Square Phase II, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the requirements in the assistant city engineer's report dated May 28, 2004. 2. The applicant shall sign a developer's agreement with the city engineer before the issuance of a grading permit. 3. The applicant shall dedicate any easements and provide any written agreements that the city engineer may require as part of this plat. 4. The applicant shall pay the city escrow for any documents, easements and agreements that the city engineer may require that may not be ready by the time of plat signing. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes - Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Lee, Mueller, Pearson, Trippler Commissioner Dierich added a friendly amendment changing item Q., number 1. from 89 parking spaces to a minimum of 100 spaces. The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on June 14, 2004. AGENDA ITEM I-1 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director/City Engineer Erin Laberee, Civil Engineer I SUBJECT: County Road D Realignment East (T.H. 61 to Southlawn), City Project 02-07--Resolution Awarding Construction Contract DATE: June 21, 2004 Introduction Final plans and specifications for the County Road D Realignment East (T.H. 61 to Southlawn) were approved by the city council on April 12, 2004, and authorization was given to advertise for bids. Those bids were received and opened on May 18, 2004. Background The bids were received and publicly read aloud at 10:00 a.m., on Tuesday, May 18, 2004. The following four bids were received: Contractor Total Base Bid 1. Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. $2,280,353.21 2. F.M. Frattalone Excavating $2,295,943.41 3. Forest Lake Contracting, Inc. $2,431,638.90 4. C.S. McCrossan, Inc. $3,222,530.06 All bids have been checked and tabulated. The engineer's estimate for the project was $3,168,318.32. The low bid from Shafer Contracting Co. Inc. of $2,280,353.21 is 28% lower than the engineer's estimate. The bids also included three bid alternatives for: landscaping, Bruce Vento Trail, south of County Road D and Bruce Vento Trail north of County Road D, respectively. All the bid alternate prices were lower than the engineer's estimates for those items. Attached is a letter from the city's engineering consultant, URS, with a recommendation of award. It is recommended that the contract be awarded for the base bid and landscaping (Bid Alternate 1) for $2,364,326.51. The right of way required for the proposed trail has not been secured and therefore it is recommended that the trail bid not be awarded at this time. Award of the trail alternatives will likely be considered at a future date. Discussion Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. has provided contracting services to numerous public agencies within the metropolitan area. They have a reputation for providing quality construction services in a timely manner. Awarding Construction Contract, Project 02-07 Page 2 June 21, 2004 A contract for an earlier phase of this project was awarded to Frattalone in November of this past year. The soil correction (surcharge) work is expected to be complete by later this summer, though Schafer is not expected to begin work in that area until later this fall or early next spring. The wetland mitigation work and pond excavation work that was to be done by Frattalone has also not been completed due to delays in easement acquisition and later by a loss of frost this spring. Due to the poor soils on the Mogren site, the pond and wetland excavation work will be completed this winter with seeding and planting to take place next spring. None of the remaining Frattalone activities are expected to conflict with the Shafer contract. Additionally, this contract is phased for the reconstruction of County Road D at Hazelwood and easterly to Southlawn and is proposed to be completed by October 2004. The work between Hazelwood and TH 61 is being delayed, in agreement with the contractor, Shafer Construction, due to the delay in the soil correction work (not a contractor failure, just consolidation taking longer than anticipated) and a delay in final agreement with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad and Minnesota Commercial Railroad on the abandonment of the railroad. There is nothing currently that would indicate that a delay in the railroad easement would occur that could impact this schedule; however, staff experience dealing with the railroad indicates a slight risk for the city of proceeding with this contractor until the abandonment is completed. Staff does not recommend delaying this work, as all indications are that a final agreement and abandonment can be completed to meet this project schedule. The bids from Shafer Construction are also very good, and the work at Hazelwood and County Road D needs to be started. The risk factor appears low and proceeding is recommended. Recommendation It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution accepting the bids and awarding the contract to Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. for the Base Bid and Bid Alternate No. 1 in the amount of $2,364,326.51. Attachments: Resolution Memo from Karl Keel, PE, V.P. - URS Location map RESOLUTION FOR AWARD OF BIDS BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, that the bid of Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. for the Base Bid and Bid Alternate No.1, in the amount of $2,364,326.51 is the lowest responsible bid for the construction of County Road D Realignment East (T.H. 61 to Southlawn) City Project 02-07, and the mayor and clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with said bidder for and on behalf of the city. The finance director is hereby authorized to make the financial transfers necessary to implement the financing plan for the project. "~ v, .Ii ~ { AGENDA ITEM J-1 AGENDA REPORT TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director/City Engineer Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: County Road D Realignment (East), T.H. 61 to Southlawn Dr., Project 02-07 Resolution for Adoption of Assessment Roll DATE: June 21, 2004 Introduction An assessment hearing was held on Monday, June 14, 2004 for all properties in the project area. At the hearing, two property owners submitted objections to their assessments. The city council, upon staff recommendation, did not adopt the assessment roll due to a delay in the award of bid for the County Road D improvements. That project is now ready for award and the city council should consider adopting the assessment roll with no revisions. Background The proposed assessments for the County Road D Improvements, Project 02-07 were submitted to the city council for adoption at the June 14, 2004 meeting. Property owners were provided with the required 14-day advance notice of the city's intent to levy the assessments, and the residents were required to file a written notice if they objected to the assessment amount. Two property owners provided written objection as follows: 1. PIN 343022430018, Eric J. Palmer, 1645 County Road D East: The property Mr. Palmer owns is part of the Emerald Estates Town Homes. He states that he already has a street and therefore does not believe these improvements will benefit his property. He also requests that the city do an appraisal of his property. Mr. Palmer's assessment was $1031.03 for street and drainage improvements and is consistent with the city's pavement management policy. Mr. Palmer's property and the existing properties on the north side of county Road D are NOT being assessed for new construction; rather, they are being assessed at the lower pavement replacement rate as defined in the city's Pavement Management Policy. A pavement replacement would have been the improvement method proposed if the realignment project was not taking place. Assessments to multi-family and commercial properties are calculated separately for each development using the residential base rate but calculated over the front footage of the development and distributed evenly over the individual parcels. In the case of asingle-family residential property, the same assessment rate has been used since 1999, with small annual increases. The single-family residential rate in this case would have been $2930 for street and a drainage assessment, which is far less than the $1031.03 charged to the Emerald Estates property owners. Assessment Objections for Project 02-07 Page 2 June 21, 2004 The rates in the city's pavement management policy were established such that the assessments would only cover a portion of the cost of the project and therefore the benefit would far exceed the amount of the assessment. It is not the city's policy to do appraisals for standard assessments to standard parcels. This assessment rate has been consistently used throughout the city since 1999 when the city's pavement policy was established. 2. PIN 032922230009, Bruce Mogren (Country View Golf Center, Inc.), 2926 Highway 61 The attorneys for the Mogren family, on behalf of the Country View Golf Course, have requested that the city delay the levy of assessment to this property until such time as the city and the property owner have reached a formal agreement on compensation for the permanent and temporary easements needed to construct the project. On Tuesday, June 15, 2004, city staff reached an agreement with the Mogrens and their attorneys regarding the acquisition of property. In that agreement, they have also agreed to withdraw their assessment objection and to waive their right to appeal the assessments against the property. That easement and assessment agreement will be presented to the city council on July 9, 2004. The assessment objection will be waived by the Mogrens as part of that agreement. Therefore no revision to the assessment will be required on this item. Recommended Adjustments The following actions are recommended for these requests: 1. PIN 343022430018, Eric J. Palmer, 1645 County Road D East: It is recommended that no action be taken on this property. No adjustment of the assessment is recommended, nor is there a basis or justification to do an appraisal of this property. 2. PIN 032922230009, Bruce Mogren, (Country View Golf Center, Inc.), 2926 Highway 61: Take no action. The property owner will be signing an agreement with the city waiving the objection to the assessments. Budget Impact None Recommendation Staff recommends that the city council approve the attached Resolution for the Adoption of the Assessment Roll for the County Road D Realignment Improvements, City Project 02-07. Attachments: Resolution: Adoption of Assessment Roll Location Map RESOLUTION ADOPTION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on Apri126, 2004, calling for a Public Hearing, the assessment roll for the County Road D Realignment (East), T.H. 61 to Southlawn Dr., Project 02-07, was presented in a Public Hearing format, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and WHEREAS, the following property owners have filed an objections to their assessments according to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, summarized as follows: 1. Eric J. Palmer, 1645 County Road D East: PIN 343022430018 2. Country View Golf Center, Inc., 2926 Highway 61: PIN 032922230009 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: A. That the City Engineer and City Clerk are hereby instructed to make the following adjustments to the assessment roll for the County Road D Realignment (East), T.H. 61 to Southlawn Dr., Project 02-07: 1. Eric J. Palmer, 1645 County Road D East; PIN 343022430018; Deny revision to assessment as benefit received. Accept assessment as originally proposed. 2. Country View Golf Center, Inc., 2926 Highway 61; PIN 032922230009; Make no adjustment. Accept assessment as originally proposed. B. Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 15 years, the first installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2005 and shall bear interest at the rate of 5.0 percent per annum for the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2004. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. C. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, but no later than October 1, 2004, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of the payment, to the city clerk, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and they may, at any time after October 1, 2004, pay to the county auditor the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. D. The city engineer and city clerk shall forthwith after October 1, 2004, but no later than November 15, 2004, transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted by the council on this 28~' day of June 2004 ,_ _ .. ;~~,~ 2 .~ ip A ~ _ ~ ~. . ~.. ~ .. ii. ~~ 19I AGENDA ITEM K-1 AGENDA REPORT TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Public Works Director/City Engineer Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: County Road D Realignment (West), Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 02-08: 1. Resolution Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids 2. Resolution Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll DATE: June 21, 2004 Introduction Final plans and specifications for the above referenced project have been completed and are ready to be advertised for bids. Following the approval to advertise for bids, the next step in the improvement process is to prepare the assessment roll. The city council will consider approving the attached resolutions for approving plans and advertising for bids, as well as ordering preparation of the assessment roll. Background The proposed bid opening for this project is scheduled for 10:00 p.m., Friday, July 30, 2004. Award of bids would be considered by the city council at the August 9, 2004, city council meeting. Phase one of this project is the construction of the Venburg/Guldens Frontage Road, which was awarded on April 12, 2004 and is well under construction at this time. 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 as defined in the feasibility study. As defined in the feasibility study, assessments will be levied against benefiting properties, with the largest share going to the Troutland Development property. The calculated assessment roll will be brought back to the city council at the July 12, 2004, council meeting. Recommendation It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolutions for the County Road D Realignment (West), Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 02-08: Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids and Ordering the Preparation of the Assessment Roll. CMC Attachments 1. Resolution Approving Plans and Advertising for Bids 2. Resolution Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll 3. Location Map RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS ADVERTISING FOR BIDS WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the city council on February 9, 2004, plans and specifications for County Road D Realignment (West), Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 02-08, have been prepared by (or under the direction of) the city engineer, who has presented such plans and specifications to the city council for approval, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 1. Such plans and specifications, acopy of which are attached hereto and made a part hereof, are hereby approved and ordered placed on file in the office of the city clerk. 2. The city clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published twice, at least ten days before the date set for bid opening, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be publicly opened and considered by the council at 10:OO.m. on the 30t" day of July, 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 August 9, 2004. RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, the city clerk and city engineer will receive bids for the County Road D Realignment (West), Walter Street to T.H. 61, City Project 02-08. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that the city clerk and city engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land abutting on the streets affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and they shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the city office for inspection. FURTHER, the clerk and city engineer shall, upon completion of such proposed assessment notify the council thereof. ~~ ~ i~ ,. ,. ~~~ ~i _ < .., 2 ~ } .~ F AGENDA ITEM K-2 AGENDA REPORT TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: R. Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works/City Engineer SLJ~JECT: English Street Improvements (Frost to Cope), Project 01-1'4 -Approve Settlement Agreement wifih William Diesslin, 2115 English Street. DATE: June 22, 2004 Introduction An insurance settlement claim has been negotiated with a property owner along English Street. Approval to pay the final claim is requested. Background Mr. William Diesslin has lived at 2115 English Street since the early 1960s. The Diesslin family has had numerous requests to the city over many years to resolve the drainage problems at their property. The English Street improvements in 2001-02 finally provided the resolution of their claims. Mr. Diesslin filed a long list of damages to his property that he believed were a result of the city's failure to properly grade the roadway prior to the new project improvements. The city's insurance carrier, the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT), has reviewed the claims and believes that the city has some exposure. The settlement amount agreed by LMCIT staff, city staff and Mr. Diesslin is $7,486.00. This is covered by insurance; however, the city has a deductible policy whereby the city pays the first aggregate amount. The total amount of claims against the city has not been reached, so this expense, while counting against the aggregate total for the city, is not paid directly by the LMCIT. The City budgets $200,000 to cover this aggregate amount in the Legal Program of the General Fund. This claim should be approved for payment from that fund (101-103-4970). Approval is recommended to settle this long-standing claim. Recommendation It is recommended that the city council' approve the settlement agreement with William Diesslin, 2115 English Street, in the amount of $7,486.OQ, and authorise payment from the Legal Program of the General Fund (101-103-497Q). AGENDA ITEM K-3 AGENDA REPORT TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: R. Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Kennard Street Improvements (Beam to County Road D}, Project 03-04 - Approve Engineering Agreement for Streetlighting Study and Authorize Project Funds. DATE: June 22, 2004 Introduction The Legacy Village project includes improvements to street corridors. Within those corridors, streetlights are required as part of the overall proposal. Engineering proposals have been submitted by two of our engineering pool consultants. Authorization to begin an overall street lighting study for this area and specific street lighting design for the various projects is recommended. Background The Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway projects have already been assessed to the adjacent property owners, mainly the developers of each parcel within Legacy Village. Included within those assessments and project budgets was the installation of streetlights. An overall plan for streetlights in the area is required, and that plan needs to be part of a citywide proposal for incorporating and maintaining streetlights throughout the city. There currently is no policy or procedures for the maintenance of streetlights citywide. It should be noted that this service was previously provided by XCEL Energy. Xcel no longer provides this service for new installations as of January 1, 2004. This will require that the city provide for a future ownership and depreciation funding source for streetlights. This issue will be investigated as part of a master planning process by the consultant. Our engineering consultant pool has the expertise to provide the city guidance through this process. Proposals from the consultants were divided into two phases: preliminary development of concepts in Phase 1 and final design and construction administration in Phase 2. Proposals were submitted as follows: Consultant Phase 1 Kimley-Horn $9,900 SEH, Inc. $15,500 Phase 2 Total $19,800 $29,700 $21,000 $36,500 The Kimley-Horn proposal appears to be very comprehensive and will provide the necessary services for this project. Funding for the process will be through the various projects, but mainly the Kennard Street project which includes the landscaping improvements for the area. Authorization to proceed with this process is recommended. City Council Agenda Background Kennard Street Lighting Program June 28, 2004 Page Two Recommendation It is recommended that the city counci' authorize the City Engineer to enter into a work order agreement with Kimley-Horn Associates in the amount of $29,7QQ for preparation of the streetlighting prQpQSaI for the Legacy Pillage project and the Master Lighting Plan. Attachment: Kimley-Horn Proposal INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER NUMBER 11 (ELEVEN) Describing a specific agreement between Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (the Consultant), and the City of Maplewood (the Client) in accordance with the terms of the Master Agreement for Continuing Professional Services dated December 9, 2002, which is incorporated herein by reference. Identification of Project: Legacy Village Streetlight Improvements City Project XX-XX General Category of Services: Preliminary and Final Design Services Specific Scope of Basic Services: Determine streetlight design standards for the Legacy Village development area of the City and prepare final plans and specifications for the installation of streetlights along Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway as detailed in the attached Scope of Services (Exhibit A). Additional Services if Required: None identified at this time. Deliverables: Design Standards Final Plans and Specifications Method of Compensation: To be billed on an Hourly (Cost Plus) basis as detailed in the attached Estimated Costs summary (Exhibit B). Schedule: See attached Project Schedule (Exhibit C) Special Terms of Compensation: None Other Special Terms of Individual Project Order: None ACCEPTED: CITY OF MAPLEWOOD KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. BY: BY: TITLE: TITLE: DATE: DATE: EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER (IPO) NO. 11 LEGACY VILLAGE STREETLIGHT IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT XX-XX The City of Maplewood is proposing to install streetlights along roadways within the Legacy Village development. City staff has requested that Kimley-Horn and Cain Ouse Associates, Inc. assist them in the development of streetlight design standards and in the preparation of final plans and specifications for the installation of streetlights along Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway. The following is a summary of the specific tasks to be completed as a part of the project. Preliminary Design/Develop Streetlight Design Concepts Kimley-Horn and Cain Ouse will complete the following preliminary design services to develop the streetlight design concepts for the Legacy Village development area. Develop preliminary lighting design concepts for up to five (5) alternative lighting systems. Each shall include drawings of a typical lighting layout for the roundabout and a one block section of typical street indicating anticipated lighting levels and assembly locations. In addition, a typical lighting assembly drawing and a summary of anticipated lighting systems construction and maintenance costs will be provided. Study alternatives for street lighting maintenance within the City and in particular for this project. This will include utility, electrical contractor, lighting maintenance company and municipal provided systems. Alternatives and the associated costs for each will be provided and the results will be used to facilitate selection of lighting systems. Prepare a letter report detailing the results of the tasks described above. The report will provide recommendations for the final design phase of the project. 2. Final Design Phase Based upon the results of the preliminary design/develop streetlight design concepts phase of the project, Kimley-Horn and Cain Ouse will prepare final plans and specifications for the following improvements: • Street lighting along Legacy Parkway from Hazelwood Street to Southlawn Drive and along Kennard Street from Beam Avenue to County Road D. • Accent lighting for landscape, signage and similar applications along Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street and within the roundabout at the Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street intersection. • Electrical service provisions for Legacy Village Park along the south side of Legacy Parkway between Kennard Street and Southlawn Drive. 3. Meetings We anticipate that we will be required to attend a number of meetings to review the preliminary and final design for the project. We have assumed that we will be required to attend up to ten (10) meetings as follows: • 1 Meeting with the Design Review Board • 2 Planning Commission Meetings • 2 City Council Meetings • 5 Coordination Meetings with City Staff and/or other Consultants We will coordinate these meetings and prepare agendas and background information as necessary. We have not included any construction related services as a part of this IPO. We propose to provide a separate IPO for construction phase services once the lighting improvements have been defined in greater detail. City of Maplewood Legacy Village Streetlight Improvements Estimated Fee Summary (Updated 6!4104) Enc~Hours Tech Hours Clerical Hours Fee _Preliminary Design/Develop Concepts Telephone Research of Maintenance Options 4 2 2 $ 750.00 Analysis of Maintenance Options 4 2 2 $ 750.00 Selection of Alternative Lighting Systems 8 4 0 $ 1,300.00 Conceptual Lighting Systems Design 8 16 0 $ 2,200.00 Computer Lighting Systems Analysis 4 16 0 $ 1,700.00 Cost Analysis 8 4 2 $ 1,400.00 Lighting Study Drawings 4 16 2 $ 1,800.00 Sub Total 40 fi0 8 $ 9,900.00 $ - Final Design_ $ - Field Survey 4 0 0 $ 500.00 Set Up Drawings 0 8 0 $ 600.00 Coordination with Park and Irrigation Systems 8 4 0 $ 1,300.00 Basic Electrical Plan Layouf 4 20 0 $ 2,000.00 Computer Lighting Analysis 8 20 0 $ 2,500.00 Volt Drop Calculations 8 8 0 $ 1,600.00 Detail Drawings 16 20 2 $ 3,600.00 Cost Estimate 8 0 0 $ 1,000.00 Specifcations 16 8 2 $ 2,700.00 Document Reproduction 0 4 8 $ 700.00 Contractor Supplifier Interface 12 4 0 $ 1,800.00 Addendum 2 2 2 $ 500.00 Final Project Review and Coordination 8 0 0 $ 1,000.00 Sub Total 94 98 14 $ 19,800.00 Project Total 134 158 22 $ 29,700.00 AGENDA ITEM K-4 AGENDA REPORT TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: R. Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Trunk Highway 61 Improvements (Beam to llnterstate 694}, Project 03-07 -- Resolution Authorizing Preparation of Preliminary Report and Approving Agreement with Kline Volvo for Frontage Road Improvements. DATE: June 22, 2004 Introduction The city has been working on various roadway improvements along Trunk Highway 61 in cooperation with MnDOT and the local businesses. Access points and driveways are a major concern for traffic movement. All efforts to consolidate the driveways are being made to improve safety and traffic efficiency. Kline Volvo and Kline Nissan are proposing a driveway consolidation study that will combine their driveways and provide a frontage road along the eastern section of the roadway. Authorization to enter into an agreement with Kline Volvo and to prepare a preliminary report is recommended. Background The combinations of driveway points along TH 61 between Beam and I-694 is part of the long- term traffic solution for this area. Kline Volvo is interested in providing a frontage road system that serves their property and connects to the Nissan site. Staff will also explore the connection of the frontage road to Lexus that would consolidate three driveways into a single driveway. The frontage road would also provide an area for off-loading new vehicles that is not on the public road system. The frontage road would be a private roadway that would be maintained by the private businesses. The reason for this project being constructed by the city is that access points and median improvements need to be constructed by a public agency according to MnDOT requirements. The city will facilitate the improvements and assess the costs back to the private business. The attached agreement provides the city with a benefit of property that Kline may have an interest in exchange for preparation of the report and consideration of the improvements. The cost exchange will be reviewed within the preliminary report. Engineering expenses are being paid mostly through the Cooperative Agreement funds provided to the city by MnDOT. Recommendation It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution authorizing preparation of a preliminary report for construction of a frontage road at Kline Volvo and Kline Nissan and approving the agreement with Kline Yolvo on right of way exchange. Attachment: Resolution Kline Agreement RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF PRELIMINARY REPORT APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH KLINE VOLVO WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held on May 24, 2004 for the improvement of Trunk Highway 61 (Beam to Interstate 694), City Project 03-07, and WHEREAS, the city council authorized improvements to TH 61, and WHEREAS, Kline Volvo has proposed an agreement for vacating their interests in property along Trunk Highway 61 (Beam to Interstate 694), and WHEREAS, said Kline agreement provides for the City to investigate the construction of a frontage road that will benefit the City and Kline Volvo and other businesses along Trunk Highway 61. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, as follows: 1. That said agreement between Kline Volvo and the City of Maplewood is hereby approved and the City Manager and Mayor are hereby authorized to sign said agreement signifying the City's approval of the agreement. 2. The City Engineer is hereby ordered to prepare a preliminary report advising the City Council of the proposed improvements of frontage roads adjacent to and along the eastern side of Trunk Highway 61 from the new alignment of County Road D and existing County Road D. 3. The finance director is hereby authorized to make the financial transfers necessary to create a project budget in the amount of $20,000 for said purposes. Approved this 28t" day of June 2004. 2 AGREEMENT This Agreement, dated June 2004, is between the City of Maplewood, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter "City") and Richard G. Kline and Jennifer S. Kline, husband and wife ("Mr. and Ms. Kline"). WHEREAS, the City is undertaking a project known as the County Road D (West) Improvements, Project Number 03-07; WHEREAS, Mr. and Ms. Kline own property in the Project Area, legally described as: Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 525, County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota. "Kline Volvo Property" upon which Kline Volvo is located; WHEREAS, the Kline Volvo Property is adjacent to the east side of the current Highway 61 ("New Highway 61"), which is owned and controlled by the State of Minnesota; WHEREAS, adjacent to the west side of Highway 61, across current Highway 61 is the property previously acquired by the State of Minnesota by easement for highway purposes ("Old Highway 61"); WHEREAS, Old Highway 61 is no longer being used by the State of Minnesota for highway purposes due to the construction of New Highway 61; WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota executed a quit claim deed to the City quit claiming its easement interest in Old Highway 61; WHEREAS, the City is acquiring property from the adjoining property owner on the west side of Old Highway 61, Trout Land, LLC ("Trout Land") for the construction of new County Road D; WHEREAS, the City is assembling the Old Highway 61 property with Trout Land's property in exchange for right-of-way for new County Road D; WHEREAS, as an adjoining property owners to the Old Highway 61 property, Mr. and Ms. Kline may have an interest in the Old Highway 61 property; and NOW THEREFORE, Mr. and Ms. Kline have agreed to execute a quit claim deed to the City quit claiming any interest that they might have had in the Old Highway 61 property in accordance with the following agreement: Mr. and Ms. Kline represent and warrant to the City that: A. They have all requisite power and authority to execute this Agreement and the documents previously listed hereof. B. They will act reasonably and exercise due diligence in the performance of the acts permitted or required under this Agreement. C. They will cooperate with all requests by the City related to this Agreement. 3 2. Mr. and Ms. Kline shall perform the following: A. Execute the attached quit claim deed to the City for the Old Highway 61 property. This deed shall be executed by Mr. and Ms. Kline and delivered to the City no later than June 24, 2004. B. Execute temporary construction easements to the City for the construction of the frontage road between Kline Nissan and Kline Volvo. C. Close one of the two access points to Highway 61 on the Kline Volvo property if the Minnesota Department of Transportation ("MN DOT") grants access to Highway 61 for the frontage road. D. Work with the Ramsey Washington County Metro Watershed District ("RWCMWD") and MN DOT in acquiring property and/or permits necessary to construct the frontage road between the Kline Nissan and Kline Volvo properties. 3. The City shall perform the following: A. If the necessary property is acquired by Mr. and Ms. Kline, construct a frontage road between the Kline Nissan and Kline Volvo properties. This frontage road shall be private unless MN DOT requires it to maintain public status. The City shall be responsible for the engineering and survey expenses incurred to design the frontage road. The cost of construction of the frontage road shall be the responsibility of Mr. and Ms. Kline through assessments levied by the City on the Kline Nissan and Kline Volvo properties. Mr. and Ms. Kline have been advised of their right to notice and a public hearing and right to appeal concerning the assessments proposed against the Kline Nissan and Kline Volvo properties with the amount to be $ The assessments are to be paid over a fifteen (15) year period at an estimated interest rate of 5%. Mr. and Ms. Kline expressly agree to waive the notice of hearing, hearing and their right to appeal said assessments pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.061, et al. Minnesota case law supports waiver of assessment procedures such as the right of notice and public hearing. In Re Nemzek, 58 N.W.2d 746 (Minn. 1953). B. Support Kline's request to MN DOT to obtain access to Highway 61 for the frontage road. C. Convey fee title to any wetland property owned by it that is deemed necessary by the RWCMWD in Mr. and Ms. Kline's purchase of property for the frontage road to RWCMWD. 4. Severability. If any term of this Agreement is found to be void or invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining terms of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect. 5. Arbitration. It is agreed by the parties that any differences, dispute or claim which arises under and pursuant to this Agreement or as to the performance thereof by the parties hereto shall be submitted for arbitration to a board of arbitrators consisting of three (3) persons, one selected by the party interested in one side of the dispute, one by the party interested in the other side of the dispute, and a third person mutually selected and agreed upon by the first two arbitrators. Any party shall notify the other party in writing, served by U.S. Mail, certified or registered, postage prepaid, of a dispute, stating the nature of the claim or dispute and the name and address of selected arbitrator. The other party shall serve notice of its selected arbitrator and opposition or other interest in the claim or dispute. The two arbitrators shall select a third disinterested arbitrator within fifteen (15) days after the response notice stated above. 4 Arbitration shall be commenced within forty-five (45) days of the original notice pursuant to the previous paragraphs hereof, and all proceedings shall be governed by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 572. The decision of any two arbitrators shall be binding and conclusive with respect to all claims and disputes submitted in such arbitration proceedings. If a party does not respond to an arbitration notice, then the party first serving the arbitration notice under the previous paragraph shall be entitled by Motion to petition a court of competent jurisdiction for its order selecting and appointing an arbitrator for said defaulting party. Any such determination by the Court shall be final, binding and conclusive as to all parties in interest. Expenses for the arbitration shall be divided equally among the parties. 6. The City's obligation under this Agreement shall be conditioned, for the sole benefit of the City, upon the following: A. Contingent upon review and approval of final terms by the City's Planning Commission and City Council. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement. By: Its: By: Its: CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Mayor Date City Manager Date Richard G. Kline Date Jennifer S. Kline Date 5 AGENDA ITEM K-5 AGENDA REPORT TO: Richard Fursman, City Manager FROM: Charles Ahl, Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: White Bear Avenue Improvements (Radatz to Buerkle), City Project 02-21: Authorize Funding for Engineering Expenditures DATE: June 22, 2004 Introduction Ramsey County and Maplewood have jointly secured federal funding for the necessary improvement of White Bear Avenue between Radatz and Buerkle Road. Continued development of the plan for these improvements has been included within the Capital Improvements Plan. Funding for the engineering evaluations of these improvements is needed prior to the construction in 2007-2010. Background The Metropolitan Council conducts a solicitation for projects to consider for funding with federal tax dollars funded by the Surface Transportation Program (STP), the Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality Program (CMAQ) and the Transportation Enhancements Program (TEP) of Title I of the reauthorized Transportation Equity Act for the 21St Century (TEA-21). Ramsey County and Maplewood were selected as the top project in the reliever category of STP funding. Combined with Ramsey County funding, over $9.0 million has been secured. Ramsey County is also considering an additional $13.0 million in funding for the White Bear Avenue/I-694 interchange. Preliminary discussions with MnDOT indicate a possible funding authorization toward the interchange of $7.0 million in 2009 or 2010. All total, this is $29.0 million in improvements that are being contemplated for this corridor in the next 5-7 years. The Maplewood share of this major initiative is expected to be less than $1.0 million. The city involvement in the transportation studies, however, involves significant transportation engineering fees. These costs are eligible for reimbursement from the city's Municipal State Aid Account. Various joint agreements and studies are being pursued and will be presented to the city council in the next 4-6 months. In the interim, funding for the continued engineering expenses is needed. Staff estimates that an additional $150,000 authorization from MSAS funds is needed for the remainder of 2004 to continue developing the final funding and construction program. Recommendation It is recommended that the city council approve a motion authorizing a budget increase of $150,000 as part of the joint project with Ramsey County for the White Bear Avenue Improvements between Radatz and Buerkle Road, Project 02-21.