The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2010 03-22 City Council PacketAGENDA MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00P.M. Monday,March22, 2010 City Hall, Council Chambers MeetingNo. 07-10 A.CALL TO ORDER B.PLEDGE OFALLEGIANCE 1.Acknowledgementof Maplewood Residents Servingthe Country. C.ROLLCALL Mayor’sAddresson Protocol: Welcometothe meetingof theMaplewood CityCouncil. Itisour desire tokeep all discussions civil aswe work throughdifficultissuestonight. If youare here foraPublic Hearing ortoaddressthe City Council, please familiarizeyourselfwith the Policies and Procedures andRules of Civility, which are locatednear the entrance. Beforeaddressing the council, sign in withtheCity Clerk. At thepodium pleasestateyour name and addressclearly forthe record. All comments/questions shallbe posedto theMayorand Council. The Mayorwill thendirectstaff, as appropriate, to answer questions or respond to comments.” D.APPROVAL OFAGENDA E.APPROVAL OFMINUTES 1.ApprovalofMarch1, 2010SpecialCityCouncil MeetingMinutes 2.Approval of March 1, 2010 CouncilManager Workshop Minutes 3.ApprovalofMarch8, 2010SpecialCityCouncil MeetingMinutes 4.Approval of March 8, 2010 CouncilManager Workshop Minutes 5.Approval ofMarch8, 2010CityCouncil MeetingMinutes F.APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS 1.StillwaterRoad/TH5Improvements, Project09-04, Appreciation ForPublic Involvement andSupport CONSENT AGENDA – G.Items onthe ConsentAgendaare considered routine and non- controversial andareapprovedbyonemotion ofthecouncil. Ifacouncilmember requests additional information or wants to make a commentregarding an item, the vote should be held untilthequestions orcommentsaremadethenthesinglevoteshouldbetaken. Ifa councilmemberobjects to an item it should be removed and acted upon as a separate item. 1.Approval of Claims 2.Approvalof2009Transfers BetweenFunds 3.Approval ofResolution Accepting Donations totheFireDepartment InMemoryof TheodoraLenzmeierFrom theFollowing Individuals: a.Pamela Cantley b.JulieMorton c. Mary Jo Rafferty 4.Resolution AcceptingDonation toVolunteers in PoliceService Program 5.AuthorizePurchaseof Bituminous Materialsfor 2010 6.AuthorizeRamseyCounty to Perform2010 StreetStriping 7.Approval ofPayment –TartanIceArenaOperation andMaintenance 8.Conditional UsePermit Review – XcelSubstation, 1480County RoadD 9.PlannedUnit Development Review – WoodlynnPond Townhomes 10.Resolutions ofAppreciation forHarland Hess (PlanningCommission), Joseph Walton PlanningCommission), Joshua Richter (Housingand Redevelopment Authority) and Frederica Musgrave (Environmentaland Natural Resources Commission) 11.Approval to EnterInto Contract With Imaging Path for Printer Services 12.Request ApprovaltoPurchase 2010Squad Cars 13.Approval ofChangetotheRules AndProcedures For CityCouncil AndCouncil Meetings – TimeChange of Council Manager Workshop H.PUBLIC HEARINGS 1.ConsiderAdoptionofAmendments totheRural Conservation Dwelling District (R1R) Ordinance – First Reading 2.Consider Adoption ofAmendments totheConditional UsePermit/Planned Unit Development Ordinance – First Reading I.UNFINISHED BUSINESS J.NEW BUSINESS 1. ApprovalofOn-SaleIntoxicating LiquorLicenseNewManager - JeffreyNaumann, Chipotle MexicanGrill 2.Consideration of Penaltiesfor Tobacco and Alcohol Compliance Failures 3.Comprehensive LandUsePlan Amendment for aCountryside VW/Saab Parcel, from LDR (Low DensityResidential) to C (Commercial) (4VotesNeeded) 4.Gervais Woods Preliminary Plat, Final Plat andLot Area Variances 5.GladstoneArea Improvements – CityProject04-21– Consider Authorizing Design ServicesforReplacement of PhalenCreekBridgeon Frost Avenue 6.HillsandDalesArea Street Improvements, Project09-15 a.Resolution ApprovingPlansandSpecificationsandAuthorizing Advertising for Bids b.Resolution Ordering Preparation ofAssessmentRoll 7.WhiteBearAvenue/County RoadD Improvements, Project 08-13 a.Resolution ApprovingPlansandSpecificationsandAuthorizing Advertising for Bids b.Resolution Ordering Preparation ofAssessmentRoll K.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS L.AWARD OF BIDS 1.StillwaterRoad/TH5 Improvements, Project 09-04, Resolution Receiving Bidsand Awarding Construction Contract M.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 1.CityAttorneyReport 2.Approval of Resolution Adopting the 2010City Council Goals 3.Update on 2010Taste ofMaplewood – Change ofLocation (NoReport) N.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS O.ADJOURNMENT Signlanguageinterpretersforhearingimpairedpersonsareavailableforpublichearingsuponrequest. The request forthismustbemadeatleast96hoursinadvance. Please calltheCityClerk’sOffice at651.249.2001to makearrangements. Assisted ListeningDevicesarealsoavailable. PleasecheckwiththeCityClerkforavailability. RULESOFCIVILITY FOROURCOMMUNITY FollowingaresomerulesofcivilitytheCityofMaplewoodexpectsofeveryoneappearingatCouncilMeetings electedofficials, staffandcitizens. Itishopedthatbyfollowing thesesimple rules, everyone’sopinionscanbeheard andunderstoodinareasonablemanner. WeappreciatethefactthatwhenappearingatCouncilmeetings, itis understood thateveryonewillfollowtheseprinciples: Showrespectforeachother, activelylistentooneanother, keep emotionsincheckanduserespectfullanguage. Agenda Item E1 SPECIAL COUNCILMINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION 5:00p.m., Monday,March1, 2010 Council Chambers, CityHall A.CALL TO ORDER Ameeting oftheCity Council was heldin theCityHallCouncil Chambers andwascalled toorder at5:00p.m.byMayor Rossbach. B. PLEDGE OFALLEGIANCE C.ROLLCALL WillRossbach, Mayor Present KathleenJuenemann, Councilmember Present JamesLlanas, Councilmember Presentat 5:07p.m. JohnNephew, Councilmember Present JulieWasiluk, Councilmember Present D. APPROVAL OFAGENDA CouncilmemberNephewmoved toapprovethe agendaassubmitted. Seconded byCouncilmember Wasiluk. Ayes – All Themotion passed. E. UNFINISHEDBUSINESS 1.Wipers Recycling v. Cityof Maplewood a.Declaration ofIntent toClose Meetingfor Attorney Update i.City Attorney, AlanKantrud addressedthecouncil andgaveastatement regarding closing themeeting forthe purpose ofdiscussing litigation. ii.Attorney, Robin Wolpert, GreenEspel, representing thecitygaveareport to the citycouncil. Councilmember Nephewmoved toclose themeetingas permitted byStateStatute 13D.05 subd. 5. Seconded byCouncilmember Juenemann. Ayes - All Mayor Rossbach opened upthe meetingat 6:44p.m. F. ADJOURNMENT MayorRossbachadjourned themeeting at6:45p.m. March8, 2010 1 SpecialCityCouncilMeetingMinutes ClosedSession Agenda Item E2 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL MANAGER WORKSHOP 6:15 A.CALLTOORDER 6:50 B. ROLLCALL C.APPROVAL OF AGENDA D.UNFINISHED BUSINESS E.NEW BUSINESS 1.Discussion OfConsidering Purchase OfProperty Within FishCreek Area (CoPar Property) AndConsiderOptions For Recovery Of Costs F. ADJOURNMENT Agenda Item E3 SPECIAL COUNCILMINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL A.CALL TO ORDER B. PLEDGE OFALLEGIANCE C.ROLLCALL D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA E. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1.Wipers Recycling v. Cityof Maplewood F.NEW BUSINESS G. ADJOURNMENT Agenda Item E4 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL MANAGER WORKSHOP A.CALLTOORDER B. ROLLCALL C.APPROVAL OF AGENDA D.UNFINISHED BUSINESS E.NEW BUSINESS 1.Introduction toDelegation Agreement with Minnesota Department of Health F. ADJOURNMENT Agenda Item E5 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL A.CALLTOORDER B.PLEDGE OFALLEGIANCE C. ROLLCALL D. APPROVALOFAGENDA E. APPROVAL OFMINUTES 1.Approval ofFebruary 22, 2010, City Council Workshop Minutes 2.Approval of February 22, 2010, CityCouncilMinutes 71 F. APPOINTMENTS ANDPRESENTATIONS(F1. andF2. wereheardbeforeagenda itemE. ApprovalofMinutes) 1.Approval of Resolution of Support for aPurple Heartfor RussellAnderson RESOLUTION 10-03-350 Supporting the Efforts toAward aPurple Heart toWorld War IIVeteran RussellAnderson WHEREAS WHEREAS WHEREAS NOW, THEREFORE, BE ITRESOLVED 2.Daffodil Presentation by the American Cancer Society G. CONSENTAGENDA 1.Approval ofClaims GRAND TOTAL 2.Approval of Temporary Gambling Permit forKnights of ColumbusCouncil 4145 3.Consider Approval of 2010Gas and Diesel FuelContracts 4.Rice/36 Interchange Improvements, City Project 09-07 Resolution ApprovingPlans and Authorizing Advertising forBids RESOLUTION 10-03-351 APPROVING PLANS ADVERTISING FORBIDS 5.LiftStationNo. 8Upgrades, Authorization toProceed, CityProject10-01 6.Approval of Resolution Accepting Donationsto the FireDepartment In Memory of Theodora Lenzmeier 7.Approvalto Change Term Expiration Date of Je Moua - HRA 8.Approval ofConditionalUse Permit/Planned UnitDevelopment Review – CarMax/Mogren Retail Addition, Highway61 andBeamAvenue 9.Acceptance of Historical PreservationCommission 2009Annual Report 10.Acceptance ofHistoricalPreservation Commission2010 Goals 11.Approval ofGoodrich Backstop Replacement 12.Approval ofResolution Supporting theTrout Brook Trail Master Plan RESOLUTION 10-03-352 APPROVING TROUTBROOK TRAILMASTERPLAN 13.Approval ofCommunity DesignReviewBoard 2009Annual Report 14.Approval of Resolutionofappreciationfor FishCreekNatural AreaGreenway commissioners RESOLUTION 10-03-353 CITY OFMAPLEWOODMINNESOTA RESOLUTION OFAPPRECIATION FORFISH CREEK NATURAL AREAGREENWAYAD-HOC COMMISSIONERS WHEREAS Cliff Aichinger Ron Cockriel John Moriarty Carolyn Peterson Ginny Yingling WHEREAS WHEREAS WHEREAS WHEREAS WHEREAS NOW, THEREFORE, ITISHEREBY RESOLVED 15.Approval of ResolutionAccepting Donation to Maplewood Nature Center 16.Approval of DelegationAgreement with MinnesotaDepartment of Health 17.Approval of Holiday Differential Payfor TemporarySeasonalCommunity Center Employees This item wasremoved byCity Manager, James Antonen during approvalof theagenda. 18.Approval toIncreaseAnnual Fireworks Permitfor Businesses Selling OnlyFireworks 19.Approval to Increase the Fee forAnnual Tobacco License 20.Approval of Commission Rules andamendments toCommission Handbook 21.Approval of Yearly Replacement Purchase ofTurnout Gear 22.Approval of Reimbursement of Fundsto the Assistance to Firefighters Grant H. PUBLICHEARING I.UNFINISHEDBUSINESS J.NEWBUSINESS 1.Approval of On-SaleIntoxicatingLiquorLicense – Samantha L. Thao, Owner/Manager DowntownLav52 Km Nay 2.Approval of ResolutionProviding for theCompetitive NegotiatedSale of $11,790,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2010A and $4,125,000 General Obligation RefundingBonds, Series 2010B RESOLUTION 10-03-354 PROVIDING FOR THE COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATED SALE OF 11,790,000TAXABLE GENERALOBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2010A BUILDAMERICA BONDS – DIRECT PAY) A. B. 3.Approve Rezoning fromM1 (LightManufacturing) to R1 (SingleDwelling Residential) for 2255 Duluth Street REZONINGRESOLUTION 10-03-355 WHEREAS WHEREAS WHEREAS WHEREAS WHEREAS NOW, THEREFORE, BEITRESOLVED 4.Approve Rezoning from R1(Single Dwelling Residentialand BC (Business Commercial) to MU (Mixed Use) forLand Northwest of Arcade Streetand Larpenteur Avenue REZONINGRESOLUTION 10-03-356 WHEREAS WHEREAS WHEREAS WHEREAS WHEREAS NOW, THEREFORE, BEITRESOLVED 5.Consider aResolution Supporting a Fiber Infrastructure Grant RESOLUTION 10-03-357 SUPPORTING BROADBAND TECHNOLOGY OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM (BTOP) GRANT APPLICATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ACOMPREHENSIVE COMMUNITY NETWORK TOBENEFIT PUBLICINSTITUTIONSIN THE NORTH EAST TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA. 6.Consider approvalof 2010Cost of LivingAdjustment (COLA) forCityManager defer 7.Consider approval of 2011Federal Appropriation Requests 8.Approval of Resolution Relocating Precinct 10 (Ramsey County Care Center) to Maplewood CityHall RESOLUTION 10-03-358 DECLARING PRECINCT 10 LOCATION K.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS L.AWARD OFBIDS M.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 1.Maplewood’s Extreme Green MakeoverCampaign 2.Update onFish CreekConservation Development Concept N.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS 1.Planning Commission Update O.ADJOURNMENT AGENDA REPORT TO: JamesAntonen, CityManager FROM: Michael Thompson, CityEngineer/ DeputyPublicWorksDirector SUBJECT: StillwaterRoad / TH5Improvements, Project09-04, AppreciationforPublic Involvement andSupport DATE: March16, 2010 INTRODUCTION Thecouncil will consider recognizingthe efforts of Stillwater Road citizens andothers who helped make this projectpossible. BACKGROUND Aseries of neighborhoodmeetings have beenheld over the pastyears with residentsand legislators, and thepastactingMn/DOTCommissioner. JohnO’Phelan, aStillwaterRoad resident andcommunity organizer, has led the grassroots effort to get improvementscompleted onthis section of State Highwayfrom Lakewood Drive to Century Avenue. Mark Anderson was also a great citizen advocate andcontinues to be involved withthe project development. His daughtercreated a PowerPoint presentationforneighborhood meetingsand council presentations. John O’Phelanwill be attending the council meeting and MarkAndersonwillattend ifhis schedule allows. Senator Chuck Wiger and Representative NoraSlawik were also a vital part of the process by facilitatingmeetings with Mn/DOT and advocating for the improvements. City staff also received support from four nearbyschools, which provided letters of support for the sidewalkimprovements. Thenearby schools are: Achieve Language Academy, Beaver Lake, GethsemaneLutheran, and Transfiguration Catholic. AlsoMr. Ahl aggressively worked to secure Local ARRAstimulus funding in an amount of $800,000, andwas successful in the highly competitiveprocess. Mn/DOT is a keypartner in both financing the project and throughfacilitating meetings early oninthe process. During the 2010 constructionseason theStillwater Road drainage/flooding issueswill be fixed along withadding a sidewalk to safely assistpedestrians through the corridor. Also a layer of bituminous asphalt willbeplacedontheroadway, which willmakeforamuchsmoother driveoncetheproject is completed. Overall many partners came together to make this projecthappen. The final step in the processis awarding of a constructioncontract whichwill be considered in theAward of Bids portion of thecouncil meeting. RECOMMENDATION Itis recommended thatthecity councilrecognizethe effortsof thecitizens and projectpartners involved withthe Stillwater Road/ TH5Improvements, City Project 09-04. THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFTBLANK G-1AGENDANO. AGENDA REPORT TO:CityCouncil Finance DirectorFROM: RE:APPROVAL OF CLAIMS March 22, 2010DATE: Attached isa listingofpaid billsfor informational purposes. TheCityManager hasreviewed the bills andauthorized payment inaccordance with CityCouncilapproved policies. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: 86,991.48Checks # 80735 thru # 80777 dated 03/02/10 thru 03/09/10 200,621.66Disbursements via debitsto checking account dated 2/26/10thru 3/05/10 375,847.62Checks # 80778thru # 80836 dated 03/09/10 thru 3/16/10 333,622.52Disbursements via debitsto checking account dated 3/05/10thru 3/12/10 997,083.28Total Accounts Payable PAYROLL 497,381.39PayrollChecks and Direct Deposits dated 03/05/2010 2,229.75Payroll Deduction check # 1008739 thru # 1008740 dated 03/05/2010 499,611.14Total Payroll 1,496,694.42GRAND TOTAL Attached isadetailed listingoftheseclaims. Pleasecallmeat651-249-2902ifyouhaveanyquestionsonthe attachedlisting. Thiswillallowmetocheckthesupportingdocumentation onfileifnecessary. kf attachments Check Register Cityof Maplewood CheckDateVendorDescriptionAmount 86,991.4843Checksinthisreport. CITY OFMAPLEWOOD Disbursements via DebitstoChecking account TransmittedSettlement DateDatePayeeDescriptionAmount TOTAL200,621.66 Check Register City ofMaplewood CheckDateVendorDescriptionAmount Checksinthisreport. 59 CITY OFMAPLEWOOD Disbursements viaDebits toChecking account TransmittedSettlement DateDatePayeeDescriptionAmount TOTAL333,622.52 CITYOFMAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSSEARNINGS REPORT FORTHECURRENTPAYPERIOD CHECK #CHECKDATEEMPLOYEENAMEAMOUNT 03/05/10JUENEMANN, KATHLEEN416.42 03/05/10LLANAS, JAMES416.42 03/05/10NEPHEW, JOHN416.42 03/05/10PERKINS, MATTHEW110.00 03/05/10ROSSBACH, WILLIAM473.15 03/05/10STRAUTMANIS, MARIS257.50 03/05/10WASILUK, JULIE416.42 03/05/10AHL, R. CHARLES5,217.95 03/05/10ANTONEN, JAMES5,800.00 03/05/10BURLINGAME, SARAH1,825.98 03/05/10CHRISTENSON, SCOTT2,511.77 03/05/10FARR, LARRY2,748.86 03/05/10JAHN, DAVID1,840.37 03/05/10RAMEAUX, THERESE3,030.67 03/05/10FORMANEK, KAREN1,762.18 03/05/10MITTET, ROBERT3,661.03 03/05/10ANDERSON, CAROLE2,189.73 03/05/10DEBILZAN, JUDY1,154.77 03/05/10JACKSON, MARY2,102.99 03/05/10KELSEY, CONNIE2,569.23 03/05/10LAYMAN, COLLEEN2,825.50 03/05/10CAREY, HEIDI2,494.95 03/05/10GUILFOILE, KAREN4,376.43 03/05/10KROLL, LISA1,901.43 03/05/10NEPHEW, MICHELLE1,554.15 03/05/10SCHMIDT, DEBORAH2,467.06 03/05/10SPANGLER, EDNA1,654.09 03/05/10CORTESI, LUANNE893.94 03/05/10JAGOE, CAROL1,886.77 03/05/10KELLY, LISA1,170.63 03/05/10LARSON, MICHELLE1,067.19 03/05/10MECHELKE, SHERRIE1,185.33 03/05/10MOY, PAMELA1,273.52 03/05/10OSTER, ANDREA1,886.79 03/05/10WEAVER, KRISTINE2,181.36 03/05/10ARNOLD, AJLA1,152.00 03/05/10CORCORAN, THERESA1,882.15 03/05/10KVAM, DAVID4,168.15 03/05/10PALANK, MARY1,886.77 03/05/10POWELL, PHILIP2,901.35 03/05/10SVENDSEN, JOANNE2,081.79 03/05/10THOMALLA, DAVID4,936.26 03/05/10YOUNG, TAMELA1,882.15 03/05/10ABEL, CLINT3,029.94 03/05/10ALDRIDGE, MARK2,928.99 03/05/10BAKKE, LONN2,888.66 03/05/10BARTZ, PAUL3,547.25 03/05/10BELDE, STANLEY2,888.66 03/05/10BENJAMIN, MARKESE2,682.95 03/05/10BIERDEMAN, BRIAN3,131.01 03/05/10BOHL, JOHN3,328.36 03/05/10BUSACK, DANIEL3,219.45 03/05/10COFFEY, KEVIN3,045.95 03/05/10CROTTY, KERRY3,507.77 03/05/10DEMULLING, JOSEPH2,546.25 03/05/10DOBLAR, RICHARD3,576.98 03/05/10DUGAS, MICHAEL3,780.18 03/05/10FRITZE, DEREK2,627.47 03/05/10GABRIEL, ANTHONY3,403.56 03/05/10HAWKINSONJR, TIMOTHY2,413.09 03/05/10HER, PHENG2,150.10 03/05/10HIEBERT, STEVEN3,448.26 03/05/10JOHNSON, KEVIN4,276.60 03/05/10KALKA, THOMAS1,633.52 03/05/10KARIS, FLINT3,507.44 03/05/10KONG, TOMMY3,022.22 03/05/10KREKELER, NICHOLAS1,441.24 03/05/10KROLL, BRETT2,830.76 03/05/10LANGNER, TODD2,964.82 03/05/10LARSON, DANIEL394.23 03/05/10MARINO, JASON790.76 03/05/10MARTIN, JERROLD2,988.56 03/05/10MCCARTY, GLEN2,904.55 03/05/10METRY, ALESIA2,943.34 03/05/10NYE, MICHAEL3,304.61 03/05/10OLSON, JULIE2,830.76 03/05/10RHUDE, MATTHEW2,875.33 03/05/10SHORTREED, MICHAEL4,060.51 03/05/10STEINER, JOSEPH3,105.44 03/05/10SYPNIEWSKI, WILLIAM2,773.06 03/05/10SZCZEPANSKI, THOMAS3,176.60 03/05/10TAUZELL, BRIAN2,122.85 03/05/10TRAN, JOSEPH2,930.85 03/05/10WENZEL, JAY2,948.24 03/05/10XIONG, KAO3,043.80 03/05/10BERGERON, JOSEPH4,207.99 03/05/10ERICKSON, VIRGINIA3,213.85 03/05/10FLOR, TIMOTHY3,386.71 03/05/10FRASER, JOHN3,375.35 03/05/10LANGNER, SCOTT2,983.45 03/05/10REZNY, BRADLEY2,302.56 03/05/10THEISEN, PAUL2,930.85 03/05/10THIENES, PAUL3,293.10 03/05/10BAUMAN, ANDREW2,827.76 03/05/10DAWSON, RICHARD3,313.39 03/05/10DOLLERSCHELL, ROBERT293.39 03/05/10EVERSON, PAUL3,384.30 03/05/10FOSSUM, ANDREW2,639.93 03/05/10HALWEG, JODI3,221.77 03/05/10HENDRICKSON, NICHOLAS2,311.99 03/05/10JUNGMANN, BERNARD3,331.60 03/05/10KUBAT, ERIC2,620.31 03/05/10LINDER, TIMOTHY2,558.62 03/05/10NOVAK, JEROME3,313.39 03/05/10OLSON, JAMES2,604.39 03/05/10PETERSON, ROBERT3,137.69 03/05/10PLACE, ANDREA2,678.70 03/05/10SEDLACEK, JEFFREY3,079.10 03/05/10STREFF, MICHAEL2,819.91 03/05/10SVENDSEN, RONALD3,604.13 03/05/10GERVAIS-JR, CLARENCE3,472.00 03/05/10LUKIN, STEVEN4,475.33 03/05/10ZWIEG, SUSAN2,234.15 03/05/10KNUTSON, LOIS1,958.96 03/05/10NIVEN, AMY1,411.62 03/05/10PRIEFER, WILLIAM2,713.17 03/05/10BRINK, TROY2,976.98 03/05/10BUCKLEY, BRENT2,233.56 03/05/10DEBILZAN, THOMAS2,319.31 03/05/10EDGE, DOUGLAS2,346.62 03/05/10JONES, DONALD2,364.31 03/05/10MEISSNER, BRENT1,936.83 03/05/10NAGEL, BRYAN3,326.49 03/05/10OSWALD, ERICK2,640.24 03/05/10RUNNING, ROBERT2,360.63 03/05/10TEVLIN, TODD2,167.35 03/05/10BURLINGAME, NATHAN1,901.35 03/05/10DUCHARME, JOHN2,713.97 03/05/10EATON, MEGAN412.75 03/05/10ENGSTROM, ANDREW2,516.97 03/05/10JACOBSON, SCOTT2,344.57 03/05/10JAROSCH, JONATHAN2,709.35 03/05/10KREGER, JASON2,268.12 03/05/10KUMMER, STEVEN3,063.75 03/05/10LINDBLOM, RANDAL2,713.97 03/05/10LOVE, STEVEN3,140.29 03/05/10THOMPSON, MICHAEL3,945.90 03/05/10ZIEMAN, SCOTT165.00 03/05/10HELCL, JOHN322.40 03/05/10EDSON, DAVID2,368.89 03/05/10HINNENKAMP, GARY2,339.89 03/05/10MARUSKA, MARK3,183.11 03/05/10NAUGHTON, JOHN2,125.35 03/05/10NORDQUIST, RICHARD2,127.66 03/05/10SCHINDELDECKER, JAMES2,129.97 03/05/10BIESANZ, OAKLEY1,499.08 03/05/10DEAVER, CHARLES707.24 03/05/10GERNES, CAROLE72.44 03/05/10HAYMAN, JANET1,520.96 03/05/10HUTCHINSON, ANN2,622.79 03/05/10SOUTTER, CHRISTINE45.75 03/05/10WACHAL, KAREN879.08 03/05/10GAYNOR, VIRGINIA3,058.69 03/05/10FRY, PATRICIA1,953.26 03/05/10HALL, KATHLEEN144.00 03/05/10KONEWKO, DUWAYNE4,590.46 03/05/10SINDT, ANDREA2,034.95 03/05/10THOMPSON, DEBRA821.71 03/05/10EKSTRAND, THOMAS3,800.52 03/05/10MARTIN, MICHAEL2,530.95 03/05/10BRASH, JASON2,154.15 03/05/10CARVER, NICHOLAS3,211.95 03/05/10FISHER, DAVID3,778.99 03/05/10SWAN, DAVID2,686.95 03/05/10WELLENS, MOLLY1,580.99 03/05/10ANZALDI, MICHAEL99.00 03/05/10BERGER, STEPHANIE254.38 03/05/10BJORK, BRANDON203.50 03/05/10FRANK, PETER110.00 03/05/10JANASZAK, MEGHAN819.70 03/05/10KOHLMAN, JENNIFER187.31 03/05/10ROBBINS, AUDRA2,847.74 03/05/10ROBBINS, CAMDEN150.00 03/05/10SCHAAF, JARED112.00 03/05/10SCHALLER, SCOTT236.25 03/05/10SHERRILL, CAITLIN565.13 03/05/10TAYLOR, JAMES2,458.82 03/05/10THOMFORDE, FAITH840.00 03/05/10ADAMS, DAVID1,673.35 03/05/10GERMAIN, DAVID2,143.23 03/05/10HAAG, MARK2,278.03 03/05/10SCHULTZ, SCOTT2,776.06 03/05/10ANZALDI, MANDY1,682.98 03/05/10BRENEMAN, NEIL1,939.70 03/05/10CRAWFORD - JR, RAYMOND841.13 03/05/10EVANS, CHRISTINE1,262.22 03/05/10FABIO-SHANLEY, MICHAEL144.26 03/05/10GLASS, JEAN2,103.67 03/05/10HANSEN, LORI2,912.02 03/05/10HER, CHONG180.00 03/05/10HER, PETER215.60 03/05/10HOFMEISTER, MARY1,050.91 03/05/10HOFMEISTER, TIMOTHY419.88 03/05/10LAMB, JACQUELINE270.00 03/05/10OLSON, ERICA88.00 03/05/10OLSON, SANDRA84.00 03/05/10PELOQUIN, PENNYE591.89 03/05/10PENN, CHRISTINE2,094.61 03/05/10SCHOENECKER, LEIGH507.50 03/05/10SMITH, TERRENCE56.00 03/05/10STARK, SUE249.75 03/05/10VANG, KAY339.25 03/05/10VUE, LORPAO165.00 03/05/10ZIELINSKI, JUDY69.30 03/05/10AICHELE, MEGAN70.75 03/05/10AMUNDSON, DANIKA157.38 03/05/10ANDERSON, MAXWELL130.50 03/05/10BAUDE, SARAH95.00 03/05/10BENJAMIN, AYLA42.08 03/05/10BERDIE, CRAIG40.00 03/05/10BIGGS, ANNETTE109.65 03/05/10BRENEMAN, SEAN50.40 03/05/10BRUSOE, AMY128.70 03/05/10BRUSOE, CRISTINA290.25 03/05/10BUCKLEY, BRITTANY210.25 03/05/10BUTLER, ANGELA34.00 03/05/10CAMPBELL, JESSICA196.00 03/05/10CLARK, PAMELA136.50 03/05/10COLEMAN, DAYSHIA58.13 03/05/10DEMPSEY, BETH183.75 03/05/10DUNN, RYAN989.54 03/05/10ERICKSON-CLARK, CAROL98.00 03/05/10FONTAINE, KIM100.50 03/05/10GRUENHAGEN, LINDA301.80 03/05/10HANSEN, HANNAH83.25 03/05/10HEINRICH, SHEILA385.50 03/05/10HOLMBERG, LADONNA629.50 03/05/10HORWATH, RONALD2,589.01 03/05/10JOYER, JENNA53.55 03/05/10KOGLER, RYAN257.10 03/05/10KOHLER, ROCHELLE34.00 03/05/10KRONHOLM, KATHRYN673.38 03/05/10KURZHAL, ALISON387.38 03/05/10MATESKI, WAYNE100.00 03/05/10MATHEWS, LEAH92.83 03/05/10MCCANN, NATALIE45.00 03/05/10MCCARTHY, ERICA141.25 03/05/10NADEAU, KELLY108.00 03/05/10PEHOSKI, JOEL100.00 03/05/10PROESCH, ANDY757.55 03/05/10RENFORD, NATHAN221.51 03/05/10RENFORD, NICHOLAS25.38 03/05/10RICHTER, DANIEL72.00 03/05/10RICHTER, NANCY1,578.35 03/05/10RONNING, ISAIAH172.73 03/05/10RONNING, ZACCEUS186.15 03/05/10SCHAEFER, NATALIE48.25 03/05/10SCHREIER, ROSEMARIE183.75 03/05/10SCHUNEMAN, GREGORY115.80 03/05/10SJERVEN, BRENDA92.00 03/05/10SKAAR, SAMANTHA114.00 03/05/10SKUNES, KELLY90.00 03/05/10SMITH, ANN187.80 03/05/10SMITLEY, SHARON301.80 03/05/10TREPANIER, TODD210.00 03/05/10TUPY, ELIANA102.00 03/05/10TUPY, HEIDE133.20 03/05/10TUPY, MARCUS322.70 03/05/10WARNER, CAROLYN284.90 03/05/10WEDES, CARYL98.00 03/05/10WEEVER, NAOMI152.25 03/05/10WOLFGRAM, TERESA65.14 03/05/10WOODMAN, ALICE138.00 03/05/10YOUNCE, BLAISE94.25 03/05/10BOSLEY, CAROL356.70 03/05/10GIERNET, ASHLEY36.13 03/05/10LANGER, CHELSEA170.00 03/05/10LANGER, KAYLYN216.75 03/05/10SATTLER, MELINDA75.75 03/05/10SAVAGE, KAREN95.00 03/05/10ZAGER, LINNEA434.63 03/05/10BEHAN, JAMES2,034.92 03/05/10BOWMAN, MATTHEW359.40 03/05/10COLEMAN, PATRICK214.25 03/05/10DOUGLASS, TOM1,339.32 03/05/10JOHNSON, JUSTIN268.63 03/05/10LONETTI, JAMES480.00 03/05/10MALONEY, SHAUNA174.00 03/05/10PRINS, KELLY1,255.62 03/05/10REILLY, MICHAEL1,915.75 03/05/10SCHOENECKER, KYLE119.63 03/05/10SEPPI, LEAH116.00 03/05/10THOMPSON, BENJAMIN235.63 03/05/10VALERIO, TARA311.60 03/05/10WILLIAMS, DAELA145.00 03/05/10FINWALL, SHANN3,138.95 03/05/10AICHELE, CRAIG2,183.27 03/05/10PRIEM, STEVEN2,390.15 03/05/10WOEHRLE, MATTHEW2,646.83 03/05/10BERGO, CHAD2,651.63 03/05/10FOWLDS, MYCHAL3,520.72 03/05/10FRANZEN, NICHOLAS2,309.67 100868503/05/10KANTRUD, HUGH184.62 100868603/05/10TAUBMAN, KEVIN140.00 100868703/05/10LU, JOHNNIE3,313.75 100868803/05/10WELCHLIN, CABOT2,941.55 100868903/05/10ABRAHAMSON, AMANDA48.00 100869003/05/10ABRAHAMSON, TYLER50.00 100869103/05/10BONKO, NICHOLAS125.00 100869203/05/10BROZAK, NICHOLAS165.00 100869303/05/10BUCZKOWSKI, ALAN68.00 100869403/05/10BURBUL, ALEXIS112.50 100869503/05/10CHAMBERLAIN, JAMIE17.00 100869603/05/10CHEZIK, CARLEY25.50 100869703/05/10DEBILZAN, COLE40.00 100869803/05/10DEBILZAN, JAIME20.00 100869903/05/10ELBERT, TA'KENDRA24.00 100870003/05/10FERNANDEZ, JOSEPH176.00 100870103/05/10FRANK, SARAH49.50 100870203/05/10GEBHARD, MADELINE330.00 100870303/05/10GEISER, EMILY34.00 100870403/05/10GREENER, DOUGLAS102.00 100870503/05/10MALLET, AMANDA240.00 100870603/05/10MASON, LAURA34.00 100870703/05/10MUELLNER, CHADD76.50 100870803/05/10NELSON, KIRSTEN52.00 100870903/05/10ORTT, MATTHEW81.00 100871003/05/10SCUNDI, ROCCO8.00 100871103/05/10SERGOT, COLLIN27.00 100871203/05/10SNYDER, JOSHUA112.00 100871303/05/10TARR-JR, GUS75.00 100871403/05/10VERMILYEA, ABBY22.50 100871503/05/10VUKICH, CANDACE145.00 100871603/05/10YORKOVICH, BENJAMIN141.25 100871703/05/10YORKOVICH, JENNA143.75 100871803/05/10BUESING, DYLAN66.15 100871903/05/10CRANDALL, KRISTA62.00 100872003/05/10FLUEGEL, LARISSA168.56 100872103/05/10GIPPLE, TRISHA68.88 100872203/05/10JOHNSON, BARBARA255.00 100872303/05/10LAMSON, KEVIN22.05 100872403/05/10MCCORMACK, MELISSA47.78 100872503/05/10MCLAURIN, CHRISTOPHER342.38 100872603/05/10MCMAHON, MICHAEL81.30 100872703/05/10MORIS, RACHEL80.00 100872803/05/10NORTHOUSE, KATHERINE46.50 100872903/05/10NWANOKWALE, EMMA56.19 100873003/05/10PIEPER, THEODORE45.00 100873103/05/10ROSTRON, ROBERT464.60 100873203/05/10SCHMIDT, JOHN250.25 100873303/05/10VIMR, CAYLA43.50 100873403/05/10DANIEL, BREANNA101.75 100873503/05/10EVERSON, SARAH28.00 100873603/05/10PERCHYSHYN, ALLYSON98.00 100873703/05/10SCHULZE, KEVIN480.00 100873803/05/10STEFFEN, MICHAEL174.00 497,381.39 TransDatePosting DateMerchant NameTrans AmountName TOTAL$47,358.80 Agenda ItemG-2 Memorandum To: JamesW. Antonen, CityManager From: BobMittet, FinanceDirector Date: March17, 2010 Re: Approvalof2009Transfers BetweenFunds BACKGROUND Attached isaspreadsheetsummarizingtransfersforwhichstaffisrequestingCity Council approval. Thesetransferscanbesummarizedasfollows: Thefirst5linesrelatetothepreviouslyauthorizedclosingoftwoprojects (Gervais andLark/Prosperity) andthetransfertothreeotherprojects withsmalldeficits. The balanceisthentransferred totherespectivedebtservice fund. Thenext5linesrelatetoprojectsincludedintheCapitalImprovementPlanand Budget. Staffseekstofund theseprojects. (firetruck, CastleandCarsgrove) Thenext6linesareroutine transfers, requested inpreviousyearsaswell, tofund required debtservicepayments. Thelargest transferismoving funds ($2,560,000) fromtherefunding bondissueto therefundedbondissue. Therefundedissuewaspaidin2009. Thenext7linesaremovingfundsbetweendebtservicefundsrecognizing thefinal paymentofcertainbondissuesandtheneedtoeliminateresidualbalances. Staff then proposes toclosethose fundsthatarenolongerneeded. Thefinal7linesaretransfers, includedinthebudget, fordebtservice. Thetransfers fromtheEnvironmental UtilityandSanitarySewerFundsarespecificallytobond issuesthatborrowedontheirbehalf. RECOMMENDATION Staffrequestsapprovalofthetransfers asdescribedaboveandenumerated onthe attachment. Stafffurtherrequestsapprovaltoclosedebt servicefundsnolonger neededastherelatedbonds havebeenfullypaid. SummaryofRequestedTransfers AsofDecember31,2009 AmountFromToComment 11,400.04GervaisProjectCottagewoodProjectFundprojectdeficit(samebondissue) 18.53GervaisProjectRainbow/MapleridgeDrivewayFundprojectdeficit(samebondissue) 6,194.35GervaisProject2007ADebtServiceFundExcessfundstorelateddebtservicefund 455.56LarkProsperityProjectPondOverlookProjectFundprojectdeficit(samebondissue) 29,495.92LarkProsperityProject2007BDebtServiceFundExcessfundstorelateddebtservicefund 45,000.00GeneralFundFireTruckReplacementFundPerbudgetreestimate 43,000.00EnvironmentalUtilityFundCastleAvenueProjectPerbudget 84,000.00EnvironmentalUtilityFundCarsgroveProjectPerbudget 43,000.00SanitarySewerFundCastleAvenueProjectPerbudget 385,600.00SanitarySewerFundCarsgroveProjectPerbudget 84,580.00TaxIncrDistrict112002CDebtServiceFundPerbudgetfordebtservice 148,000.00TaxIncrDistrict122002CDebtServiceFundPerbudgetlimitedbyavailablefunds($13,090) 51,140.00TaxIncrDistrict132002CDebtServiceFundPerbudgetfordebtservice 32,412.00TaxIncrDistrict141999BDebtServiceFundPerbudgetfordebtservice 33,460.00St.PaulWACFund2002BDebtServiceFundPerbudgetfordebtservice 132,140.00SanitarySewerFund2003BDebtServiceFundPerbudgetfordebtservice 2,560,000.002004ADebtServiceFund2000ADebtServiceFundMoveescrowfundstocorrectfund 515,564.931998ADebtServiceFund2004BDebtServiceFundClose1998ADSFundasbondsarepaid 2,292.672001ADebtServiceFund1998BDebtServiceFundClose2001ADSFundasbondsarepaid 63,382.921999ADebtServiceFund2002BDebtServiceFundClose1999ADSFundasbondsarepaid 10,251.772002ADebtServiceFund2000ADebtServiceFundFunddeficitin2000Aafterbondsarepaid 365,931.402001BDebtServiceFund2002BDebtServiceFundClose2001BDSFundasbondsarepaid 117,356.122001CDebtServiceFund2002BDebtServiceFundClose2001CDSFundasbondsarepaid 37,646.002004FDebtServiceFund2002CDebtServiceFundClose2004FDSFundasbondsarepaid 75,000.00GeneralFund1998BDebtServiceFundPerbudgetreestimate 150,000.00GeneralFund2004BDebtServiceFundPerbudgetreestimate 125,000.00GeneralFund2004EDebtServiceFundPerbudgetreestimate 45,660.00EnvironmentalUtilityFund2007ADebtServiceFundPerbudget 67,000.00EnvironmentalUtilityFund2008ADebtServiceFundPerbudget 4,885.00SanitarySewerFund2009ADebtServiceFundPerbudget 156,900.00SanitarySewerFund2008ADebtServiceFundPerbudgetincreasedforactualneed($29,645) 5,426,767.21 AgendaItemG3 AGENDA REPORT TO: JamesAntonen,CityManager FROM: SteveLukin, FireChief SUBJECT:ResolutionAcceptingDonationstotheFireDepartment DATE: March 22, 2010 INTRODUCTION Thefiredepartment hasreceiveddonationsfromthefollowinginlovingmemoryofTheodora Lenzmeierand citycouncilapprovalisrequiredbeforethesedonationscanbeaccepted: $145.00 fromJulieMorton, $20.00fromPamelaCantleyand $25.00fromMaryJoRafferty. RECOMMENDATION Irecommend thatthecitycouncilapprovetoacceptthedonationsintheamount of $190.00and thatthenecessary budgetadjustmentsbemadesothefundscanbeexpended bythefire department asneeded. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GIFT TO CITY WHEREAS, Maplewood isAUTHORIZED to receive andaccept grants, giftsand devices of real and personal property andmaintain thesame for thebenefit ofthe citizens andpursuant tothe donor’s termsif so-prescribed, and; WHEREAS, Pamela Cantley, JulieMortonand MaryJo Raffertytogrant thecity Maplewood the following: $190.00and; WHEREAS, Pamela Cantley, JulieMortonand Mary Jo Rafferty haveinstructed that the Citywillbe required touse theaforementioned for: use bythefire department todirectlyimprove the community in memoryofTheodora Lenzmeier, and; WHEREAS, thecity of Maplewood hasagreed touse thesubject of thisresolutionforthepurposes and under thetermsprescribed, and; WHEREAS, the City agrees thatitwill accept the giftby afour-fifths majority of itsgoverning body’s membership pursuant to Minnesota Statute §465.03; NOW, THEREFORE, BE ITRESOLVED, pursuant toMinnesotaStatute §465.03, thatthe Maplewood CityCouncil approves, receivesand accepts thegift aforementioned and undersuch termsand conditions as maybe requestedor required. The Maplewood CityCouncil passed thisresolution byfour-fifths or more majority vote ofits membership on ________________________________, 20______. Signed: Signed: Witnessed: Signature) (Signature) (Signature) Mayor ____Chief ofFire City Clerk__________________ Title) (Title) (Title) Date) (Date) (Date) Agenda #G-4 AGENDAREPORT To: CityManagerJamesAntonen From: Chief ofPoliceDavidJ. Thomalla Subject: ResolutionAccepting DonationtoVolunteersinPoliceService (VIPS) Program Date: March9, 2010 Introduction TheVolunteers inPoliceService havereceivedadonationfromtheQwestFoundation, andCityCouncilapprovalisneededbeforethisdonationcanbeaccepted. Background AmemberofthePoliceDepartment'sVolunteers inPoliceServiceprogramisan employee ofQwest, andtheQwestFoundationhasmadea $500donation to VolunteersinPoliceServiceinrecognition ofhervolunteerismtohercommunity aspart oftheirSpiritofService program. Theirdonationisbaseduponthenumber ofhours of participation bytheiremployee. Qwesthasstipulated thatthefundsfromthisdonationbeusedonlyfortheVolunteers inPoliceService programand, toensurefiscalresponsibility, theymaymonitorthe expenditures made withthismoney. Budget Impact Thenecessarybudgetadjustmentswould havetobemadetoexpendthesefundsfor thestatedpurpose. Recommendation Itisrecommended thatCityCouncilapprovalbegiventoacceptthisdonationfromthe Qwest Foundation fortheiremployee’sparticipationintheMaplewood Police Department Volunteers inPoliceService program. ActionRequired SubmittotheCityCouncilforreviewandapproval. DJT:js Attachment RESOLUTION AUTHORIZINGGIFTTOCITY WHEREAS, MaplewoodisAUTHORIZED toreceiveandacceptgrants, giftsand devices ofrealandpersonalpropertyandmaintainthesameforthebenefitofthe citizensandpursuanttothedonor’stermsifso-prescribed, and; WHEREAS, theQwest Foundation wishes togranttheCityofMaplewood thefollowing: 500, and; WHEREAS, theQwestFoundation hasinstructedthattheCitywillberequired touse theaforementioned for: theMaplewood PoliceDepartment Volunteers inPolice Service VIPS) program, and; WHEREAS, theCityofMaplewood hasagreedtousethesubjectofthisresolutionfor thepurposesandunderthetermsprescribed, and; WHEREAS, theCityagreesthatitwillacceptthegiftbyafour-fifthsmajority ofits governingbody’smembershippursuant toMinnesota Statute §465.03; NOW, THEREFORE, BEITRESOLVED, pursuanttoMinnesota Statute §465.03, that theMaplewood CityCouncilapproves, receivesandacceptsthegiftaforementioned andundersuchtermsandconditions asmayberequestedorrequired. TheMaplewoodCityCouncilpassed thisresolution byfour-fifths ormoremajority vote ofitsmembershipon _________________________, 20_____. Signed: Signed: Witnessed: Signature) (Signature) (Signature) Mayor______________ChiefofPolice_________CityClerk____________ Title) (Title) (Title) Date) (Date) (Date) AGENDA REPORT TO: James Antonen, CityManager FROM: Michael Thompson, CityEngineer/DeputyPublicWorksDirector Bryan Nagel, StreetSuperintendent SUBJECT: Authorize Purchase ofBituminousMaterialsfor2010 DATE: March11, 2010 INTRODUCTION Eachyear the largestbudgetary item in thestreet department’s maintenance fundis for bituminous purchases inorder tomaintainroadsthrough patching, paving, andcurbwork. Itis anticipated thatthe bituminous purchases will beroughly $40,000.00 during the 2010season. This amount is budgeted and was approved as part of the 2010 budget process. Alsothe 2010parks maintenance budget wasapproved for an additional $40,000 for purchaseof bituminous materials inorder tooverlaytrail systems inthreeMaplewood Parks: Maplewood Heights, Harvest, and Kohlman Parks. Over2 milesof thetrails willbeimproved. BUDGETIMPACT Thereis no impact on thebudget as theseexpenditures were expected andapproved aspart of the 2010 operating budget in PublicWorks. Allocated in101-502 “Street Maintenance Materials” toprovide forwork listedaboveestimated in the amount of $40,000. Allocated in101-602 “ParksMaintenance Materials” toprovide for thetrail overlaysestimated in theamount of $40,000. RECOMMENDATION Authorizethe StreetSuperintendent to purchasethe bituminous materials needed for streetand parks maintenance projects up to $80,000.00. AGENDA REPORT TO: James Antonen, CityManager FROM: MichaelThompson, CityEngineer/DeputyPublic WorksDirector Bryan Nagel, StreetSuperintendent SUBJECT: Authorize RamseyCountytoPerform2010StreetStriping DATE: March11, 2010 INTRODUCTION Eachyear the Ramsey County Public Works Department provides roadway pavement striping services to thevarious County municipalities. Council approval isneeded. BACKGROUND Pavement striping is importantto vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Ramsey County has sent out the yearlynotification for pavementstriping servicesfor the 2010 season. Eachyear when the City receivesthe notification weevaluatethe existing conditions and any upcoming projects ormaintenance operations. Currently50% ofthestripingthroughout thecityisdoneeachyear. BUDGETIMPACT Thereis no impact on the budget. The fundswere allocated in the approved 2010 Public Works operating budgetunder 101-502 “Fees for service.” RECOMMENDATION Staffrecommends authorizing RamseyCounty to perform City pavementstriping needs, in an amount not to exceed $27,000.00. ItemG7 MEMORANDUM TO James Antonen, CityManager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, Director Citizen Services DATE: March 16, 2010 RE: Approvalof Payment – Tartan IceArena Operation and Maintenance Background In1995 the cities of Maplewood, Oakdale and NorthSt. Paul partneredto have an additional sheetoficewithin School District 622tobelocated attheTartanHighSchool site. Theabove aforementioned entities areequal partners inpaying for annual maintenanceand operating expenditures of thearena. During the first five years, eachpublic entity was responsiblefor $15,000 of operating expendituresand the final 15years of debt service, each publicentity is responsible for operatingexpenditures of $30,000. Thecity has received the2009 invoice from Independent School District622 for the city’s one- thirdportion of theArenas operations and maintenance. Due torevenue shortfall at the Arena from July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2009, the invoice for eachpartnering entity is $40,372.93. Thirty thousanddollarswas budgetedin 2009. Consideration Staffis requesting approval to pay theinvoice of $40,372.93. Theunbudgeted amount of 10,372.93will betransferred from the General Fund Balance. MEMORANDUM Conditional – XcelEnergy SubstationFacilityUsePermitReview INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND DISCUSSION 2009 (Feb. 2009 toFeb 2010) – Atotal of 16,144yards of woodchipswere transferred 2008– A totalof 19,650yards ofwood chips weretransferred RECOMMENDATION 2 Attachment 4XXEGLQIRX 694 SITE 61 919 Location Map 1480 CountyRoad D East XcelSubstation page #2 XXEGLQIRX XXEGLQIRX Attachment 4 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 p.m., Monday,March10, 2008 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 08-08 J.UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1.Conditional UsePermit – Xcel Energy Electrical Substation (1480County Road D). a.Planner, KenRoberts gave thereportandanswered questions ofthecouncil. i.Dale Trippler, Planning Commissionrepresentative gaveareport fromthePlanning Commission. ii. Chris Rogers, Sitingand LandRights Agendarepresenting XcelEnergy, addressed the council. iii.Dennis Phalen, Supervisor ofVegetation Management forXcelEnergy, addressed and answered questions of thecouncil. iv. ElizabethSletten, 2747 ClarenceStreet North, Maplewood.Ms. Sletten spoke regardingher strongdisapproval ofthis projectdueto allegedhealthconcerns. Mayor Longriemoved toapprove the resolution approvingaconditional use permit forXcel Energy tohave and expand the electricalsubstation and relatedelectrical systemoperations and a wood chippingand transfer operation ontheir property at1480 County RoadD.The city basesthis approval onthe findings required bythe ordinance and issubject tothe following conditions: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 08-03-032 WHEREAS, Mr. Chris Rogers, representing Xcel Energy, applied to Maplewood for a conditional use permitfor the expansionof theexisting electricalsubstationand for a woodchippingand transfer operation at 1480 CountyRoadD. WHEREAS, thispermit applies tothe property onthe south side ofold County RoadD and north and westofnew County Road DinMaplewood. The legaldescription is: Registered LandSurvey262, Subject toRoads, Tract A (PIN 03-29-22-21-0002) WHEREAS, the historyofthis conditional usepermit is asfollows: 1.OnFebruary 2, 1972, theMaplewoodCityCouncil approvedaspecialusepermit forNSP (Northern States Power) toconstruct anelectrical substation onthe subjectproperty. 2.OnFebruary 19, 2008, theplanning commission helda public hearing. Thecity staff published a noticein the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gavepersons at the hearing a chanceto speak and present written statements. The commission alsoconsidered reports and recommendations of the city staff. The planning commission recommended that thecitycouncil approve theconditionalusepermit. 3.OnMarch 10, 2008, the city council discussed the proposed conditional use permit. They considered reports andrecommendations from the planning commission andcitystaff. NOW, THEREFORE, BEITRESOLVED that thecity councilapprovetheabove-described conditional use permitrevision, because: March10,2008 1 CityCouncil MeetingMinutes Attachment 4 1.Theuse would belocated, designed, maintained, constructed and operatedto be inconformity with the city'scomprehensiveplan andcode of ordinances. 2.Theuse would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3.Theuse would not depreciate propertyvalues. 4.Theuse would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that wouldbe dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbingor cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, waterrun-off, vibration, generalunsightliness, electrical interference orothernuisances. 5.Theuse would generateonly minimal vehicular trafficon local streets andwould not create traffic congestion orunsafe accesson existing or proposed streets. 6.Theuse would be servedby adequate publicfacilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, waterand sewersystems, schools andparks. 7.The usewould notcreateexcessiveadditional costs forpublic facilities orservices. 8.Theuse would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into thedevelopment design. 9.The use would cause minimaladverse environmentaleffects. Approval issubject to thefollowing conditions: 1.Allconstruction and activities on thesite shall follow the site and projectplans dated January 18, 2008as approved bythe city. Citystaff mayapprove minorchanges tothese plans and thecity council must approvemajor changesto the approved plans.These plansshall include the planting ofatleast 10treesonthe southeastcorner ofthesiteas shownonsubmitted planting plan. Xcel Energy shall replace any of the treesthey plant if they are damaged or die. 2.Anyfence over six feet tallrequires a building permitissued by the city. Thecity building official willrequirethesubmittal of a structural plan for the proposed fence approved by a registered engineer withthe buildingpermit materials. 3.XcelEnergy must start the installation of the new transformer and associated site work within oneyear of council approval or the permit shall becomenull and void. The council may extend this deadlinefor one year. 4.XcelEnergy shall preparean annual report and submit it to the city aboutthe wood chipping and chipremoval activities on their site. This report shallinclude documentation about the dates and amount ofmaterials thecontractor removesfrom the site. 5.The citycouncil shallreview thispermit in oneyear. The Maplewood CityCouncil approved this resolution onMarch 10, 2008. Seconded by CouncilmemberRossbach. Ayes – All Themotion passed. March10,2008 2 CityCouncil MeetingMinutes MEMORANDUM Planned Unit DevelopmentReview – Woodlynn Ponds Townhomes INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND DISCUSSION RECOMMENDATION Attachment 1 BruentrupFarmNeighborhood Preserves WoodlynnPonds Site MaplewoodHeightsPark Location Map Woodlynn Ponds Townhomes MEMORANDUM TO: James Antonen, City Manager FROM: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director Resolutions ofAppreciation for HarlandHess, JosephSUBJECT: Walton, JoshuaRichter andFrederica Musgrave DATE: March 12, 2010 INTRODUCTION Attached areresolutions ofappreciation forthefollowingcommissionersthathave recently resigned. They areHarland Hess (planning commission), Joseph Walton planning commission), Joshua Richter (housing andredevelopment authority) and Frederica Musgrave (environmental and naturalresources commission). Each respectivecommission hasendorsedtheseresolutions ofappreciation andthey request thecitycouncil’s adoption as well. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attachedresolutions of appreciationfor Harland Hess, Joseph Walton, Joshua Richterand Frederica Musgrave. P:Planning Commission\Resolutionsof Appreciation forHess, Walton, Richter, Musgrave310 te Attachment: 1. Resolution of Appreciation for HarlandHess 2. Resolution of AppreciationforJoseph Walton 3. Resolutionof Appreciation forJoshua Richter 4. Resolution ofAppreciation for FredericaMusgrave Attachment 1 JOINTRESOLUTIONOFAPPRECIATION WHEREAS, HarlandHesshasbeenamemberoftheMaplewoodPlanning CommissionsinceFebruary13, 2006andhasservedfaithfullyinthatcapacitytothe present time; and WHEREAS, thePlanningCommissionhasappreciated hisexperience, insights andgoodjudgment; and WHEREAS, hehasfreelygivenofhistimeandenergy, withoutcompensation, forthebettermentoftheCityofMaplewood; and WHEREAS, hehasshown sincere dedicationtohisdutiesandhasconsistently contributedhisleadership, timeandeffortforthebenefitoftheCity. NOW, THEREFORE, ITISHEREBY RESOLVEDforandonbehalfofthe CityofMaplewood, Minnesota, anditscitizensthatHarland Hessisherebyextendedour gratitudeandappreciation forhisdedicatedservice. PassedbytheMaplewood CityCouncilon ___________, 2010 WillRossbach, Mayor PassedbytheMaplewood Planning Commission OnMarch2, 2010 LorraineFischer, Chairperson Attest: KarenGuilfoile, CityClerk Attachment 2 JOINTRESOLUTIONOFAPPRECIATION WHEREAS, JosephWaltonhasbeenamember oftheMaplewood Planning CommissionsinceFebruary12, 2007andhasservedfaithfullyinthatcapacitytothe present time; and WHEREAS, thePlanningCommissionhasappreciated hisexperience, insights andgoodjudgment; and WHEREAS, hehasfreelygivenofhistimeandenergy, withoutcompensation, forthebettermentoftheCityofMaplewood; and WHEREAS, hehasshown sincere dedicationtohisdutiesandhasconsistently contributedhisleadership, timeandeffortforthebenefitoftheCity. NOW, THEREFORE, ITISHEREBY RESOLVEDforandonbehalfofthe CityofMaplewood, Minnesota, anditscitizensthatJosephWaltonisherebyextended ourgratitudeandappreciationforhisdedicatedservice. PassedbytheMaplewood CityCouncilon ___________, 2010 WillRossbach, Mayor PassedbytheMaplewood Planning Commission OnMarch2, 2010 LorraineFischer, Chairperson Attest: KarenGuilfoile, CityClerk Attachment 3 RESOLUTIONOFAPPRECIATION WHEREAS, JoshuaRichter hasbeenamemberoftheMaplewoodHousingand Redevelopment AuthorityfortwoyearssincehisappointmenttotheHRA bythecity councilonFebruary 25, 2008andhasservedfaithfully inthatcapacity; and WHEREAS, theHousingandRedevelopment Authorityhasappreciatedhis experience, insightsandgoodjudgment; and WHEREAS, Mr. Richter hasfreelygivenofhistimeandenergy, without compensation, forthebetterment oftheCityofMaplewood; and WHEREAS, Mr. Richterhasshown dedicationtohisdutiesandhasconsistently contributed hisleadership andeffortforthebenefitoftheCity. NOW, THEREFORE, ITISHEREBY RESOLVEDforandonbehalfofthe CityofMaplewood, Minnesota, anditscitizensthatJoshuaRichterisherebyextended ourgratitudeandappreciationforhisdedicatedservice. PassedbytheMaplewood CityCouncilon ______, 2010 WillRossbach, Mayor PassedbytheMaplewood Housing andRedevelopmentAuthority OnMarch 10, 2010 GaryPearson, Chairperson Attest: KarenGuilfoile, CityClerk Attachment 4 RESOLUTIONOFAPPRECIATION WHEREAS, FredericaMusgrave hasbeenamemberoftheMaplewood Environmental andNaturalResourcesCommissionfortwoyearsandsixmonths, from June27, 2007toDecember 31, 2009; and WHEREAS, theEnvironmental andNatural ResourcesCommission wouldlike toshowappreciationforherexperience andinsights; and WHEREAS, Ms. Musgrave hasfreelygivenofhertimeandenergy, without compensation, toserveonthecommissionforthebetterment oftheCityofMaplewood; and NOW, THEREFORE, ITISHEREBY RESOLVEDforandonbehalfofthe CityofMaplewood, Minnesota, anditscitizensthatFredericaMusgrave ishereby extended ourgratitude andappreciation forherservice. PassedbytheMaplewood Environmental andNaturalResources CommissiononFebruary24, 2010. CarolMasonSherrill, Chairperson PassedbytheMaplewood CityCouncilonMarch22, 2010. WillRossbach, Mayor Attest: KarenGuilfoile, CityClerk Agenda ItemG11 AGENDA REPORT TO: CityManager,JimAntonen FROM: ITDirector, MychalFowlds SUBJECT: Approval toEnterInto Contract withImaging Path for PrinterServices DATE: March 16, 2010 Introduction TheCity has beengivena proposalbyImagingPath tosupplyall tonerandprovideservice forallofthe City’s laser printers. Background Wehave beenpurchasing toner from AGSfor almost 3 years. Included inthe priceoftheirtoneris service,although not parts,onanymachinethatisusing theirtoner. While wehavehadarelatively good experience with AGS we have had some complaints regarding their refurbished toner cartridges. rdImagingPathcontactedtheCityinearly2009. Inthe 3quarter of 2009webegancompilingusage estimateswhichwould allowthem topresentus aquote onamonthly per-print charge. This means that there are nocharges for toner cartridges; we simplypaya certainamount foreach print. Whenwe need toner weplace anorderwith Imaging Pathand they deliverit. That toner isincluded intheper-print charge. While it is fairlycommon with copiers, Imaging Path is theonly company thatwe’ve found that is offering this pricestructure forprinters.Based on theestimates that werecompiledour initialmonthly charge would be $1,019.70and thatwould coverall Citylaser printers.This represents a 25% reduction in cost for theCity’s printservices and supplies. Includedintheper-printchargeare additional valueadded services as well. In our current agreementwith AGSonly some printerparts areincluded, with theproposedagreementwith Imaging Pathall partsand serviceare included. This agreement also includes a quarterlyinspection of each of our printersto provide pro-activesupport so any problemscan be identified andresolved prior to any workstoppages. Imaging Pathalso includes theuse of their print management software. This will allow us to reporton print usage forallofour printers givingusamuchbetterpicture ofoverall use throughout theCity. Budget Impact Themonthlypayment of $1,019.70 wouldbe chargedback toeach department basedon usagemuch like we currently do withthemain copier. Recommendation It is recommendedthat authorizationbe given toenter into a1 year contract to receive printer services fromImaging Path. ActionRequired Submit toCityCouncil for reviewand approval. Attachments: 1.ImagingPath Proposal 2.ImagingPathContract MRF 4VSTSWEP SV EXI 4VITEVIH F] 4VMRX QEREKIQIRX EW MRHMZMHYEP EW SY EVI 1-RRILELE ZI 1TPW 12 34=MQEKMRKTEXL GSQ FSYX 1EREKIH 4VMRX 7IVZMGIW RZIWXQIRX 3TXMSRW Agenda #G-12 AGENDAREPORT To: CityManager James Antonen From: Chief ofPoliceDavidJ. Thomalla Subject: RequestApprovaltoPurchase2010SquadCars Date: March16, 2010 Introduction ThePolice Department isrequestingauthorizationtoorderfour2010FordCrown Victoria Police Interceptor squadcarsandone2010ChevroletImpala. Background Policedepartmentsareabletoplaceordersforsquadcarsinthespring, andwe purchase them inconjunctionwiththeStateofMinnesota andmanyothermunicipal departments. Thevehiclesmustbeordered soonfordeliverylaterthisyear. TheState contractpricefortheCrownVictoria squadcarsis $22,422.32each, andthe Chevrolet Impala is $20,571.30. Thetotalamount ofthepurchases is $110,260.58. Budget Impact Fundingforthepurchaseofthreeofthese vehicles, aspartofthedepartment’sfleet rotation, isincluded inthe2010Police Department OperatingBudget. Twoofthese vehicleswillbefunded outof2009budgetcarryover funds. Recommendation Itisrecommended thatauthorization begiventopurchasefourFordCrownVictoria PoliceInterceptorsquadcarsandoneChevroletImpala. ActionRequired SubmittotheCityCouncilforreview andaction. DJT:js Item G13 MEMORANDUM TO: Chuck Ahl, CityManager FROM: KarenGuilfoile, Director, CitizenServices DATE: July 8, 2008 RE: Approval ofChangeto the Rules and Procedures for City Council andCouncil Meetings – TimeChange of CouncilManager Workshop Introduction Atthe first council meeting of theyear on January11, 2010, thecity council approved changes tothe CityCouncil Rules ofProcedure forCityCouncil andCouncil Meetings. Thechanges included havingCouncil ManagerWorkshops start at 5:00 p.m. With current workhours of someof the council members andthe fact that thetraffic is an issueduring that timeit has been suggested that the CouncilManager Workshop begin at a later time. Staffis recommending thatSection 2: Agenda for CouncilManagerWorkshop bechanged to reflecta start time of 5:15 and that the City CouncilRules of Procedures for City Council and Council Meetings (see below) beupdated toreflect thischange. Section 2: AGENDA FORCOUNCIL MANAGER WORKSHOP A. All matters tobesubmitted forthe CouncilManager Workshop shall befiled no later than 12:00 noon on the Mondayprior tothe Workshop andshall be deliveredtothe CityManager, orin his/her absence, the CityClerk. Workshops areheldat 5:00 5:15p.m. priorto regularly scheduled Council meetings. The Council ManagerWorkshop is designed tolook in-depth intoupcoming issues, interviewing commission and board members, andmeeting anddiscussing issues with other civic leaders. Council Manager Workshop is aregularly scheduled meeting. B. Additional Council Manager Workshops maybe scheduled as needed andwill be posted andnoticed accordingly. Recommendation Directstaff tomake the appropriate changes totheCity Council Rulesof Procedure forCouncil MeetingsandCouncil Administrative Policies that reflect change ofthe Council Manager Workshop tobeginat5:15unlessotherwisenotedandposted. THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFTBLANK MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT:ConsiderAdoptionofAmendments totheRural Conservation DwellingDistrict (R1R) Ordinance —FirstReading DATE: INTRODUCTION DISCUSSION February 23, 2009Amendments Table 1: Conservation Toolsfor Density Incentives GroupA: NaturalCharacteristicsGroup B: DesignCharacteristics Proposed Amendments totheR1-R ZoningDistrict Sec. 44-120 Sec. 44-127, Sec. 44-130, COMMISSIONACTION RECOMMENDATION Attachment 1 PROPOSED ORDINANCEMODIFYING THER-1R (RURAL SINGLE-DWELLING RESIDENCE) ZONING DISTRICT THEMAPLEWOODCITYCOUNCIL ____________ thefollowingchangestotheMaplewoodCode ofOrdinances: Deletionsarecrossedoutandadditions areunderlined.) 7IGXMSR SRMRK MWXVMGXW Thecityisherbydividedintothefollowingzoningdistricts: F, FarmResidence District. R-1, Residence District (Single Dwelling). R-1R, RuralConservation DwellingDistrict R-1S, Small-LowSingle-DwellingDistrict. R-2, Residence District (DoubleDwelling). R-3, Residence District (Multiple Dwelling). R-E, Residence Estate District. NC, Neighborhood CommercialDistrict. CO, CommercialOfficeDistrict. BC, BusinessandCommercialDistrict. LBC, LimitedBusinessCommercialDistrict. BC(M) BusinessCommercialModifiedDistrict. SC, ShoppingCenterDistrict. M-1, LightManufacturing District. M-2, Heavy manufacturingDistrict. 7-32 6 6 696%0 327)6:%8-32 00-2+786-'8 7IG 4YVTSWI ERH RXIRX TheCityofMaplewoodfindsthatthereisadirectlinkbetweenthenaturalsystemsandcharacterthatexists throughout certain areasofthecommunity. Therequirements ofthisRuralConservation DwellingDistrict aremeant topreserve andenhancetheecological/aesthetic characterbyproviding incentivesthat: 1) reinforceandestablish ecological connections throughout thecity; 2) protectandenhancedrainageways andwaterquality; 3) protectand enhanceecologicalcommunities; 4) preserveandimprove vistas; and5) preserveorreinterpret localhistorical landmarks. Toallow forandtoprotectasemi-rural, residentiallifestyle, thecitycreatestheR-1Rzoningdistrictthatisintended toencourage conservationbaseddevelopment. ThiszoningdistrictisfortheareasofMaplewood thatarenot suitableforsuburbanortractdevelopment becauseoftopography, vegetationorotherfactorsthatmakethearea unique. Thecityfindsthemostsuitableuseoftheseareasissingledwellings onlargelots, butisinterestedin protecting thenaturalresourcesandwillencourage developments tofollowtheconservationprinciplesandinitiatives identified insubsequentsectionsofthisordinance. Tofurthersupporttheruralqualityofthearea, thedensity calculations intheR-1Rdistrictshallbecalculatedonanetacrebasiswhichisfurtherdescribed Section44-130 (c) ofthisordinance. Low-densityresidential developmentandconservationdevelopmentwilllessengradingandsoil erosionandwillhelpprotectgroundwater, vegetation, ecologicalcommunitiesandwooded areas. 7IG 9WIW TheCityshallonlyallowthefollowinguses: a)Permitteduses: 1)AnypermitteduseintheR-1District, subjecttoitsregulations. b)Conditional uses. TheCitymaypermitthefollowingbyconditional usepermit: 1)AnyuseallowedbyconditionalusepermitintheR-1 (singledwelling) District. 2)Commercial farming orgardening, includingtheuseorstorageorassociated equipment, whenon aproperty withasingledwelling. 3)Standsforthesaleofagricultural productsgrown orproduced ontheproperty. 4)Metalstoragebuildings, commonlyknown aspolebarnsoragri-buildings, subjecttotheapplicable sizeandheight requirements. c)Prohibiteduses. ThecityprohibitsthefollowingusesintheR-1(R) zoningdistrict: 1)Accessory buildingswithoutanassociated singledwellingonthesameproperty. 2)Reserved. 7IG IMKLX SJ FYMPHMRKW Themaximumheight ofasingle-familydwellingshall bethirty-five (35) feet. 7IG 0SXHMQIRWMSRW PSX EVIE MHXL VIUYMVIQIRXW ERH WMHI EVHW a)Nopersonshallbuildasingledwellingonasitelessthaneightyseventhousandonehundredtwenty 87,120) squarefeet (2acres) inarea; unlesstheconservationdesignprinciplesareappliedasdescribedin Section 44-128. b)Eachlotorparcelshallhaveenoughareaorusablespaceforahouse, driveway, andifneeded, awelland individual sewagetreatmentsystem (ISTS) withaprimaryandsecondarysiteoranacceptabledesignand planforacommunitysepticsystemorregionalsewer. c)Eachdwellingandanyaccessorystructure(s) shall havesideyardsetbacksasdefinedintable44-120.1 andshallbemeasuredfromthepropertylinetothestructure. Thefollowingexceptions tothisstandard shallapply: 1)Thesideyardonthestreetsideofacornerlotshallhaveawidthofatleastthirty (30) feet. 2)When apropertyownerusestwo (2) ormoreadjoininglotsasasingle-buildingsite, thesideyard requirementsshallapplyonlytotheoutsidelotlines. d)Thefollowing table identifiestheminimum lotareaandlotwidthbased ontheconservation tiers: 2 Table44-120.1 ConservationTierDensity Minimum AreaMinimum SideYard FrontYard Range FrontageSetbackSetback TierI (0-2 0.5 –1.5015,00043,560100’30’50’ Principles)U/ASF TierII (3-54 1.61–3.51.510,00015,00080’15’30’ Principles)U/ASF TierIII (6-7 3.6 –4.3U/A7,500SF50’10’20’ Principles) e)Eachinteriorlotshallhaveatleastfifty (50) feetoffrontage onanimproved publicstreet. f)Eachcornerlotorparcel shallhaveatleasteighty (80) feetoffrontage oneachofthepublicstreets. 7IG VSRX EVHW a)Eachdwellingandanyaccessorystructure(s) shallhaveafrontyardsetbackasdefinedintable44-120.1. Exceptthat: 1)Ifeachofthelotsnexttoaninteriorlothasadwelling, theminimum setbackshallbethesetbackof theadjacent dwellingclosesttothestreet. Themaximum setbackshallbethesetbackofthe adjacentdwellingfarthestfrom thestreet. 2)Ifsubsection (a)(1) abovedoesnotapplyandthereisapredominantsetback, adwellingshallbe nofurtherforwardandnomorethanfivefeettotherearofthepredominantsetback. 3)Regardless oftheabove, ifthecitycouncilhasapproved specialsetbacks foradevelopment, thosesetbacksshallapply. Cityapproval ofapreliminary platwithbuilding padsdoesnot constituteapproval ofspecialsetbacks. 4)Regardless oftheabove, homeownersmayaddontotheirhomesusingtheexistingsetback. 5)Inallcases,theaccessorystructuresshallbenocloserthantheprinciple structureunless approved bytheCityCouncil. b)Thedirectorofcommunitydevelopment mayallowadifferentfrontyardsetback iftheproposedsetback wouldnotadversely affectthedrainageofsurroundingproperties andifanyofthefollowingconditions apply: 1)Theproposedsetbackwouldnotaffecttheprivacyofadjacenthomes. 2)Theproposedsetback wouldsavesignificant naturalfeatures, asdefinedinSection9-188. 3)Theproposed setbackisnecessarytomeetcity, stateorfederalregulations, suchaspipeline setbackornoiseregulations. 4)Theproposed setbackisnecessaryforenergysaving, healthorsafetyreasons. 7IG 6IEV EVHW a)Single dwellings shallhavearearyardsetbackofatleasttwenty (20) percentofthelotdepth. b)Accessory buildingsshallhavearearyardsetbackofatleastthirty (30) feet. 7IG 8S[IV ERXIRRE ERH JPEKTSPI WIXFEGOW Antennas andflagpoles forresidential (non-commercial) useintheR-1(R) zoning districtshallmeetthesame setbacksasaccessorybuildingsintheR-1 (singledwelling) district. 3 7IG 1MRMQYQ JSYRHEXMSR EVIEW VSSQ VIUYMVIQIRXW a)Theminimumfoundationareashallbeatleast: 1)Aone-storydwelling, ninehundredfifty (950) squarefeet. 2)Aoneandone-halfstory dwelling, seven hundred twenty (720) squarefeet. 3)Abi-leveldwelling, eighthundredsixteen (816) squarefeet. 4)Atri-leveldwelling, seven hundred sixtyfive (765) squarefeet. 5)Atwostorydwelling, fivehundred twenty-eight (528) squarefeet. b)Roomsizeandnumber shallbeconsistent withthestandardsoftheInternational ResidentialCode. 7IG YMPHMRK MHXL VIUYMVIQIRXW Theminimumbuildingwidthontheprimaryfrontageshallbeatleasttwenty-one (21) feet. Thebuildingwidthshall notincludeentrywaysorotherappurtenancesthatdonotrunthefullydepthofthebuilding. 7IG GGIWWSV]FYMPHMRKW a)Section 44-114 (Accessory buildings) intheR-1District shallapplytotheuseandheightofaccessory buildings andgarages intheR-1Rzoningdistrict. b)ForlotsintheR-1Rzoning district, thefollowing sizestandardsshallapplytoaccessorybuildingsand garages: Table44-127.1AccessorySizes DetachedBuildings (Max Attached Garages (Max Combination ofdetach Area, Square Feet)Area, Square Feet)buildingsandattached Garage (MaxArea) TierI1,400 (garages), 1,100 1,4002,800 other) TierII1,0001,250SFTotal1,0001,2501,4801,850 TierIII850 SFTotal8501,000 7IG IJMRMXMSRW ERH SRWIVZEXMSR 4VMRGMTPIW Theconservationprinciplesinthefollowingtableshallrepresenttheconservationincentivesforthisordinance. The definitionsofeach principlefollowthetable. Allincentives, andsubsequentconservationbonusesasdescribedin Table44-130.1, shallonlybegrantedIFtheyexceed theminimum standardssetforthintheexistingCityordinances thatrelatetoenvironmental protectionasidentified in, butarenotlimited to, OrdinanceChapters12and44. Itshall benotedthattheCityhasseveralordinances thatcontrolanddefinenaturalresources andenvironmental quality, inallcases, themorerestrictive ordinanceshallapply anditisthedeveloper’sresponsibility todiscussany issuesorquestionsregarding theapplicable ordinances withtheCityPlanner. 8LI HIZIPSTIV WLEPP FI E[EVI XLEX XLI GSRWIVZEXMSR TVMRGMTPIW WLEPP FI WYFNIGX XS XLI VIGSQQIRHEXMSRW SJ XLI GMX]WXEJJ ETTPMGEFPI GSQQMWWMSRW TPERRMRK GSQQMWWMSR ERH YPXMQEXI ETTVSZEP F]XLI GMX]GSYRGMP W WXEXIH MR 7IG XLI HIZIPSTIV WLEPP FI VIUYMVIH XS SVO GPSWIP]MXL XLIWI FSHMIW XS HIZIPST E TPER XLEX WYTTSVXW XLI KSEPW ERH SFNIGXMZIW JSV XLI 6 6 MWXVMGX MXLSYX GSYRGMP ETTVSZEP XLI HIZIPSTIV MPP FI IRXMXPIH XS E FEWI IRXMXPIQIRX SJ SRI YRMX TIV X[S EGVIW MXL E EGVI PSX QMRMQYQ 4 Inallcases, thedeveloper shallreceiveaconservation bonusasdescribed inTable44-130.1ONLYifthe development integrates theconservationprincipleasadominantthemethroughouttheproposeddevelopment. This shall berequired ofallproposedconservationprinciples. TheCity’sobjective istomaintain theruralqualityoftheR- 1Rdistrictandencourage conservationprinciplesanddevelopment inthecity’sareaswithnaturalresource quality. Table44-128.1identifiestheconservationprinciples thatmayqualifyfordensity incentives. Thetable iscategorized intotwogroups: GroupA –Natural CharacteristicsandGroupB –DesignCharacteristics. Thedevelopershallbe required topresentadiverse setofconservationprinciplesforasite. Additionally, thedeveloperisencouragedto useamixofconservationprinciplesandmaynotduplicateprinciplesandreceive adensityincentive inexchange. Forexampleifthedeveloper proposestopreserve alargewoodedareaandconsequently preservesanimportant standofoaktrees, thedeveloperwillreceivethedensityincentiveforoneconservationprinciplenottwo. Table44-128.1 ConservationPrinciplesforDensityIncentives VSYT 2EXYVEP LEVEGXIVMWXMGW+VSYT IWMKR LEVEGXIVMWXMGW AdditionalShorelineBuffersClustering AdditionalStormwater ManagementCreate/Develop TrailConnections CreekRestorationManagementCreatePassiveParks Dedicate50% OpenSpaceEnergy Efficiency Enhance/PreserveLargeWoodedAreasorForestHistoric Preservation EnhanceWetlands, CreateManagement PlanLEEDCertifiedBuildings/Development PrairieRestorationLowImpact Development (LID) SlopeBufferPreservationPreserveandEstablishNaturalAreaGreenways TreePreservationVista Shed/CorridorPreservation 6394 2EXYVEP LEVEGXIVMWXMGW Thefollowingconservation principles aredefined forthisordinanceasnaturalcharacteristicsbecause theydirectly applyspecificallytonaturallyoccurring characteristics onasite. Theprinciplesarepresentedinalphabetical order. Beyond thosealreadyidentified intheShorelandOverlayDistrict, thecreationandplanHHMXMSREP7LSVIPMRIYJJIVW forpermanent protectionofprotectivebuffersaroundthoseareas whicharemoresensitivetothenegative impactsof development, especially areasthataredefined asbluffsorsteepslopes, where criticalhabitatmaydwell, near historictreeclusters orheritagetreesetceteraforwhichtheadditional buffersmayvaryorbeaveragednearthe locationofprotectionimportance. Thecityhasexistingstormwater managementpolicies, butthereisopportunityHHMXMSREP7XSVQ[EXIV 1EREKIQIRX tofurtherimprove thestormwatermanagement onasite. Thedevelopershallbegivenaconservationbonusfora stormwater management planandimplementation thatexceeds thecity’sexistingpolicy. Restoration projects thatthecitybelieveswouldassistintherestorationoftheVIIO6IWXSVEXMSR1EREKIQIRX streamornaturalcreekthatcompensateforthelossofpastusesofthewatershedduetocontamination, erosionand otherinfluences orissues. Specifictypesofprojects proposed forimplementation aspartofadevelopment plan wouldbethosethatenhance habitat, waterquality, andflowregimesuchasstormwatermanagement, stream 5 channel stabilization orgreenways byimplementingconservationeasements, oradditionalbuffersinriparian corridors. Openspaceisdefinedaspublicorpubliclyheldlandthatisgenerally naturalinIHMGEXI3TIR7TEGI characterandcontainsrelativelyfewhuman-madestructures. Thedevelopercanachieve aconservationbonusfor dedicationof50% ofasitetoopenspace. Theopenspacededicationmustbedevelopableorhave buildable qualitiesinordertoachieve thisprinciple. Thisconservationprinciplewillbemandatory toachieve thefulldensity allocation. AnactofdeliberatelyavoidingtheremovalofclustersofRLERGI4VIWIVZI0EVKISSHIHVIEWSVSVIWX structurallyhealthymaturetreesandunderstory treeswhicharenativetotheareaandnon-invasive, individual heritagetreeswhicharestructurallyhealthyandgreaterthan20caliperinchesinorder toprotectthepresentor futurevalue fortheiruseinprotectionfromerosion, fortheirlandscape andaestheticvalue, fortheiruseinscreening development orforotherenvironmental orintrinsic benefits. Tomeet thisstandard, thedevelopermustpreparea healthassessmentofthetreesonsite, andmustshowapolygon areaonthesitewithpermanent protectionplan, thattheDeveloper shallimplement, fortheareastobepreservedandamanagement planincludingremovalof invasivespeciesonthesite. AplantoresolvedevelopmentRLERGIIXPERHWVIEXIESQTVILIRWMZIIXPERH1EREKIQIRX4PER14 andprotection conflictswherewetlandsaffectasignificantportionofacommunity. Theplanencompassesthe identification, study, andevaluationofwetlandfunctionsandcommunityvalues, anddevelopment needs and investments withregardtowetlandsprotection, enhancement andregulation. Theapplicantshallberequired to createaplan, thatthedevelopershallimplement, thatexceedsthestandardsoftheadoptedWetlandOrdinance. Afterperformingahistoricalanalysistodeterminepre-settlement conditions, prepare aplanfor4VEMVMI6IWXSVEXMSR prairierestorationwithaspecific management strategy thatthedevelopershallimplement, overthecourseoffive yearsinordertoassurethattheprairieestablishes. Thisplanshallbesubmittedandapprovedbythecity’snatural resourcecoordinator todetermine ifitmeetsthisrequirementandsubsequently qualifies fortheconservationbonus. Adevelopment planthatdeliberately avoidsplacinganylots,inthebufferareaofaslope7PSTIYJJIV4VIWIVZEXMSR exceeding12percent,orasdescribed inthecity’sslopeordinance section44-1238 andbuildingcodesection12- 308. Thedevelopershallestablishabufferwithpermanent protection todemonstrate howthebuffer andslopeis protected andthepurposeoftheprotectionmeasures andhowitexceedsthecurrentslope ordinance requirements. Aconservationbonuswillbegiven forthoseplans thatexceedthestandardsidentifiedinthecurrent steepslopes ordinance. Throughmeansofatreeinventory, identifyingthemostsignificant treesonasiteand8VII4VIWIVZEXMSR permanentlyprotecting them. Thedeveloper shallberequiredtopresent aplanforprotectionofthesetrees, andwill berequiredtodemonstrate howthesetreeswillbeintegrated asakeycomponentofthedevelopment. 6 6394 IWMKR LEVEGXIVMWXMGW Thefollowingconservationprinciplesrelatetothedesign ofaprojectorofasite. Theprinciplesarepresentedin alphabeticalorder. Adesign techniquethatgroupshousing ordevelopment sitesinamannerthatallowsfortheconservationPYWXIVMRK andpreservationofopenspaces suchasfarmland, naturalareas, including habitatareasandopenvistas. Aplanthatillustratesthedevelopment oftrailsthatareindicatedontheParks, VIEXI IZIPST 8VEMP SRRIGXMSRW TrailsandOpenSpacePlanmapaspartofthesubdivisionprocess, whether activeorpassiveinnature, withan emphasis oncreating trailconnectionstoexisting trails. Aconservationbonuswillbegiven forthedevelopment and constructionofthetrailnotforthelanddedicationwhichwillbeconsidered partofthecity’sparkaccessibility charges. Anareasetasidethrough thedevelopment processthatisenvironmentally sensitiveandmayVIEXI4EWWMZI4EVOW ormaynotbedevelopable. These parksmaysupportpassiveusessuchaswalkingtrails, boardwalksandnature observationareas, butsomeareasmaybetooenvironmentallysensitivetoaccommodateanypublicaccess. A conservationbonuswillonlybegiven forpassivededicationareasthatarepermanently protectedandthatare dedicatedtoapublicentity. Using theMinnesotaGreenstarProgram, develop energyefficientandGreenstarratedprojectsRIVK]JJMGMIRG] andbuildings. Aconservationbonuswillbegivenwhenthedeveloperutilizes theprogramtocreatea ‘theme’ ina development andusestheGreenstarandconservationprinciplesinmarketing theproject. Identifyingandprotecting throughpermanent means, anyhistoricallysignificantareasonaMWXSVMG4VIWIVZEXMSR specific site. Ifhistoricalpreservation isproposed asaconservationprinciple, thecity’sHistoricalPreservation Commission shallreviewandproviderecommendations totheCityCouncilregardingthisprinciple. Toreinforcethe historicalquality, asignage planshallbeincludedtoclearlycommunicate thehistoricalsignificanceoftheareaor artifact. Anationalsetofstandardsforbuildings and0))(IVXMJMIH YMPHMRKW IZIPSTQIRX 4VEGXMGIW TIV WXVYGXYVI neighborhoods thatfocusesontheprinciplesofgreenbuilding , smartgrowth, sustainabilityandhealthyliving.The LEEDforNeighborhood DevelopmentRatingSystemprovides independent, third-partyverificationthata development'slocationanddesignmeet acceptedhighlevelsofenvironmentallyresponsible, sustainable development. Aconservationbonuswillbegivenforaminimumof3practicesintheLEEDstandardscertification criteria. Theconservationbonusshallonlybegiven iftheLEEDstandardsareappliedtoallstructuresthroughout a development. DevelopersareencouragedtoseekLEEDcertification. Anecologically friendlyapproachtositedevelopment andstormwatermanagement0S[QTEGX IZIPSTQIRX 0-( thataimstomitigatedevelopment impactstoland, waterandair. Theapproach emphasizestheintegrationofsite design andplanningtechniquesthatconservethenaturalsystemsandhydrologic functionsofasite. Inallcases, thedevelopermustminimizetheimpervioussurfacecoveragetoachieve lowimpactdevelopment, andmustbea minimum of5% belowthe30% coveragestandardallowed. Thismustbeaccomplished inconjunction withotherLID techniquestoachieve thisprinciple. Inordertoachieve thisprinciplethedevelopermustdemonstrate howtheywill achievetheseprinciples. 7 Thededication, maintenance ormanagementofanareaidentified4VIWIVZIERHWXEFPMWL2EXYVEPVIEVIIR[E]W ontheCity’sNaturalAreasGreenway map. TheNaturalAreaGreenway isdefined aslargecontiguousareasof natural habitatthatcrossownershipboundaries. Asiteplanordevelopmentpattern thatisdesignedspecificallytoprotectanareaMWXE7LIHSVVMHSV4VIWIVZEXMSR onornearthedevelopment sitethatisviewedasintegral toprotectingthesenseofplace, whether thefeaturesinthe vistaarecultural, historicalornaturalorwhether theyareviewedfromthestreetorwithinthedevelopment site. 7IG TTPMGEXMSR 6IUYMVIQIRXW ERH 4VSGIHYVIW Thedeveloper shall followthestepsoutlinedbelowaspartofthedevelopment reviewprocess. Thedevelopershall berequired toreviewthecontentsofthisordinanceandprepareaplanconsistingofwrittenandvisualdocumentsto supporttheproposed development. a)Thedevelopershallreviewthisordinanceandavailablenaturalresourcedata. Theintentistoestablishthe property’secological connectionsbothwithinMaplewoodandaspartoftheregionalecologicalsystem. If thedeveloperchoosesnottouseaconservation approach thedevelopermaydevelopatthebase entitlement ofone (1) unitpertwo (2) acresoflandandskiptostepe. Ifthedeveloper isinterested in additional unitsandsmallerlotsizes, thenthedeveloper shall followstepsb-e. b)Thedevelopershallprepareandsubmitanaturalresources evaluationofthesite, includingallofthe following elements, thisstepisinpreparationformeetingwiththecityplannerandshouldbecompleted priortodeveloping aconceptplan: 1)Treesurvey, includingallsignificantindividualtreesgreater than6inchesindiameter, andstands oftrees, identifyingtreespeciesandsize. 2)Wetlandinventory, includingdelineation reports; andMnRAMverification 3)Topographicsurveyindicatingexisting drainagepatterns. Thisshallincludeonefoot (1’) contours forsteepslopeareas tobetterunderstand where thetopandbottom oftheslopesarefor preservation andplacement c)Thedevelopershall setupameetingwiththecityplannertodiscussandestablishtheintentandgoalfor thesubdivision. Theprocessshallincludeadiscussionregardingtheappropriateconservationprinciplesas identified inTable44-128.1forthespecificsiteandshallbebased onthepreliminarynaturalresource information collected instep (b). 8LI TVMRGMTPIW YXMPM^IH XS EGLMIZI LMKLIV HIRWMXMIW SR E WMXI QYWX FI VIZMI[IH ERH VIGSQQIRHIH F]XLI MX]7XEJJ 4PERRMRK SQQMWWMSR ERH ETTVSZIH F]XLI MX] Theconservation principlesandcorresponding conservation bonusesareshownintable44-130.1SYRGMP d)Thedeveloper shallcreateaconceptplanthatincludesthefollowinginformation: 1)Abaseyieldplan, whichdemonstrates thenumber ofallowedlotsasdeterminedbythebase entitlementofoneunitpertwoacres. 2)Adescriptionoftheconservationprinciplesthatareused andthecorresponding conservation bonusandunitcount asthedeveloper understandsit. Thisshallalsoinclude information anddata thatsupportshowtheconceptplanaddressestheconservationprincipleandhowtheplanmeets andexceedsthestandards ofthecity’sexistingnaturalresource ordinances. 3)Agraphicthatdemonstrates generallyhowthelotswouldbelaidoutandtheunittypesproposed aspartofthedevelopment. 8 4)Anarrativethatdescribestheconservationprinciplesused intheconcept planandsupporting data demonstrating howtheconceptmeetsthestandardsofexistingordinances, anddata demonstrating howtheconceptplanexceedsthem. 5)Thedeveloper shallsubmit,withtheirconceptplans, dataandreportsrelatedtotheconservation principles performed byareputable ecologistorecologicalfirm. Thecityshallreservetheright, if needed, tohiretheirownecologicalexpertatthecostofthedevelopertoverify andfurther understandtheplanssubmittedbytheapplicant/developer. 6)Submit twenty (20) copies ofitems1through 4forinformalornon-binding commentsbycitystaff, planningcommission andcitycouncil. Eachbodywillprovidefeedback andrecommendations to thedeveloper sothedeveloperunderstands thechanges theyneedtomakemovingforwardtothe preliminary plat. Itwillbeuptothecitycounciltomakethefinaldecisionwithrespecttothe implementation oftheconservationprinciplesandfinaldensityofaproject. e)Aftertheconcept planreview, thedeveloper shalltakeandintegratetherecommendations andpreparea preliminary platandfinalplatsubmittalinaccordance withsection34-5ofthesubdivisionordinance. f)Afulldeveloper’sagreement aswellasanynecessaryagreementsthatdocumenttheconservation principlesandhowtheywillbeupheld willberequiredasapartofanyfinalplatapproval. Thisshallalso include, ifapplicable, anydedicationortransferofpropertyforthepurposeofpermanentconservationwhich shallbecompleted priortofinalplatapprovalortheissuanceofanybuilding permit. 9 7IG SRWIVZEXMSR SRYW 7XERHEVHW Thefollowingconservation bonuses shallberewardedbasedonthenumberofconservation principles (asidentified inTable44-128.1) integrated withinadevelopment. Theconservationprinciplesandtheirapplicationmustbe agreed tobyboththedeveloper andthecity. a)Conservationbonusisdefinedastheadditional allotmentofalotorlotsasdeterminedbythenumberof conservationprinciplesmet. Conservation bonusisalsocommonly referredtoasadensitybonus. b)Theunitsobtained throughtheconservationbonuscalculationshallalwaysberounded down tothenearest wholenumber. c)Thedensityandnumberofunitsshallbecalculated onanetareabasis. Netdensityshallbedefined asthe numberofdwelling unitsperacreexclusiveofarterialstreetsandrightofways, steepslopes (inexcessof 18%), wetlandsandwaterfeatures, andotherpublicly dedicated improvements suchasparks. Table44-130.1Conservation BonusAllotmentforConservationPrinciples Thefollowingtableidentifiesthebaselineentitlement forallpropertyzonedR-1Rof0.5unitsperacre. All conservationbonusesarecumulativeandthepercentage bonuscalculated assuch. IRWMX]2YQFIV SJ SRWIVZEXMSR FSRYW SYWMRK 9RMXW 2YQFIV SJ 0SXW SR E GVI 6ERKI'SRWIVZEXMSR 7MXI EQTPI 4VMRGMTPIW Tier1:0None –baseentitlementof2AcreLots5Lots 0.5 – 1.50150%7lots 2100%10lots Tier2:3-16lots 1.6 –3.5450100% 2415 lots 1.1 – 1.55100%32lots Tier3:6-36lots 3.6 –4.37*20%43lots TheasteriskinTable44-130.1denotesamandatory conservation principleofprotectingfiftypercent (50%) ofa proposed projectinopenspace. Amanagementplanforallprotectedopenspaceshallberequiredtoachieve final platapproval. Potential optionsincludemanagement byaHomeowners Association, dedicatedtoapublicuseor interestedagency. 10 Attachment 2 DRAFT MINUTESOFTHEMAPLEWOODPLANNING COMMISSION 1830COUNTYROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY,MARCH2, 2010 V.NEWBUSINESS a.RuralConservationDwellingDistrict (R1R)—CodeAmendment Planner Martinpresentedthestaffreportexplaining thatsincethecitycouncilhas adoptedthe2030Comprehensive Plan, someadjustmentsneedtobemadetothe R1Rzoningdistricttoensureconsistency between landuseandzoning. Afterdiscussionbythecommission, additional phasingandtextrevisionstothe ordinanceweresuggested. CommissionerTrippler moved thatthenumbersin beTable44-120.1TierI (0-3 andPrinciples) TierII (6Principles). CommissionerDesai seconded Ayes – Desai, Trippler Nays – Bierbaum, Boeser, Fischer, Yarwood Abstention – Nuss Themotionfailed. CommissionerFischersaidshevotednosincestaffhasputalotoftimeandeffort into developingthisnumberandtheywillbetheones implementing it, andshefeelsstaff knowswhatfigureisworkable. Othercommissioners votingnoconcurred. CommissionerTripplermoved approvetheamended texttotheR-1Rzoningdistrict withthefollowingadditionallanguagechanges: Onpage2, firstparagraphadd ecologicalcommunities” afterthewordvegetation; underSec. 44-120(b) add “andif neededa” before thewordwell; andonpage 6, paragraph5, removethecommas from lines1and2. Commissioner Yarwoodseconded Ayes – all Themotionpassed. MEMORANDUM TO: James Antonen, CityManager FROM: TomEkstrand, Senior Planner DuWayne Konewko, Community Development andParks Director ConsiderAdoptionofAmendments totheConditionalUseSUBJECT: Permit/PlannedUnitDevelopment Ordinance—FirstReading DATE: March 16, 2010 INTRODUCTION On February 22, 2010, thecity councilreviewed theplanning commission’srevisions to the conditionalusepermit/plannedunitdevelopment (CUP/PUD) ordinance. Thecouncil referred theordinance amendment backtotheplanning commission forthecommission to considerthecouncil’squestions andcomments. Thecouncildirected staffto reschedule thisordinance amendment forafirst-readingpublic hearingfollowingthe planning commission’sreview. On March2, theplanning commission considered the council’scomments andmade additional revisions tothisordinance amendment. Theselatest revisions bytheplanning commission areincluded inthe attached ordinanceamendment. Theplanning commission requested thattheyreviewthechanges tothisordinance one final timeprior tothecouncil’sreviewonMarch 22. They willdosoon March16. BACKGROUND The planning commission reviewed the CUP/PUDordinance onseveral occasionsover recentmonths. OnJanuary 19, 2010, theymoved toforwardtheCUP/PUDordinance with revisions to the citycouncil for theirreview. DISCUSSION City CouncilComments fromFebruary 22, 2010 1. Section44-1092. Concerns thetypes ofuses thatrequireaCUP. Putback inthe andnot specificallyprohibited.” wording. . . 2. Section44-1093. Concernsflexibility ordeviationsfrom cityrequirements. Thecouncil feltthat there is always a “degree of interpretation” to be applied in analyzing a CUP proposal. Therefore, the hard requirement that all the findings must be met for any deviation” from the ordinance requirements should be softened. The council stated, thereisno blackand white.” 3. Section44-1097. Concernsthe ninestandards for CUPapproval. As withSection 44- 1093above, the council feltthe same about the nine standardsfor CUP approval. Council feltthatstrictlybasingapprovalon compliance withallninestandards for approvalwould bedifficult since thereisalwaysa “degree ofinterpretation” tobe considered. 4. Section 44-1097(a). Concernsdenying aCUP. Thecouncil feltthattheword “denied” shouldbe left in so it isclear that denial is anoptional decision bythe city. Staff had suggestedtaking out theword “denied” sincethe standards are intendedfor approval. If theywere not met, the request wouldbe denied by default. Staff, hasno problem with thisreversal, however. 5. Section22-1097(5). Concerns basingtraffic impact onstreetdesign. The council felt thatthis wording should be clearer so that thepotential traffic increase resulting from a exceedproposedprojectwouldnotthedesign standard of anyaffected streets. not.” 6. Section44-1097(9). Concerns adverse environmentaleffects. Delete the word The usewould cause nomore thanminimal adverseThissentenceshouldread, environmental effects.” 7. Section44-1097(b). Concernsdeleting thisclause givingthe council the ability to waive requirements for publicbuilding or publicutility structures. Thecouncil felt thatthere were occasionswherethecity mayneedtoapprove a “public” project. Forexample, a sanitary-sewer lift station that may be needed for the public good would likely not meet all ofthestandards forCUPapproval. Nevertheless, itmaybenecessarytoprovide needed service tothecommunity. Thecouncilfound benefitinthisclause. 8. Section44-1103(b). ConcernsconformingtoCUPtermsorconditionsofapproval. The council found thisrevisionconfusingandnotaclarification orsimplification. Planning CommissionChanges ofMarch 2, 2010 In referencetotheeightpoints above, theplanning commission moved to: 1. Addthe wording back in, “andspecifically not prohibited.” 2. Statethat itis thecity council, nottheplanningcommission that “may consider flexibility from strictcodecompliance. . . “ Andalsotoaddbackintheoriginallast sentence of the paragraph that, “Deviations may be granted for planned unit developments providedthat. . . “ 3. This wording should be made more specificby requiring, “A conditional usepermit maybeapproved or amended bysatisfying all of thefollowing standardsfor approval.” 4. Alsoin 44-1097(a), the option for “denial” as an action was dropped because if a project isnot approved, itis deniedby default. 5. Add that the use would “not exceed the design standards of any affected street.” 6. Addthat theusewould cause “nomore than” minimal adverse environmental effects. 2 7. Subparagraph (b) shall beput backin allowingthecouncil theflexibility towaive the standards forapproval forpublic building orutility structures. 8. Go backto theoriginal language dealingwiththe alteration and enlargement of uses eitherthosethatarenonconformingorthosehavingaCUPalready. Anychanges would require aCUP. RECOMMENDATION Approvefirst reading of the proposed amendments of theconditional usepermit/planned unit development ordinance. p:\ planning commission\PUD OrdinanceAmendment CC #2 310te Attachments: 1. Conditional Use Permit/Planned UnitDevelopment and Definitions Ordinance Amendment 2. Suggested ordinance changes by thecity councilon February 22, 2010 3 Attachment 1 THISVERSIONINCLUDESTHEPLANNINGCOMMISSION’STHISVERSIONINCLUDESTHEPLANNINGCOMMISSION’S REVISIONSOFMARCH2,2010REVISIONSOFMARCH2,2010 ORDINANCE NO. ___ ANORDINANCEAMENDING THECONDITIONALUSEPERMITAND PLANNED UNITDEVELOPMENTREQUIREMENTS TheMaplewoodCityCouncilapprovesthefollowing additionstothe MaplewoodCodeofOrdinances. (Additionsareunderlinedanddeletions arecrossed out.) Section1. ThissectionrevisesArticleVoftheMaplewoodCodeof Ordinances dealingwithconditionalusepermitsandplannedunit developments. ARTICLEV. CONDITIONAL USEPERMITS Sec. 44-1091. Purpose. The purpose of a conditional usepermit isto provide thecity with some discretion, based on specific standards, in determiningthe suitability of conditional uses. Thecity is not obligatedto approve suchuses. Code1982, ss 36-436) Sec. 44-1092. Conditional uses. The city councilmay issueconditional use permits for thefollowing usesinany zoning district infromwhich they arenot permittedandnot specificallyprohibited: 1) Publicandprivate utilitiesutility, publicservice or publicbuilding uses. 2) Mining. Refer tothe requirements underarticleIVof this chapter. 3) Library; community center; state-licensed daycare or residential program unless exempted bystatelaw; church; hospital andahelistop asanaccessory usetoa hospital; anyinstitution ofanyeducational, philanthropicorcharitable nature; cemetery, crematory ormausoleum. 4) Anoff-streetparking lotas aprincipal usein acommercial or industrialzoning district. other than a commercial or industrial district. 4 5) Partofan apartment building for commercialuse, intended forthe building’s residents, suchasdrugstore, beautyparlor, barbershop, medicalofficeorsimilar use. 6) Planned unit developments (PUD). 7) Construction ofan outlot. Code1982, ss 36-437) Sec. 44-1093. Plannedunitdevelopments. a) Aplanned unit development (PUD) may not bedivided unless thedensity distributionapproved in the PUDis ensured. b) The city council may consider flexibility from strict code compliance inthe internal and external design requirements ofaproposed PUDandmay consider deviationsfromthoserequirements. Itis theintention ofthis section andthe other sectionsofthisarticlerelatingtoplannedunitdevelopments toprovidea meanstoallow flexibility bysubstantial deviations from this chapter, including uses, setbacks, height andother regulations. Deviations maybe grantedfor planned unitdevelopments providedthat: 1. Theproposed development andthesurrounding neighborhood canbe better served by relaxingthecode requirements that regulatethephysical development orlayout ofthe project because ofitsunique nature. Certain regulations contained in thischaptershouldnot apply totheproposed development because ofits unique nature. 2. The PUDwouldbe consistent withthe spirit, intent and purposes of this chapter. 3. The plannedunit development wouldproduce adevelopment ofequal or superior quality tothatwhich would result from strict adherence tothis chapter. 4. The deviations would notconstituteasignificant threatto theproperty values, safety, health or general welfare of the ownersor occupants of nearby land or tothe environment. 5. The deviations arerequired forthereasonable and practical practicable physical developmentof theproject andarenotrequiredsolely for financial reasons. c) Thedevelopment shall conform to theplansand specificationsas filedwiththe city. Any substantive changesinthe plansand specifications shallrequire a recommendation bytheplanning commission and approvalbythe citycouncil after a public hearing. d) Common openspace. The developershallprovide deed restrictions, covenants, easements, public dedication orotherequallyeffective andpermanentmeans to 5 preserve andmaintain anycommon open space. Theinstruments mustinclude all thefollowing protection: 1. Exceptfor routine maintenance, thecitymust approve thealteration of any vegetation ortopography thatis visible from a public water. 2. Prohibit theexterior storage of vehicles or other materials. Storage shall not include routine vehicle parkingorthetemporary storageof materialsforan ongoing construction project. 3. If ona publicwater, prohibit theuncontrolled beaching of watercraft. e) Owners’ association. Allplanned unitdevelopments with commonopen space must have anowners’ associationwith thefollowing features: 1. Each lot ownermust bea member. 2. Each member must payapro ratashare of theassociation’sexpenses, and unpaid associationassessments canbecome liens onunits orsites. 3. Association assessmentsmustbe adjustable to adapt to changing conditions. 4. Theassociation must be responsible for insurance, taxes andmaintenance of all commonly ownedproperty andfacilities. f) The city shall designate PUDsonthe official cityzoning map. Code1982, ss 36-438) Sec. 44-1094. Outlots. a) Nobuilding permit shallbe issuedfor construction uponan outlot, except by conditional use permit. b) Thecity councilshall notgrant aconditional use permit for building upon any outlot, unless the outlotmeets the following conditions: 1. It meets theminimum size andfrontage requirements provided for in this chapter. 2. It has therequisite publicimprovements. 3. The permitted density under thisCode hasnot beentransferred to another parcel andis, therefore, sufficienttoaccommodate theproposed construction. 4. Theoutlot isnotused forpermanent common open space. 5. The proposedconstruction can overcome or accommodate thetopographical problems andpeculiar site characteristics. 6 Code1982, ss 36-439) Sec. 44-1095. Application. a) An applicationfor a conditionalusepermit maybe made by anyperson having a legal interestinthepropertydescribed inthe application. Allapplications shallbe submitted tothedirector ofcommunity development upontheform supplied by the city. Thedirector shallnotaccept anapplicationthat isnotcomplete. Specific requirements shallbeasstated onthisform, butshallincludeatleast thefollowing information, ifapplicable: 1) Allinformation required on thecommunity design review board application. 2) Written justification foranyPUD deviations. 3) Anabstractor’scertificate showing property owners’ namesand addresses within500350 feetoftheboundaries ofthepropertyfor which thepermit is requested. 4) Anyother information required bythedirector of community development, the city council or thecouncil’s advisory bodies. b) Theapplicantshall also, atthetimeof filingsuchapplication, payafeetothe directorof communitydevelopmenttodefrayadministrative expensesincurredby thecity in the handling of the application, which fee shall be established by the city council, by ordinance, from timeto time. Code1982, ss 36-440) Sec. 44-1096. Procedure. a) Afteranapplication fora conditionaluse permit hasbeen submitted, thedirector of community development shallprepare areport and recommendationand submititto theplanning commission, and communitydesign review boardand anyother commission as appropriate, forarecommendation tothe citycouncil. Thecitycouncilplanning commission andcommunitydesign review board shall take actionontheapplicationwithin 60daysoftheirrespectivehearingdates, unless anextension isapproved inaccordance withstate statute. writing bythe applicant. Thestaffreport and theplanning commission’sandcommunity design reviewboard’srecommendations by allapplicable advisory boards or commissions shallthenbe forwarded tothe city council. b) Theplanning commission city council shallhold atleast onepublic hearingon each applicationfora conditionalusepermit. Thishearingshall notbehelduntil theThe citycouncil shall takefinal actionafterconsidering the hasreceived writtenrecommendations orreportsfromthe citystaff, planning commission, and communitydesign reviewboard andother applicablecommissions. or until60 dayshaveelapsed fromthe respective hearing dates. The director ofcommunity development shallhaveanoticeofthehearingpublished intheofficial newspaper atleasttendays beforethehearing. The director shallalsomail cause a notice tobe mailedto eachofthe ownersofproperty within 500350 feet 7 of theboundary lines of the property upon which such usehas been requested whichnotices aretobemailed tothelast known address ofsuch ownersatleast tendays before the dateof the hearing. Suchnotice shall include the date, time andplace ofthehearingandshalldescribetheconditionaluserequest. Failure ofpropertyownerstoreceivenoticeshallnotinvalidate anyoftheproceedings in this section. c) Thecouncil may refer theapplication backto theplanningcommission when the council finds that specific questions or information that may affect the final decision wasnot considered bythe planning commission. Thisprocedure shall only be usedonce foreach application. d) Thecitycouncil mayapprove, amend ordeny anapplication foraconditional use permit bya majorityvote. e) Alldecisions bythe citycouncil shallbe final, except thatany person aggrieved byadecision, may within30daysofthe decision, appeal to the county district court. (Code1982, ss 36-441) Sec. 44-1097. Standards. a) A conditionaluse permitmaybe approved, oramended or denied bysatisfying all of based on thefollowingstandards forapproval, inaddition toanystandards orfindingsfor aspecificconditional usefound elsewherein theMaplewoodCode ofOrdinances: in this chapter: 1) Theuse would belocated, designed, maintained, constructedand operated to beinconformity with thecity’scomprehensive planandthis Code. 2) Theusewould notchange theexisting orplannedcharacter ofthe surrounding area. 3) Theusewould notdepreciate property values. 4) The use wouldnotinvolve anyactivity, process, materials, equipment or methods ofoperationthatwould bedangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing orcauseanuisance toanyperson or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, waterorair pollution, drainage waterrunoff, vibration, generalunsightliness, electrical interference or othernuisances. 5) Theusewould not exceed thedesign standards ofanyaffected streets nor would itnegativelyimpactthetraffic onanystreetbasedonthecurrent designof thoseaffected streets. generateonly minimalvehicular trafficon localstreets andwould notcreatetraffic congestionorunsafeaccesson existing or proposed streets. 6) Theuse would beserved byadequate public facilities andservices, including streets, police and fireprotection, drainagestructures, water andsewer systems, schools and parks. 8 7) Theuse would notcreate excessive additionalcosts forpublic facilities or services. 8) Theuse would maximizethepreservation of andincorporate thesite's natural and scenic features intothe developmentdesign. 9) The usewould causeno more than minimaladverse environmental effects. b) Thecity council may waive any ofthe requirementsin subsection (a) ofthis section forapublic building orutilitystructure, providedthe councilshallfirst makeadetermination that the balancingof publicinterest betweengovernmental unitsof the state wouldbebest servedby suchwaiver. c) (b) The applicant shall have the burden of proving that the use would meet all of the standards requiredforapprovalofa conditionalusepermit. Thecitymay require theapplicantprovide, athiscost, anyinformation, studiesorexpert testimony necessarytoestablish whether thesestandards would bemetorto establish conditions forapproval. Code1982, § 36-442) Sec. 44-1098. Conditions. a) The city council, ingranting aconditional use permit, may impose such conditionsandguaranteesthatitconsidersnecessaryandassupported bythe recordoftheproceedings toprotect adjacent propertiesandthepublic interest and toachieve thegoals andobjectivesofthe comprehensive plan. b) Conditionsandguaranteesmayinclude butarenotlimitedtothefollowing: 1) Controllingthe number, area, bulk, height, illumination and location of such uses. 2) Regulating access tothe property, withparticular reference tovehicle and pedestrian safety andconvenience, traffic control andemergency vehicle access. 3) Regulating off-street parkingand loading areas, including thenumber and width of parkingspaces. 4) Thelocationanddesign of utilities includingdrainage. 5) Berming, fencing, screening and landscaping, including underground sprinkling. 6) Compatibility of appearance withsurrounding landuses. 7) Preservation ofthe site'snatural, historicandscenic features inthe development design. 8) Limitingthenumber, size, locationor lightingofsignage, notwithstanding article III of thischapterwhich pertains tosigns. 9 9) The location, dimensions and upkeep of open space. 10) Increasing required lotsize, yarddimensionsorsetback requirements. 11) Compliance withany planspresented. 12) A timelimit forreviewof thepermit. 13) Awritten agreement, cash escrow, letter of credit or other guarantee to ensure that the projectwill be built asapproved. 14) Restrictive covenants. 15) Controlof the interiorandexterior components of a building, provided that such conditiondoesnotconflictwiththebuilding code. Suchcomponents may include butnotbe limitedtothe finishedexterior materials and installation of elevators. 16) Control ofpotential noise generators. Code1982, § 36-443) Sec. 44-1099. Startof construction oruse. The proposedconstruction mustbesubstantiallystarted ortheproposeduseutilized within oneyearofcouncilapprovalortheconditional usepermit shallbecome nulland void. The council may grant up to one one-year extension of the permit if just cause is shown. Thisrequirementshallnotapply toPUDswithanapprovedphasingplan. Such extension shallberequestedin writingandfiled with the directorof community developmentat least 30 days before the expiration of the originalconditional use permit. Thereshall be no charge for filingsuch petition. The request for extension shall state factsshowingagoodfaithattempttocomplete orutilize theusepermitted inthe conditional use permit. Code1982, § 36-444) Sec. 44-1100. Duration. a) Allconditional use permits shallbe reviewedbythecouncil within oneyear ofthe date ofinitial approval, unless suchreview iswaived bycouncil decisionor ordinance. Attheone-yearreview, thecouncil mayspecifyanindefinite termor specific term, nottoexceed fiveyears, forsubsequentreviews. Thecouncilmay impose neworadditional conditionsupon thepermit atthetimeoftheinitialor subsequent reviews. b) Aconditional usepermit shallremainin effectaslong astheconditions agreed uponareobserved, butnothing inthissectionshallpreventthecityfromenacting oramending official controls to change the status of conditional uses. Any conditional usethatmeetstheagreed uponconditionsandislaterallowed becauseof the city enacting or amending official controls shall be considered a legal nonconforming use. Code1982, § 36-445) 10 Sec. 44-1101. Termination, suspension orrevision. a) Thecouncil maysuspend orterminate thepermit iftheapproved conditions have beenviolated or theuse is no longer ineffect. Where theconstruction of a buildingor structure of a monetary value in excess of $100,000.00 has been permitted, thecouncilshallprovideforaperiodofamortizationofnotlessthan fiveyears. Where publichealth, safety andwelfare concerns arethreatened, the five-yearamortizationperiod isnotrequired, andthecouncil maydeterminethe amortization period, ifany, tobeallowed. Theownerofthepropertyuponwhich the conditionalusepermit wasissuedshall benotifiedinwritingatleasttendays beforethemeeting. Iftheproposedtermination isbasedonaviolationof conditions, theproperty owners within 500350 feetshall also benotified. The director ofcommunity development mayissue astop order forwork inprogress untilthe councilhears the matter. b) The citycouncil may reviewapermitat anytime. If thecouncil decidesto consider adding, droppingorchangingconditions, thecouncilshallfollowthe procedures insection44-1096forapproving anewpermit. Thecouncilshallnot change conditionsunlesstheconditionalusenolongermeetsoneofthe standards insection44-1097 forapprovinga newpermit. Code1982, § 36-446) Sec. 44-1102. Reapplication. Whenever an application fora conditional use permit hasbeen denied by the city council, asimilar application affecting substantiallythesame propertyshallnotbe considered againbythe city forat leastoneyear fromthe dateofits denial, unless the councildirects such reconsiderationby atleast fourvotes. Code1982, § 36-447) Sec. 44-1103. Conditionaluses toconform toterms andconditions attached to issuance. a) Anyuse permittedunder the termsof anyconditional usepermit shall be established andconducted inconformitywiththetermsandconditionsofthe permit. b) Anychange involving structural alteration, enlargement, intensification ofuse, or similar change notspecifically permitted bytheconditional usepermit shall require anamendedpermit, andallprocedures shall apply asifanewpermit werebeing issued. All usesexisting on the effective dateof the ordinance from which thisarticle derivesshallbe considered ashaving aconditional usepermit which contains conditionsthatpermit the landuseandstructuresastheyexisted on suchdate. Anyenlargement, structural alteration, orintensification ofuse shall requirean amendedconditional usepermit asprovided forinthis subsection. Code1982, § 36-448) 11 Sec. 44-1104. Records. The director ofcommunity development shallmaintainarecordofallconditionaluse permits issued, includinginformationontheuse, location, conditionsimposedbythe council, timelimits, reviewdates andotherinformation asmaybe appropriate. Code1982, § 36-449) Sec. 44-1105. Filing. Acertified copy of any resolution approving a conditional use permit shall be filed with thecounty recorder orregistrar oftitles. The resolution shallnot includethe legal description of theproperty. Failure to file doesnot affect thevalidity or enforceabilityof the permit. Code1982, § 36-450) Secs. 44-1106—44-1130. Reserved. Section 2. This sectionrevisesSection 44-6. Definitions. Basic structural alteration means any enlargement ofabuilding or modificationtothe framing ofabuilding, whether by extending onanyside orbyincreasing in height, length, widthor changescaused by orthemoving ofa buildingfrom one location to another. Conditional use means aland useordevelopment thatwould notbe appropriate generally, butmaybeallowed withappropriate conditionsor restrictions asprovidedby the officialcontrolsoutlined inArticle V, Conditional UsePermits. Planned unitdevelopments (PUD) meansatype of developmentcharacterized by a unified sitedesign, with twoormoreprincipal usesorstructures. APUDmayinclude townhouses, apartments, multiple-usestructures suchasanapartment withcommercial shops, orsimilar projects. Residential PUDsmusthave atleastfivedwelling unitsor dwelling sites. ThePUD application, timing andrecording process isdescribed under Article V, ConditionalUse Permits. Section 3. This ordinance shalltake effect after the approval by the city council and publishing in theofficial newspaper. The MaplewoodCity Council approvedthis ordinance revision on ___________. Mayor Attest: City Clerk Attachment 2 12 Attachment2Attachment2 THESESUGGESTIONSWEREMADEBYTHECITYCOUNCILONTHESESUGGESTIONSWEREMADEBYTHECITYCOUNCILON FEBRUARY22,2010FEBRUARY22,2010 Additionsareunderlined anddeletionsarecrossedout. Sec. 44-1092. Conditional uses. The citycouncilmayissue conditionalusepermits forthefollowingusesinanyzoning district infromwhich they arenot permittedandnot specificallyprohibited: Sec. 44-1093. Plannedunitdevelopments. b) Thecitycouncil mayconsiderflexibility from strict codecompliance intheinternal and external designrequirements ofaproposedPUDandmayconsiderdeviations fromthose requirements. The city council shall consider the following factors: It is theintention of this section andthe other sections of thisarticle relating to planned unit developments toprovide ameans toallowflexibility bysubstantialdeviations from this chapter, including uses, setbacks, height andother regulations. Deviations may begranted forplanned unitdevelopmentsprovided that: Sec. 44-1097. Standards. a) Aconditional usepermit maybe approved, amendedor deniedbased onthe following standards for approval, inaddition toanystandards orfindingsfor a conditional use foundelsewhere inthe Maplewood CodeofOrdinances: in this chapter: Sec. 44-1097(a)(5). Standards. 5) The use would not exceed the design standard of any affected streets. generateonly minimal vehiculartrafficonlocal streets and would notcreate traffic congestionorunsafe accessonexisting orproposedstreets. Sec. 44-1097(a)(9). Standards. 9) Theuse wouldcausenomore than minimaladverse environmental effects. 13 Sec. 44-1097(b). Standards. b) Thecitycouncilmay waive anyofthe requirements insubsection (a) ofthis section forapublic building orutilitystructure, providedthe councilshallfirst makeadeterminationthatthebalancing ofpublic interestbetween governmental units of thestate would bebest servedbysuch waiver. Sec. 44-1103. Conditionaluses toconform toterms andconditions attached to issuance. b) Anychange involving structural alteration, enlargement, intensification ofuse, or similar change notspecifically permitted bytheconditional use permit shall require anamendedpermit, andallprocedures shall apply asifanewpermit werebeing issued. All usesexisting on the effective dateof the ordinance from which thisarticle derivesshallbe considered ashaving aconditional usepermit which contains conditionsthatpermit the landuseandstructuresastheyexisted on suchdate. Anyenlargement, structural alteration, orintensification ofuse shall requirean amendedconditional usepermit asprovided forinthis subsection. 14 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFTBLANK ItemJ1 MEMORANDUM TO James Antonen, CityManager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, Director Citizen Services DATE: March 16, 2010 RE: Approval ofOn-Sale Intoxicating Liquor LicenseNew Manager Jeffrey Naumann, Chipotle MexicanGrill Introduction JeffreyNaumann has submittedan application for an on-saleintoxicating liquor license for Chipotle Mexican Grill located at 2303White BearAvenue. Background Asrequired by City ordinances, the necessary background investigation was completed by the PoliceDepartment on Mr. Naumann. In thecourseof theinvestigation, statecriminal history files werechecked alongwithcontacts andwarrants inthecitiesofMankato, EdenPrairie, Woodbury and Maplewood and the counties ofNicollet, Blue Earth, Le Sueur, Hennepin, Washington and Ramsey. Mr. Naumann grew upinNicollet, MN wherehegraduated fromHighSchool in2003. He then wenttoMinnesota StateUniversity-Mankato wherehereceivedhisdegree inSpanish and International Business. Whileliving in Mankatohe began working for Chipotle and was promotedto manager of the restaurant. He later moved to the Eden Prairie restaurant as the manager and recently to the Maplewood restaurant as themanager. Therewas nothing found that would prohibit Mr. Naumann from holding a liquor license in the City. He has been given a copyof the City Code of Ordinancesthat apply to being an intoxicating liquorlicenseholderandhasmet withChiefThomalla todiscuss measuresto eliminatethe sale of alcohol to underage persons, general security and retail crime related issues. Recommendation It isrecommended thattheCityCouncil approve theliquorlicense application. Item J2 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager Antonen FROM: Karen Guilfoile, DirectorCitizen Services RE: Consideration ofPenalties for Tobaccoand AlcoholCompliance Failures DATE: March 17, 2010 Introduction Thecity completed another round of alcohol and tobacco compliancechecks during 2009. In allinstances, an employee failed the compliance check by selling tobacco or alcohol to an underage buyer and was issued a criminal complaint for that offense which has been prosecuted. Background Whenthe city council began performing tobacco and alcohol compliancechecks in 2000, they optednot to have a strict guideline for penalties because somecompliance failures are more egregious andwarrant stricter penalties. Whilethe citydoes nothave specifiedfinesfor cigarette and tobacco compliance failures, past practicehas beento adhere to thefollowing guidelines for imposingpenalties fortobacco: first offense $250, second offense $500and the thirdoffense $750. Foralcohol compliance failures, past practice hasbeen to follow State guidelines of imposing a penaltyof $500forthe firstoffense, $1,000for thesecond offense, $2,000if thereis athird offense andthenrevocationorpossiblesuspension ofthelicense. InJanuary of2005the city council implemented anincentive program thatincludes aone-time 5% discount onthe annual intoxicating liquor license fee after remaining violation free for five consecutiveyears. Ifafter receivingapenalty andremaining violationfreefor fiveconsecutive years theviolation would beremoved fromtheir compliance failure record. Attachedis a statistical history of compliance failuresfor those establishmentsthat have failed tobacco and alcohol compliance checks thathave yet to come before council for an administrative penalty. Following past practicein imposing fines, Ihave listedwhatstaff is proposing forfines forthemajority ofthecurrent failures. Allestablishments have been notified of the proposed civil penaltyagainst them and were encouraged to attend the March 22, 2010 council meeting. There will be additional compliance failureson thecouncil agendafor April 12, 2010, for thosethat were unable to attendthe March 22, 2010 council meeting. Consideration Council considerationfor penaltiesis requested. BUSINESS NAME - OWNER - ADDRESS - CHANGE OF MANAGER OR OWNER DATE COMPLIANCECOMPLIANCE FAILUREDATESTATUSCOURT DATESTAFF RECOMMENDATIONCOUNCIL ACTION 5-8TAVERN - 2289 MINNEHAHA AVE ALCOHOL11/14/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION01/25/2010PROPOSED $500 FINE AMAROSE CONVENIENCESTORE - 3001 WHITE BEARAVE - OPENED07/01/2009 TOBACCO12/15/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION11/23/2009PROPOSED $250 FINE AMF MAPLEWOOD LANES - MAPLEWOODBOWL - 1955ENGLISH ALCOHOL11/29/2008PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION04/30/2009PROPOSED $500 FINE BROADWAY PIZZA - 1900 COUNTY ROADD - OPENED 7/23/2007 ALCOHOL12/14/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION03/15/2010PROPOSED $500 FINE COSTCO DISCOUNT LIQUOR - 1431 BEAMAVE - OPENED08/14/2008 ALCOHOL10/23/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION03/08/2010PROPOSED $500 FINE CUB FOODS #31264 - 2390 WHITE BEARAVE ALCOHOL12/14/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION03/15/2010PROPOSED $500 FINE FREEDOM VALUCENTER # 65 - 1535 BEAM AVE TOBACCO08/03/2006COMPLETED10/09/2006PROPOSED $250 FINE08/26/2006 - APPROVED $250 FINE TOBACCO11/21/2006PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION01/12/2007PROPOSED $500 FINE TOBACCO08/13/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION09/21/2009PROPOSED $750 FINE GULDEN'SROADHOUSE - 2999MAPLEWOOD DRIVE ALCOHOL11/13/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION12/21/2009PROPOSED $500 FINE HILLTOP FOODS - ABRAHAM WOLFE - 2150MCMENEMY - OPENED 01/01/2006 - CLOSED 12/31/2006 ALCOHOL06/05/2006ISSUED - CERTCOLL LTR06/25/2007PROPOSED $500 FINE07/24/2006 - APPROVED $500 FINE TOBACCO08/03/2006ISSUED - CERT COLLLTR10/09/2006PROPOSED $250 FINE08/28/2006 - APPROVED $250 FINE TOBACCO11/20/2006PENDING - COUNCILACTION01/12/2007PROPOSED $500 FINE HOLIDAY - 280SMCKNIGHT ROAD TOBACCO12/16/2008PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION02/09/2009PROPOSED $250 FINE LES'SSUPERETTE - 2665 WHITE BEARAVE TOBACCO12/06/2007COMPLETED02/15/2008PROPOSED $500 FINE10/27/2008 - APPROVED $250 FINE TOBACCO08/13/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION09/21/2009PROPOSED $750 FINE MAPLEWOOD KWIKMART (AKAHILLTOP FOODS) - CHANDER KANT - 2150 MCMENEMY - OPENED 10/11/2007 TOBACCO10/19/2007PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION12/21/2007PROPOSED $250 FINE MAPLEWOOD WINECELLAR - 1281FROST AVE ALCOHOL11/13/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION01/25/2010PROPOSED $500 FINE DATE PRINTED: 3/17/2010PAGE 1 OF 2 BUSINESS NAME - OWNER - ADDRESS - CHANGE OF MANAGER OR OWNER DATE COMPLIANCECOMPLIANCE FAILUREDATESTATUSCOURT DATESTAFF RECOMMENDATIONCOUNCIL ACTION MCKNIGHT MARKET & GAS - 1690N MCKNIGHT ROAD - OPENED 07/16/2007 - CLOSED06/26/2009 TOBACCO12/06/2007COMPLETED02/15/2008PROPOSED $25010/27/2008 - APPROVED $250 FINE ALCOHOL07/16/2008COMPLETED12/01/2008PROPOSED $50010/27/2008 - APPROVED $500 FINE ALCOHOL11/22/2008PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION09/17/2009PROPOSED $1,000 FINE MERWIN LIQUORS - 1700RICESTREET - OPENED 11/26/2007 ALCOHOL11/29/2008PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION05/20/2009PROPOSED $500 FINE MGM LIQUOR WAREHOUSE - 2950 WHITE BEARAVE - OPENED01/22/2007 TOBACCO11/26/2008PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION08/31/2009PROPOSED $250 FINE ALCOHOL12/14/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION03/15/2010PROPOSED $500 FINE MYTH NIGHTCLUB - 3090SOUTHLAWN - OPENED 08/01/2005 - CLOSED08/01/2009 ALCOHOL11/29/2008PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION05/18/2009PROPOSED $500 FINE RICHARD'S MARKET - 1344FROST AVENUE TOBACCO12/07/2007COMPLETEDNOT IN SYSTEMPROPOSED $250 FINE10/27/2008 - APPROVED $250 FINE ALCOHOL11/13/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION01/25/2010PROPOSED $500 FINE SARRACK'S INT'L WINE & SPIRITS - 2305 STILLWATER ALCOHOL10/10/2006COMPLETED12/28/2006PROPOSED $500 FINE10/27/2008 - APPROVED $500 FINE ALCOHOL11/13/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION01/25/2010PROPOSED $1,000 FINE SINCLAIR RETAIL - MICHAELHUYNH - 2158 RICE STREET - OPENED 04/05/2008 TOBACCO12/16/2008PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION04/20/2009PROPOSED $250 FINE THE ROCKNIGHT CLUB - 2029 WOODLYN AVE - OPENED09/28/2004 TOBACCO08/03/2006COMPLETED10/09/2006PROPOSED $250 FINE08/28/2006 - APPROVED $250 FINE TOBACCO08/13/2009PENDING - COUNCIL ACTION09/21/2009PROPOSED $500 FINE DATE PRINTED: 3/17/2010PAGE 2 OF 2 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT:Comprehensive LandUsePlanAmendment foraCountryside VW/SaabParcel, fromLDR (lowdensityresidential) toC commercial) (4votesneeded) LOCATION: DATE: INTRODUCTION Project Description Requests Number of VotesRequired DISCUSSION Comprehensive LandUsePlan Amendment Metropolitan Council Review COMMISSION ACTION RECOMMENDATIONS REFERENCE INFORMATION SITEDESCRIPTION SURROUNDINGLANDUSES PLANNING Attachment1 Schmelz Countryside — Comprehensive Plan Amendment lowRequesttoamendcomprehensiveplanforthisparcelfrom densityresidentialcommercialto . Currently usedasaparking lot. Nodevelopmentproposed. FigureOne — LocationMap CityofMaplewood February 12, 2010NORTH ATLANTIC ST DULUTH ST Attachment3 Schmelz Countryside — Comprehensive Plan Amendment M1Schmelzpropertycurrentlyzoned (lightmanufacturing) FigureThree — ZoningMap CityofMaplewood February 17, 2010NORTH Attachment 4 MINUTESOFTHEMAPLEWOODPLANNING COMMISSION 1830COUNTYROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY,AUGUST 19, 2008 V.PUBLICHEARING a.7:00p.m. -2008Comprehensive PlanUpdate Public Hearing RoseLorsungofMFRAgave apresentation onthedraftplanofthe2008 ComprehensivePlan andexplained ground rules forthepublichearing. Itwasdecidedbythecommissionersthattheywould holdtheir discussionsuntilafter thepublic completestheircommentsaspartofthehearing. ChairpersonFischerreiteratedthegroundrulesandopenedthepublichearingfor comments. Thefollowingpeoplespoke: Duane Goodnek, 2002English Street, saidhispropertyabutstheBruceVento Trail. HereferredtotheLightRailTransit/BuswaysectionoftheTransportationchapterthat referstothefeasibilityoffutureuseofbuses ontheVento Trail alignment. Mr. GoodneksaidhereviewedtheRamseyCountyRegionalRailAuthority’splanwhich statesthatthetrailisnotplannedforbususeandhasspecifically beenpurchasedfor futurerailservice. Mr. Goodnekasked thecommission toeliminatethereference to busrapidtransituseonthetrailsfromtheplanandalsoinsertastatementtotherail authority thatrecreational trailswillnotbeusedforabusrapidtransitway. TomHorton, 1970 ClarenceStreet, questionedwhetheravariancewould berequired toaddascreenporchtothepropertyonagrandfathered-inpropertyinaMixed-Use area. GordonAnderson, 2255DuluthStreet, saidhehaslivedatthataddressfor53years andtheadjacent propertyiszoned residential, buthisproperty iszoned commercial. Mr. Anderson saidhewould likehisproperty rezonedtoresidential. LettieSageser, 1241Frisbie Avenue, saidherproperty abutstheGladstoneSavanna which hasbeen changedfromanopen spacedesignationtoaparkdesignationand asked whythiswasdone andwhetheralltheopen space designations have been changedtopark. DavidBartol, 1249 FrisbieAvenue, commented onthechangesoftheGladstone Savanna usefromopen spacetoaparkdesignation, whetherthisgivesthelandless protection, andalsoreferenced thelimited budgetfortheparkssystem. JimValenciano, 1489 SherrenAvenue, commentedthatsince thecolorshavebeen changedonthenewusemap, itisdifficulttocompare thenewmapwiththeold. Mr. Valencianosaidhisproperty abutsHighway 36andtheplanshowsanewpath betweenthehighwayandhisproperty, butwasnotclearhowitwould tieintoWhite BearAvenue. Mr. Valencianoaskedhowthispathwouldaffecthisproperty. LeoCapederspoke representing TruckUtilitiesatHighway 36andEnglish Street which isanindustrial use. Mr. Dieterasked howthiswould affecttheir taxesandsaid theyareconcerned withthewatershedproblems andsewer problems. Mr. Capeder saidtheyareconcerned withhowmuchwaterwillrunacrossHighway36andthrough their backproperty totheothersideofGervaisAreaandintothewetlandarea. Mr. Capedersaidtheywanttomakesure thattheirconcernsareaddressed. JimSvoboda, 2036 EnglishStreet, saidhispropertyisontheproposed SkillmanStreet hasadrivewayeasement. Mr. Svoboda saidhewantstodevelophispropertyand displayedaletterfromRamseyCountyPropertyRecords andRevenueshowinghis property valuehasdiminishedbutshowshistaxeshave increased. Mr. Svoboda said hispropertyhasbeendetermined tobelandlockedandcannot bedeveloped, buthe intendstopursue developinghisproperty. JonathonBuseng, 1247 Kohlman Avenue, saidhispropertyisproposedtobe reclassified fromresidentialtocommercial. Mr. Busengaskedthatspecific guidelines beadded tothecityordinancesonwhatcanandcannotbepermittedona nonconformingresidence. Heaskedforspecificclarification onwhetherhecould add suchthingsasnewsidingorreplacewindowswithoutthisbeingconsideredaspecial usepermitprocess. Michael Eller, 1581Sexton Avenue, saidhisproperty iszonedresidentialandasked whatisplannedforthisarea. Henotedthatthereisvacantlandbehindhisproperty andaskedwhatisplanned forthatarea. RalphSletten, 2747 NorthClarenceStreet, saidthecity, RamseyCountyandthe WatershedDistricthavemade changesbyputtingindams, waterfalls andbacking up wateron43acresofKSTP’sproperty. Mr. Slettensaidthetoweronthatproperty has beencompromisedduetothebackedupwater. Mr. Sletten saidtheWatershedDistrict haspreviously paidtohaveoneofthetower anchorsre-stabilizedandanotheranchor needstobefixedandcausesgraveconcernsbytheresidents. Hesaidtheywantthe anchortakencareofandthewatermovedback. Mr. Sletten alsosaidthatthe1950s Watershed Districtenacted theWaterwaysActwhichprohibitsthechangingofwater directionsandhewantsthatlookedinto. JohnWykoff, 2345MarylandAvenueEast, asked forthecoststotaxpayersforthe comprehensiveplan, theparks, trails, andopen spacestudy, andtheGladstone projectandmentionedthatthecitywouldnotlethimbuildagarage. Therewerenofurthercomments fromthepublic; thepublichearingwasthenclosed forcommentsfromthepublic. RoseLorsungsuggestedthatthecommission andstaffconsider thepublic’s commentsintheorderthatthey were made. BrandonBourdonofKimley-HornAssociatesconsidered thefirstquestionregarding theBruce VentoTrail andthetransitalternativesbeingconsidered. Mr. Bourdon saidit isearlyintheprocessandmany trailsincludingtheVentoTrail willbeconsidered for transitalternativesrangingfromlightrailtocommuter railtobusrapidtransit. ActingcitymanagerChuckAhlmentionedthattheVento Trail corridorisowned bythe RamseyCountyRegionalRailAuthority. Mr. AhlsaidtheRailAuthorityispurchasing additionaltraillandforexpansion andwillhaveameetingforpubliccomments onthe futureplansforthetrailinmidSeptember. Mr. Ahladvisedthoseinterested residents tocheckthenextissueofCityNewsorcallcityhallforthemeetingdate andattend thatmeeting. CommissionerBoeserasked forclarificationonwhetherthecityhastheabilityto eliminatethepossibility ofbustransitonthetrailcorridor. ActingcitymanagerAhlrespondedthecitydoes nothavevetoauthorityoverthissince theRailAuthority istheownerofthepropertyandhasjurisdiction. Mr. Ahlsaidifthe cityisnotinsupportofbustransitonthetrail, thisshouldbemade clear. DuaneGoodnekspoke againregardinghiswishforthistobemade clearinthe comprehensiveplan. Mr. Goodneksaidthatsince theRamseyCountyRegionalRail Authority’splanstatesbustransituseisnotplannedonrecreationaltrails, this statementshould beaddedtoMaplewood’splanorataminimum, deletethestatement thatbusrapidtransitwillbeconsideredfromthecity’splan. Ms. Lorsung presented thesecondspeaker’squestion regardinggrandfathering clauses andpossibleadditions oralterations toanonconformingusepropertyina mixedusearea. Ms. Lorsung saidthere arelocalpoliciesandstate statutesthat governspecifictypesofgrandfathering, butusuallyprecedentestablishescity requirements. Seniorplanner TomEkstrand explainedoftentimesajudgmentcallneeds tobemade andasanexamplehesaidpastprecedent wouldallowahomeonpropertythatis zonedtobecommercialornonconforming tomakeminorchanges suchasnewsiding orwindows. Mr. Ekstrand furtherexplained thatinthepastrequestsforadditions or garages onthesenonconformingpropertieshaverequiredaConditional UsePermit applicationforconsideration bythecitycouncil. Mr. Ekstrand commented that establishingguidelinesforwhatwould beallowableonthesetypesofproperties would behelpfulandagoodidea. CommissionerBoesersaidguidelines areneededforthesesituations, butthese nonconformingusesarezoningrelatedquestions andafter thecomprehensiveplanis updated, thezoningcodewillbereviewedandthesezoningquestions willbe consideredatthattime. RoseLorsungcommentedthecityhastofollowthestate statutefornonconformities andgrandfatheringclauses, butthecitydoeshave theopportunitytoupdatethe ordinance making itclearandinlinewithwhatthestatutesays. Ms. Lorsung encouragedresidentsinterested ingrandfatheringclauses andnonconformitiestogo tothecity’swebsiteandview thosesectionsofthecitycode. CommissionerBoeserasked atwhattimeaperson’sland useofficially changeswhen thelanduseistobechanged. Ms. Lorsung respondedthelanduseofficiallychanges whenthecitycounciladopts theplanandwhenthatplanispublishedinacity newspaper. Ms. Lorsungpresentedthenextresident’scomments regardinghispropertyonDuluth Streetdesignatedascommercialinaresidentialarea. Ms. Lorsungsaidthetwo propertiesbeingusedasresidentialwerepreviouslyguidedasfutureindustrial and underthenewplan willbereguided ascommercialaspartofthecleanupto commercialuseinthatarea. CommissionerDesaisuggested thatsincethepropertyisbeingused asresidential, the industrial designationwaspossiblyamistake andthatthedesignationcouldnowbe correctedtoresidential intheupdatedplan. Ms. Lorsung respondedthisisnotthecaseeventhough thepropertyisbeingused as residential, sincetheproperty’susedesignationfellwithinthehighwaycorridorarea designatedatthetimeasindustrialuse. CommissionerBoesersaidhewouldfavor reguidingtheproperty toresidentialuse ratherthancommercialuseasthepropertyownerrequested, sincethepropertytothe eastandsouthisdesignatedasresidential use. CommissionerTripplermovedtorecommend changingthetwoparcels’ designation toLowDensityResidential designation. CommissionerMartin seconded themotion. CommissionerMartinasked howthisresidentcould havehispropertydesignation changedandnothave beennotifiedofthechange. Acting citymanagerAhl commentedthecityhasgonethroughtheprocessofupdatingthisplanfivetimesover the50-yearhistoryandthevarious commissions andcouncilshave used different procedures. Mr. Ahlmentioned residentswerenotifiedthisyearaboutproposedland usechangesaffectingtheir designation, butthiswasnotrequiredordoneinthepast. Ms. Lorsung commentedthecityisnotrequiredbylawtonotifyindividualproperty ownersoflandusechanges, butarerequiredtonotifyresidentsofproposedzoning changes. Thecommissionthenvotedasfollowsregardingtheabovemotiontochangethe twoparcels’ designationtoLowDensity Residential: Ayes -all Attachment 5 DRAFT MINUTESOFTHEMAPLEWOODPLANNING COMMISSION 1830COUNTYROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY,MARCH2, 2010 V.PUBLICHEARING a.7:04p.m.: Comprehensive LandUsePlanAmendment forCountryside VW/SaabParcelfromLDR (lowdensity residential) toC (commercial) PlannerMartin presented thestaffreport, explainingthatJohnSchmelzofSchmelz Countryside VW/Saabisrequestingthatthecityreconsiderthefuturelanduseguideof alotownedbythedealership. Planner Martinexplained thatparcelwasguidedlow densityresidentialduringthecity’srecentupdate ofitscomprehensiveplan, but previouslywasguidedM1 (lightmanufacturing). PlannerMartinnotedthatasaresult ofthe2003 comprehensiveplanupdate, allparcelspreviously guidedM1along Highways36and61werere-guidedtocommercial. PlannerMikeMartinsaidtheapplicant, JohnSchmelz, isoutoftownandunableto attend thismeeting. Thepublichearing wasopenedforcomments fromthepublic. Therewereno comments; thepublichearingwasclosed. CommissionerTripplermovedadoption oftheresolutionapproving acomprehensive landuseplanamendmentfromLDR (lowdensity residential) toC (commercial) forthe 0.73-acresitesouthofthemainparcelutilized fortheSchmelzCountryside VW/Saab auto dealership located at1180Highway36. Approvalisbased onthefollowing reasons: 1.TheCountryside VW/Saabparcelisalready developedasacommercial lotand shouldbeappropriately guidedassuch. 2.Theparcels tothenorthandwestoftheCountryside VW/Saabareguided commercial, meaningthatitwouldbeconsistent toguide thisparcelcommercial. Thisactionissubjecttotheapproval ofthislanduseplanamendmentbythe Metropolitan Council. CommissionerYarwoodseconded Ayes – all Themotionpassed. LANDUSEPLANAMENDMENTRESOLUTION MEMORANDUM TO:JamesAntonen, City Manager FROM:Tom Ekstrand, SeniorPlanner DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director PreliminaryPlat, Final PlatandLotArea VariancesSUBJECT: APPLICANT:LandmarkDevelopmentofMinnesota LOCATION:South ofLabore Road andEastofArcadeStreet DATE:March 16, 2010 INTRODUCTION Project Description NathanFair, of Landmark Development of Minnesota, is requesting approval of a proposed subdivisionto develop eleven single-dwelling lots in a subdivision called Gervais Woods. The majorityof Gervais Woods would be locatedin the City of LittleCanada. The southerly2.2 acres wouldbe located in Maplewood. All of theproposed elevenlots would be locatedin Little Canada andeach of those lotswould have access to a proposed streetalso entirely withinLittle Canada. Thesoutherly part ofthe proposed southfour lots wouldhave back yards extending into the Maplewood citylimits. Refer totheplans andthe applicant’sletter. Proposed Revision Sincethepublic hearingattheplanning commission meeting onFebruary 16, Mr. FairandKen Wehrle, of RamseyCounty Parks, discussed andagreed on a landswap that would: 1) transfer a partof the county’s abutting openspace landto the developerand2) wouldtransfer partof the Gervais Woods site to Ramsey County as openspace (Outlot D on the proposed plat). Thereason for this land swap is toprovide increased storm waterpond capacity and to utilize flat land asopposed to cutting into the slope. Phasing oftheLand Swap Theland swap would takeplace after the County Boardauthorizes this landtransfer. This will take about 120days. Oncethe plat isrecorded, and thecounty board approves the landtransfer, theapplicant and countywouldpropose a metes and boundssplit ofthe county-owned pondarea for attachment to the Gervais Woods plat. Requests The applicant isrequesting thefollowing city approvals: 1. Apreliminary plat and final platto createthe proposed four lots that wouldbe in Maplewood. Cityordinance requiresapreliminaryandfinalplattosubdivide landcreating morethanthree lots. 2. Lot areavariances for twoofthe proposed lotsinMaplewood. Cityordinance requiresa minimumof 10,000square feet oflot area for aresidential lot. ProposedLot 2, Block 2 would havean areaof 16,929square feet, but thepart in Maplewood would be 2,378 squarefeet in arearequiring alot area variance. Lot 5, Block2 would have anarea of 15,525square feet, butthe part in Maplewood would havean area of only 7,758 square feet requiringa lot area variance. Note: Staff required the variance applicationsin order toaccount for theback yardareas of the proposed southerly four lotsin the City of Maplewood. These proposed lotsin their entirety would, however, meet allsize requirements of theCities of Maplewood andLittle Canada. BACKGROUND Richie Place (aprevious proposal) Latein 2008, a previous developer, Lauren Development Company, proposed a similar subdivision tothe proposed one by Mr. Fair. That project was called Richie Place and had 16 lots proposed withthreeinMaplewood. ThatproposalwasapprovedbyLittleCanada, buttheportion in Maplewoodwasdenied bythe MaplewoodCityCouncil. Later, the propertywent intoforeclosure andRichie Place wasnot developed. Landmark Development, subsequently, purchased the land. Refer to theattached RichiePlace subdivisionplan. OnJanuary 26, 2009, the city council tabled actionon Richie Placeand directed staffto research pastcouncil actions to see ifan earlier citycouncil had takenany pertinent action onthe status of this property. Thecouncilgavesixmonths forstafftoreport backtothem. June22, 2009: The Maplewood City Council moved to deny the subdivisionrequest for that part ofRichiePlace inMaplewoodbased on thefollowing reasons: The preliminary plat approved for theLittle Canada portion ofthe Richie Place development hadlapsed and anynew developmentfor that area wouldrequire a new application that would be subjectto LittleCanada’srevisedsingle dwelling zoningrequirements. The Maplewoodportion ofthe Richie Place project was toreceive allofits accessand utilities fromLittle Canada and wasinherently dependenton theLittle Canada portion of theproposed development. Since preliminaryplat approval nolonger exists in Little Canadait deemsthe Maplewood portionof thedevelopment inaccessible. City ofLittle CanadaApproval TheLittle Canada CityCouncil approved the Gervais Woods Preliminary Plat on January27, 2010. They willreview thefinalplat on March24. 2 DISCUSSION Subdivision Considerations Preliminary andFinal Plat Thecitytypicallyreviews apreliminary platfirst. Whenconditions ofthepreliminary plathave been met, a developer then applies for theirfinal plat approval. Occasionally, when the proposal is small andnot too involved, the city hasreviewed the final plat along withthe preliminary plat request. Staffsupports the approval of the finalplat with the preliminary plat in this instancesince the majorityof thedevelopment isinLittle Canadaand the Maplewood portion isa muchsmaller part ofthe proposal. Staff will ensurethat all plattingrequirements are met during our monitoring of the development portion withinMaplewood. Theapplicant has worked closelywiththeCity ofLittle Canada, the Cityof Maplewood, Ramsey County and the neighborsto develop aproposal that suitseveryone’s interests and needs. The proposed subdivision hastakenintoaccount Maplewood’sshoreland requirements, tree replacement and wetland ordinance requirements and meets our criteria. Refer to the discussion below. Density Theproposed homeson the southerlyfour lots would be locatedin the City ofLittle Canada. It makes sense, therefore, that density would be calculated from theLittle Canada acreageand not Maplewood. However, if the density was allottedto the 1.7 net acres of land in Maplewood (net acreagesubtractsout the wetlandbuffer area), thecity would allow a density range of 2.6 to 6 unitsper net acre or a range of 4units to 10 units. Density requirements would be met in either approach of density calculation. Outlot C The applicanthasanagreementtosellOutlotCtoMr. andMs. Gores, theabuttingproperty ownersto the west at 2870 Arcade Street. To assure the city that Outlot C will be attached to Mr. andMs. Goresproperty, andnotremainasastand-alonelandlockedproperty, Mr. Fairsuggested to theplanning commission thatthecityrequiretheGorestolegallycombineOutlotCtotheir property at 2870Arcade Street within120 days ofthe final plat beingrecorded at RamseyCounty. Ifthis does not happen, he would give OutlotC to the city tocombine with the abutting Maplewood openspace land. The planningcommission agreedwith this approach andmade that a condition of theirapproval. FutureConstruction on OutlotC Mr. andMs. Goresstated thatitispossiblethey mayatsometimewish tobuildanaccessory building onOutlotC. Thiscould beallowed bytheMaplewoodOrdinances providedallbuilding placement and building sizerequirements aremet. However, thefollowing must alsohappen to allow anaccessory building onOutlotC: Outlot C mustbe legally combined, as onelegally-describedparcel, with2870 Arcade Street since thecityordinance doesnotallowanaccessory building onapropertyunlessthereis 3 house onthelot. Section 44-6, definitions, statesthat “accessory building meansa building subordinate to the mainbuilding on a lot and usedfor purposes customarily incidental to those ofthe main building.” Therefore, the city cannot allow an accessory building unless there is a houseon the lot. Combining Outlot C with the Gores property would, therefore, be necessary forthem to build anaccessorybuilding. The ownerof Outlot Cmust applyfor and receive a conditional use permit tobuildan accessory building. Section 44-1094(a) of the city ordinances states that “no building permit shall be issued forconstruction upon anoutlot, exceptbyconditional usepermit.” LotSize Variances Theproposed lots would meet all size, area and setbackrequirements. The only deficiencies are withthe Maplewood portions of lotstwo and five, block two whichhave less than 10,000 square feetof lot area. This minor technicalitycreates theneed for the lotarea variances for those two proposed parcels. In actuality, though, these twolots will have enough area overall to meet Little Canada’s and Maplewood’s ordinances. Environmental Considerations Shoreland Overlay District ThemajorityoftheMaplewoodlandproposedforsubdivision iswithin theShoreland Overlay District. Thecityhasclassified Gervais Lake, tothesouthwest, as aClassIIwaterwhich requires aminimum lot width of 75 feet forlots with sanitary sewer and a minimumlot size of 10,000 square feetfor lots without waterfrontage. Thecity has classified Kohlman Lake, to the southeast, as a Class IVwaterwhich requiresaminimum lotwidth of75feetforlotswithsanitary seweranda minimumlot size of15,000 square feetfor lots without waterfrontage. Under the Shoreland Overlay regulations, the maximum amount of impervious surface allowed for the proposed lots wouldbe 30 percent. Theproposed lots would meetand exceed all of theShoreland Overlay District lot requirements. Tree Replacement Theapplicant must replace 121 caliper inches of trees (60 two-inch caliper trees) or pay into the city’s tree fundif thetrees cannot be provided. Theapplicant has agreedto payinto the treefund sincethe Maplewood portion ofthe development would remain heavilywooded. Therate fortree replacement is $60per caliper inch or $7,260. Wetland Requirements Thenearby wetland to the southeast is a Manage B wetland as determined by the city’s wetland classification map. Manage B wetlands require an average ofa 75-foot-wide buffer. The minimum bufferwidthis 50 feet. The proposed storm water pondin the southeast cornerwould havea 75- foot-wide bufferwhen the pondinstallation is finished. Howeverthe applicant would disturbthe 25 feetnearest the pondduring its installation. The developerwould then restore this disturbed 25 feet toprovidewiththerequired 75footwidewetland buffer. Becauseof thedisturbance ofthe 25feet ofbufferfor pondinstallation, the applicantis proposing to “average” the buffer widthby providingadditionalwetland bufferto thewest. By doingso, the 4 applicant would exceed the city’s wetland buffer requirements. Refer to the applicant’s letter regarding wetlandimpact and averaging. Utilities Water andsanitary sewerwillbelocated within theproposedstreetright-of-waywhich is completely within theCityofLittleCanada. Thedeveloper isworkingwiththeCitiesofLittle Canada and Maplewood toprovide these utilities. Building PermitsandAccessory Buildings—Jurisdiction Sincethe futurehomes on thefour southerlylots are proposed to be builtin Little Canada, building permitsfor those homes must beobtained from Little Canada. Anyconstruction in the back yards thatareinMaplewood musthave building permitsfrom the CityofMaplewood. However, staff feelsthat the accessory building development requirements for Little Canada should apply, not Maplewood’s. Accessorybuilding requirements differ betweenLittle Canada and Maplewood. Little Canada allowsa maximum of 1,000 square feet of accessory building area. Maplewood bases allowed accessory building area onlot sizeand this wouldpermit arangeof (for acombinationof attached anddetached buildings) 1,480 squarefeetto 1,850squarefeet ofaccessory building area. Staff feelsthe city shouldapply Little Canada’srequirements for uniformitythroughoutthis development. Withthat thought in mind, all back yard uses, gardensheds, swimming pools, etc, shall be subject to therequirements ofLittle Canadaforconsistency anduniformity. Theexception to following Little Canada’s criteriais that Outlot C should besubject to the City of Maplewood’srequirements since Outlot Cwould be entirely inMaplewood. Code Enforcement Thequestion has come up as to who will answer codeenforcement calls to the southerly lots with theirback yards in Maplewood. Staff’s feeling isthat this should be governed by Little Canada much likeLittleCanada would respond topolice, fireandambulance calls. Department Comments Engineering Comments Staffengineer Steve Kummer has prepared a report that discusses grading, drainage and utilities. Please refertoMr. Kummer’sreport. Mr. Kummer findsthattheapplicant’sproposedplans are basically welldesignedwithsomesuggested modificationsbasedonMaplewood’srequirements. FireDepartment Comments AssistantFire Chief, Butch Gervais, stated that if the houses have Maplewood addresses, Maplewood would provide fire and medical services. If the houses have Little Canada addresses, LittleCanada wouldprovidefire serviceand Allina wouldprovide medical service. 5 PoliceDepartment Comments Chief Thomalla stated that if the homesare in Little Canada, policeservice would be provided by the Ramsey County Sheriff’sDepartment as isLittleCanada. Historic Preservation Commission Previously, during theRichiePlace review, Historic Preservation Commission memberRon Cockriel spokeattheNovember 18, 2008planning commission meeting. Mr. Cockriel saidhedid not seeanyartifactsontheproperty. Mr. Cockriel saidhealsoresearched theMinnesota Historical siteand did not see whereany burialgrounds wouldhave existed onthe property. Citizen Comments Staffsurveyed the surrounding property owners (see Citizen Comments). The nearest Maplewood resident, Mr. andMs. Goresat2870Arcade Street, hadthefollowing comments: Werequestthat therebea condition that willlimit thegradingand creationof any accessory buildings inthe backyard ofLot5, Block 2nexttoour property. Leave as muchtrees as possible. Ifthere areany revisions totheplans, we wouldlike tobeincluded in seeing thosechanges. Wewouldlike tosee anevergreen bufferprovided betweenour home andthe proposedhome on Lot 5, Block 2. Mr. and Ms. Gores haverequested an evergreen buffer toscreen the house proposed on Lot 5 from their house. Staff recommends that theapplicant provide five six-foot-tall evergreen trees to accomplishthis. Staff does notfeel that the cityshould prohibit the constructionof accessory buildings on Lot 5. The LittleCanada accessory building rules, however, should be followed for consistency throughout thisdevelopment. Staffreceived comments from two Little Canada neighbors. Both were opposed. Neil andAnnSullivan statedthattheywould like thelandto “stayasis.” David Himmelbach stated: 1) concernsaboutthe presenceof archaeological artifacts on the property, 2) thatthe pond isa calcareous fen, 3) that thereis the presence ofnorthern cricket frogs and, 4) thereshould be buckthorn removed. COMMISSION ACTION OnFebruary 16, 2010, the planning commission held a public hearing to review these requests andrecommended approval ofthe preliminary plat, the final platand lot area variances. OnMarch 2, 2010, the applicant appeared before the planning commission with a proposed plat revision that includeda land swap with RamseyCounty for aportion of their abutting land to better facilitate ponding. 6 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Approve thepreliminary and finalplat for LandmarkDevelopment of Minnesota forthe proposed eleven lot Gervais Woods single-familysubdivision located southof Labore Road andEast of Arcade Street. This subdivisionis subject to the following conditions: a. Prior toapproval of agrading permit, theapplicant shallinstall city-approved wetland signsat the edgeof the wetlandbuffer thatspecify that nobuilding, mowing, cutting, grading, fillingordumpingisallowed within thewetland buffer. Thesesigns mustbe placedevery100 feetalong theedge ofthe 75-footwetlandbuffer orat every property line whicheveris closer. b. Comply withtheconditions of approvalin theengineering report by SteveKummer, Maplewood StaffEngineer, February 24, 2010, andanyrevisedcomments and requirements based on the recentlyrevised plans. c. Approval of afinal platfor Gervais Woods fromtheCity of LittleCanada. d. TheCities of LittleCanadaand Maplewood shallenter intoan agreementas tothe provision ofpolice, fire, codeenforcement services and utilities. Itisthe recommendation oftheMaplewood citycouncilthatLittle Canadaprovidethese services since theproposedfoursoutherly homes would beaddressedinLittleCanada. e. The accessory building, swimming pooland anyother “back yard” construction requirements ofLittleCanadashallapply totheMaplewoodportions ofthesoutherly four parcels. However, anyconstruction intheCityofMaplewoodshallrequirethatthe builder obtainabuilding permit from the CityofMaplewoodifrequiredbycode. f. The proposed homesonthe southerlyfour lots of thissubdivisionshall be constructed inthe footprints shown on the applicant’s plans. This would require that they be located in the CityofLittle Canada. g. Within120 daysof recording the final plat, Outlot C shallbe legally combinedwith 2870 Arcade Street as one parcel. If it is not combined with 2870 Arcade Street by that time, thedeveloper shallgiveOutlotCtotheCityofMaplewood, asheproposedtothe planning commission. Thisshallbeastipulationofthedevelopment agreement. h. Within120 daysof recording thefinal plat, the developer shalldeedOutlot Dto Ramsey County. Thisshall beastipulation ofthedevelopment agreement. i. Thedeveloper shall provide five, six-foot-tallevergreen trees between the home on proposed Lot 5, Block2 and the neighboring house at 2870 Arcade Street prior to the issuance ofa grading permit. j. The developershall pay $7,260 into the city’s tree fundpriortogettinga gradingpermit. k. Staff mayapprove minor changes. Major revisions shall be referredto thecity council. 7 2. Adoption ofthe attachedresolution approving lot areavariances for Lot 2, Block2with 2,378 squarefeet in Maplewood and Lot5, Block 2 with 7,758 square feetin Maplewood. Approval is based onthefollowing findings: a. Strictenforcement would cause undue hardshipbecause of circumstancesunique tothe property under consideration. This situation is unique because credit for lot area can’t be givenfor land outside of Maplewood. If the entiresite was in Maplewood, the question of lot areawould notbe anissue. b. Thevariancewould be inkeepingwiththe spiritandintent of theordinance sincethe proposed southerly lots would have more lot areathan is required by both the Cities of Little Canada and Maplewood. 8 CITIZENCOMMENTS Staffsurveyedthe 30 surrounding property ownerswithin 500feet of this proposed development. Thisincluded those property ownerswithin Little Canada. Of the threereplies, one was opposed and twooffered comments. Opposed Wewould liketo see theproperty stay asis. (Neil and Ann Sullivan, 985 Kohlman LaneEast) Someconcerns: Archaeologyofstub roadsite and vicinity. If the pondis a noncalcareous fen. Presence ofnorthern cricketfrogs. (DNR?) Helpbuckthorn removal. DRH. (David Himmelbach, 2970Labore Road) Miscellaneous Comments Comments fromMr. andMs. Gores at2870Arcade Street: Werequestthat therebea condition that willlimit thegradingand creationof any accessory buildings inthe backyard ofLot5, Block 2nexttoour property. Leave as muchtrees as possible. Ifthere areany revisions totheplans, we wouldlike tobeincluded in seeing thosechanges. Wewouldlike tosee anevergreen bufferprovided betweenour home andthe proposedhome on Lot 5, Block 2. 9 REFERENCEINFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Existing Use: Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Undeveloped Lotin LittleCanada East: Kohlman Marsh Open Space South: Kohlman Marsh OpenSpace West: Single-Family House andNeighborhood Preserve PLANNING LandUse: LowDensity Residential Zoning: R1 – Single Dwelling Code Requirement Section 34-8(f)(1)(3) of the subdivisionordinance and Section 44-106 of thezoning ordinance require aminimum of10,000 square feetforsingle-dwellingresidentiallots. Findings forVariance Approval State law requires that thecity council make the following findings to approvea variance from the zoning code: 1. Strict enforcementwould cause unduehardship becauseof circumstances unique to the property under consideration. 2. The variance would be in keeping with the spiritand intent ofthe ordinance. Undue hardship”, as used in grantingof a variance, means the property in questioncannot be put toa reasonable use if usedunder conditions allowedby theofficial controls. The plightof the landowner is due to circumstancesunique to his property, not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alterthe essential character of the locality. Economic considerations aloneshall notconstitute anundue hardship if reasonable use for theproperty existsunder the terms of thecity code. Application Date Thecity received the complete applications for the proposed preliminary plat and variances on January11, 2010. MinnesotaState Statute15.99, states thatthe city shall review and decide on proposalswithin 60 days, however, the city may extend this review period an additional 60 days. Staffhas extended the review deadline. The new deadlinefor city actionis May 11, 2010. 10 P:sec4\GervaisWoods\GervaisWoodsPreliminary PlatandVariancesCC310 #3te Attachments: 1. Zoning/Location Map 2. Land UsePlan Map 3. Shoreland Overlay Map 4. Proposed Subdivision Plan 5. Applicant’sLetterof Wetland Buffer Impact/Averaging dated March 12, 2010 6. 2008Richie Place Subdivision Proposal 7. Engineering Reportdated February 24, 2010 8. Variance Resolution 9. Plans date-stamped March15, 2009 (separate attachment) 11 SATHRE-BERGQUIST,INC. SATHRE-BERGQUIST,INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY, WAYZATA, MINNESOTA, 55391 (952) 476-6000 FAX (952) 476-0104 March 12, 2010 Subject: Gervais Woods – Wetland Buffer Impact / Averaging Prepared For: Landmark Development, LLC Prepared By: Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. Theproposed 11lot single familydevelopment “Gervais Woods” proposes astormwater treatment pond inthesoutheast cornerofthe site. Thepondwillbe within theCityof Little Canada and Maplewood. During thefinaldesign, itwas determined that locating the pondonthe RamseyCountyPark property would bebeneficial forconstructionand long termmaintenance. Thisarea isflatter andmoresuitedfor a stormwatertreatment pond. Theproposedstreet andutility planwill allowfor future developments to theeast andthe west along with providing neighborhood connectivity for the residents ofboth communities. Thedesignalso providesacorridorto the ponding areafor apossible future trailaccessing the Ramsey CountyPark area andwetland. To facilitate this, additional land (OutlotC) will be soldto Mr. Gores, theMaplewood resident tothewest of the proposed development and alandswap is proposed withRamsey County. The land swap requested would be (13,023sf) fromtheCountyfor OutlotD “GervaisWoods” and (27,924sf) ofpropertytothe Countyoratradeof2.14/1. Basedupon theproposed plantheCity of Maplewood would need to approve the proposed wetland bufferaveraging. The existing wetland, located onthe Ramsey County Park propertyis classified as aManage “B” andrequires a75 foot buffer average, witha minimum buffer width of50 feet. Theproposedgrading planimpacts 5,220 sf of thebuffer area, within the 50to 75 footring. (as hatched in brown below) - Wetland Buffer Impact Area (5,220sf) We are proposing anadditional 16 feetofbuffer beadded tothe existing 75foot bufferfor a total of91 feet ofbuffer, tomaintain the required averagebufferwidth area. This additional buffer area is5,296 sf. Inaddition theimpacted buffer areawould be restored witha BWSR-P8seed mix andblanketed with anerosion control blankettoprotectthe areafrom erosion problems and tohelpthe restoration process. Wetland Buffer Averaging Area (5,296 sf) Basedupon Section 4. Buffer Widths and Requirements, we are requestingthatthe Cityof Maplewood allow bufferaveraging, dueto the sitetopographicalconstraintsand theconfiguration of our parcel. We will be restoring theimpacted buffer area sothat areawillbe maintained aswetland bufferareaupon thecompletion ofthe restoration work. Thiswill provide a future netgain in thewetland buffer area. We do notbelieve that the proposed wetland averaging planwill cause degradation of theexisting wetland. According to the guidelines to usewetlandbuffer averaging, the proposed planneeds tomeet one or moreofthe requirements described inSection 7 (Best Management Practices). Section 7 – a. Restore buffer with native plantings. The plan proposes to restore the impacted bufferarea by seedingthe impacted area with a wetland bufferseed mix (BWSR-P8) and cover the area with an erosion controlblanket. b. Manage weed in buffer. Dueto theproposed sizeof the impact (5,220 sf) a weed management plan isnotproposed. However, the plan will provide erosion control management andre-seeding if necessary. c. Reduce stormwater runoffand/or improve the qualityofstormwater runoffentering a wetland orstream. As part of ourstormwater management planwe are creating rainwatergardens, infiltrationareas, anda stormwaterquality andquantity treatment pond. These are designed to improve thequality ofrunoff enteringthewetland. Sumps are proposed in some of the stormsewerstructures totrapthe runoffsediment prior to reaching theponding and wetland areas. The stormwater pondalso provides additional treatment and sediment removal. The site restoration planproposesnative vegetation around thestormwater pond. We believe that throughtheprocess ofworkingwith theCities of Maplewood andLittle Canada, along with Ramsey County to helpfacilitate a land swap, we have been abletoarrive at a finaldesignproviding for thesubdivision of elevensingle familylotswhileprovidinga grading and storm water planthat meets orexceeds therequirements for storm water management and wetland buffering. If you have any additional questions, please contact Nathan Fair (763-438-2561) or myself at ( 952) 476-6000. Sincerely, SATHRE- BERQUIST, INC. Robert S. Molstad, P.E. File: 49368- 005 Maplewood EngineeringComments – Gervais Woods Development 2-24-10 1of3Page Engineering Plan Review – Supplemental Comments on RevisedPlans PROJECT: GervaisWoods PROJECT NO: 10-02 COMMENTS BY: SteveKummer, P.E. – Staff Engineer DATE: 2-24-10 PLAN SET: City Submittal Set: Civil Drawings by Sathre-Bergquist Dated 11-12-09 rev 2-22-10 COMPS: Drainage Computations by Sathre-Bergquist Dated 11-18-09 and latestrevised 2-22-10 Summary LandmarkDevelopment, LLCisproposing todevelopapiece ofpropertyintosingle-family housing within the Cityof Little Canada south of Labore Rdand north of Kohlman Marsh. The mostsoutherly portion of the property is within the City of Maplewood. The topography of the landis such that all proposed runoff from the property will drain into Maplewood. The new developmentwillconnect to anew sanitary sewer constructed bythe City ofMaplewood as part of theKohlman Laneprojectin 2008. Commentsherein are additionalconditions of approval for the developeron revised plans and computations. The developer shallcomply with conditions ofapproval of theMaplewood Engineeringdepartment dated 2-8-10. Such comments shall be addressed prior to issue of gradingpermits Storm Water RunoffComments Thedeveloper is proposing several means for controlling and treating storm water runoff when thesite is developed. The developer is proposing two rain water gardens and a traditional dead-storagestormwatertreatment pondtomeetstormwaterratecontrol, treatment and infiltration requirements. The ponding area has beenrevisedper the 2-22-10 versionof the plans. Subsequent revised computations dated2-22-10have beensubmitted forreview. The newstorm water drainageplanaddresses drainagefromfutureparcels thatwill access and drain toward CherryHill Lane. Comments Based onthestorm watercomputations, the sitestorm waterfacilitiesfortherevised plans meetor exceed thefollowing: Theproposedraingardensprovideanoverall volumereductiononthesiteof6,996 cubic feetwhichexceedstheirrequiredvolume reductionof6,959cubicfeet. The required volumereduction isbasedonthestandard 1.0inchofrunofffromall proposed impervioussurfaces. Maplewood EngineeringComments – Gervais Woods Development 2-24-10 2of3Page All proposedstorm water facilitiesperthe revisedplandated 2-22-10provide adequate runoffratecontrol forthe2-year, 10-yearand 100-year/24-hourstorm events. Therequirement isthatallrunoffrates fromthesitearecontrolled toexisting conditions fortheproposed site. Therevised planmeetsthose requirements. All proposedstorm waterfacilities meetTotal Suspended Solids andTotal Phosphorus treatment requirements fortheproposedsite. Thedeadstoragepondis designed tothe2.5-inchesofdeadstoragerequirementandbothraingardens provide adequate volume forinfiltration. The applicant shall comply with thefollowing requirements: 1) Theapplicantshallput up an escrowor letterof creditfor 100% of the costofbuilding proposed infiltration measuresandshallcontact citystaff48hourspriortoconstruction of therain watergardens. 2) Addnoteto plans: “The contractor shallcontactMaplewood Public Works staff48 hours prior toconstruction oftherain gardens andinfiltrationponds.” 3) The Cityof Maplewood willrequirea letterfrom thedeveloperor theCity of Little Canada astothe maintenance responsibility forthe pondingareas. Wetlands, Construction SiteErosionControl, Grading and Drainage Thedevelopment’sstormwaterrunoffwilldrainintotheKohlmanMarshwetland tothesouth. Directimpacts to the wetlandbuffer (but not thewetland) are proposed as part of the revised plan. RefertocommentsbyShann Finwall, Environmental Planner, addressingrequirements of the Wetland Ordinance forbufferdisturbances. The finalgrading plan adequatelyaddresses possible flows to neighboring properties. The applicant proposesto contain a majority of the site runoffintheproposedstormsewersystem andstormwatertreatment facilities. Comments 1)Add notetothe plans: “The contractor and engineershallmeetwith Maplewood Engineeringstaff as acondition of thegrading permit due to the relative steepnessof thesite and the potential fornegative impacts on the downstream Kohlman Marshand other properties inthe vicinity. The applicant shall have prepared aproposedstaging plan forclearing, grubbing, grading and setting of erosion controlmeasures onthis site for review priortothe meeting. No construction isallowed tocommence without a meeting withcity of Maplewood personnel.” 2) Show all temporary construction easements onthe plans. Add noteto plans: “The contractor shallobtain alltemporary rights-of-entry ortemporary construction easements priortoany encroachments of materials andequipment outside the currentproperty boundary.” Maplewood EngineeringComments – Gervais Woods Development 2-24-10 3of3Page 3) The applicantshall obtainthe entirepermanent easement forthe proposed rain gardensandpondingareasforwhichpermanentconstruction willoverlaponto current RamseyCounty Parks property. Showtheeasement ontheplatandsubmit a copyofthesignedeasement document against theRamseyCounty property for the benefitof theapplicant’sproperty to theCityofMaplewood. Miscellanous Theapplicantshallcoordinate treeremovals andreplacementsandwetland ordinance requirements withMaplewoodenvironmentalplannerShann Finwall at (651) 249-2304. END COMMENTS- VARIANCERESOLUTION WHEREAS, Landmark Development of Minnesota applied for variances fromthe zoning ordinance. WHEREAS, this variances apply to two proposed single-dwelling lots inthe GervaisWoods single-family development subdivision. The legaldescriptions are: LOT 2, BLOCK 2, AND LOT 5, BLOCK 2GERVAIS WOODS WHEREAS, Section 44-106of thezoning ordinancerequires a minimum of 10,000square feet forsingle-dwelling residential lots. WHEREAS, theback yards of these two proposed lots wouldhaveless than therequired 10,000 square feet of lotarea for single-dwelling residential properties in theCity of Maplewood. WHEREAS, thehistory ofthese variances areas follows: 1. OnFebruary 16, 2010, the planning commission held apublichearing. City staff published anoticeintheMaplewoodReview andsentnoticestothesurrounding property owners asrequiredbylaw. Theplanning commission gave everyone at thehearing an opportunity to speak and present written statements. The planning commission recommended thatthe citycouncil approve thesevariances. 2. TheCity Council held apublic meetingon ___________. Thecouncil considered reports andrecommendations fromthecity staffandplanning commission. Thecity council ________ these variance requests. NOW, THEREFORE, BEIT RESOLVED that the CityCouncil approve theabove-described variances forthe following reasons: 1. Strictenforcement would cause undue hardshipbecause of circumstances unique to thepropertyunderconsideration. Thissituation isuniquebecause creditforlot area can’tbegiven forlandoutside of Maplewood. Iftheentiresitewasin Maplewood, thequestion oflot areawould notbean issue. 2. The variance wouldbe inkeeping with the spiritand intent of the ordinance sincethe proposed southerly lotswould havemorelot areathanisrequiredbyboththeCities ofLittle Canada and Maplewood. Adopted on ___________. AgendaItemJ5 AGENDAREPORT TO JimAntonen, CityManager FROM: CharlesAhl, AssistantCityManager SUBJECT: GladstoneAreaImprovements - CityProject 04-21– Consider Authorizing Design Services forReplacementofPhalenCreekBridgeonFrostAvenue DATE:March 17, 2010 INTRODUCTION Itis proposed thattheCity Council consider advancing thedesign of thebridge on FrostAvenue crossing Phalen Creekfor thepurpose ofsecuring available state grantfunds. StateofMinnesota BridgeBonds areavailable to coverthe construction cost ofprojects whereplans arecompleted. Qualificationfor fundsrequires thelocalagency tohave theplans completed before applyingfor funding. Inthe pastfewyears, all funds withinthis account, managed by MnDOT, havenot been obligated to local agencies, so approval of the construction cost is likely. SUMMARY ThebridgeoverPhalen Creek onFrostAvenue isdeteriorated, sub-standard in width, andin need of upgrading. Therecent bridgeinspection, conducted onbehalf of Maplewood bytheRamsey County bridge inspectionteam, indicated thatthe bridge isstructurally deficient [this doesnotmean itis in dangerof collapse] andrecommends thatmaintenance work isrequired ifreplacement is not imminent. Theestimatedcostofthemaintenanceworkis $250,000. Minnesota StateBridge Bond Fundsare available tolocalagencies toupgrade localbridgeson afirst- come/first-served basis. Inthe pastfewyears, allavailable bondfundsto localagencies havenot beenclaimed, so funding is readily available for thereplacement. Agenciescannot apply for these funds, however, until acompleted environmental document andplansare completed. The costof preparingthe environmental document and bridge plans is $140,000from our consultant engineers on theproject, Kimley-Hornand Associates, Inc. [KHA]. The likely construction cost of the bridge replacement is $1.5million, which would be theamount ofbridge bondfunding thatwill berequested from MnDOT. Weanticipate that100% of theconstruction cost willbe coveredby thesestatebond funds. Weplanto coordinatethese improvementswith otherGladstone areaimprovements thatare beingconsidered witha pending development ofthe Tourist Cabins property. Thereplacement ofthe bridge wouldbecoordinated withthe roadway improvements considered with thoseGladstone improvements. BUDGET IMPACT Thisauthorization willprovide theproject budget withan additional $140,000 ofauthorized expenditures toKHAfortheenvironmental documentation andbridgedesign. KHAhasthe preliminaryengineering from theGladstoneengineering andare workingwith SEHEngineers onthe overall Gladstone improvements. The $140,000 iseligible forMunicipal State AidStreet [MSAS] funding reimbursement and is the source of funding for this project. RECOMMENDATION Itis recommended thatthe CityCouncil authorizethePublic WorksDirectorto enterinto an agreement forengineering services withKimley-Horn andAssociates, Inc. in theamountof $140,000 forenvironmental documentationand preliminarybridge plansfor the PhalenCreekBridgeonFrost Avenue as partofthe Gladstone AreaImprovements, City Project04-21, andfurther authorizethe Public Works Director toproceed toapply for State Bridge Bond funding for thereplacement ofthe Phalen Creek Bridge upon completionofsaid plans. AGENDA REPORT TO: JamesAntonen, CityManager FROM: MichaelThompson, CityEngineer/ Dep. PublicWorksDirector SteveLove, AssistantCityEngineer JonJarosch, CivilEngineer I SUBJECT: HillsandDalesAreaStreetImprovements, Project09-15 a. ResolutionApprovingPlansandSpecificationsandAuthorizing Advertising forBids b. ResolutionOrdering PreparationofAssessment Roll DATE: March12, 2010 INTRODUCTION Finalplans andspecifications for theabove referencedprojecthave beencompleted and areready to beadvertised for bids. Thebid opening for this projectis proposed to be scheduledat 10:00 a.m., Tuesday, May4, 2010. The next stepafter approving theadvertisement for bidsis orderingthe preparation of theassessment roll. An assessment hearing would be scheduledfor May 10, 2010 upon councilapprovingthe rolland calling a hearingat thenext regular meeting. The awardof bidwould be considered by the citycouncil at the May 10, 2010 meeting afterthe assessment hearing is conducted. BACKGROUND Thecity council ordered the preparation of thisfeasibility studyat the August10, 2009, regular meeting. Thescope ofthe feasibility study wasmodified toadd Area #2at the September 14, 2009regular meeting. On January11, 2010 thecity council accepted the feasibility report and orderedthe public hearing. Theproject was thenordered atthe January25, 2010 council meetingafter the publichearing was conducted. Theproposed projectis illustrated on the attached projectlocation mapsand consists of the following twoareas: AREA #1: AtlanticStreet, BelmontLane, Burke Avenue, Chambers Street, Cope Court, DayRoad, Duluth Street, Duluth Place, Junction Avenue, Lark Road, Leland Road, RyanAvenue, Shryer Avenue, and SkillmanAvenue AREA #2: Furness Street, Howard Street, and Ripley Avenue Aplan review open house was held at the Maplewood Community Center on March 18, 2010 between 4:00 p.m. and8:00 p.m. Theopen houseis an opportunity for residentsto viewthe designplans and make suggestions forstafftouseinfinaladjustments totheplans. DISCUSSION Thisproject accounts forthe full reconstructionof approximately 4 miles of streets includingthe replacement ofthe existing pavementsurface, replacement of poor subgrade soils with a2-foot sand subcut, addition of concrete curb and gutter, watermain replacements, sanitary sewer repairs and lining, andextensive stormsewerinstallations. Stormwatermanagementimprovements havebeen designed in coordinationwith Ramsey-WashingtonMetro Watershed District (RWMWD) and include rainwatergardens and filtration techniques in orderto meet volume and rate control requirements. Dueto feedbackreceived from residents atthe neighborhood meetingsand at the publichearing, surveys were sent out to projectresidents to gatherinput in regard to street narrowing, traffic calming, curbtypes, and the needforasidewalk. The results fromthese surveyswere utilizedin thedesign of thisproject. Ofthosesurveys that werereturned, themajority ofresidents responded that theywere opposedto streetnarrowing, sidewalks, and trafficcalming techniques at intersections. Staff also askedfor residentfeedbackin regardto the type ofconcrete curband gutter they wouldlike to see utilized in the neighborhood. Of those surveys that were returnedthe majority werein favor of utilizing B618 (BarrierStyle) concrete curbandgutter. ThePhaseII InvestigationReport, prepared bySEH, Inc., has beenreceived by staffin regardsto the potentially contaminated soils, noted in thefeasibility study. Thecontamination reportedin the Phase II Investigation Reportis comprised of 8 areascontaining low levelsof diesel contamination. Staff is currently workingwithSEHonpreparing aResponse ActionPlan (RAP) which willoutlinehowany contaminated soilsunearthedas part of the proposed projectwould be handled and properly disposed of. The city has enrolled in the Minnesota Pollution control agencies Petroleum Brownfield Program which provides thetechnical assistance andliability assurance. Theproposed project schedule anticipates constructionbeginning in late Mayand completion of the project infall2010. PROJECT BUDGET Thetotal projectbudget, for Area #1 and Area #2, was approved at the January11, 2010city council meeting intheamountof $7,836,087. Noadjustments areneeded. The following isasummary ofthe approved project budget: APPROVED PROJECT BUDGET PROJECT AMOUNTFUNDINGSOURCE G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS$3,164,283 SANITARY SEWERFUND$428,064 ENVIRONMENTAL UTILITYFUND$1,060,541 SPECIALASSESSMENT$2,792,721 ST. PAULWATER$209,102 W.A.C. FUND$101,376 DRIVEWAYREPLACEMENT PROGRAM$80,000 TOTALFUNDING$7,836,087 RECOMMENDATION Itis recommended that the city council approve the attached resolutions for the Hills and Dales Area StreetImprovements, City Project 09-15: Approving Plans and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids and Ordering the Preparation of theAssessment Roll. Attachments: 1. Resolution Approving Plansand Advertising for Bid 2. Resolution Ordering PreparationofAssessment Roll 3. Project Location Map RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS ADVERTISING FOR BIDS WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passedby the city council on January 11, 2010 plans and specificationsfortheHillsandDales AreaStreetImprovements, CityProject09-15, havebeen prepared by (or under the direction of) the city engineer, who haspresented such plans and specifications to the council for approval, NOW, THEREFORE, BE ITRESOLVED BYTHECITYCOUNCIL OF THECITYOF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 1. Suchplans andspecifications, a copyof which areattached hereto and made a part hereof, are herebyapproved and ordered placedon file inthe office of thecity clerk. 2. Thecity clerk shallprepare and causeto be inserted in theofficial paper and inthe Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making ofsuch improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published twice, at least twenty-one daysbefore the date setfor bid opening, shallspecify thework to bedone, shallstate that bidswill be publiclyopenedand considered by the council at 10:00 a.m. on the 4th dayof May, 2010, at city hall andthat no bids shallbe considered unlesssealed and filedwith the clerk and accompanied by a certified checkor bid bond, payable to theCity of Maplewood, Minnesotafor fivepercent ofthe amount of such bid. 3. The cityclerk and city engineerarehereby authorizedand instructedto receive, open, andread aloudbids received at thetime and placeherein noted, and totabulate thebids received. The council will consider the bids, and the award of a contract, at the regular city council meeting of May 10, 2010. RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OFASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, thecityclerkandcityengineerwillreceivebidsfortheHillsandDales AreaStreet Improvements, City Project09-15, NOW, THEREFORE, BE ITRESOLVED BYTHE CITYCOUNCIL OFMAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA thatthecityclerkandcityengineershallforthwith calculatetheproperamounttobe speciallyassessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land abutting onthe streetsaffected, without regardto cashvaluation, asprovided by law, andthey shall filea copy of suchproposedassessment inthecityoffice forinspection. FURTHER, theclerkshall, uponcompletion ofsuchproposedassessmentnotifythecouncil thereof. AGENDA REPORT TO: James Antonen, CityManager FROM: MichaelThompson, CityEngineer SUBJECT: WhiteBearAvenue / CountyRdDImprovements, Project08-13 1) ResolutionApprovingPlans andSpecifications andAuthorizingAdvertising forBids 2) ResolutionOrderingPreparation ofAssessmentRoll2) DATE: March16, 2010 INTRODUCTION Citystaff has beenworking with the County in the developmentof theproposed improvements. Final plans andspecifications for theproject havebeen completed andthe project isready to beadvertised for bids. The councilwillalso considerorderingthe preparation ofthe assessmentroll. BACKGROUND OnDecember 15, 2008 the council ordered theimprovementsfor the WhiteBear Avenue improvement projectwhichincludes reconstructionof White BearAvenue from Radatz Avenue tojust northof County RoadD. Alsoincluded isCounty RoadD just westof Southlawn Avenue extending east past WhiteBear Avenue. The County RoadD portion of theproject was bid by RamseyCounty and theCity concurred with the award toShafer Contracting onOctober26, 2009. Theresolution approving plansand specifications andauthorizing advertisement for bids in this report coincideswiththe White BearAvenue portion. Howeverthe preparation of the rollrelates to bothCounty Road DandWhite BearAvenue aspartofCity Project08-13. Thebid opening for the WhiteBear Avenue portionof the projectwill occurin April or Mayof 2010. Maplewood is financing a portionof its share through special assessments as describedin the feasibility studythatwas adopted by thecouncil on November 24, 2008. A copyof thereport canbe foundin the officeofthe CityEngineer. Aseries ofopenhouse meetings havebeen conductedover past years regarding the proposed improvements andassociated assessments. PROJECT BUDGET Thetotal project budget as reported in the feasibility study is $16,711,000. The city’s capitalimprovement program projected $3,550,000 as Maplewood’s contribution towards totalproject costs. The proposed amountidentified inthefeasibility study asMaplewood’scontribution is $3,374,000. TheWhite Bear Avenue Improvements, Maplewood City Project 08-13and Ramsey County Project P- 3202, areproposed to be financed through variousCounty and Cityfunding sourcesin addition tofederal funds. The following is a summary of the current financingplan for the overall project. Financing Source Amount CSAH Funds $ 5,582,000 Federal STP Funds $ 7,400,000 MSA Bonds $ 1,131,525 Special Assessments $ 1,738,475 SPRWS Funds $ 355,000 Maplewood SPRWS WAC Funds $ 355,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility $ 149,000 Total $ 16,711,000 Thetotal proposed Maplewood funding allocated to the projectidentifiedin the feasibility study is as follows: Financing Source Amount MSA Bonds $ 1,131,525 Special Assessments $ 1,738,475 Maplewood SPRWS WAC Funds $ 355,000 Sanitary Sewer Utility $ 149,000 Total $ 3,374,000 Priorto concurring with Ramsey Countyfortheawardof contract, slated forMay 2010, aCity/County cost shareagreement willbe brought to the council for consideration stipulating cost breakdownsbased on actual bid pricing. RECOMMENDATION Itis recommended that thecouncil approvetheattached resolutions forthe White BearAvenue / County RoadD Improvements, Project 08-13: Resolutions Approving Plans and Specifications and Authorizing Advertising forBids, and Ordering PreparationofAssessment Roll. Attachments 1. Resolution Approving Plans andSpecsand Adfor Bids 2. Resolution Ordering PreparationofAssessment Roll 3. Location Map RESOLUTION APPROVINGPLANSANDSPECS AUTHORIZINGADVERTISING FORBIDS thWHEREAS, pursuanttoresolution passed bytheCityCouncil onNovember 24, 2008, plans and specifications for theWhite Bear Avenue / County RoadD Improvements, City Project 08-13, have been prepared by (orunder the direction of) the CityEngineer, whohas presented suchplans andspecifications to theCouncil forapproval, NOW, THEREFORE, BE ITRESOLVED BYTHECITYCOUNCIL OF THECITYOF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 1. Suchplans andspecifications, a copyof whichareattached hereto andmade a parthereof, arehereby approvedand orderedplaced on filein the officeof theCity Engineer. 2. Ramsey County shallprepare andcauseto be inserted inthe officialpaper and inthe Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making ofsuch improvement under such approved plansand specifications. The advertisementshall bepublished twice, atleast thirty-onedays before thedate set forbid opening, shallspecify thework to bedone, andshall statethat bidswill be publiclyopenedand that nobids shall be considered unlesssealed andfiled with theCounty and accompanied bya certifiedcheckor bidbond payableto theCountyfor 5% of theamount ofsuch bid. 3. Ramsey Countyishereby authorized andinstructed to receive, open, and readaloud bids received, and to tabulate the bids received. The Councilwill consider the bids, and concur with Ramsey County ontheawardofacontract ataregularCityCouncil meeting inMayof2010. ndAdoptedbytheCouncilthis22day ofMarch 2010 RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OFASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, Ramsey County on behalf of the cityclerk and city engineer willreceive bids for the White BearAvenue / CountyRoad DImprovements, CityProject 08-13. NOW, THEREFORE, BE ITRESOLVED BYTHE CITYCOUNCIL OFMAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA thatthe cityclerkandcityengineer shallforthwith calculate theproper amount tobe specially assessedfor such improvement against everyassessable lot, piece or parcel of landabutting on the streets affected, without regardto cashvaluation, asprovided bylaw, and they shallfile acopy of such proposed assessment in thecity officefor inspection. FURTHER, theclerkshall, uponcompletion ofsuchproposedassessmentnotifythecouncil thereof. ndOrderedbytheCouncilthis22day ofMarch 2010 AGENDA REPORT TO: JamesAntonen, CityManager FROM: Michael Thompson, CityEngineer/ DeputyPublicWorksDirector SUBJECT: StillwaterRoad / TH5Improvements, Project09-04, ResolutionReceiving Bids andAwarding Construction Contract DATE: March15, 2010 INTRODUCTION Bidswere received and subsequently opened on Friday, February 5, 2010. The council will consider receiving the bidsand awarding aconstructioncontract. BACKGROUND Elevenbids were openedand read aloud. T.A Schifskyand Sons, Inc wasthe low bidder in the amount of $1,331,999.99, whichwas 26% under the engineer’s estimate of $1,806,355.00. The highestbidread aloudwas $1,713,426.73. Thebreakdown of bidders can befound inthe attachment. Mn/DOThasauthorizedtheproject tobeawardedasstatedintheattached letter. BUDGET Thebid fallswell under the approved budget of $2,500,000 fortotal projectcosts. A majorityof the fundingis fromARRA StimulusFunding awarded totheCity andacontribution fromMn/DOT. The Mn/DOT contribution maydecrease since construction pricing came inmuch lowerthan anticipated. A revisedbudget will be brought backto council upon finalization of theMn/DOT contribution towards non-construction costs. It is expected that total project costs will be $2 million, $500,000 less than anticipated. CurrentBudget Federal Stimulus Local ARRA Funds $ 800,000 Mn/DOT ARRA Funds (MillandOverlay) $ 856,000 perMn/DOTAgreement No. 95693 City of Maplewood MSA - Bonds $ 508,700 Cityof Maplewood EUF $ 335,300 Total $ 2,500,000 RECOMMENDATION Itis recommended that the city council approve theattached Resolution for Receiving Bids and Awardinga Construction Contract for theStillwater Road/ TH5Improvements, City Project 09-04. Attachments: 1. Resolution: Award of Bids 2. Mn/DOTAuthorization to AwardLetter 3. KHA BidLetter/ DBE Clearance 4. Project Map RESOLUTION RECEIVING BIDSANDAWARDINGCONSTRUCTION CONTRACT BE ITRESOLVED BYTHECITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, thatthe bidof T.A. Schifsky andSons, Inc., in the amount of $1,331,999.99 is the lowestresponsiblebid for the constructionof the Stillwater Road/ TH 5 Improvement – City Project 09-04 [S.P.6230-28 (T.H. 5=045), S.P.138-010-17], and the mayor andcity manager arehereby authorized and directedto enter into a contract with saidbidder for andonbehalf ofthe city. The finance director is hereby authorized to makethe financial transfers necessary to implement the financing planfor the project. ndAdoptedbythecouncilonthis22dayofMarch, 2010. PROJECT LOCATION PROJECT LOCATIONMAP STILLWATER ROAD STREET, SIDEWALK, AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS CITYPROJECT 09-04 SP NO. 138-010-17 EXHIBIT 1 Agenda Item M1 CITYATTORNEY REPORTTOCITY COUNCIL MARCH22, 2010 The CityofMaplewood recently becameawarethatDiana Longrie, in her private practice as an attorney andduring hertenure asmayorof theCity, represented PatriciaGearin and Wipers Recycling LLCat thesame timethat Ms. Gearin, Wipers Recycling LLC andGearin LLC were engaged inlitigation against theCity andvariousCity officials. Ms. Longrieparticipated in meetings ofthe City Council thatwere closedfor attorney-clientprivileged discussionsof litigation strategy relating tothe lawsuitsbrought by Ms. Gearin andher companies. Ms. Longrie did notrecuse herselffrom thosediscussions, nor didshe disclose tothe Citythat she represented Ms. Gearin andWipers. Morespecifically, theCity isaware of the followingfacts in thepublic record: Diana Longrie, a licensed attorney inthe stateofMinnesota, was electedtooffice in2005 and sworn inasMayorin January 2006. She becamea paid public officialof theCityof Maplewood at that time. Her termofoffice endedonJanuary 4, 2010. A companycalledWipers Recycling, L.L.C., moved intotheCity ofMaplewood inthe summerof 2007. Thecompany isownedand operated byPatricia Gearin. Ms. Longrierepresented Ms. GearinandWipers Recycling LLCin a civilmatter, RecoverySystems Company, Inc. v. Patricia Gearin, WipersRecycling LLC., 27-CV-06- 14894, Hennepin County, Fourth Judicial District. Courtrecords indicate that Ms. Longrie represented Ms. Gearinand Wipers Recycling LLCfrom May2007 untilthe conclusion of thelitigation in November 2007. InAugust 2008, Ms. Gearin, Wipers Recycling LLC, and Gearin LLCbroughta federal civil lawsuit against theCity and Cityofficials disputing theCity’sbuildingand fire code decisions with respect toher building, amongother issues. Patricia M. Gearin, etal. v. Cityof Maplewood, Minnesota, et al., 08-5019 (PJS/AJB). Thatcaseisstill pending. InFebruary 2009, Ms. Gearin, Wipers Recycling LLC, and Gearin LLCbroughta state civil lawsuit against theCity and Cityofficials disputing theCity’sbuildingand fire code decisions with respect toher building, amongotherissues. Gearin, LLC, et al. v. Vecoplan, LLC, et al., 62-CV-09-1924, RamseyCounty, Second Judicial District. That caseis stillpending. In September2009, Ms. Gearin, WipersRecycling LLC, andGearin LLCappealed the decision by theCity and itsbuilding officialthat Ms. Gearin changed theuse of her building and neededa new certificate ofoccupancy. They appealed thisdecision to the state boardof appeals ofthe Department of Labor & Industry. InSeptember 2009, the board upheldthe decisions oftheCity and its building official. Ms. Gearin, Wipers Recycling LLC, and GearinLLC appealed that decision. That case isstillpending before the Officeof Administrative Hearings. Agenda Item M1 After Ms. Gearin, Wipers Recycling LLC, and Gearin LLC brought afederallawsuit in August 2008, the Citytendered defense ofthe claims toitsinsuranceprovider, the League ofMinnesota CitiesInsurance Trust (LMCIT), which acceptedthe claim. The LMCIT contracted withthe firmGreene Espel P.L.L.P. to provide theactual legaldefense services and RobinWolpert wasassigned asthe principalattorneyto thefile. As partofthe process ofdefending theCity, Ms. Wolpert metperiodically with theCity Council in closedsessions to holdattorney-client privileged communications with the Councilregarding litigation strategy. During these meetings, the CityCouncilsought legal advice, andMs. Wolpert provided legal advice, regardingthe pending lawsuits. The closed sessions regarding the pending lawsuits thatMs. Longrieparticipated inincluded sessions onSeptember 8, 2008; February23, 2009; July 6, 2009; and September 14, 2009. AfterMs. Longrie’s term ended, theCity learned that sherepresented Ms. Gearin’s company Wipers Recycling LLC, in another civillawsuit from April 2009 to the present, Bro-Tex, Inc. v. Wipers Recycling, LLC., 62-CV-09-6032, RamseyCounty, Second Judicial District. Court documentsindicate thatMs. Longrie appealed the conciliation court decision onbehalfof Wipers inMay2009 andremainscounsel of record. Ms. Longrierepresented Ms. Gearin andWipers Recycling LLC while shewas anelected andpaid public official andwhile her client wasalso suing the City inmultiple forums state, federal, andadministrative). Specifically, from the spring of2009 until theend of her term, Ms. Longriesimultaneously wasan attorneyfor Wipers Recycling LLC and Ms. Gearin anda participant asmayor inclosedsessions regarding thesuits ofWipers Recycling LLCandMs. Gearin against the City. Ms. Longriedid not discloseher representation ofMs. Gearin and Wipers Recycling LLCtothe City. The City never consented to Ms. Longrie’s actions. Ms. Longrie attended attorney client privileged meetings todiscusslitigation strategy relatedtothe pending lawsuits against the City. Members of the CityCouncil, based on the information containedin thisreport, Iwillbe reporting thesefacts to theappropriate state agenciesfor furtherinvestigation. Item M2 MEMORANDUM TO James Antonen, CityManager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, Director Citizen Services DATE: March 16, 2010 RE: ApprovalofResolution Adopting the 2010 CityCouncil Goals Background On February 5, 2010aCityCouncil andManagement Team Retreatwasheldandwas facilitated by Barbara Strandell. The purpose of the retreat wasto set council direction and goals forthenext twoto threeyears. Starting withinputthatwascollected byMs. Strandellpre-retreat, themayor andcouncil discussed their goals, consolidatedwhere appropriate and thenranked the goals during the retreatday. Staffis requesting thatthe city council approve the following resolution establishingthe three yeargoals. Afterapproval, thegoals willbedistributed on thecity website, in theMaplewood Monthly andposterswillbemadetohanginvarious citybuildingssothatthecitizens can review them. Consideration Approve thefollowing resolution adopting the 2010CityCouncil Goals. Resolution Establishing CityCouncil ThreeYear Goals WHEREAS thecity councilofthe Cityof Maplewood on February5, 2010 heldacity councilretreat anddiscussed theirgoals ranking themin order ofpriority as follows; GoalNumber 1 - RestoreReputation ofMaplewood Re-establishMaplewood’s reputation as anattractive, viablecommunity with good management, financial stability, sensible leadership withprofessional and dedicated staff. GoalNumber 2 - Good Government Make Maplewoodcitygovernment transparentandaccessible; operate withinan environment ofefficiency and mutual respect. Takesteps torestoretrustand respect between thecitizens, staffand electedofficials. GoalNumber 3 - Parksand Recreation Department Re-establish aParks andRecreation Departmentusinginput from citizen surveys; revitalize leadership, establish newdirection, program determination/stabilization, andpossible jointventure withneighboring communities. GoalNumber 4 - Environmental Planning Further develop processes for “going green,” sustainability. GoalNumber 5 - FiscalResponsibility Manage thecity’sfinances andfinancial planning effectively withaneyeto providing stabilityand maximum value inthe longterm forour citizens. GoalNumber 6 - Infrastructure Complete infrastructureupgrades. GoalNumber 7 - Redevelopment Plan Create andcommit toaredevelopment planforthe citythrough prioritizing and updating theMaster Plan. WHEREAS these goals were established by thecity councilwith input from citystaffandwillbeplacedinprominent placessothattheymaybe viewed bythecitizens of Maplewood. NOW, THEREFORE, BE ITRESOLVED, thatthe CityCouncil of the CityofMaplewood hereby approves theResolutionEstablishing CityCouncil Three YearGoals thatwereseton February 5, 2010. Approved this22ndDayof March, 2010 MayorWillRossbach Attest: Karen Guilfoile City Clerk Greetings! I have a packet of information that I wish to hand out to each of you....may I approach? Please make the packet handed to the Clerk part of the official public record. Let me address a number of issues: Before you, are public documents from the two cases cited in Mr. Kantrud's memorandum As you will see, i was an attorney for Ms. Gearin before she was criminally charged by Maplewood and before she sued the city. NOTE FOR THE RECORD: The City has never been one of my clients nor have I ever represented Ms. Gearin in any action opposing the City of Maplewood. Case number one: Go through Packet No 1. Case number two: Go through Packet No 2. Conflict of Interest: The Memorandum published in the council packet and presented on the city web site for public viewing is curiously absent of any legal basis for the "reporting of these facts to the appropriate state agencies for further investigation". - no case law, no rules, no citation to Attorney General Opinions, no citation to the League of MN Cities guidance protocols, no anything - Just " The city never consented to Ms. Longrie's actions"' League of MN Cities The League has a 44 page book on Conflict of Interest for elected officials. Attached to this memorandum for the record are select pages of that booklet for your inspection and contemplation - specifically p. 2, 4, L5, L6, 17, 78, 19, 20,27,28, 29,30, 37, 32, 33, and 34. This booklet is available on the internet and is part of the new council member orientation training. Page 2 specifically states: Read Section 1. P 27 Specifically addresses Conflict of interest in non-contractual situations with specific situations beginning on page 29 - read first sentence. Let's take a look at specific examples: read p 29-33. In the second case - A case to remove a conciliation court matter to district court - Ms. Gearin hired me again to help her with a debtor/creditor issue because she was satisfied with the assistance I provided in the previous debtor/creditor case. lust like Mr. Rossbach might get repeat customers for remodeling or Mr. Nephew might get repeat Maplewood sales for his card games Let'S Kill and To Make a Pretty Corpse, I have repeat clients too. Neither of Ms. Gearin's 2 debtor/cred itors cases had anything to do with the city of Maplewood nor the outcome of the cases between Ms. Gearin and the City. These 2 cases did NOT involve Contracts with the city of f4aplewood and did NOT involve licenses or permits with the city of Maplewood. Additionally, while I was Mayor, I don't recall that we even ever took a vote on any of the Maplewood vs. Gearin matters - Plus - our League appointed attorney was running the litigation - NoT us - she informing us of her actions after they generally had already occurred. l,t t For the record, I am NOT a shareholder of Wipers, I am not a Director of Wipers. I have NO personal financial interest in Wipers Recycling what so ever. Mr. Kantrud has been very careful in his memorandum - he claims that he has only stated the facts. However, the structuring of the "facts" are crafted in such a way as to lead the reader to the conclusion that something wrongful and deceitful has occurred. This impression is then reinforced by the last sentence where he states he will be repofting "these facts to the appropriate state agencies for further investigation". I asked Mr. Kantrud what state agencies would be doing the investigation. He replied "I don't know what agency would do anv investigation, but I know it will not be me or anyone here at the City if I have any say about it". The email is attached to the public record. Throw the mud on the wall - see if it sticks! So what's this all about? I'm no longer an elected official. I don't serve on a board or commission. l'm simply a private citizen - an attorney in our community. My representation of Ms. Gearin or anyone else in the Court system is public information, available on the internet, for free, to all citizens and has been for years. So, this is what I think. You've been sitting on this for a while - waiting for the right time to trot it out and get the big headlines in the Maplewood Review. No better time than now to fling the mud bombs to defame my name, my character, and my integrity as an attorney. This isn't the first time for Mr. Nephew, he has published several incidences of defamation per se about me on his blog site in the past. Everyone at the council table knows that I am seeking DFL endorsement over Betty McCollum for US Congress on April 17th. Unlike Mccollum, I do not suppot the current senseless occupation of Afghanistan nor do I follow the drum of the entrenched status quo politics that are still trying to convince us that the bail-out of corporate interests such as AiG or the other the too big too fail, too big too jail bankers somehow was a good thing for the little fellow. I'm going to leave you with a thought or two. Written publications calculated to expose a person to public contempt or ridicule and thus to induce an ill opinion of him in the good opinion and respect of others are libelous - even though they involve no charge of crimes. These statements are actionable without any allegation of special damages. Further, the defamation of a professional person where a defjmatory charge imputes to that professional a lack of due qualification, misconduct or want of integrity is actionable per se when those words relate to his professional capacity. Thank you very much for your time U ri' h \) .l <2ffi' rl'" l.ogoul S.xr.lr \1. rr N.tr ar\ rl Scarch Ba.l' Register of Actions Case No. 27-CV -06-14894 RECOVERY SYSTE,MS COMPANY INC A Minnesota Corporation vs Patricia Gearin, Wipers Recycling LLC a Minnesota limited liability compan-v Party Information Defendan'Gearin, Patricia St. Paul Park. MN 55071 DefendanWipers Recycling LLC St. Paul Park. MN 55071 Plaintiff RECOVERY SYSTEMS COMPANY INC 0612112007 06t2112007 0712312007 10t2212007 1012212007 111021200'7 Events & Orders ofthe Court luspostroNs 07l23l2OO7l settled (Judicial Officer: Scherer.Richard S. .) I 08/01/2006 08t0112006 08t15t2006 08/15/2006 08n612006 09t2812006 10t04t2006 1110l/2006 1U0112006 0310112007 03t2312007 06t0712007 06t2012007 06t2112007 OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS Summons and Complaint Affidavit of No Answer, ID, Non-Military Status and Amt Due Certifi cate of Representation Answer Notice of Case Assignment (Judicial Officer: Scherer.Richard S' , ) Informational Statement Informational Statement Scheduling Order (.Iudicial Officer: Scherer,Richard S' , ) Order-Other (Judicial Officer: Scherer'Richard S . ) Correspondence Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel Order-Other (Judicial Officer: Scherer,Richard S , ) Notice of Appearance Pre-trial (i:is pu) (.Iudicial officer Scherer,Richard S' ') Result: Held Correspondence Notice of Appearance c)icfLti Jury Trial (9:00 AM) (Judiciat Officer Scherer'Richard S ') Other Notice of Motion and Affidavit Memorandum Motion Hearing (1 :30 PM) (Judicial Officer Scherer'Richard S ') Page I of3 Location : All MNCIS Sites - Case Searchttctl Case Type: Default Judgment Date Filed: 08/0I /2006 Location: - HennePin Civil .ludicial Officer: Scherer,Richard S' ' Lead Attorne]'s LONGRIE, DIANA htto:i/oa.courts.state.mn.us/CaseDetail'aspx?CaselD: 1 6 i 0573 897 3t22l20l0 Retained LONGRIE. DIANA Retdined CLARK, DONALD Relained $ $ $ $ $ $ t1/0212007 11t0212007 r11021200'7 1U0612007 Financial Information 08116t2006 08t1612006 10t0212006 10t02/2006 06t2l/2007 0612v2007 1110212007 1U0212007 08t1612006 08/16/2006 10t0212006 10t0212006 0612112007 0612112007 1110212007 1110212007 htto://pa.courts.state.mn.us/CaseDetail'aspx?CaseID=1 6 I 0573 897 3122120t0 Result: Held Notice of Motion and Affidavit Memorandum Taken Under Advisement (Judicial Officer: Scherer,Richard S' ' ) Order Granting Motion (Judicial Officer: Scherer"Richard S' ' ) Page 2 of3 407.00 407.00 0.00 252.00 (252.00) 75.00 (75.00) 25.00 (2s.00) 55.00 (ss.00) 407.00 40"7.00 0.00 252.00 (2s2.00) 75.00 (7s.00) 25.00 (2s.00) 55.00 (ss.00) Defendant Gearin, Patricia Total Financial Assessment Total Payments and Credits Balance Due as of 03/2212010 Transaction Assessment Counter Payment Transaction Assessment Mail Payment Transaction Assessment Mail Payment Transaction Assessment Counter Payment Receipt # 1227-2006-024604 BOEHMKE, JULIE LYNIN' Receipt # 1227-2006-030188 BOEHMKE, JULIE LYNN Receipt # 1227-2007-021912 LONGRIE, DIANA LYNN Receipt # PSL27-2007-09310 LONGRIE, DIANA LYNN Defendant WiPers RecYcling LLC Total Financial Assessment Total Payments and Credits Balance Due as of 03/2212010 Transaction Assessment Credit-Joint Filing Transaction Assessment Credit-Joint Filing Transaction Assessment Credit-Joint Filing Transaction Assessment Credit-Joint Filing Plaintiff RECOVERY SYSTEMS COMPANY INC Total Financial Assessment Total Payments and Credits Balance Due as of 03/2212010 Page 3 of 3 307.00 307.00 0.00 252.00 (2s2.00) 55.00 (ss.00) 0811212006 08t1212006 10t2312007 t012312007 Transaction Assessment Mail Payment Transaction Assessment Mail Payment Receipt # 1227 -2006-02420 | Receipt # 1227 -200'7 -03831 4 CLARK. DONALD GRAHAM CAMPBELT, Jr. CLARK. DONALD GRAHAM CAMPBELL, Jr. httn://oa.courts.state.mn.us/CaseDetail'aspx?CaselD:1610573897 3t22120r0 I SF_l-r ilil il[:]fi]- l rirli.:il.l' I:Filjl"l:lO: hijl7'l'iirBLrl r-t[-nr"] 07 JUI -] Pt1 pI$TRIcr couRr ; r --.*---!'o{rRffi .fiiiucrrrr DISIRICT H[]lH CC 0lS T{rtiT l" il S1'A'I'Ii OII MINNESOTA COUNTY OF }.IONNEPIN cnIqT l^1;'\L(TT !i TOA Recovery Systoms Company, [n*,, a Minnesota corporation, Plaintil'[,ORDILR .FOR JURY :I]RIAI, VS irile No. ZeY06-,L{!24 Patricia Gearin and wipers Recycling, LLC a Miruresota limited liability compuly, I)efendants. T0 TH,II ATTORNEYS (OR }tTO SD I'ARTIES) IN THE ABOVE.ENTTTLI]D ACTION; IT IS HER-EtsY ORDERf,D thot thc abovc-cntitled matter is scheduled for tuial during l.he tirne period Iiom Julv 23 - Auqust 3. 2007 in re order given on the attached trial list. 'Ihe trial will be held in Courtroom C-1 553 of the l.Iennepin Cornrty Covemment Center. Be preparcd 1o proceed to irial during these dates. NOTII'Y TI{n COURT AT LtrAST TWO WEEKS PRIOIT TO THE BEGINNING OF THE CI}'IL BLOCK RT,GARDING DATES THAT YOU HAVE CONTLICTS WIT[I., casu(s) alte of thsirs to determine approximate hial liming. Please call the court one day prior to confinn the status of your ca.se. Althr-rugh we will give you the maximum possible notice, you are adviscd that noticc may bc orlly FOIJR huur:s. IW 0 wllli S PR](N{'l o 'tRtAt .. Counsel shall cxchange Iists ofexhibits that will be r:ffered in evidence at trial. The exhibits must be availablc for examination, inspeolion and copying by all counsel. Ifcounsel cannot agree as to the admissibility ofany exhibit, counsel shall be prepared to specify the grounds fbr objection with authorities Counscl shall stipulate as to all unoontested facts and matters not in contoversy. Counsel shall disclose the narues and addresscs nfall pr:ospectivc witnesses Attomeys can monilor the slatus ol theil case by contaclirrg counsel [or the ! lr !. r:l.l.t:, ::ll I , ,l li : Li.l /!lirJ h.] '.!,P RI()R 1'O TR]AI, Cou:rsol shall fumish to the Corut a trial memorandum whioh shall include, but is not limited to, disputed issues nf law with authorities, (krunseI shall submit proposed j ury instruclions an.d a proposed special verdict forrn. Counsel shall also submil any motions in limine I AN \ Continuanccs will not be gralted cxcopt fur lhe most extraordinary and untbreseen ciroumstances. sE"mLEMjilrL Counsel shall noti{y tlre undersigned Judge in writing ofany final dispositions of the case prior to trial. 5. SETI'L CO CU: Il'a settlement conference would be benefioial to this case, please contact my clerlc to schedule a dq.te. T'AILIJRU TO COMIILY WITH THE AROVI PROVISIONS MAY RESULT IN l'HE ITITOS]TION OF SANCTIONS WHICII MAY INCI.,IIDE THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AGAINST TIIE DELINQUENT PARTY, THE STRIKING OF PLIIADINGS, RIIFUSAI, TO ALLOW SUPPORT OR OPPOSTTION TO CERTAIN DISIGNATED CI,AIMS OR DEF'ENSES, DISMISSAL, DET'AUL'I..IUDGDMENT OR OTHER RELIEF AS TEE COURT MAY DtrN,M NtrCtrSSARY. BY TII]] COIIR]'; DATEII: .lure 7,2007 Richard S. Scherer Judge of District Court (612)348-3759 &.M"- STATE OP MINNESOTA COLI{TY OF HENNEPTAI Recovery Systems Company, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, plaintiff vs. DISTRICT COIIRT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT L.ASE TYPE: CONTRACT Court File No. 27 -CV-0614594 Judge fuchard S. Scherer Patricia Gearin, and Wipers Recycling, LI.C, NOTICE OT WITHDRAWAI, OF COUNSEL FOR DEFENDAN'I'S PATRICIA GDARIN AND WIPERS RECYCLING, LLC a Minnesota limited liability company, Defendants TO: PLAIN'IIFI.', R-bCOVERY SYSTEMS COMPANY, INC., AND ITS ATTORNEYS,MARK W. pEERy, ESQ., CLARK & pEERy, p.A., 614 poRTr.AND AVENUE,ST,PAUL,MN 55I02 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Rule r05 of the Generar Rules of pracrice for lhe District courts, the undcrsigned counser hereby wilhdraws Iiom its representation in this matter of Defendants patricia Gearin and wipers Recycling, LLC. Defendants can be served and notified ofmatters relating to this acljon al: Wipers Recycling, LLC 501 - 9th Avenue Sr. Paul park, MN 55071 Patricia Gearin can be served and notified of matters relating to this action at: Patricia Gearin c/o Wipers Recycling, LLC 501 9'' Avenue St. Paul Park, MN 55071 Dated: March 23, 2007 GPr2081307 vl GRAY, PLANT, MOOTY, MOOTY & BENNETT, P.A. Julie (#317330) Center Eighth Street Minneapo)is, Minnesota 55402 Telephone: (612) 632-3000 Facsimile: (612) 333 - 4444 ATTORNEYS T-OR DEFENDANTS PATRICIA GEARIN AND WIPERS RICYCLING, LLC 7 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Recovery Systems, I-nc., a Minnesota corporation, Plaintiff, Vs. Patricia Gearin; and Wipers Recycling, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, Defendants. DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT CTVL COURT DIVISION Assigred to Judge Richard Scherer NOTICE OT' APPEARANCE Court File No. !f.Q.,l@!@ Case Type: Contract PLE.ASE TAKE NOTICI that Diana Longrie, Attomey at Law, appears as counsel for Defendants, Parricia Gearin; and Wipers Recycling LLC, in the above-referenced matter. Please direcr all future correspondence as follows: Diana Longrie Attomey st Law I 321 Frost Avenue E. Maplewood, MN 55109 65 l -793 -6248 or 65 l -2 14-0859 Fax 651-793-6E64 Attomey ID 259305 Dated: June 20,2007 Diana Longrie (2593 Attorney at taw Attomey for Defendant STATE OF OTA COLINTY OF TN r i DISTRICT COURT FOfJRTH ruDIC IAL DISTRICT . Case Type: Breach of Contract li ,t:i,: :, rari;t a Recovery Sy Company, Inc,Court File No.27-CV-06 I4894 corporation Plaintiff,ORDERGRANTING MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT Patricia Gearin.and, Wipers Recycl LLC limited liability company, Defendant. entitled matter came on for hearing before the Court on the 2nd day of November, 2 , upon the Motion of plaintiff Reco very Systems Company, Inc. seeking an Order to tl're settlement Agreement of the parties. D. Graham c. clark Jr. and Mark w. Peery appeared the Plaintiff, Recovery Systems Company, lnc. Diana Longrie, appeared for Defendants cia Gearin, and Wipers Recycling, LLC. Based all of the files, records and proceedings herein, and being fully advised in the premlses. a a The J-A*; 'i1i:i ORDERED: Plaintiffs Motion is Granted in its entiietyi Defendants shall immediately comply with all provisions of the settlement agreement en the parties; and. IT IS J. immediately I 2 pursuant to the settlement agreement between the parties, Defendants shall ver the entire Mitts and Merrill shredder to plainti8 including the conveyor, hopper,and all other components that had been originary purchased from praintiff and that had been to, integated into, otherwise physically attached to, or delivered with the shredder Dxtedthisb ayo 2007 BY ge of District Court 2 l.osool S.xr.I \j..,, N.\ ar\,l S.3r.I BarL Register of Actions Case No. 62-CV-09-6035 Bro-Tex Inc vs Wipers Recycling LLC Related Case Information Related Cases 62-CO-09-807 (Administrative) Party Information DefendanVipers Recycling LLC Maplewood. MN 5 5109 Plaintiff Bro-Tex Inc St Paul, MN 551 14 Location : All MNCIS Sites - Case Searchtt"rp Case TyPe: Conciliation APPeal Date Filed: 0512612009 Location: RamseY Civil ludicial Officer: Johnson, Gregg E. Lead AttorneYs LONGRIE. DIANA Reldined WARNER. GEORG Retained $ {i $ $ $ {i Events & Orders of the Court 05126/2009 0st26t2009 05t2612009 0st2612009 0st26t2009 05t2612009 05t2612009 0810312009 02t0112010 OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS Demand for Removal/APPeal Affidavit of Service Statement of Claim and Summons Order Vacating Judgment (Judicial Officer: Lindman' Dale B' ) Informational Statement IR] Notice of Case Assignment (Judicial Officer: Johnson, Gregg E' ) Publicly Viewable Note to File Scheduling Order (Judicial Officer: Johnson, Gregg E ) CANCELEb Jury Trial (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Johnson' Gregg E') Other 0l/25/2010 Reset by Court to 02/01/2010 Hearing (4:00 PM) (.Tudicial Officer Johnson, Gregg E') Result: Held Jury Trial (9:00 AM) (.Iudicial Officer Johnson' Gregg E ) 02t2s12010 05t17120t0 Financial Information Defendant WiPers RecYcling L['C Total Financial Assessment Total Payments and Credits Balance Due as of 03/2212010 05t26t2009 Transaction Assessment Transaction Asscssment Counter 0512612009 0512612009 325.00 325.00 0.00 250.00 75.00 htto://oa.courts.state.mn'us/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=|6|2729817 312212010 County Judicial District to Case No. Cool8D Name Bto- rsx Name /r'tsAddressH Addrcss City/State/Zip Name YCLLi& LLW IPEPS R Name Address €Address r^A?L€t^rooo lf.'NCity/StatdZip 55t oq City/State/Zip STATEMENT OF CLAIM AND SUMMONS Conciliation Court Plaintiff #1 Plaintiff #2 VS Defendant #2 T ti P L E A s E P R I N T State of M innesota Defendant #I City/State/Zrp A,a ^l E I. The of$ TATEMENT OF CI"AIM plus filing fees and costs of $ GO for a total ZYK<L u96A Lt/ g oF e&E Pn\M<d(s orJ OPd^o*f vr? what happened and when it happened) fderhAsEs Plus s Eu.lc {( \\*WS tA 2_o o9 1,4 L Lo rrl€D ro ALApH 4-aso -r 24co ot'L zbs e€AaUsr-Y,D 06€ ?ic*u? AFi €e 5€'tZ(Av 'lfngs- oF ^lo€at1 Y {xs\r,, /tJD co PGA6€A ot)Q- pEK)tr 2. The Defendant(s) has/have the foIlowing property that belongs to me (list property),Oen, qtf m Hrt{5$ 4lgo plus filing fees and costs of$valued at for a total of$I*anfi;coi,.t;..d;this property retumed to m€or make the Defendara(s) pay me money for the value of o r.l A|C the property. Ra Coun HalVCourt Hou 15 West 3 I believe the person(s) I am suing iyarc at reast lE years old and not in the miriary service.4 I understand that if I do not mme to cout on my hearing date, iy case *lu be dismissed ald I may have to paymoney to the Defendant(s) on any coumerclaum that has been filed. SUMMONST MPORTANTN OTICE TO THE PARTIES You 4l1 come to court for a hearing o 1_ tZ _O I at 9:so A .^. ot 6- }J oo.-o OOo Dste Blvd St Paul, MN Timc 55102 Room: Ifyou do not come to court for this hearing, yo u may lose the case and heve to pay money to the other party. NOTARY STAMP OR COTJRT SEAL Sign&ture: Ddcl TIIE ABOVE STATEMENI OF CL{M IS TRI,'E { G r"1 AND CORRECT Sigrslure: T MY KNOWLEDCE t- 6+ Name: Titlc (if r.Frs.nlrtivct El*',^ C F.<" The above-entitled case having been settred, the same may be and hereby is dismissed with my consent. Date N otice of Settlement Plaintiffs S rgnature: Dated Court Administrator/Deputy Ce,oozo VS, SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON: State of Minnesota RAMSEY COUNTY NAME AND ADDRESS Bro-Tex lnc 800 Hampden Ave St Paul MN 55114 VS NAME AND ADDRESS Wipers Recycling LLC 1255 Cope Ave Maplewood MN 55109 Conciliation Court SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE No. 62-CO-09-807 NAME AND ADDRESS Vs. NAME AND ADDRESS Appearances: Xptaintit ffi Defendant Neither Party X Contested E Default Upon evidence received, lT lS HEREBY ORDERED: X plaintiff is entitled to judgment against Defendant for the sum of $4.410.00, plus fees of -, for a total of $4.410.00. n judgment shall be entered in favor of Defendants f] - claim is dismissed without prejudice. E - shall immediately return - to the -, and that the Sheriff of the county in which the property is located is authorized and directed to effect repossession of such property according to M.S. S 491A.01 subd.5, and turn it over to . fl other / E Memo _ Dated: April 13,2009 Referee: Dick JUDGMENT is hereby declared and entered as stated in the Court's Order for Judgment set forth above, and the judgment shall become finally effective on the date specified in the notice of judgment set forth below. Dated: April 29,2009 Court Administrator/Deputy:sg THE PARTIES ARE HEREBY notified that Judgment has been entered as indicated above, but the Judgment is stayed by law until: May 22,2009 (to allow time for an appeal/removal if desired) THE PARTIES ARE FURTHER NOTIFIED that if the cause is removed to district court and the removing pa y does not prevail as provided in Rule 524 of the Minnesota General Rules of Practice for the District Courts, the opposing party will be awarded $50 as costs. Dated I certify that the above is a correct transcript of the Judgment entered by this Court Da!e.l: Distribution: Original for file Copy for Plaintiff Copy for Defendant Court Adminislrator/Deputy: Court Administrator/Deputy: State of Minnesota Conciliation Court County Ramsey Plaintiff #1 Plaintiff#2 vs. Defendant # I Defendant *2 Demand for RemovaUAppeal From Conciliation Court to District Court and Affidavit of Good Faith State of Minnesota County ofRamsey ) To Bro-Tex lnc- the above named I plaintiff ! defendant. Diana Longrie attorney for Wipers Recycling LLC , being swom/affirmed on oath states (Ar?elknr or An6ney) That the appealing party is aggrieved by the judgment in Conciliation Court and hereby demands the removal ofthe above case from Conciliation Court to the District Court for trial De Novo (new trial) by I court I lury. AND That this appeal is made in good faith and not for the purpose ofdelay. (Sign only of notlt:y public or d.Frty.) -- P L E A s E P R I N T VS. ) ) Dated ,/ /3 'ru7) Swom/affirmed before me this th day of /,U" Notary Public \ Itputy Signature of ttorney or the Pa-ty if plo If appealing prty is a corporatioq the pody's attomey must sign Name of Attorney: Diana Lonerie Address 1321 Frost Ave. E. - S urte A 2009 City/State/Zip:Mapl Judicial District: Court File Number: Case Type: 62-CO-09-807 Second Contract Bro-To(, Inc. 800 Hampden AvenueAddress St. Paul, MN 55114City/State/zip Narne Wipers Recycling LLC Address 1255 Cope Avenue Maplehrood, MN 55109City/State/Zip Narne Address City/State/Zip Name Address City/State/Zip VICTORIA VANG HEU Notary Public Minnesola Jan.31 2012ommission Telephone: (65,l)793-6248 MN 55109 Name State of Minnesota Rarnsey County DIANA LYNN LONGRIE 1321 Frost AVE E Maplewood MN 55109 District Court Second Judicial District Court File Number: 62-CV-09-6035 Case Type: Conciliation APPeal Notice of Case Filing and Judge Assignment - Conciliation Court APPeal Bro-Tex Inc vs Wipers Recycling LLC The above entitled case was filed in this offrce on May 26,2009 and has been assigned to Judge Gregg E. Johnson. Please include the case number and the judge's name on all future documents and correspondence. within approximately 30 days from this notice, you will receive a notice of trial for a future date. A trial in district Court is governed by the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure, the Minnesota General Rules of Practice for the District courts, and the Minnesota Rules of Evidence. Strict compliance with those rules is required. You are urged to seek the assistance of an attomey. Corporations cannot appear in District Court without a licensed attomey. You will soon receive a notice oftrial date, time and location. Ifyou resolve this case prior to trial, please notify the court promptly. Thank you for carefully reading this notice. Ifyou need to schedule any motions or hearings, please contact the assigned judge's case manager: Judges Johnson and Monahan Judges Lindman and Awsumb Judges Cleary and Mott 6s1-266-8307 6s 1-266-8308 6st-266-8306 lilillllltilL{llll illlillilfi llll l{{llllllfl llllill lilllil*62-CV-09-6035*