Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2008 10-27 City Council Meeting
AGENDA MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 6:30 P.M. Monday, October 27, 2008 City Hall, Council Chambers Meeting No. 30-08 A. CALL TO ORDER B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1.Acknowledgementof Maplewood Residents Serving the Country. C. ROLL CALL Mayor?s Address on Protocol: ?Welcome to the meeting of the Maplewood City Council. It is our desire to keep all discussions civil as we work through difficult issues tonight. If you are here for a Public Hearing or to address the City Council, please familiarize yourself with the Policies and procedures and Rules of Civility, which are located near the entrance. When you address the council, please state your name and address clearly for the record. All comments/questions shall be posed to the Mayor and Council. I then will direct staff, as appropriate, to answer questions or respond to comments.? D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approval of October 6, 2008, Council Manager Workshop Minutes. 2. Approval of October 13, 2008, Special Council Manager Workshop Minutes. 3. Approval of October 13, 2008, City Council Meeting Minutes. F. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS ? PART I (Note: Visitor Presentations shall not extend past 7:00 p.m.; if time is not available to complete this item; all presenters will be instructed to remain at the meeting until this item is re-opened following Award of Bids, or return to the next Regular Meeting of the Council.) G. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS (Note: Items G-H shall not extend past 7:00 p.m.; if time is not available to complete these items, they shall be extended by Council motion to the end of the meeting following Visitor Presentation ? Part II.) H. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS I. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS J. PUBLIC HEARINGS ery), City Project 07-24 1. Priory Public Improvements (St. Paul?s Monast a. Assessment Hearing 7:00 p.m. b. Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll K. UNFINISHED BUSINESS L. NEW BUSINESS 1. Tobacco and Alcohol Compliance Check Failures 2. On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License ? Mai Lee Yang, New License and Manager for Stargate Night Club 3. John Wykoff, 2345 Maryland Avenue a. Approve or Deny Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for An Oversized Garage 4. County Road C Area Street Improvements, City Project 08-11, Consider Citizen Request for a Retaining Wall Study 5. Legacy Shops, Legacy Village, County Road D a. Planned Unit Development Revision b. Design Review 6. Maplewood Community Center ? Request for Proposal ? Food Catering Services 7. Approval of Joint-Powers Agreement with North Saint Paul for the Maintenance of a Segment of the Lake Links Trail 8. Consider Contract Change Order with McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. for Completion of Comprehensive Plan 9. Requesting Council Approval for Distribution of Surface Water Management Plan for Agency Review 10. Consider Approval of Donation to the Police Department Reserves From the 3M Foundation 11. Approval of Claims M. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Annual Gambling Permit Renewal ? Hill Murray Mother?s Club 2. Heritage Square Second Addition Annual PUD Review 3. Salvation Army CUP Annual Review 4. City of Landfall Police and Fire Rates for 2009 Contracts 5. Priory Public Improvements (St. Paul?s Monastery), Project 07-24, Modification of Existing Construction Contract, Change Order No. 1 6. Approve Purchase of GeoMelt 55 ? Ice Melt for City Maintained Streets 7. Request for Additional Funds for 2008 Street Striping N. AWARD OF BIDS 1. TH/61 Frost Avenue Improvements, City Project 07-30, Resolution Awarding Construction Contract O. VISITOR PRESENTATION ? PART II (NOTE: This is a continuation of VISITOR PRESENTATIONS from earlier in the meeting and is intended to make time available if the item is not completed by 7:00 p.m. -Not intended for new visitor presentation items.) P. ADJOURNMENT Sign language interpreters for hearing impaired persons are available for public hearings upon request. The request for this must be made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk?s Office at 651.249.2001 to make arrangements. Assisted Listening Devices are also available. Please check with the City Clerk for availability. RULES OF CIVILITY FOR OUR COMMUNITY Following are some rules of civility the City of Maplewood expects of everyone appearing at Council Meetings ? elected officials, staff and citizens. It is hoped that by following these simple rules, everyone?s opinions can be heard and understood in a reasonable manner. We appreciate the fact that when appearing at Council meetings, it is understood that everyone will follow these principles: Show respect for each other, actively listen to one another, keep emotions in check and use respectful language. AGENDA ITEM E1 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL MANAGER WORKSHOP 5:00 p.m., Monday, October 6, 2008 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 28-08 A. CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the City Council was held in the City Hall Council Chambers and was called to order at 5:05 p.m. by Mayor Longrie. B. ROLL CALL Diana Longrie, Mayor Present Erik Hjelle, Councilmember Present Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present John Nephew, Councilmember Present Will Rossbach, Councilmember Present C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Hjelle moved to approve the agenda as submitted. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach. Ayes ? All The motion passed. D.UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. 2009 Proposed Budget (5:00 p.m. ? 6:30 p.m.) a. Acting City Manager, Chuck Ahl introduced the proposed budget items. a. Presentation of Proposed IT Department Budget IT Director, Mychal Fowlds gave the IT Department Budget presentation and answered questions of the council. b. Presentation of Proposed Fire Department Budget Maplewood Fire Chief, Steve Lukin gave the Fire Department Budget presentation and answered questions of the council. c. Presentation of Proposed Police Department Budget Maplewood Police Chief, Dave Thomalla gave the Police Department Budget presentation and answered questions of the council. The Council took a 10-minute break at 7:30 p.m. October 6, 2008 1 City Council Manager Workshop Minutes Packet Page Number 3 of 204 2. Discussion of City Manager Selection Process. a. Councilmember?s Nephew and Hjelle spoke regarding this item. This will be discussed further at the October 13, 2008, Council Meeting. E. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Longrie adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m. October 6, 2008 2 City Council Manager Workshop Minutes Packet Page Number 4 of 204 Agenda Item E2 SPECIAL COUNCIL MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION/COUNCIL MANAGER WORKSHOP 5:00 p.m., Monday, October 13, 2008 Council Chambers, City Hall 29-08 A. CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the City Council was held in the City Hall Council Chambers and was called to order at 5:05 p.m. by Mayor Longrie. B. ROLL CALL Diana Longrie, Mayor Present Erik Hjelle, Councilmember Present Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present John Nephew, Councilmember Present Will Rossbach, Councilmember Present C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Councilmember Nephew moved to approve the agenda as submitted. Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle. Ayes ? All The motion passed. D. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Declaration of Special Meeting Topics and Intent to Close Session Mayor Longrie closed the meeting at 5:25 p.m. pursuant to Minnesota State Statute, Chapter 13 relating to Attorney/Client privilege for the purpose of discussion. a. Markham Pond Retaining Wall Improvements ? City Project 05-18 ? Discussion with Attorney on Settlement Agreement with Property Owner Mayor Longrie reopened the closed session meeting at 6:15 p.m. 2. 2009 Budget ? Presentation of Citizen Services Proposed Budget a. City Clerk, Citizen Services Director, Karen Guilfoile gave the Citizen Services Budget Presentation. b. Acting City Manager, Chuck Ahl addressed and answered questions of the council. *The remainder of the Citizen Services Proposed Budget will be heard at the October 27, 2008, council meeting due to time constraints to start the regular city council meeting. E. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Longrie adjourned the meeting at 6:35 p.m. October 13, 2008 1 CLOSED SESSION MEETING/MANAGER WORKSHOP Special City Council Meeting Minutes Packet Page Number 5 of 204 Agenda Item E3 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 6:30 p.m., Monday, October 13, 2008 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 29-08 A. CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the City Council was held in the City Hall Council Chambers and was called to order at 6:55 p.m. by Mayor Longrie. B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE C. ROLL CALL Diana Longrie, Mayor Present Erik Hjelle, Councilmember Present Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present John Nephew, Councilmember Present Will Rossbach, Councilmember Present D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The following items were requested to be added to Council Presentations. H1. Rush Line Open House ? Councilmember Rossbach H2. Silver Lake Association Membership for the City of Maplewood - Mayor Longrie H3. Update on the Silver Lake Link Design Open House ? Mayor Longrie H4. Channel 16 Rebroadcasting of City Meetings ? Mayor Longrie H5. Kaboom Playground Update and Designation of Playful Cities for 2008 - Mayor Longrie Councilmember Hjelle moved to approve the agenda as amended. Seconded by Councilmember Nephew Ayes ? All The motion passed. E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the September 15, 2008, Special Closed Session Meeting Minutes as submitted. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann. Ayes ? Mayor Longrie, Councilmembers Juenemann, Nephew & Rossbach Abstain ? Councilmember Hjelle The motion passed. October 13, 2008 1 Packet Page Number 6 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the September 22, 2008, City Council Meeting Minutes as submitted. Seconded by Councilmember Nephew. Ayes ? All The motion passed. Councilmember Nephew moved to approve the September 30, 2008, Special Council Meeting Minutes as submitted. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann. Ayes ? All The motion passed. F. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS ? PART I 1.Elizabeth Sletten, 2747 Clarence Street North, Maplewood. Ms. Sletten said a City Engineer was on their property taking photos and she felt it was improper and wanted the situation investigated. 2.Ann Fosburg, 2516 Idaho Avenue East, Maplewood. Ms. Fosburg read comments aloud regarding the refusal to have a public hearing to reexamine the reopening of Sterling Street. 3.Ralph Sletten, 2747 Clarence Street North, Maplewood. Mr. Sletten asked for further information regarding a development proposal at the October 7, 2008, Planning Commission meeting regarding the City of Little Canada and the City of Maplewood and asked if the issues were resolved. Mr. Sletten also mentioned a memo that was pre-dated for October 8, 2008, stating the proposal was already approved even though the meeting was October 7, 2008, and asked that this situation be checked into. (Chuck Ahl said he would check further into this and bring the answers back to the city council.) spoke regarding various issues such 4.Dave Schelling, 1955 Greenbrier Street, Maplewood. as the Dr. Marlene Palkovich case, Maplewood Supervisory raises, south Maplewood wanting to separate themselves from the rest of the City of Maplewood, The lack of people attending the City Council meetings and his concern of what is happening in Maplewood, and his concern of what is happening in surrounding cities, the concern of spending, employees being laid off and taxes being raised. 5.Christine Stone, 2727 Hazelwood Street, Maplewood. Ms. Stone appreciated the work that has gone into putting the City of Maplewood?s financial records back on track. She appreciated the effort being put forth by the city council in the hiring process of a new City Manager. Ms. Stone said she appreciated the article by Dr. Marlene Palkovich, Chairperson of the Maplewood Police Civil Commission explaining how the board works and thanked other volunteers who serve on boards and commissions for the city. (Due to time constraints items G. Administrative Presentations and H. Council Presentations were moved to the end of the council meeting.) G. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 1. Discussion of Scheduling November 3, 2008, as a Work Session a. Acting City Manager, Chuck Ahl discussed the possibility of having a Workshop on Monday, November 3, 2008. October 13, 2008 2 Packet Page Number 7 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes H. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS H1. Rush Line Open House ? Councilmember Rossbach H2. Silver Lake Association Membership for the City of Maplewood - Mayor Longrie H3. Update on the Silver Lake Link Design Open House ? Mayor Longrie H4. Channel 16 rebroadcasting of city meetings ? Mayor Longrie H5. Kaboom Playground Update and Designation of Playful Cities for 2008 - Mayor Longrie I. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS None. J. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. K. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Consider Approval of Resolution Directing Establishment of Panels for Assisting with Selection of City Manager and Approval of Schedule. a. Acting City Manager, Chuck Ahl gave the presentation and answered questions of the council. Councilmember Nephew moved to Approve the Resolution Directing the Establishment of two Panels for the Purpose of Assisting with the Selection of a New City Manager, Consistent with the Parameters Listed within the Report Along with Adopting a Tentative Schedule as Listed Within the Report. Adding the January 8, 2009, on the Schedule to council conducts final interviews of two to three candidates adding Social Reception to follow. Mayor Longrie friendly amendment adding the Philosophy of the Appointment. Also Identifying the Matrix of items. Those items ?could? be based upon the criteria. There was a lengthy discussion regarding whether to video tape the meetings or not and the a copy of the DVD. number of people that would request RESOLUTION 08-10-151 Directing Establishment of Panels for Assisting with Selection of City Manager and Approval of Schedule. WHEREAS, the City Council is desiring to hire a new City Manager, and WHEREAS, the City Council has entered into a contract with The Par Group for the ssisting with the review and selection of candidates, and purpose of a WHEREAS, the City Council desires the input of employees, commission members, residents and business representatives, and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to have a schedule and process for a professional and systematic selection process. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD THAT the following is established: October 13, 2008 3 Packet Page Number 8 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes There shall be 2 interview panels, as follows: 1. "Employee Panel". 9 persons total. a. 1 Rep from Police (either street officers or Sergeants). b. 1 Rep from Fire (full-time). c. 1 Rep from Metro Sup. d. 2 Reps from AFSCME. e. 4 Department Heads or their designee. f. Appointment to the panel shall be made by the respective Union or Association Group. 2. "Resident ? Business Representative Panel". 11 persons total. g. Each Councilperson has 2 choices that should be made by the end of October. h. 1 choice must be either a Commission Memberor Business Representative; the other choice can be an "at large" resident. i. The 11th person is a Paid per Call District Fire Chief, also a resident. 3. The panels shall have the following guidance from the City Council: j. Each panel shall meet at least once in advance of the interview process to establish procedures for reviewing the candidates. k. The panels shall generate their own questions. l. A moderator may be provided for each panel if desired by the panel. m. The panel shall provide a report to the City Council on their overall findings. This may include a matrix of items, but this shall be a final determination of the panel. The Council is not interested in a numerical ranking of the candidates; they are looking for more detailed evaluations. 4. A social [Community Reception] shall be provided for the panels to ?Meet the Candidates? in a different type of setting, and a more informal basis. This shall occur prior to the panels making their final report to the Council. 5. These panel meets shall be governed by the Open Meeting Requirements. 6. The following schedule shall generally be adhered to: September 30 ? November 15: The Par Group solicits and reviews candidates October 31, 2008: Last day for City Council to designate panel members November 10 ? 21, 2008: Advance meetings of Panels; develop questions November 24, 2008: Executive Session to review ?Semi-finalists? November 28, 2008 City announces names of 4- 6 ?finalists? December 10, 2008: Panels conduct interviews of 4 ? 6 ?finalists? Meet the Candidates Social Event at MCC December 22, 2008: Panels make recommendation to City Council Council reduces ?finalist? list to 2 ? 3 candidates January 8, 2009: Council conducts final interviews of 2 ? 3 candidates January 12, 2009: Council selects final candidate and authorizes contract February 2, 2009: New City Manager begins employment th Adopted this 13 day of October 2008. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann. Ayes ? All The motion passed. October 13, 2008 4 Packet Page Number 9 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes 2. Consider Awarding 2009 Charitable Gambling Funds. a. Acting City Manager, Chuck Ahl gave the presentation and answered questions of the council. Councilmember Nephew moved to approve the Spreadsheet in the Staff Report for Distribution of 2009 Charitable Gambling Funding of $45,000 with the exception of adding $1,500 for the Dispute Resolution Center and Leaving a Final Reserve of $392. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach. Ayes ? All The motion passed. 3. Markham Pond Retaining Wall Improvements ? City Project 05-18 Resolution Authorizing Preparation of Plans and Specifications. a. Acting City Manager, Chuck Ahl gave the presentation and answered questions of the council. b. City Attorney, Alan Kantrud answered question of the council. Mayor Longrie asked if anyone from the audience wanted to speak regarding this item. 1. Ralph Sletten, 2747 Clarence Street North, Maplewood. 2. Dave Schelling, 1955 Greenbrier Street, Maplewood. Councilmember Rossbach moved to Approve the Resolution Authorizing Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the Markham Pond Retaining Wall, City Project 05-18, and Authorizing a Project Budget of $375,000 from the 2009 Proceeds. October 13, 2008 5 Packet Page Number 10 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes RESOLUTION 08-10-152 AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTABLISHING PROJECT BUDGET WHEREAS, pursuant to authorization of the council adopted June 13th, 2005, a report has been prepared by SEH Engineers, Inc. with reference to the improvement of Markham Pond Retaining Wall, City Project 05-18, and this report was received by the council on April 23, 2007 and WHEREAS, the report provides information regarding whether the proposed project is necessary,cost effective, and feasible, WHEREAS, the City Engineer has recommended the preparation of plans and specifications in preparation for a full project review of costs and improvement needs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, OTA: MINNES 1. The council has determined the need for the improvement of such retaining wall in accordance with Option 2A within the report at an estimated total cost of the improvement of $375,000. 2. The City Engineer is hereby directed to have plans and specifications prepared by a consulting engineer, selected by him from the City?s consultant pool, under his direction. 3. The Finance Director is hereby authorized to establish a project budget of $375,000 with funds from the assessment to the property owner consistent with a development agreement to be prepared by the City Attorney and funds from the Environmental Utility Fund. 4. The City Engineer is hereby directed to report to the City Council on the extent of the improvement upon sufficient completion of the project design and to have a Public Hearing to meet the assessment requirements. Adopted this 13th day of October, 2008. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann. Ayes ? Councilmembers Juenemann, Nephew & Rossbach Nays ? Councilmember Hjelle, Mayor Longrie The motion passed. Councilmember Juenemann moved to Approve the Resolution Authorizing Preparation of Plans and Specifications and Establishing the Project Budget for the Markham Pond Retaining Wall, City Project 05-18. RESOLUTION 08-10-153 AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT TO REBUILD MARKHAM POND RETAINING WALL WHEREAS, Maplewood is conducting a reconstruction of White Bear Avenue which shall include impacts to Markham Pond in the form of additional run-off entering the pond and; WHEREAS, the City?s easement for storm runoff already established will not be tly contained by the existing easement area and will further deteriorate the retaining wall sufficien that runs long the north east corner of the pond and; October 13, 2008 6 Packet Page Number 11 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes WHEREAS, the City and owner of the retaining wall have been involved in negotiations regarding the ownership and ongoing maintenance responsibilities for the wall prior to the White Bear Avenue project moving forward and; WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood is desirous to settle and ownership/responsibility matter with respect to the retaining wall as well as move forward with the project along White Bear Avenue. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves and authorizes the Acting City Manager and Public Works Department to enter into an Agreement regarding the reconstruction of the Markham Pond retaining wall, owned by Azure Property, and in a form substantially similar to a ?development agreement? with the owner of Azure Property and with the following specific terms being provided for therein: City agrees to replace wall during the first 6 months of 2009. ° All design, engineering will be completed by the city. ° City will restore the Azure Property parking lot to an equal or improved condition as part of project costs and will provide alternative parking in adjacent lots during construction at no cost to Azure Property. ° Azure Property will have joint approval over final design. ° At the completion of the project, the City will own and maintain the wall; (the wall is necessary to contain the pond within the dedicated easement) Azure Properties agrees to pay a storm water assessment as follows: ° All assessments to be paid over 8 years at 6%. 388,555 sq. ft. X $0.08/sq. ft. =$41,084.40 to the Beam Avenue property at Kennard. Once this is paid on this parcel, the City agrees that property has been assessed to the maximum allowed under current policies. Azure Properties will agree to an additional $25,000 assessment [for a total assessment of $56,084.40] to be spread among [or up to] 2 properties owned by Azure Properties along White Bear Avenue: All properties drain to Markham Pond and contribute to the drainage that required the installation of the retaining wall. This $25,000 assessment would have been assessed as part of the future White Bear Avenue improvement project, and the City will agree that Azure Property will be granted credit toward the White Bear Avenue project for these assessments. Azure Property will acknowledge that these assessments do not provide the maximum assessment to the White Bear Avenue properties allowed under the current city policy, An assessment waiver will need to be signed by Azure Properties agreeing that they will not object to the assessments as well. October 13, 2008 7 Packet Page Number 12 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes The new replacement wall will be located in approximately the same location as the existing wall. While it is anticipated that no new easement area is required; Azure Properties agrees to provide any minor adjustments [defined as less than 2 feet in lateral movement] to the drainage easement onto Azure Property. As part of the project, Azure Properties agrees to cooperate with the City to memorialize the existing easement area subject to the minor revisions as listed above. There will be no additional compensation due to Azure Properties for these minor revisions. Azure Properties will grant to the City of Maplewood a temporary easement for the purposes of constructing the new wall at no cost to the City. The Maplewood City council passed this resolution on October 13, 2008. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach. Ayes ? Councilmembers Juenemann, Nephew & Rossbach Nays ? Councilmember Hjelle, Mayor Longrie The motion passed. L. NEW BUSINESS 1.Application for Use, Deed, Property East of 2590 Maplewood Drive. a. Michael Thompson, Assistant City Engineer gave the report. b. Acting City Manager, Public Works Director, Chuck Ahl spoke regarding this item. Councilmember Hjelle moved to Approve the amended Resolution requesting that Ramsey County Grant the City a Use Deed for the Subject Parcel. The Granting of this Use Deed would serve the City of Maplewood?s needs by Preserving a Drainage Way for the Gerten Pond Chain and the High-Quality Wetlands for Open Space. RESOLUTION 08-10-154 USE DEED REQUEST WHEREAS, Ramsey County has given the City of Maplewood of the opportunity to attain a use deed on a tax forfeited lot. WHEREAS, this property is located adjacent to Maplewood Drive and across from 2590 MaplewoodDrive, legally described as follows: W. H. HOWARD'S GARDEN LOTS EX E 550 FT THAT PART ELY OF ST AS OPENED, LOT 14. PID# 09-29-22-11-0056 WHEREAS, storm water quality treatment will be needed upon future reconstruction of MaplewoodDrive between Gervais Avenue and Connor Avenue, WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood, has determined that this parcel would serve the Public?sinterest by making it available for drainage and ponding purposes, October 13, 2008 8 Packet Page Number 13 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Maplewood City Council hereby formally requests that Ramsey County grant a use deed to the City of Maplewood for the parcel legally- described herein, by making it available for drainage and ponding purposes. Adopted by the Maplewood City Council on October 13, 2008. Seconded by Councilmember Ayes ? All The motion passed. 2. Discussion of Use of City Council Travel and Training Budget for National League of Cities Conference. a. Acting City Manager, Chuck Ahl gave the report and answered questions of the council. Councilmember Nephew moved to Authorize funds to cover travel and training for Mayor Longrie to attend the National League of Cities Conference. Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle. Ayes ? All The motion passed. 3.Approval of Claims. Councilmember Hjelle moved Approval of Claims. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: 216,350.43 Checks # 76497 thru # 76538 $ Dated 09/19/08 thru 09/23/08 $ 71,274.53 Disbursements via debits to checking account Dated 09/12/08 thru 09/30/08 $ 812,267.18 Checks # 76539 thru # 76587 Dated 09/26/08 thru 09/30/08 $ 364,317.92 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 09/18/08 thru 09/26/08 $ 961,945.02 Checks # 76588 thru # 76655 Dated 09/29/08 thru 10/07/08 $ 589,016.17 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 09/26/08 thru 10/03/08 __________________ $ 3,015,171.25 Total Accounts Payable October 13, 2008 9 Packet Page Number 14 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes PAYROLL $ 554.565.20 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 09/19/08 $ 3,599.12 Payroll Deduction check #1006008 thru #1006009 dated 09/19/08 $ 466,033.97 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 10/03/08 $ 3,580.67 Payroll Deduction check #1006061 thru #1006062 dated 10/03/08 ___________________ $ 1,027,778.96 Total Payroll GRAND TOTAL $ 4,042,950.21 Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach. Ayes ? Mayor Longrie, Councilmembers Juenemann, Nephew & Rossbach Nay ? Councilmember Hjelle The motion passed. M. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Mayor Longrie moved to approve item 1. Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle. Ayes ? All The motion passed. 2. Councilmember Nephew moved to approve items 2, 3, 4, & 5. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach. Ayes ? All The motion passed. 3. Councilmember Hjelle moved to approve item 6 & 7. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann. Ayes ? All The motion passed. 4. Councilmember Nephew moved to approve item 8. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach. Ayes ? All The motion passed. October 13, 2008 10 Packet Page Number 15 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes 1. Consider Approval of Police Department Donation from Residential Mortgage Group. Mayor Longrie moved to approve the Police Department Donation of $50 from Residential Mortgage Group. RESOLUTION 08-10-155 AUTHORIZING GIFT TO CITY WHEREAS, Maplewood is AUTHORIZED to receive and accept grants, gifts and devices of real and personal property and maintain the same for the benefit of the citizens and pursuant to the donor?s terms if so-prescribed, and; WHEREAS, Residential Mortgage Group (RMG) wishes to grant the City of Maplewood the following: $50, and; WHEREAS, Residential Mortgage Group has instructed that the City will be required to use the aforementioned for: use by the Police Department to directly improve the community where the donator will be living, and; WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has agreed to use the subject of this resolution for the purposes and under the terms prescribed, and; WHEREAS, the City agrees that it will accept the gift by a two-thirds majority of its governing body?s membership pursuant to Minnesota Statute §465.03; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, pursuant to Minnesota Statute §465.03, that the MaplewoodCity Council approves, receives and accepts the gift aforementioned and under such terms and conditions as may be requested or required. The Maplewood City Council passed this resolution by two-thirds or more majority vote of its membership on October 13, 2008. Signed:Signed:Witnessed: __________________________________________________________ (Signature) (Signature) (Signature) Mayor______________Chief of Police_________City Clerk_____________ (Title) (Title) (Title) _________________________________________ ___________________ (Date) (Date) (Date) Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle. Ayes ? All The motion passed. October 13, 2008 11 Packet Page Number 16 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes 2. Consider Approval of Youth Service Bureau Agreement. Councilmember Nephew moved to approve the Youth Service Bureau Agreement for 2009. CITY OF MAPLEWOOD MAPLEWOOD POLICE PURCHASE OF SERVICE AGREEMENT Hall, 1830 County Road B East, The City of Maplewood, through its Police Department, City Maplewood, Minnesota, 55109, hereinafter referred to as the ?City,? and Youth Service Bureau, Inc., 101 West Pine Street, Stillwater, Minnesota, 55082, hereinafter referred to as the ?Contractor,? enter into this agreement for the period from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2009. WHEREAS, the mission of the Maplewood Police Department is to build safer communities by repairing the harm from, reducing the risk of, and involving the community in the resolution of juvenile crime; WHEREAS, the Maplewood Police Department is committed to using community-based approachesto strengthen individuals, families, and community; WHEREAS, the Maplewood Police Department has identified the following outcomes for juvenile diversion and early intervention: Juvenile offenders will be held accountable for their actions by engaging in activities that repair the harm done to the victim and community and will participate in programs that promote an increased understanding of the impact of their offense on victims, communities, and themselves; Crime victims will be notified of diversion proceedings; will have opportunities to provide input; and, if willing, will have the opportunity to participate in the process; Community members will have active and direct involvement in programming; WHEREAS, the City, pursuant to its goals of providing accountability and the most appropriate diversion and early intervention available to juvenile offenders, wishes to purchase services for youth involved in at-risk behavior from the Contractor to support these outcomes; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1.Contractor?s Duties ? The Contractor agrees to the provision of the following services: a. Recruit and support community work-service sites. Supervise and monitor community work-service clients who are ordered by the court and/or referred by the Maplewood Police Department. b. Educational and prevention programs, specifically as follows: chemical awareness, fire awareness, theft awareness, violence awareness, or another approved alternative. Eligible juveniles include those who are referred by the Maplewood Police Department. The reason for the referral must be behavior or actions that could result in a police report and a petition for delinquency. October 13, 2008 12 Packet Page Number 17 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes c. Evaluation and counseling. Counseling services include crisis intervention, youth, and family and group counseling. Referrals will be made for psychological/psychiatric evaluation and long-term mental health treatment. d. The Maplewood Police Department agrees to provide victims of crimes diverted by local law enforcement the opportunity for direct or indirect involvement into how the juvenile should be held accountable, including consideration of the impact of the crime on the victim and any specific needs for restitution. When necessary, due to the offense, restitution will be determined and collected. e. When possible and appropriate, facilitate restorative justice interventions, such as victim/offender mediation, family group conferencing, and/or community panels, so that juvenile offenders are held directly accountable to the victim and victimized community through some form of reparation. 2.Attachments and References ? The Contractor agrees to provide the enumerated services in Exhibit A, which is attached and incorporated herein by reference. 3.Cost and Delivery of Purchased Services ? The total amount to be paid to the Contractor for services purchased under this agreement shall not exceed Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000). For these services, the City agrees to make quarterly payments to the Contractor of Six Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($6,250) on or about February 15, May 1, August 1, and November 1, 2009. 4.Eligibility for Services ? A Ramsey or Washington County resident between the ages of five and eighteen (or older if still in high school), their family members, and the victims of juvenile crime who are assessed to be appropriate shall be eligible for the services provided under the terms of this agreement. 5.Evaluation, Reporting, and Information Requirements ? The Contractor agrees to reasonable evaluations of its programs, employees, and volunteers and make them available for review by the Maplewood Police Department if so requested. The Contractor agrees to comply with all reporting requirements as assigned by law, rule, or contract by the State of Minnesota and Ramsey County. The Contractor further agrees to abide by all laws and rules regarding confidentiality and data practices. The Contractor agrees to provide necessary information allowed by law and deemed necessary by the Maplewood Police Department on referred cases. 6.Indemnification ? The Contractor agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, and agents for all claims arising out of the Contractor?s activities related to the services provided under this agreement up to the liability limits set forth in Minn. Stat. 466.04. The City will indemnify YSB, Inc., from and against all liability up to the liability limits set forth in Minn. Stat.466.04. No other provision of this agreement shall serve to limit in any way the obligations of the Contractor to indemnify and defend the City under this clause. ? The Contractor agrees that in order to protect itself, as well as 7.Insurance Requirements the City, from claims arising out of the Contractor?s activities under this agreement, it will at all times during the term of this agreement keep in force policies of insurance providing the following liabilities: professional liability insurance policy in the minimum amount of Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($400,000) bodily injury or death of one person; One Million Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,200,000) for bodily injury per occurrence; comprehensive general liability insurance policy in the minimum amount of Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($400,000) bodily injury or death of one person; One Million Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,200,000) bodily injury per occurrence; One Million Dollars October 13, 2008 13 Packet Page Number 18 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes ($1,000,000) property damage; automobile insurance, including non-owned and hired autos, in the minimum of Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($400,000) bodily injury or death of one person; One Million Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,200,000) bodily injury per occurrence; and One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) property damage. The Contractor further agrees to maintain Workers? Compensation insurance in the statutory amounts. Certificates of Insurance showing the coverage listed herein shall be provided to the City prior to the effective date of this contract. 8.Data Privacy ? All data collected, created, received, maintained, or disseminated for any purpose by the activities of the Contractor because of this agreement is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Chapter 13, as amended, the Minnesota Rules implementing such Act now in force or as adopted, as well as federal regulations on data privacy. 9.Record Disclosures/Monitoring ? Pursuant to Minn. Stat. 16C.05, Subd. 5, the Contractor agrees that the City, the State Auditor, or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent to the accounting practices and procedures of the Contractor and involve transactions relating to this agreement. The Contractor agrees to maintain these records for a period of three years from the date of termination of this agreement. ? During the performance of this agreement, the Contractor agrees to 10.Nondiscrimination the following: No person shall, on the grounds of race, color, religion, age, sex, disability, marital status, public assistance status, criminal record, creed, or national origin be excluded from full employment rights in, participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any and all applicable federal and state laws against discrimination. 11.Independent Contractor ? Nothing contained in this agreement is intended or should be construed as creating the relationship of co-partners or joint ventures with the City or the Maplewood Police Department. No tenure or any rights or benefits, including Workers? Compensation, unemployment insurance, medical care, sick leave, vacation leave, severance pay, PERA, or other benefits available to City employees shall accrue to the Contractor or employees of the Contractor performing services under this agreement. 12.Conditions of the Parties? Obligation ? This agreement may be canceled by either party at any time, with or without cause, upon 30 days? notice, in writing, delivered by mail, or in person. Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of the provisions of this agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing, duly signed by both parties, and attached to the original of this agreement. ? The Contractor shall abide by all federal, state, or local laws, 13.Compliance With Law statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations now in effect or hereinafter adopted insofar as they relate to the Contractor?s performance of the provisions of this agreement. 14.Firearms ? Unless specifically required by the terms of this contract, no provider of services pursuant to this contract, including, but not limited to, employees, agents, or subcontractors of the Contractor shall carry or possess a firearm on City premises. Violation of this provision shall be considered a substantial breach of the agreement. Violation of this provision is grounds for immediate suspension or termination of this contract, without notice, pursuant to Section 12. October 13, 2008 14 Packet Page Number 19 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes 15.Savings Clause ? If any section of this agreement is found to be invalid or not enforceable, the remainder of the agreement will remain in force and binding. 16.Governing Law ? The laws of Minnesota shall govern the interpretation and prosecution of this agreement. 17.Notices ? If any official correspondence concerning this agreement needs to be communicated to the other party, the following shall be deemed the effective addresses: As to the City: Maplewood Police Department 1830 County Road B East Maplewood, MN 55109 As to the Youth Service Bureau: Youth Service Bureau, Inc. 101 West Pine Street Stillwater, MN 55082 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the City and the Contractor have executed this agreement this ____________day of _____________________________, 2008. APPROVED AS TO FORM By:_____________________________ By:______________________________ City AttorneyMayor, City of Maplewood By:_____________________________ City Manager, City of Maplewood By:_____________________________ Chief of Police, City of Maplewood By:_____________________________ Executive Director, Youth Service Bureau, Inc. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach. Ayes ? All The motion passed. 3. Pond Overlook Public Improvements, Project 07-08, Resolution for Project Acceptance. Councilmember Nephew moved to approve the Resolution for the Pond Overlook Public Improvements, City Project 07-08: Acceptance of Project. RESOLUTION 08-10-156 ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Engineer for the City of Maplewood has determined that the Pond Overlook Public Improvement, City Project 07-08, is complete and recommends acceptance of the project; October 13, 2008 15 Packet Page Number 20 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, that City Project 07-08 is complete and maintenance of these improvements is accepted by the city; and the final construction contract amount is $121,130.33. Final payment to Northdale Construction and the release of any retainage is hereby authorized. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach. Ayes ? All The motion passed. 4. CarMax/Mogren Addition Improvements, Project 06-17, Modification of Construction Contract, Change Order No. 4. Councilmember Nephew moved to approve the Resolution for the Modification of Existing Construction Contract, Change Order No. 4, for City Project 06-17. RESOLUTION 08-10-157 DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PROJECT 06-17, CHANGE ORDER NO.4 WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made Improvement Project 06-17, CarMax/Mogren Addition Improvements, and has let a construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and WHEREAS, it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designatedas Improvement Project 06-17, Change Order No.4. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that: 1. The mayor and city engineer are hereby authorized and directed to modify the existing contract by executing said Change Order No. 4 in the amount of -$70.28. The revised contract amount is $2,421,256.58. 2. The construction contract retainage is hereby authorized to be reduced from 5% to 1%. The motion passed. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach. Ayes ? All 5. Beam Avenue Improvements, Project 07-26, Modification of Construction Contract, Change Order No. 1. Councilmember Nephew moved to approve the Resolution for Modification of Existing Construction Contract, Change Order No. 1, for City Project 07-26. RESOLUTION 08-10-158 DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PROJECT 07-26, CHANGE ORDER NO.1 WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made Improve ment Project 07-26, Beam Avenue Improvements, and has let a construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and October 13, 2008 16 Packet Page Number 21 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes WHEREAS, it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designatedas Improvement Project 07-26, Change Order No.1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that: 1. The mayor and city engineer are hereby authorized and directed to modify the existing contract by executing said Change Order No.1 in the amount of $46,318.80. The revised contract amount is $1,596,191.58. 2. The finance director is hereby authorized to adjust the budget to reflect an additional $46,318.80 in funding from the City of North Saint Paul. Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach. Ayes ? All The motion passed. 6. Consider Authorization to Renew Ramsey County GIS Users Group Joint Powers Agreement. Councilmember Hjelle moved to approve the Ramsey County GIS Users Group Joint Powers Agreement. JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AMONG MEMBERS OF THE RAMSEY COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS USERS GROUP This JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT (Agreement), which shall have an effective date of January 1, 2009, is entered into pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59 between ________________________ body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota and other bodies politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota for the purposes of forming the Ramsey County Geographic Information System Users Group hereinafter referred to as the Users Group. ARTICLE I. INTENT OF THIS AGREEMENT: In 1995, an alliance was formed between public agencies interested in using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and data created and maintained by Ramsey County. This agreement is intended to enable those parties who are part of the Users Group to be represented by the Users Group for the purposes of undertaking negotiations and transactions with Ramsey County and any other body politic. ARTICLE II. DEFINITIONS: Section 1. Members are deemed to be those local units of government, special purpose government units, local agencies and the Ramsey Conservation District who have executed this Joint Powers Agreement and have paid fees as provided in Article X. Section 2. Paying Affiliates are those county, regional, state and federal agencies, local government organizations with regional jurisdiction, local government cooperative organizations, non-profit organizations and educational institutions with direct or indirect involvement in GIS activities that have paid fees as provided in Article X. Paying Affiliate membership must be approved by the Board. Paying Affiliates are nonvoting participants and are not eligible to serve on the Board. Section 3. Non-Paying Affiliates are those representatives of county, regional, state and federal agencies, local government organizations with regional jurisdiction, local government cooperative organizations, non-profit organizations and educational institutions with direct or indirect involvement in GIS activities. Private sector entities who are contracted to perform GIS-related tasks for a Member can also join as a Non-Paying Affiliate. Regular Affiliate membership must be approved by the Board. Non-Paying Affiliates are non-voting participants are not eligible to serve October 13, 2008 17 Packet Page Number 22 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes on the Board, do not pay membership or fees as described in Article X, and are not entitled to data access and exchange detailed in this agreement. ARTICLE III. USER GROUP STRUCTURE: Section 1. The Users Group will be governed and managed by a Board of Directors (Board). Section 2. One Director will represent each Member organization. Each Member organization shall appoint a Director to serve on the Board. An organization may also choose an alternative Director. Section 3. The Board shall also have the following officers: a Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary and Treasurer. Section 4. These officers are elected annually by the Board. Section 5. These officers are undertaken on a voluntary basis without pay. Section 6. A quorum will consist of at least a one-half attendance of full membership of the Board. Section 7. Decisions will be made by majority of the quorum ARTICLE IV. DUTIES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS: Section 1. The Board shall meet at least two times per year. Section 2. The Board shall conduct an organizational meeting no later than 30 days after the effective date of this Agreement. The meeting will be called for the purposes of electing the officer positions of Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary and Treasurer. This meeting will allow the adoption of by-laws and other procedures governing the conduct of its meetings and its business as it deems appropriate. This meeting will also be called by the Board to determine the User Group Budget, review the operating procedures within this Agreement, and approve agreements with Ramsey County for the purposes of GIS data exchange, data access, data delivery and the updating of physical features. Section 3. The Board shall approve and adopt the formula for the distribution of costs associated with access to Ramsey County GIS data and for the updating of physical features. This formula shall be reviewed annually by the Board. Section 4. The Board shall arrange for and facilitate regular meetings of the User Group and for User Group activities. Section 5. The Chair presides at meetings of the Board.The Vice Chair will preside in the absence of the Chair. The Secretary is responsible for recording the proceedings of the Board and communicating these proceedings to all Member organizations. The Treasurer is responsible for the funds and financial records of the Board. Section 6. The Chair and the Treasurer must sign vouchers or orders disbursing funds of the Users Group. Disbursement will be made in the method prescribed by law for statutory cities. Section 7. The Board may take such actions as it deems necessary and convenient to accomplish the general purposes of this Agreement. Section 8.The Board shall purchase liability insurance on behalf of the Users Group to insure against liability of the Users Group and its constituent Members. Section 9. The Board may: (i) enter into contracts to carry out its powers and duties, in full compliance with any competitive bidding requirements imposed by State or local law. (ii) provide for the prosecution, defense, or other participation in proceedings at law or in equity in which it may have an interest; (iii) employ such persons as it deems necessary on a part-time, full-time or consultancy basis; (iv) purchase, hold or dispose of real and personal property; (v) contract for space, commodities or personal services with a Member or group of Members; (vi) accept gifts, apply for and use grants or loans of money or other property from the state, the United Statesof America, and from other government units and may enter into agreements in connection therewith and hold, use and dispose of such money or property in accordance with the terms of the gift, grant, loan or agreement relating thereto. (vii) appoint a fiscal agent; ARTICLE V. NEW MEMBERS: Section 1. Those units of government who are not part of this initial Agreement may join as Members of the Users Group at any time. Section 2. To become a Member, a local unit of government shall adopt a resolution and shall sign the current Agreement. Section 3. The New Members and Paying Affiliates will pay the current one-time membership fee and the data exchange fee due for the year in which the new Member is joining as set by the Board in Article IV, Section 4, as calculated by the current formula. Fees will not be pro-rated for new Members who join after January 1 of each year. October 13, 2008 18 Packet Page Number 23 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes ARTICLE VI. GIS DATA TO BE SUPPLIED BY RAMSEY COUNTY: Section 1. It is the intent of this Agreement that the Users Group will negotiate an agreement with Ramsey County for the exchange of County GIS Data with Members and Paying Affiliates at a preferential fee structure. A component of the fees will apply to the maintenance of digital physical features from aerial photography captured County-wide on a three year basis. Section 2. The GIS Data should consist of the following components: (i) The Ramsey County Digital Base Map as generated and maintained by the County. (ii) The Ramsey County Attribute Data Base as generated and maintained by the County. (iii) The Physical Features File as generated and maintained by the County. Section 3. The Board will negotiate on behalf of the Members and Paying Affiliates for the cost and method of access to this data. Prior to each annual payment to Ramsey County, the Board shall determine whether it is satisfied with the content, accuracy and timeliness of the data provided to date and make a determination if further payment shall be made. ARTICLE VII. GIS DATA TO BE EXCHANGED AS PART OF THIS AGREEMENT: Section 1. Members agree to exchange any GIS data with Ramsey County and with any requesting Member for the requesting parties own use where that GIS data has been in some way derived and developed from the County GIS Data as a result of this Agreement or future agreements between the Users Group and Ramsey County. Members agree to exchange with Ramsey County and with any other Member, any attribute data that it has created and maintained where that data can be associated to a parcel using a parcel identifier. Members also agree to exchange any building permit data deemed by Ramsey County as necessary for the identification of future physical feature data base updates. Section 2. The Board will negotiate with Ramsey County on behalf of the Members in all matters deemed necessary relating to supply of GIS data generated by a Member. Section 3. Any costs associated with a Member supplying data to Ramsey County or to any other Member shall be for access and delivery of that data only and not for any costs associated with the development of that data. ARTICLE VIII. DATA ACCESS AND USAGE: Section 1. All Members and Paying Affiliates shall have equal rights to access Ramsey County GIS Data. Section 2. Data generated by Ramsey County and provided to Members and Paying Affiliates may not be sold in its or iginal form to third party agencies. However, a Member or Paying Affiliate may allow use of the original data by a third party for specific contracted purposes. Section 3. Data which results from enhancement by a Member or Paying Affiliate of Ramsey County GIS Data, ved pursuant to this Agreement, may be sold or exchanged to a third party. recei Section 4. All Members and Paying Affiliates will adhere to future Users Group license agreements for County or other agency GIS data. ARTICLE IX. DATA SECURITY: All Members and Paying Affiliates of the Users Group agree to abide by the data privacy and data security standards of the supplying agency when using data made available by that agency. ARTICLE X. FINANCIAL MATTERS: Section 1. The fiscal year of the Users Group is the calendar year. Section 2. The Board shall adopt an initial budget and must thereafter adopt an annual budget prior to July 1 of each year for each succeeding year. The Board will give an opportunity to each Member to comment or object to the proposed budget before adoption. Notice of the adopted budget must be mailed promptly thereafter to the chief administrative officer of each Member organization. Section 3. Operational costs shall be shared according to a method agreed upon by majority decision of the Board of Directors. The costs could be met by membership fees. These costs could include Users Group administrative costs, purchase of liability insurance and others as appropriate. Section 4. Membership Fee: New Members and new Paying Affiliates shall pay a one-time membership fee of $500 to the Users Group for the calendar year 2009. The amount of this fee shall be reviewed and set annually by the Board of Directors for new Members and new Paying Affiliates. Section 5. Data Access and Physical Features Maintenance Fee: Members and Paying Affiliates shall commit to a three-year payment of data access and physical features maintenance fees, except where a one-year limitation is imposed by State Statutes. Ramsey County will charge the Users Group on an annual basis for unlimited access to the Ramsey County GIS Data. This fee will be paid to Ramsey County by the Users Group on behalf of the October 13, 2008 19 Packet Page Number 24 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes Members and Paying Affiliates on an annual basis. The amount to be paid by each Member and Paying Affiliates will be determined by the Board and will be reviewed annually. Section 6. Special Projects Assessments: Members and Paying Affiliates who wish to enter into special projects and consultations shall present proposals to the Board for review. Examples of special projects could be cooperative training or consortium purchase of software. Upon approval by the Board, those Members and Paying Affiliates who are part of the project will be assessed to meet the cost of the project. Section 7. Billings to the Members and Paying Affiliates are due and payable no later than 60 days after the receipt of the annual invoice. In the event of a dispute as to the amount of a billing, a Member or Paying Affiliate must nevertheless make payment as billed to preserve membership status. The Member or Paying Affiliate may make payment subject to its right to dispute the bill and exercise any remedies available to it. Failure to pay a billing within 60 days results in suspension of voting privileges of the Member Director. Failure to pay a billing within 120 days is grounds for termination of membership, but the Users Group rights to receive payment are not affected by the termination of membership. ARTICLE XI. TERM Section 1. This Agreement shall be in force through December 31, 2011, or until superseded by another agreement. Section 2. Based on the annual review of the operating procedures within the Agreement conducted by the Board, a new Agreement will be developed and circulated at least three months prior to December 31, 2011 and be agreed upon and signed on or before December 31, 2011. ARTICLE XII. TERMINATION: Each Member or Paying Affiliate shall have the right to terminate its membership and participation in the Users Group with or without cause by formal resolution of the Member?s or Paying Affiliate?s organization and communicated to the Board in writing. However, the Member or Paying Affiliate is still obligated to its financial commitments for the year during which termination of membership occurs. These commitments include: (i) any balance of the Data Access/Physical Features Maintenance Fee. This commitment applies to all Members and Paying Affiliates. (ii) any balance owing on Special Projects Assessments. This commitment applies to Members and Paying Affiliates which have entered into any special project agreement(s). Termination of membership prior to expiration of the Agreement shall make a local unit of government ineligible to re-join as a Member or Paying Affiliate under the current Agreement. ARTICLE XIII. DISSOLUTION: Section 1. The Users Group may be dissolved by a two-thirdsvote of its Members in good standing. Dissolution is mandatory when the Secretary has received certified copies of resolutions adopted by the governing bodies of the required Members requesting dissolution of the Users Group. Section 2. In the event of a dissolution, the Board must determine the measures necessary to effect the dissolution and must provide for the taking of such measures as promptly as circumstances permit, subject to the provisions of this agreement and law. Section 3. In the event of dissolution, following the payment of all outstanding obligations, assets of the Users Group will be distributed among the then existing Members and Paying Affiliates in direct proportion to their cumulative annual contributions. If those obligations exceed the assets of the Users Group, the net deficit of the Users Group will be charged to and paid by the then existing Members and Paying Affiliates in direct proportion to their cumulative annual contributions. ARTICLE XIV. ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS: Until the expiration of three years after this Agreement terminates,the Users Group shall make available to the Member organizations and to the State Auditor, a copy of this Agreement and books, documents, accounting procedures and practices of the Users Group relating to this Agreement. ARTICLE XV. HOLD HARMLESS: Section 1. Each Member or Paying Affiliate agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the other Members or Paying Affiliates harmless from any claims, demands, actions or causes of action, including reasonable attorneys fees, against or incurred by such other Members or Paying Affiliates, for injury to, death of, or damage to the property of any third person or persons, arising out of any act or omission on the part of the indemnifying Member or Paying Affiliate or any of its agents, servants or employees in the performance of or with relation to any of the work or services provided by Members or Paying Affiliates under the terms of this Agreement. October 13, 2008 20 Packet Page Number 25 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes Section 2. Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver by either Members or Paying Affiliates or the Users Group of any limitation of liability under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466. Section3. Under no circumstances, however, shall a memberor Paying Affiliate be required to pay on behalf of itself and other Members or Paying Affiliates, any amounts in excess of the limits on liability established in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 applicable to any one Member or Paying Affiliate. The limits of liability for some or all of the Members or Paying Affiliates may not be added together to determine the maximum amount of liability for any Member or Paying Affiliate. SECTION XVI. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY: Section 1. The Members and Paying Affiliates and the Users Group agree to comply with all federal, state and local laws, resolutions, ordinances, rules, regulations and executive orders pertaining to unlawful discrimination on account of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, sexual preference, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability or age. Section 2. When required by law and requested by the other party, the Users Group shall furnish a written affirmative action plan to the Members and Paying Affiliates. SECTION XVII. DATA PRACTICES: Section 1. All data collected, created, received, maintained or disseminated for any purpose in the course of either the Member?s or Paying Affiliate?s or the Users Group?s performance of this Agreement is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, and rules adopted to implement the Act. Section 2. The Members and Paying Affiliates and the Users Group agree to abide strictly by these statutes, rules and regulations. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on this ____ day of ___________, _________. ORGANIZATION ______________________________________ Approved: By:___________________________________________________ ( Mayor / Chair / President ) By:___________________________________________________ ( City Manager / Administrator ) DESIGNATED DIRECTOR TO REPRESENT ORGANIZATION: Name:____________________________________ Phone:____________________________________ Email:____________________________________ ALTERNATE DIRECTOR (IF APPLICABLE): Name:____________________________________ Phone:____________________________________ Email:____________________________________ Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann. Ayes ? All The motion passed. October 13, 2008 21 Packet Page Number 26 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes 7. Consider Authorization to Complete Fiber Optic Ring Throughout City Campus. Councilmember Hjelle moved to approve the Authorization to Complete the Fiber Optic Ring Throughout City Hall Campus to Access Communications for $39,794.27. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann. Ayes ? Councilmembers Hjelle, Juenemann, Nephew & Rossbach y Na ? Mayor Longrie The motion passed. 8. Consider Cost Adjustments for Additional Services to Contract with Kimley-Horn and Associates for the Preparation of Comprehensive Plan Sections. Councilmember Nephew moved to approve Acting City Manager, Chuck Ahl to revise the consulting contract with Kimley-Horn (KHA) in the amount of $16,800 to complete the Sewer and Transportation Components of the Comprehensive Plan with funding from the Sewer Fund (601- 508-000-4490) in the amount of $8,800 and from the Public Works Administrative Account (101- 501-000-4490). Seconded by Councilmember Rossbach. Ayes ? All The motion passed. N. AWARD OF BIDS None. O. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS ? PART II None. (Due to the time constraints items G. Administrative Presentations and H. Council Presentations were moved to the end of the meeting.) G. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 1. Discussion of Scheduling November 3, 2008, as a Work Session a. Acting City Manager, Chuck Ahl discussed the possibility of holding a Workshop Session on Monday, November 3, 2008. H. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS 1. Rush Line Corridor Task Force Open House on October 2, 2008 at the MCC ? Councilmember Rossbach spoke about the lack of attendees at the Open House and that people should be concerned about the possibility of light rail coming to the City of Maplewood in 10 to 15 years. 2. Silver Lake Association Membership for the City of Maplewood - Mayor Longrie Acting City Manager, Chuck Ahl said the city has made an application to be a member but that he hadn?t heard if the city?s application has been accepted or not. He will report back to the city council with further information. October 13, 2008 22 Packet Page Number 27 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes 3. Update on the Silver Lake Link Trail Design Initiative Open House ? Mayor Longrie Acting City Manager, Chuck Ahl said he did not have the information but would get it from Mr. Konewko and get back to the council with the information. 4. Channel 16 GTN Rebroadcasting of City Meetings ? Mayor Longrie Mayor Longrie stated that she is receiving phone calls and emails regarding when the city is going to be replaying council, board and commission meetings. 5. Kaboom Playground Update and the Designation of Playful City?s for 2008 ? Mayor Longrie. The 2008 Playful City?s are St. Paul and Landfall. Mayor Longrie was encouraged that Maplewoodcould work with Kaboom Playground to get the playground designated for the Mississippi Street area. P. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Longrie adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m. October 13, 2008 23 Packet Page Number 28 of 204 City Council Meeting Minutes Agenda Item J1 AGENDA REPORT TO: Charles Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: Michael Thompson, Assistant City Engineer Steve Love, Civil Engineer II SUBJECT: Priory Public Improvements (St. Paul?s Monastery), City Project 07-24 a. Assessment Hearing, 7:00 p.m. b. Approve Resolution For Adoption of Assessment Roll DATE: October 17, 2008 INTRODUCTION All property owners have been mailed a notice of the exact amount of their assessment, as well as notice that they must submit a written objection either at or prior to the hearing if they disagree with the assessment amount. The council should conduct the assessment hearing, receive any objections, and refer objections to the staff for action at the November 10, 2008 council meeting. If there are no objections to the assessment amounts then the roll should be adopted on the date of the assessment hearing, October 27, 2008. This is a developer driven project: as such the amount is being assessed to improved properties. ASSESSMENTS The project consisted of the construction of two new public streets (Monastery Way and Benet Road), two right-turn lanes, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water main. The proposed special assessments for the improvements are calculated based upon the actual construction contract amount and all related project costs of $925,019.57. A copy of the assessment roll is provided as a supplement to this report. The five properties created from the new plat abutting Monastery Way and Benet Road will be assessed based on percentage of road front frontage, over a period of eight years at 6.0% interest. As of October 21, 2008, staff has received no written objections to the proposed assessments. It should be noted that the Developer signed an assessment objection waiver form, as required by the developer agreement, which waives the rights for parties to object to the assessment. Staff will review all objections and provide the city council recommendations for motion at the November 10, 2008 city council meeting. Objections will be received up to and as part of the assessment hearing on October 27, 2008. Once the hearing is closed, no further objections will be considered. BUDGET IMPACT On January 14, 2008, the city council held a public hearing for the project and approved a proposed project budget of $1,212,089. Table A shows the proposed project financing which was approved at that public hearing: TABLE A: Special Assessments$1,144,487.00 City-Go Improvement Bonds$67,602.00 TOTAL$1,212,089.00 Packet Page Number 29 of 204 Agenda Item J1 The final projected project cost is $971,995.17. Table B shows the project financing: TABLE B: Special Assessments$925,019.57 Developer Cash$10,000.00 City-Go Improvement Bonds$36,975.60 TOTAL$971,995.17 No adjustment to the current budget is needed. Contract prices for the work detailed in the construction contract fell well within staff?s estimate. Throughout the execution of the construction contract, staff monitored the project administration costs as well as the progress of the construction work. The city portion reflects the trail improvements on the north side of Larpenteur Avenue west of the Priory Development extending to Sterling Street. Tables A and B show that the project savings are considerable as a result of the competitive construction bidding market; benefiting both the developer and the city. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the city council approve the attached resolution for Adoption of the Assessment Roll for the Priory Public Improvements (St. Paul?s Monastery), City Project 07-24, less all objections received. Objections will be referred to staff for review and recommendation to the city council at the November 10, 2008 regular meeting. Attachments: 1. Resolution: Adopting Assessment Roll 2. Assessment Roll 3. Location Map Packet Page Number 30 of 204 Agenda Item J1 Attachment 1 RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL nd WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on September 22, 2008, calling for a Public Hearing, the assessment roll for the Priory Public Improvements (St. Paul?s Monastery), City Project 07-24, was presented in a Public Hearing format, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and WHEREAS, the following property owners have filed objections to their assessments according to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, summarized as follows: a. None. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: That the City Engineer and City Clerk are hereby instructed to review objections received and report 1. to the City Council at the regular meeting on November 10, 2008, as to their recommendations for adjustments. 2. The assessment roll for the Priory Public Improvements as amended, without those property owners? assessments that have filed objections, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby adopted. Said assessment roll shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. 3. Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of 8 years, the first installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 2009 and shall bear interest at the rate of 6.0 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2008. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 4. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, but no later than November 27, 2008, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of the payment, to the city clerk, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and they may, at any time after November 27, 2008, pay to the county auditor the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 28, 2008 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. 5. The city engineer and city clerk shall forthwith after November 27, 2008, but no later than November 28, 2008, transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over the same manner as other municipal taxes. th day of October, 2008. Adopted by the Maplewood City Council on this 27 Packet Page Number 31 of 204 Agenda Item J1 Attachment 2 PRIORY PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FINAL ASSESSMENTCITY PROJECT 07-24 (SAINT PAUL'S MONASTERY) PARCEL PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL PARCEL IDTAXPAYERFRONT FRONT FOOTAGEASSESSMENT FOOTAGE 132922440004 TUBMAN875.0831.08%$287,460.63 132922440005 ST. PAUL'S MONASTERY228.068.10%$74,916.89 132922440006 COMMON BOND ACQUISITION, LLC365.4412.98%$120,045.72 132922440007 COMMON BOND ACQUISITION, LLC663.2623.55%$217,878.52 TRAILS EDGE TOWNHOMES LIMITED 132922440008684.0824.29%$224,717.81 PARTNERSHIP TOTALS =$925,019.57 100.00% 2,815.92 NOTES: 1) TOTAL DEVELOPER RELATED PROJECT ASSESSMENT = $925,019.57 2) ASSESSMENT AMOUNT BASED ON PERCENT OF FRONT FOOTAGE ABUTTING THE NEW PUBLIC ROADS: MONASTERY WAY AND BENET ROAD. 1 of 1 Packet Page Number 32 of 204 Agenda Item J1 Attachment 3 Packet Page Number 33 of 204 MEMORANDUM AGENDA ITEM L1 TO: Chuck Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, Director Citizen Services RE: Alcohol and Tobacco Compliance Check Failures DATE: October 16, 2008 Introduction The city has completed another round of alcohol compliance checks and will soon begin the next round of Tobacco compliance checks. When reviewing the 2008 alcohol compliance failures and proposing an appropriate penalty, it was discovered that the final round of alcohol compliance failures in the fall of 2006 did not come to council for review. Typically, the fall failures are brought to council with the completion of the ones that are done the following spring and compliance checks for alcohol were not conducted in 2007. In all instances, 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 or will be prosecuted. Background When the city council began performing tobacco and alcohol compliance checks in 2000, they opted not to have a strict guideline for penalties because some compliance failures are more egregious and warrant stricter penalties. While the city does not have specified fines for cigarette and tobacco compliance failures, past practice has been to adhere to the following guidelines for imposing penalties for tobacco: first offense $250, second offense $500 and the third offense $750. For alcohol compliance failures, past practice has been to follow State guidelines of imposing a penalty of $500 for the first offense, $1,000 for the second offense, $2,000 if there is a third offense and then revocation or possible suspension of the license. In February of 2005 the city council implemented an incentive program that includes a one-time 5% discount on the annual license fee after remaining violation free for five consecutive years (beginning January 1st, 2005) and after receiving a penalty and remaining violation free for five consecutive st years (beginning January 1, 2005) the violation would be removed from the record: Packet Page Number 34 of 204 Following is a statistical history of compliance failures for each licensed establishment. Following past practice in imposing fines, I have listed what staff is proposing for fines for the majority of the current failures. All establishments have been notified of the proposed civil penalty against them and were encouraged to attend the October 27, 2008 council meeting. Consideration Council consideration for attached penalties is requested. Packet Page Number 35 of 204 Compliance Checks City Council Report October 16, 2008 Intoxicating Liquor, Off-Sale, On-Sale, Club On-Sale, Wine On-Sale and Cigarette Licenses BusinessPrior Failures and Action Proposed Penalty Intoxicating Liquor License 5-8 Tavern and Grill A/2002 - $500 Abe?s Tobacco T/2006 - $250 T/2007 $500 Acapulco Mexican Restaurant A/2004 - $500 A/2008 $1,000 AMF Maplewood Lanes T/2006 ? $250 Applebee?s Grill A/2004 - $500 Bennigan?s The Bird BleechersA/2000 - $500 A/2004 - $1,000 Best Western T/2002 - $250 T/2003 - $500 Budget Service/Frost T/2003 - $250 T/2007 $500 License is no longer active. Staff will pursue collection of violation. Budget Service/Larpenteur Century Avenue Service Chalet Lounge T/2002 $250 Previous Owner A/2004 $500 Previous Owner T/2006 ? $250 Previous Owner Champp?s T/2006 - $250 T/2007 $500 Chili?s Restaurant A/2004 Current Owner $500 Chipotle Mexican Grill Cub Foods/County Road B Cub Foods/White Bear Ave. A/2000 - $500 CVS Pharmacy T/2005 - $250 Deans Tavern A/2006 ? $500 Duc?s Restaurant Fast Break Fleming?s Auto Service T/2003 - $250 Freedom Valu Center A/2004 Current Owner $500 T/2006 - $250 Garrity?s Go For It Gas T/2003 2 Times - $500 Goodrich Golf Course Gulden?sA/2001 - $500 A/2004 Current Owner $500 Packet Page Number 36 of 204 Hilltop Foods, Inc. A/2006 ? $500 T/2007 $500 ? Under new T/2006 - $250 ownership. Staff will staff will pursue collection of violation from previous owner Holiday Station/Century T/2001 - $250 T/2003 2 Failures $1,000 T/2006 - $750 Holiday Station/McKnight T/2001 - $500 Huey?s Saloon-Formerly A/2002 - $500 Prior Owner Smiley?s A/2006 - $500 Keller Clubhouse A/2008 $500 Keller Lake Convenience A/2004 Current Owner $500 A/2006 $1,000 T/2006 - $250 T/2007 $500 Knowlan?s Super Market T/2006 ? $600 (2 Failures) Les?s Superette T/2004 - $250 T/2007 $500 M & M #1, Inc. M & W Tobacco T/2006 - $250 Mama Mia?s Pizza Maplewood Amoco T/2006 - $250 McKnight Mart and Gas T/2006 ? No fine imposed, could A/2008 New Owner $500 not locate previous ownerT/2008 New Owner $250 Myth Noodles & Company Oasis Market/Cope T/2007 $250 Oasis Market/White Bear T/2003 A/2004 - $500 T/2004 - $500 The Olive Garden Outback Steakhouse Party Service Pond?s at Battle Creek A/2004 - $500 Rainbow Foods T/2006 - $250 T/2007 $500 Red Lobster A/2006 $500 A/2008 $1,000 Richard?s Market T/2007 $250 The Rock A/2000 - $1,000 T/2006 - $250 Shinders, Inc. Sinclair Station T/2004 2 Times - $750 T/2007 $250 Smiley?s D.G. Burgers Stargate Bar & Danceclub Superamerica/Century A/2000 - $500 Superamerica/1750 WBA T/2001 - $500 Packet Page Number 37 of 204 Superamerica/2529 WBA A/2006 $500 T/2007 $250 Establishment inactive. Staff will staff will pursue collection of violation from previous owner. Suzanne? Cuisine A/2002 - $500 A/2004 - $1,000 Tobacco Palace T/2003 - $250 Tom Thumb A/2000 2 Times $1,000 T/2002 - $250 Vietnam Star Restaurant A/2006 $500 Walgreen?sT.2006 - $250 Yocum Food Mart Zalloum, Inc. T/2004 - $250 Club On-Sale Moose Lodge 963 Wine On-Sale Taste of India Singapore Chinese Cuisine A/2000 - $500 A/2003 - $500 Council reduced fine stating one more violation would be $2,000 fine and the $500 that was reduced Off-Sale Liquor Licenses A-1 Liquor A/2004 - $500 Big Discount Liquor T/2006 - $250 A/2006 $500 Hillside Liquor A/2008 $500 Laber?s Liquors A/2000 2 Times $1,000 T/2000 - $250 T/2001 - $500 A/2002-$2,000/3day suspension T/2003 - $1,000 A/2006 - $2,000 Lor?Liquor Store Maplewood Wine Cellar A/2000 - $500 M.G.M. Liquor Warehouse Party Time Liquor T/2003 - $250 A/2008 $500 A/2006 ? no fine imposed due to circumstances explained by owner Princess Liquor ?n Tobacco Sarrack?s Wine & Spirits A/2006 $500 Sid?s Discount Liquor Blue is off-sale 3.2 beer and cigarette license holder?s. Red is cigarettes only. Green is on-sale beer only. Packet Page Number 38 of 204 AGENDA ITEM L2 MEMORANDUM TO: Chuck Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, Citizen Services Manager David Thomalla, Police Chief Alan Kantrud, City Attorney DATE: October 20, 2008 SUBJECT: On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License ? Mai Lee Yang, New License/Manager, Stargate Bar & Dance Club Introduction Mai Lee Yang has submitted an application for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license to be used at Stargate Bar & Dance Club, 1700 Rice Street. Ms. Yang states that she will be the on-site manager of the liquor license and intends to operate the establishment as a hip-hop and dance club with occasional live bands. Background Ms. Yang grew up in St. Paul and graduated from Harding High School in 1985. She attended St. Paul Technical School where she earned her LPN in 1987. From 1987 to 1999 she worked as a nurse at West Side Health Center in West St. Paul. In 1988, she earned her Bachelor of Arts degree in nursing from St. Kate?s. In 1997, she started her own home care business called Asian Home Care which she still runs today. In 2002, she and her sister opened a liquor store in Bloomington called Liquor Time. In 2004, she sold her half to her sister because there was not enough work for two people. From 2003 to 2008, she worked part-time for the Hennepin County Developmental and Delay program. On August 25, 2008 Ms. Yang met with Ms. Guilfoile to submit her liquor license application and discuss the application process with her. At that time Ms. Yang was informed that the background investigation could take six to eight weeks depending on the work load of the police department. On August 26, 2008 the application was forwarded to the police department by Citizen Services for the background investigation to be conducted. Due to the Republican National Convention, and the workload of the Chief and Police Department investigators, the background investigation was not complete until the week of October 5, 2008. Chief Thomalla met with Ms. Yang on Wednesday, October 8, 2008. While there was nothing in the background investigation that would prohibit Ms. Yang from holding a liquor license with the City, staff is collectively recommending denial of the license due to public interest. Please see the following State Statute governing intoxicating liquor licenses. Packet Page Number 39 of 204 STATE STATUTE 340A.412 LICENSE RESTRICTIONS; INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSES. Subd. 2. Investigation of on-sale licenses. (b) No license may be issued, transferred, or renewed if the results of the investigation show, to the satisfaction of the governing body, that issuance, transfer, or renewal would not be in the public interest. In October 2006 the city council approved revisions to the city code of ordinances pertaining to liquor licenses that included adoptions of State law. Following see city code Section 6-7. Sec. 6-7 Adoption of State Law - this language was set forth to formally adopt the provisions of Minnesota State Statute Chapter 340A, the State code pertaining to malt liquor, wine, and intoxicating liquor licenses. Due to concerns that staff has, Ms. Yang was requested to submit to the City an action plan on how she would operate the nightclub. Attached you will find Exhibit 1 which is Ms. Yang?s Course of Action Plan. Consideration Staff is recommending denial of the on-sale liquor license submitted by Ms. Yang. It is staff?s professional opinion that due to her inexperience in managing an intoxicating liquor license the size and scope that is required at Stargate Bar & Dance Club, that it would not be in the interest of the public for the license to be approved. Packet Page Number 40 of 204 Exhibit 1 COURSE OF ACTION FOR STARGATE BAR & DANCE CLUB BY MAI YANG Packet Page Number 41 of 204 Course of Action Once granted the Liquor License, I will take over the operation of Stargate. In the first 1-2 months, based on observation and feedback, I will gain a clearer perspective of how the business should operate. The next improvisation includes implementing any change (s) for smooth operation of the business. I know it is not easy and will require a lot of work and effort to operate a successful business. Yet, that is who I am and what I do. I am very dedicated in my work. A successful business does not become successful with just one person. Like Senator Hillary Clinton said ?It takes a village to raise a child.? In a business, it takes the whole team of the company to make a difference. With Stargate, to ensure a good outcome, as a manager, my responsibilities are to hire the right staff, ensure customers safety, NO under-age drinking and make sure everyone who comes in, leaves with a great impression Operation of Stargate Manager: Oversees the whole operation of the business, Authorizes approvals of events, Makes all final approvals and/or decisions regarding business affairs, Delegates tasks to appropriate staffs, Organizing and maintaining staff assignment, and Ensure staff are trained to meet if not exceed all requirements. Security: Internal and External A. Internal Security supervisor to oversee and supervise all security staff. Security duties are: Protect the customers and staff, Be on the look for any under-age drinking and take the appropriate measure Be aware of any suspicious activity and inspect/investigate the situation, Monitor and prevent alcohol consumption beyond designated areas, Screen and check for any inappropriate patron (drunk person or not adhering to dress code) before entrance, and Check/Exam proper ID for entrance, B. External Outside securities will monitor and control all outside premises such as parking lot: Ensure safety of the customers, Prevent and stop any fight, and Ensure customers enter and exit safely and calmly Bartender: Bartender supervisor will oversee and ensure that bartends: Are knowledgeable in the following aspects: Legal drinking age, legal drinking intake, Check for age appropriateness before serving alcohol beverage, and Do not serve intoxicated customer. OCTOBER 13, 2008 Packet Page Number 42 of 204 Agenda Item L3 MEMORANDUM TO: Acting City Manager FROM: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Building Size SUBJECT: APPLICANT: John Wykoff LOCATION: 2345 Maryland Avenue DATE: October 21, 2008 INTRODUCTION Previous Request/Previous Actions Staff originally reviewed a request by Mr. John Wykoff to build an oversized garage in March and April, 2006. Upon the planning commission?s recommendation for denial of the requested conditional use permit (CUP,) Mr. Wykoff withdrew his application. Since these two years plus, following the planning commission?s recommendation, Mr. Wykoff has continued to express his desire to build the garage at various public forums, with the city manager and planning staff. Mr. Wykoff has not resubmitted a formal application for this CUP to build the oversized garage. The acting city manager directed staff to present this matter to the city council for their discussion in order to give Mr. Wykoff an feeling as to whether submitting a formal request will have any merit for approval. The issue before the council is merely to discuss this issue with Mr. Wykoff. There is no application that has been made, therefore, there is no formal request to decide on. This discussion is to help guide Mr. Wykoff to whether he should submit a formal application for a CUP. Project Description John Wykoff was originally requesting that the city approve a conditional use permit (CUP) to allow him to build a 36-foot by 56-foot detached garage on his property north of his existing accessory buildings. Mr. Wykoff wanted this new garage to house a 45-foot-long motor coach. He purchased this motor coach to convert into a recreational vehicle. The proposed garage would be centered between his side property lines and have approximately 20 feet of setback from each adjacent property. The proposed garage would also be 20 feet tall measured to the mid-point of the roof. Refer to the applicant?s statement and the maps. This Proposed Garage Would Require the Following Approvals A CUP to build a 2,016-square-foot garage. The ordinance requires a CUP to exceed the size limitations required by ordinance. In this case, based on Mr. Wykoff?s lot size, the largest garage he could build by CUP is 1,250 square feet. Mr. Wykoff?s proposed garage would exceed the required maximum by 766 square feet. A CUP for the proposed garage to exceed a height of 16 feet. As stated, the proposed garage would be 20 feet tall and exceed the allowed maximum height for accessory buildings of 16 feet. Packet Page Number 43 of 204 BACKGROUND On August 13, 1990, the city council approved a home occupation license for Mr. Wykoff to run an art studio and sign painting business from this property. This approval was subject to the following conditions: Show proof of ownership of the property. Comply with the city?s home occupation licensing requirements. Do not store flammable liquids in the basement. Waste materials must be stored in tight-fitting containers. There must be smoke detectors on each level of the home. There must be one fire extinguisher in the work area. On February 9, 1998, the city council approved two CUPs for Mr. Wykoff for this property. The first CUP allowed Mr. Wykoff to construct an oversized accessory structure on the property to increase his total garage square footage to approximately 1,500 square feet (a proposed 1,152-square-foot garage plus an existing 336-square-foot shed equaling 1,488 square feet). This permit was subject to the following conditions: The garage shall not exceed 1,500 square feet in size. The garage shall be started within one year. However, the council may extend this for one year. The owner shall not use the garage for repairing others? vehicles or other business activities. The brown storage shed must be removed after completing construction of this building. The city council shall review this permit if a problem develops. The second CUP approved by the council allowed Mr. Wykoff to store and park a heavy commercial vehicle (a one-ton pick-up truck) on his property. This permit was subject to the following conditions: The owner must park this vehicle on his property within one year of this approval. This vehicle must be for personal use only. The city council shall review this permit only if a problem develops. Existing Garages/Accessory Buildings Mr. Wykoff presently has the following garages or accessory buildings: Attached garage 12? x 24? 288 square feet Storage building 14? x 24 336 square feet Garage/shop 24? x 48? 1,152 square feet Total 1,776 square feet Planning Commission Action Taken on This Request Mr. Wykoff initially applied for this CUP on March 24, 2006. The planning commission considered this request on April 17, 2006 and recommended denial of Mr. Wykoff?s CUP. The planning commission?s reasons for denial were: 1. The proposed garage would exceed the amount of garage space allowable by a conditional use permit by 766 square feet. (Staff note: At this time, in 2006, the zoning code allowed a CUP for 2 Packet Page Number 44 of 204 additional square footage, but only to 1,250 square feet. Beyond that the process would require a variance.) 2. The proposed garage, in addition to the applicant?s previous large garage, would be overwhelming visually on this residential property. 3. There is too much risk for abuse for zoning requirements by permitting such a large garage on residential property. The city often gets requests for non-conforming businesses on properties when there are large out buildings. Examples of these businesses are: auto repair, landscaping businesses and contractors with commercial vehicles to store. Please refer to the entire planning commission minutes that are attached. DISCUSSION Proposed Garage Requests such as this concern staff from the standpoints of aesthetics and the potential of such a large amount of garage space to be an attraction for illegal commercial usage. Garage structures like the applicant?s would be desirable for auto mechanics, for example, to operate from the home once Mr. Wykoff sells his property. Department Comments Building Inspections The owner or contractor must build the structure in accordance with the 2006 IRC. No plumbing is permitted in the garage, including floor drains, sinks or bath facilities. Soils must be shown to be suitable for construction. The building must be splinkered if it exceeds 2,000 square feet. The applicant could avoid this requirement by reducing the building size by 16 square feet. Police Department (Lt. Michael Shortreed) The garage should have sufficient insulation and noise barriers to assure that the noises associated with the restoration of the bus do not interfere with the day-to-day activities of the neighborhood. There should be adequate lighting and security mechanisms on the garage to prevent thefts from or burglaries of the facility. City Engineer Jon Jarosch, Civil Engineer 1 with the City of Maplewood, submitted the enclosed report of his review of Mr. Wykoff?s proposal. Mr. Jarosch has the following recommendations: Mr. Wykoff should install a rainwater garden on the west side of his property to catch the runoff from the proposed building as well as from the existing garage. This is needed because the 3 Packet Page Number 45 of 204 property is near the 30 percent impervious-surface area maximum allowed within the Beaver Lake Shoreland Overlay District. With the additional garage it would increase to 35 percent. The gravel driveway on the west side of the house is eroding. This driveway should be graded to divert any silt-laden runoff into the boulevard and prevent it from entering Maryland Avenue. A rainwater garden would also be beneficial in this area. Shoreland Overlay District Requirements As stated by Mr. Jarosch, the applicant?s property is located within the Beaver Lake Shoreland Overlay District. Within this overlay district, the maximum impervious surface coverage area allowed is 30 percent, but up to 50 percent with an impervious-surface coverage bonus. The applicant?s proposed detached accessory structure would bring the total building area on his property to about 35 percent, therefore requiring on-site water-quality control measures. In this case, the installation of rainwater gardens would serve this purpose. Neighborhood Comments Of the five neighbors that replied to our survey regarding this proposal, four were in favor and one questioned what the future use of such a large accessory building may be. Staff shares this concern but wonders if it would be a disservice to the neighbors if Mr. Wykoff worked on his bus conversion and repairs outdoors in view by some neighbors and passersby. Garage Height The maximum garage height allowed by ordinance is 16 feet. City ordinance states that a building?s height is measured to the mid-point of the roof. This is because the mass of a structure diminishes as a building goes up to its peak. The proposed garage would be 20 feet to the midpoint, therefore requiring a CUP for height. Staff does not object to this additional height since it does not substantially affect the mass of the proposed building. The proposed height is a result of the needed wall height in order to get the bus within the building. The 4/12-pitch roof is also a relatively low pitch which would keep the profile of the building lower than it would be with a steeper pitch. Design/Screening The proposed garage would have beige vinyl siding. This would match the applicant?s other accessory buildings. When staff visited the site, I saw that the proposed structure would be screened quite well from many of the surrounding neighbors. The most impact on neighbors, though, would be the view from the two homes to the east. The northerly of these has a six-foot-tall, solid wood fence around their yard which provides lower screening. The southerly of these two neighbors? homes would not be well screened. One option to help soften the appearance of the proposed garage would be the planting of trees along the easterly lot line. The neighbors on this side did not request any. However, staff sees a benefit for the future to provide a visual screen for the applicant?s neighbors. 4 Packet Page Number 46 of 204 COMMITTEE ACTIONS April 17, 2006: The planning commission denial of this CUP as stated above. RECOMMENDATION Staff is forwarding no recommendation since there has been no formal request made by Mr. Wykoff. 5 Packet Page Number 47 of 204 CITIZEN COMMENTS From March & April 2006 Staff surveyed the 42 surrounding property owners within 500 feet of Mr. Wykoff?s property. Of the five replies, four were in favor and one was opposed to this proposal. In Favor 1. I approve of Mr. Wykoff?s building. (Evelyn Salkowicz, 1240 McKnight Road) 2. It would be my recommendation that this project be allowed to proceed. Once the garage was erected and sided, it appears that it would blend with his other garage. I have walked by on Maryland and driven by viewing from the north end. I visualize a finished product that would not be out of character with the surroundings. I would prefer to see the garage rather than a bus parked outside. (Gary Salkowicz, 2299 Maryland Avenue) 3. OK by me, but concerns would be noise, appearance, work hours, odors to homes at 1225, 1235 Lakewood Drive. (Manager, Beaver Lake Estates Manufactured Home Park) 4. I don?t have any problem with it. It?s no big deal to me. (Boe, 2262 Tilsen Court) Opposed 1. I am against this garage proposal. What will it be used for in the future? (Batterson, 2321 Tilsen Avenue) 6 Packet Page Number 48 of 204 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site Size: 35,325 square feet Existing Land Use: Single Family House and accessory structures SURROUNDING LAND USES North: Single-family homes and Lakewood Drive South: Maryland Avenue and Ramsey County open space East: Single-family homes West: Single-family homes PLANNING Land Use Plan: R2 (double dwelling residential) Zoning: R2 CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL Accessory Buildings Section 44-114(c) states that the city council may approve an increase in height or area by CUP. Subsection (b) states that a private garage shall not exceed 16 feet in height as viewed from the street. Conditional Use Permits Section 44-1097 states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards. Refer to the findings in the attached resolution. APPLICATION DATE/APPROVAL DEADLINE There is no current application which the applicant has submitted, therefore, there is no deadline for review or council decision. 7 Packet Page Number 49 of 204 p:sec24-29\Wkoff CUP 10 08 te #2 Attachments: 1. Address/Location Map 2. Site Plan 3. Enlarged Site Plan 4. Applicant?s Statement 5. Photo of Motor Coach 6. Building Elevations 7. Engineer?s Report dated April 10, 2006 8. April 17, 2006 Planning Commission Minutes Packet Page Number 50 of 204 Packet Page Number 51 of 204 Packet Page Number 52 of 204 Packet Page Number 53 of 204 Packet Page Number 54 of 204 Packet Page Number 55 of 204 Packet Page Number 56 of 204 Packet Page Number 57 of 204 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, APRIL 17, 2006 a. Conditional Use Permit ? Oversized Accessory Structure (2345 Maryland Avenue) (7:17 ? 8:13 p.m.) Mr. Roberts said John Wykoff is requesting that the city approve a conditional use permit (CUP) for his property at 2345 Maryland Avenue. He would like to add a 36-foot by 56-foot detached garage to his property north of his existing accessory buildings. Mr. Wykoff wants this new garage to house a 45-foot-long motor coach. He purchased this motor coach with his father to convert into a recreational vehicle. The proposed garage would be centered between his side property lines and have approximately 19 to 20 feet of setback from each adjacent property. Staff has misgivings about this request. Building such a large storage garage would be a temptation for illegal commercial usage in the future after Mr. Wykoff sells the property. A building of this nature would easily be a temptation for a future homeowner to operate an auto-repair garage from this residential lot. It is true that the city has regulations against such occurrences, but these violations are difficult to regulate when they happen. Staff asked, why create a problem? Another problem is the sheer size and mass of the proposed garage. The proposed building would be very large and visually very noticeable and overwhelming for neighbors. Staff does not feel that approving such a large garage on residential property is a good idea. As noted, it opens the door for code violations to occur in the future. The garage would also be visually overwhelming. The applicant already has an over-size garage for his home occupation. Staff feels that the proposed structure exceeds the regulations of the city code far too much. The only plus staff sees is that there weren?t any abutting neighbors that voiced any concern about this proposal. There were over forty neighborhood surveys sent out with five responses received. Four were supportive of the request and felt it was better to keep the bus-repair activity out of view in the proposed garage and one person had concerns about this proposal. Staff is recommending denial for the proposed conditional use permit requested by John Wykoff at 2345 Maryland Avenue for the construction of a 36-by-56-foot, 2,016-square-foot, 20-foot-tall garage on his property for the storage and repair of a motor coach. Denial is based on the following reasons in recommendation A. items listed as 1-3 in the staff report. If the city council or planning commission wishes to approve this conditional use permit, staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for a larger and taller garage than allowed by ordinance, subject to the following conditions in recommendation B. items listed as 1-15 in the staff report. If the city council or planning commission approves Recommendation B, they should also approve the attached code amendment for accessory buildings on page 21 in the staff report. This ordinance would allow garages to be larger and taller than the limits expressed by ordinance by conditional use permit with no required maximum. Maximum sizes would be determined by the city council based on each individual proposal. Commissioner Hess said he would be abstaining from the discussion and voting because he was an acquaintance of the applicant, John Wykoff. Packet Page Number 58 of 204 Planning Commission -2- Minutes of 04-17-06 Commissioner Pearson said he responded to the neighborhood survey and he felt there was a conflict of interest for him to vote on this proposal. Chairperson Fischer said she didn?t think that would disallow Commissioner Pearson from voting on this proposal just because they were within the notification distance of a proposal. Chairperson Fischer asked staff to clarify this matter? Mr. Roberts said as long as there is no financial interest it would be fine for Commissioner Pearson to vote on this proposal. Commissioner Dierich asked if the 16 foot garage height ordinance only applied to detached garages and not attached garages? It would seem this would be a common problem in the City of Maplewood if this ordinance applied to attached garages. Mr. Roberts said the 16 foot garage height ordinance is only for detached garages. However, there are attached garages that are taller but there?s usually living space above the garage and the garage space itself is not taller than 16 feet tall. Commissioner Dierich said she noticed the immediate neighbors on either side of the applicant did not have any comments. Mr. Roberts said the comments staff received are in the staff report and the neighbors on either side of the applicant did not respond. Commissioner Trippler said looking at the ordinance staff is recommending amendments to what was the rational to increase the garage sizes in the ordinance? Mr. Roberts said on page 21 of the staff report, under the ordinance amending accessory-building requirements in item (a), in the middle column, the word Detached was added and on the line that has 42,000+ square feet, the line accessory was added. Otherwise the garage sizes have not changed. What has changed is paragraph (b) removing the wording as viewed from the street and adding as measured from grade and paragraph (c) where the three lines are stricken and reduced to one sentence. Commissioner Dierich asked if a CUP would always come before the planning commission and never be done administratively? Mr. Roberts said correct. Unless somebody changes the code down the line for a conditional use at this point, CUP?s are reviewed by the planning commission. Commissioner Dierich said the city rarely enforces CUP?s. For example, on the Schlomka property the planning commission required no outdoor storage but yet when you look at the site there are tractors, vehicles and other things on the property, so from what she can see the city rarely enforces any of the conditions put on a CUP. Mr. Roberts said the city staff tries to stay on top of enforcing the CUP?s. When complaints come in city staff inspects the complaint. He said this is another reason city staff does the annual CUP review. Packet Page Number 59 of 204 Planning Commission -3- Minutes of 04-17-06 Commissioner Dierich said she would prefer that the planning commission do the annual review of the CUP?s due to the lack of enforcement of the conditions placed on the CUP. Commissioner Desai said when he drove behind the proposed site on Lakewood Drive he thought right away this proposed garage would be a visual detraction in comparison to the homes in the neighborhood and would stick out like a sore thumb. He said you may not see the oversized garage from Maryland Avenue but you would definitely see it from Lakewood Drive. Maryland Avenue is not as well traveled as Lakewood Drive. Lakewood Drive is an area where many people drive and the area carries a lot of traffic to and from 3M so the proposed oversized garage would really look out of place in this area. Chairperson Fischer said three car garages are very common these days and she asked if the allocated square footage under this ordinance is still adequate for the types of construction and the types of vehicles and toys that require additional storage today? Mr. Roberts said he?s sure if people asked if they could build a larger garage or storage space they would if it was allowed. He said with a 10,000 square foot lot it starts to become a balancing act regarding how much storage you want on a property and how large the structures are that you can have. Staff is comfortable with the number of requests that come in. Chairperson Fischer said that?s another reason the code had been amended to take into account that larger lots could accommodate larger garages or accessory buildings. Mr. Roberts said correct. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Packet Page Number 60 of 204 Planning Commission -4- Minutes of 04-17-06 Mr. John Wykoff, the applicant, 2345 Maryland Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said he and his dad purchased a 1989 Prevost Motor Coach from the Voyageur Bus Company last year to convert into a motor home. Brand new it would cost $500,000. It was so nice on the inside that they felt bad taking the bus seats out because it had just been reupholstered, it had 3 brand new televisions in it, 30 different radio stations can be played on it at the same time and it was absolutely beautiful, but his dad wanted to convert it to a motor home. He said he then started taking the seats out etc. He said he is self employed, doesn?t work for the government and he depends on people to give him business. In the summer months he letters boats for the rich and famous so the more people that buy boats, the better off he is. Because of the price of gasoline the boat business is pretty slow out there. Even the rich complain about the price of gas. So in the summer months he doesn?t have time to work on this motor home. He would only be able to work on the motor home in the winter months in the off season for boaters. He said his driveway is not eroding as stated in the staff report. He said he dug drainage ditches to divert the water from washing out the rocks on his property. There are other properties around his home that more than half of the property is impervious and those people are not being asked to put rainwater gardens in. He said he doesn?t know how much it costs to have a rainwater garden but he did get an estimate for the trees to be planted that the city is requiring which is estimated to cost $4,000. It?s going to take him awhile to save up enough money to put a cement driveway in. One of the reasons he doesn?t want to put a cement driveway in yet is he knows if he gets the permit to build the garage he wouldn?t want to drive a cement truck over the concrete driveway because it would bust it up. But he said he would put the concrete driveway in if he gets the permit to build the garage for the motor home. If he doesn?t get permission to build the garage he and his dad are going to work on the motor home outside. He said if he didn?t have anything to do right now, it would still take him 9 years to finish converting the motor home to an RV while storing in the proposed garage. Without the permit to build the garage it would take about 19 years to convert the motor home to an RV outside on his property. Mr. Wykoff said he?s only one person and his dad is 90 years old and can?t do very much. Commissioner Dierich said she thought there was a city ordinance stating you can?t have a large oversized recreational vehicle sitting in your yard and the applicant just stated he would leave it outside while working on it which could take 19 years? Mr. Roberts said vehicles that are licensed as a ?recreational? vehicle are allowed and there are no size limits. ?Commercial? vehicles have size and weight limits in the City of Maplewood. He understands this motor coach is a commercial vehicle but understands that once the motor coach is converted to an RV it would be considered a recreational vehicle. Commissioner Trippler asked if there was another location off-site that the applicant could work on this motor home? Mr. Wykoff said he is not a millionaire and he explained he was self employed and it would cost too much money to rent a space and work on the motor home off-site. Commissioner Trippler asked if the motor home could be worked on at his father?s property? Mr. Wykoff said his dad lives with him. He said his dad didn?t make a lot of money in his life time either and it was his dad?s dream to own a motor coach. He said if you bought a motor coach like this it would cost about $1.5 million brand new. He said this is called the poor man?s Prevost. Packet Page Number 61 of 204 Planning Commission -5- Minutes of 04-17-06 Chairperson Fischer asked Mr. Wykoff if he had any questions for the planning commission? Mr. Wykoff said he is against planting the trees that are required in the staff report. He said he cannot plant the trees himself so he would have to hire someone and that would cost about $4,000. He doesn?t know what the cost of the soil testing will be, he doesn?t know what it means to require noise barriers or what that means, he doesn?t have a problem with a security system in the garage because he said he has one now and he said he doesn?t know what a rainwater garden is or what that consists of, if he could do it himself, or how expensive that would be. He found out that a 2½ inch caliper tree weighs 450 pounds and him and his dad could not lift the tree and set it in the ground themselves. He said he didn?t know what the 150% escrow would cost that was required, or if he could even able to afford that. He said he is going to build a ?first class? building here and everything on his property is first class. He said when he bought his home it was not first class, it was a HUD house and it had a Harley Davidson motorcycle parked in the middle of the living room, the house was trashed and nobody wanted it. Commissioner Kaczrowski asked if the applicant looked into renting a commercial space to work on this motor coach and storing it compared to the costs to build this large garage and all the fees involved for the requirements by the city involved in this proposal? He believed it?s less expensive to rent a commercial space compared to the concrete driveway, rainwater garden, security system, noise barriers, permit fees, tree requirements, and the cost to build the garage, etc. Mr. Wykoff said yes he checked into a commercial space and that it would be way too expensive and would add to the cost of doing this project. All of his tools and stuff would be off site and he said he would have to have ?two? of everything. Chairperson Fischer said no one is in the audience to speak regarding this proposal. The planning commission then closed the public hearing. Chairperson Fischer asked the planning commission for their comments. Commissioner Yarwood said his feeling is as much as this exceeds the normal city guidelines for the size of accessory buildings or garages on properties, if you don?t abide by the city code and you allow this proposal, at what point does the city follow the city code requirements? This may be nice to convert a bus into a motor home but he can?t find a compelling reason to allow this proposal over what the City of Maplewood normally allows. If it were him, he personally would have put more thought into if it would even be possible to have the motor home on the property and if it would be allowed by the city to work on the motor home on the property prior to purchasing the motor home. Another issue is if you wouldn?t be allowed to work on this on the property where could you work on it if you purchased it and how long would it take to do the renovations given the resources and time you have etc. It doesn?t appear that the applicant weighed all the factors before purchasing the motor home. He said he cannot find a reason to approve this proposal. Chairperson Fischer asked if Commissioner Yarwood was making a motion to deny this proposal then? Commissioner Yarwood said yes. Mr. Wykoff asked if he has a voice in this discussion? Packet Page Number 62 of 204 Planning Commission -6- Minutes of 04-17-06 Chairperson Fischer said the planning commission has closed the public hearing portion of the meeting and have already moved forward with making a motion to forward to the city council. The motion made by the planning commission is only a recommendation; the city council makes the final decision. Commissioner Yarwood moved to deny the proposed conditional use permit requested by John Wykoff, of 2345 Maryland Avenue, for the construction of a 36-by-56-foot, 2,016-square-foot, 20- foot-tall garage on his property for the storage and repair of a motor coach. Denial is based on the following reasons: 1. The proposed garage would exceed the amount of garage space allowable by conditional use permit by 766 square feet. 2. The proposed garage, in addition to the applicant?s previous large garage, would be overwhelming visually on this residential property. 3. There is too much risk for abuse of zoning requirements by permitting such a large garage on residential property. The city often gets requests for non-conforming businesses on properties when there are large out buildings. Examples of these businesses are: auto repair, landscaping businesses and contractors with commercial vehicles to store. Ayes Commissioner Dierich seconded. ? Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Kaczrowski, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood Abstention ? Hess Commissioner Hess abstained from voting because he is an acquaintance of the applicant. The motion passed. This item will go to the city council on May 8, 2006. Chairperson Fischer said she would like the planning commission to consider that the city council does not always go with the recommendation given by the planning commission. If in the case the city council would consider granting this proposal, would the planning commission prefer to have a motion made regarding recommendation B stating if the city council wishes to approve this conditional use permit what the conditions would be as written by staff? Commissioner Grover asked the chairperson if she is asking if the planning commission should vote on recommendation B as well? Chairperson Fischer said in the past she remembered a proposal that the planning commission recommended denial of and the commission didn?t put any other conditions on the proposal. Then the city council approved the proposal. When the city council was questioned about the decision the city council said if the planning commission had other conditions they wanted to place on the proposal why weren?t they included in the report before it went to the city council. Commissioner Grover asked staff if that was the intent of recommendation B in the staff report? Packet Page Number 63 of 204 Planning Commission -7- Minutes of 04-17-06 Mr. Roberts said he understands recommendation B to be for the city council. If the planning commission already voted to deny the proposal, staff wouldn?t recommend the commission make a separate motion for recommendation B. Chairperson Fischer asked if recommendation B would go to the city council anyway as it is shown in the staff report? Mr. Roberts said staff would leave recommendation B in the staff report and unless there is a strong minority report, the planning commission already made a recommendation to deny the proposal so there would be no need to make a motion on recommendation B. Chairperson Fischer asked staff how the planning commission should address the recommendation of approval of the ordinance on page 21 of the staff report? Commissioner Dierich asked if she could make a recommendation to strike recommendation B in the staff report? Chairperson Fischer said the planning commission is not voting on recommendation B. Mr. Roberts said if you want to make that a motion so it is recorded in the minutes you can, but staff would leave recommendation B in the staff report for the city council. Commissioner Dierich said her feeling is the more options that are put on the table for the city council the more doorways you allow the city council to walk through. She understands the political reason staff wants to do that but on the other hand the planning commissioners were chosen to represent the city?s interest. When the planning commission recommends denial of a proposal you shouldn?t leave a second door open as the backup. The planning commission doesn?t review proposals to make a denial or recommendation to the city council and have a backup in case the city council chooses a second option. Mr. Wykoff said he wanted to take every person in this room to court and sue them. He asked for the names of every person in the room to be written down now. Chairperson Fischer asked the planning commission if they wanted to allow Mr. Wykoff to make a statement? The planning commission replied no. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Trippler said he would agree with Commissioner Dierich?s comments to strike recommendation B from the staff report. Mr. Wykoff threw his book across the room and his papers emptied out on the floor. While picking up his papers he screamed foul language at the planning commission. Commissioner Trippler said he believes it sets a bad precedence if the planning commission starts second guessing what the commission thinks the mayor and the city council want to hear and he doesn?t believe this is the purpose of being an advisory committee. Packet Page Number 64 of 204 Planning Commission -8- Minutes of 04-17-06 Mr. Wykoff screamed another foul word to the planning commission before exiting the city council chambers. Commissioner Trippler said the purpose of an advisory committee is to give the city council the commission?s opinion of what they would like to see or not to see and clearly the planning commission thinks this garage proposal is a bad idea and recommended denial to the city council. The commission didn?t recommend denial and then think if the city council doesn?t agree with the commission, here is a second option to consider. What he hears staff saying is recommendation B will remain in the staff report for the city council but requires no motion by the planning commission since they recommended denial of the proposal. Commissioner Grover said the planning commission has the pleasure of having a city attorney present this evening. He asked if the planning commission had the ability to strike information in the staff report? He also said this discussion would be part of the planning commission minutes so the city council would have the opportunity to read the discussion that took place. He said even though he respects the opinion of Commissioner Dierich he has no problem leaving recommendation B in the staff report. Mr. Roberts said the planning commission could ask the city attorney that question. Chairperson Fischer said she has no problem leaving recommendation B in the staff report as well. Commissioner Grover said he strongly believes that this proposal should be denied and he would not consider recommendation B. This is the first time he has seen another option given in the staff report and he asked how often this happens because since he was chosen to serve on the planning commission 1½ years ago, this is the first time he has seen this option in the staff report. Mr. Roberts said staff?s first recommendation was to deny the proposal. However, staff does not want this to get to the city council and have the council make any conditions up as they go. This way if the city council disagrees with the recommendation to deny this proposal staff would have things properly laid out ensuring nothing could is missed. Including this in the staff report is for the city council?s benefit. This is an unusual situation. For the most part staff is committed one way or the other regarding proposals. Mr. Roberts introduced the city attorney to the planning commission. Mr. Trevor Oliver, one of the city Attorneys with Kelly & Fawcett, addressed the commission. Commissioner Grover asked the city attorney if the planning commission had the ability to strike text from the staff report when this is forwarded to the city council? Packet Page Number 65 of 204 Planning Commission -9- Minutes of 04-17-06 Mr. Oliver said his opinion would be no. The staff report and the opinion of the planning commission are two different things. Staff owes certain duties to the city council and if staff feels that certain conditions should be in the staff report then it shall be so stated. It?s very clear that the staff recommendation is to deny the proposal and it?s been stated very clearly that the planning commission recommended denial of this proposal and that information will be very clear when the city council reads the minutes from this evening?s meeting. You can still have consideration motions on the ordinance in part C regardless of how it was structured in the staff report, if the commission chose to discuss that. Mr. Roberts said the planning commission will have the benefit of having a PC representative to give their report at the city council meeting as well. Commissioner Dierich said since the recording secretary has recorded the discussion and the planning commission has given a firm opinion about this, she would withdraw her recommendation to strike recommendation B from the staff report. Commissioner Grover asked if there is something that is driving staff to include recommendation B? Mr. Roberts said the city council appears to listen to the neighbors regarding proposals and three or four of the neighbors had no problem with the garage proposal being built. If there were neighbors voicing disapproval of the garage and staff was recommending denial of this proposal, then there would be no need to include a second option or recommendation B in the staff report. However, being that there is a slight chance this could still be approved by the city council even though staff and the planning commission recommended denial, the city council for a lack of neighbor descent, could view that as approved by the neighbors and could prove to be okay with the city council. Staff?s opinion is, if by chance the city council thought this proposal was appropriate, the conditions would be laid out correctly ahead of time. Recommendation B in the staff report reads as follows: If the city council wishes to approve this conditional use permit, staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for a larger and taller garage than allowed by ordinance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The city council must first amend the Accessory Buildings Ordinance to permit a garage larger than 1,250 square feet in area and taller than 16 feet. 2. All construction shall follow the plans approved by the city date-stamped March 24, 2006. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 3. The proposed construction must be substantially started and or the proposed use utilized within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 4. The council shall review this permit in one year. Packet Page Number 66 of 204 Planning Commission -10- Minutes of 04-17-06 5. The applicant must present a grading and drainage plan to the city?s engineering department for approval of an on-site stormwater management system. My Wykoff shall install a rainwater garden on the west side of his property to catch the runoff from the proposed building as well as from the existing garage. This is needed because the property is near the 30 percent impervious-surface area maximum currently required within the Beaver Lake Shoreland Overlay District. With the additional garage, it would increase to 35 percent. 6. The gravel driveway on the west side of the house is eroding. This driveway shall be graded to divert any silt-laden runoff into the boulevard and percent it from entering Maryland Avenue. This driveway shall be paved from the property line a distance of 20 feet into the property. A rainwater garden would also be beneficial in this area and may be required. 7. The applicant shall comply with any additional requirements of the engineering department based on the plan to be submitted by the applicant. 8. Mr. Wykoff shall submit a landscaping plan for the area east of the proposed garage to provide screening for the two neighbors to the east. This plan shall provide at least eight trees, four for screening for each neighbor. The applicant shall work with staff to determine placement and the type of trees. Evergreens shall be at least eight feet tall and deciduous trees shall be at least 2½ inches in caliper, balled and burlapped. 9. The applicant shall comply with all building code requirements. There shall be no plumbing in the garage including floor drains, sinks or bath facilities. 10. The garage shall have sufficient insulation and noise barriers to assure that the noises associated with the restoration of the bus do not interfere with the day to day activities of the neighborhood. 11. There shall be adequate lighting and security mechanisms on the garage to prevent thefts from or burglaries of the facility. 12. The applicant shall provide escrow in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of planting the trees and providing the required paving and stormwater-control elements prior to getting his building permit. 13. The use of the proposed garage shall be limited to the applicant?s residential needs and the storage and repair of his motor coach. Any commercial use of this building is prohibited. 14. There shall be no excessive noise allowed anytime. Noise is especially prohibited by ordinance between the hours of 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. Monday through Saturday and all day Sunday. 15. Staff may approve minor changes to these conditions. Packet Page Number 67 of 204 Agenda Item L4 AGENDA REPORT TO: Charles Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: Michael Thompson, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT:County Road C Area Street Improvements, City Project 08-11, Consider Citizen Request for a Retaining Wall Study DATE: October 22, 2008 INTRODUCTION The council will consider a request by a resident on Clarence Street to conduct additional studies regarding a retaining wall north of the citizen?s private property (property location can be found in attachments). BACKGROUND th On October 16, 2008 staff received a formal request (attached) to consider an investigation for installing a retaining wall on the north side of the subject property along the KSTP property, located just northwest of the Clarence Street cul-de-sac. The citizen is requesting that this be studied as part of the County Road C Area Street Improvements feasibility study. The citizen is concerned about public waters and wetland th , 2008 is attached from buffers affecting private property. For background purposes a letter dated July 11 the city?s environmental planner, Shann Finwall, detailing that historically this area has collected water according to aerial photos. The Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District administrator also concurs that this area has historically collected surface water. The citizen?s retaining wall request is being brought to the council for approval of additional funding in the case that it falls outside of the scope of the County Road C Area Street Improvement project; recognizing this would be work outside of the street improvement project scope. BUDGET If an investigation were to proceed an additional $5,000 in the city?s general levy (G.O Improvement Bonds) should be added to the County Road C Area Street Improvement Project feasibility study financing plan. RECOMMENDATION If the council feels this request is warranted, then staff should be directed to proceed with an investigation funded by a $5,000 increase in the city?s general levy (G.O. Improvement Bonds) and be studied concurrently with City Project 08-11. Attachments: 1. Citizen Official Formal Request: October 16, 2008 2. Wetland Ordinance Letter: July 11, 2008 3. Location Map Packet Page Number 68 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 1 Packet Page Number 69 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 1 Packet Page Number 70 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 1 Packet Page Number 71 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 2 Packet Page Number 72 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 2 Packet Page Number 73 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 2 Packet Page Number 74 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 3 Packet Page Number 75 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 3 Packet Page Number 76 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 3 Packet Page Number 77 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 3 Packet Page Number 78 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 3 Packet Page Number 79 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 3 Packet Page Number 80 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 3 Packet Page Number 81 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 3 Packet Page Number 82 of 204 Agenda Item L4 Attachment 3 Packet Page Number 83 of 204 Agenda Item L5 SUMMARY TO: Acting City Manager FROM: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner SUBJECT:PUD Revision and Design Review?Legacy Shops at Maplewood LOCATION: County Road D, East of Southlawn Drive DATE: October 20, 2008 INTRODUCTION Frank Janes, of the Hartford Group, is requesting approval of plan revisions for the Legacy Shops at Maplewood, a 14,616-square-foot retail center at Legacy Village. This project was previously approved by the community design review board on September 27, 2005, but the applicant has now revised the proposal to relocate the proposed building to the middle of the site rather than placing it with a 15-foot front setback from the County Road D right-of-way. The applicant is requesting the following approvals: A revision to the approved planned unit development (PUD). The PUD required that the building have a reduced setback from the front lot line (code requires a minimum of 30 feet, the PUD required a maximum of 15 feet). The revision of the approved 2005 plans. DISCUSSION From staff?s point of view, the only negative is the visual departure from the theme of Legacy Village which promotes the reduced front setback from roadways for the ?walkable? design element which was meant to bring buildings closer to front sidewalks. Buildings and landscaping were intended to be a primary feature as viewed from roadways in this community rather than parking lots. From a standpoint of function, staff agrees with the applicant in that if the back wall of this building was set close to the street, it would not serve as an appealing feature on the street side since there would be no customer doors on the street side. The north side of the building is the service side and it would have to function as the back of the building even though it faced the street. By moving the building to the center of the site, the building could still retain some of the ?reduced? setback appearance since it would not be placed all the way on the south side of the property. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Adopt the resolution approving the revision of the planned unit development (PUD) for the Legacy Shops retail site at Legacy Village at Maplewood. B. Approve the site/building design plans and the comprehensive sign plan date-stamped September 9, 2008, for proposed Legacy Shops at Maplewood retail center at Legacy Village. Packet Page Number 84 of 204 MEMORANDUM TO: Acting City Manager FROM: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner SUBJECT:PUD Revision and Design Review?Legacy Shops at Maplewood LOCATION: County Road D, East of Southlawn Drive DATE: October 20, 2008 INTRODUCTION Frank Janes, of the Hartford Group, is requesting approval of plan revisions for the Legacy Shops at Maplewood, a 14,616-square-foot retail center at Legacy Village. This project was previously approved by the community design review board on September 27, 2005, but the applicant has now revised the proposal to relocate the proposed building to the middle of the site rather than placing it with a 15-foot front setback from the County Road D right-of-way. Refer to the applicant?s letter and the attached maps and plans. Requests The applicant is requesting the following approvals: A revision to the approved planned unit development (PUD). The PUD required that the building have a reduced setback from the front lot line (code requires a minimum of 30 feet, the PUD required a maximum of 15 feet). The revision of the approved 2005 plans. BACKGROUND July 14, 2003: The city council approved the Legacy Village PUD. The only condition of the PUD that is in question is the requirement that, ?The building(s) on the retail/commercial site should be sited on the north side of the parcel within 15 feet of the County Road D right-of-way with all parking to the south.? September 27, 2005: The CDRB approved the original Legacy Shops proposal. Refer to the attached minutes from this meeting. September 16, 2008: The planning commission reviewed the PUD revision and recommended approval in support of the revised building setback. See Committee Actions below. DISCUSSION PUD Revision On February 19, 2008, the planning commission reviewed the applicant?s proposed design alternatives for this site. Refer to the planning commission?s minutes. The main change was to Packet Page Number 85 of 204 pull the building away from County Road D and place it in the center of the site as now proposed. (There was another alternative that the planning commission minutes reflect in which there was a possible driveway connection to Village Trail East on the south side of the site. The applicant dropped this idea for the current proposal.) The planning commission had mixed feelings regarding the proposed building placement in the middle of the site and its front elevation facing County Road D. According to the minutes, though, there were more members in support than opposed. On March 24, 2008, the city council discussed the applicant?s site plan changes for this property. The minutes do not reflect any preference, but they expressed a willingness to consider options. From staff?s point of view, the only negative is the visual departure from the theme of Legacy Village which promotes the reduced front setback from roadways for the ?walkable? design element which was meant to bring buildings closer to front sidewalks. Buildings and landscaping were intended to be a primary feature as viewed from roadways in this community rather than parking lots. From a standpoint of function, staff agrees with the applicant in that if the back wall of this building was set close to the street, it would not serve as an appealing feature on the street side since there would be no customer doors on the street side. The north side of the building is the service side and it would have to function as the back of the building even though it faced the street. By moving the building to the center of the site, the building could still retail some of the ?reduced? setback appearance since it would not be placed all the way on the south side of the property. This plan, if approved, should provide proper, aesthetic buffering on its south side for the Wyngate Townhomes. Substantial screening should be installed along the south property line by means of a decorative fence and proper landscaping. The goal of the CDRB should be to buffer this back side of the building for these residential neighbors. Another important element for the CDRB to consider is the control of light glare or spill over from the proposed retail site. The owner of Ashley Furniture is in favor of the proposed setback for the Legacy Shops. Staff met with the owner?s representatives recently and they supported the increased setback. The currently-required 15-foot front setback would obscure the view of Ashley Furniture from the west which they strongly oppose. The owner of Ashley Furniture, in fact, would support the placement of the Legacy Shops building to the south side of the site. Design Considerations Building Design The proposed building is attractively designed with the following materials: face brick, EIFS (exterior insulation finish system), rock-face concrete block and cultured stone. Staff?s main concern had been with the appearance of the south elevation which faces the Wyngate Town Homes. The applicant has improved the design of this elevation by adding brick on the columns, cultured stone and cementitious (stucco) panels. The earlier proposal was primarily rock-face concrete block. 2 Packet Page Number 86 of 204 Staff?s recommendation is that the rock-face concrete block be the variety that has a deeper ?cut? to it to more resemble actual stone, rather than the typical, flatter profile rock-face textured block often used. An example of this design of block is on the retail building to the east occupied by Pei Wei, AT&T and others. The PUD conditions also required ?the architectural character and exterior building materials must be in keeping with the adjacent townhomes and other buildings if present.? The applicant has improved the west elevation significantly over their initial submittal, however, staff is recommending that the brick columns on the back of the building be designed with crowns or caps like those at Ashley Furniture. These are attractive details and the addition of these would further meet the PUD requirement for architectural design being ?in keeping? with other buildings in this development. Roof Equipment Screening The city ordinance requires that roof-top mechanical equipment be screened from the view of residences. The applicant must show that this would be accomplished, and if it can?t by the parapet, there must be screening enclosures around the mechanical units. Trash Enclosure The applicant is proposing to provide indoor trash storage in the center of the building on the rear elevation. Staff feels this is appropriate but questions whether trash haulers can easily access the dumpsters. If they become too cumbersome to haul from and return to their spaces, staff worries that they may eventually be left outside of the building. These would not be in a location easily backed up to by a trash hauler. Parking, Setbacks and Access Parking: The applicant is proposing 76 parking spaces. Code requires 73. Therefore, there are enough spaces to meet code. The parking stalls and drive aisle dimensions also meet code requirements. Setbacks: The proposed setbacks meet code requirements. Access: Access to this site is via two existing curb cuts on the west and east sides of the site. Lighting Plan The photometric plan meets code for limiting light intensity to below .4 foot-candles at the property lines. The applicant has not submitted a lighting fixture design plan yet, but is proposing to install lights that are in keeping with the design of existing lighting fixtures at Legacy Village. 3 Packet Page Number 87 of 204 To be considerate with the residents at Wyngate, there should not be any lights that shine toward the south. Staff recommends that the site lights on the south side of the building be placed on poles along the south lot line and shine toward the north. Landscaping The proposed landscaping along the north side, the County Road D frontage, is very light. There is only one tree proposed and two short runs of shrubbery. The proposed landscaping along the west frontage is acceptable, but the east side is sparse. The southerly frontage is primarily proposed to be screened by a row of Techney Arborvitae. This has the potential of becoming a tall, thick hedge and would be acceptable. The PUD requirements also required that, along the southerly frontage, there shall be over-story trees planted at 30 to 40 feet on center. The applicant should plant additional over-story trees along this frontage to meet that requirement, in addition to the row of arborvitaes. In summary, the applicant should revise the landscaping plan to increase the plantings along the north and east frontages and to provide the over-story trees at 30 to 40 feet on center along the south frontage. Deliveries, Noise and Hours of Operation The planning commission was concerned with the potential for disturbances for the Wyngate residents due to deliveries, noise in general and the hours of operation. The noise ordinance limits noise-causing activity to between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. It is likely that there will be stores or restaurants that open before 7 a.m. and close later than 7 p.m. A coffee shop is one such example. Staff recommends that noise issues be periodically evaluated. Staff does not feel it is appropriate, at this time, to limit hours of operation. It is more a function of managing the noise output. For example, if the order panel p.a. is too loud, the business should be required to change their practices to lessen the noise. One suggestion staff has now is that the menu and order panel, if one is proposed later, be on the east side, not on the south side of the building to limit direct noise to Wyngate. Comprehensive Sign Plan A comprehensive sign plan is required for this project. The applicant will be submitting this later. Engineering Comments Refer to the report by Jon Jarosch of the Maplewood Engineering Department dated August 12, 2008. Building Official?s Comments Dave Fisher, the Maplewood Building Official, had the following comments: A complete building code analysis will be required when plans are submitted for a building permit. The city requires signed architectural plans to be submitted for the building permit. 4 Packet Page Number 88 of 204 The applicant shall ensure that the project design allows for adequate fire department access to the building. Mr. Fisher recommends a pre-construction meeting with the building department prior to plan submittal. Police Lieutenant Kevin Rabbett reviewed the proposal and stated that there were no significant public safety concerns. Fire Marshal Butch Gervais, the Maplewood Fire Marshal, reviewed the proposal and stated the following: There must be a 20-foot-wide emergency-access road provided. A fire-protection system must be provided. The door where the fire-protection system is located must be properly marked as such. A fire department lock box shall be installed (see Mr. Gervais for the order form). There may be one box for the complex if all the keys will fit. The box must then be located in the center of the complex. COMMITTEE ACTIONS September 16, 2008: The planning commission reviewed the PUD and recommended approval. They recommended revisions to staff?s initial recommendation by stating that: The proposed building shall be placed a specific distance from the County Road D right-of- way, as measured from the site plan, rather than generally stating that the building may be placed in the ?middle? of the site. The project complies with the city?s noise ordinance, including deliveries. The hours of operation be worked out with staff. The PUD references to street names be revised to accurately reflect the existing street layout. September 23, 2008: The community design review board (CDRB) recommended approval of the plans. The CDRB added conditions stating: Freestanding lighting fixtures be consistent with those in place throughout Legacy Village. 5 Packet Page Number 89 of 204 Lighting fixtures on the back of the building be down-shining lights only. The color of the awnings be compatible with the color scheme of the building materials. There shall be no garish colors. Color selection shall be subject to staff approval. The applicant shall modify the area above the columns on the back of the building to provide a contrast to the main wall color to break up the expansive large back wall. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Adopt the resolution approving the revision of the planned unit development (PUD) for the Legacy Shops retail site at Legacy Village at Maplewood. This revision would allow the placement of the proposed retail shops building in the location as shown on the site plan, a distance of approximately 83 feet from the front (northerly) lot line rather than the previously required 15-foot setback. Approval is subject to the findings required by ordinance and subject to the following conditions (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Retail/Commercial (Outlot A): a. The retail/commercial site is planned in concept only within the PUD and will come in for design review and approval at a later date, but the use is allowed as long as the provisions of the BC zoning district and conditions outlined here are met; b. The building(s) on the retail/commercial site shall be set back as shown on the site plan approved by the city council, approximately 83 feet, from the north lot line; should be sited on the north side of the parcel within 15? of the County Road D right-of-way with all parking to the south; c. The applicant shall submit a comprehensive sign plan. One criteria to be established, however, is that pylon signs shall not be allowed. Monument signs may be allowed, but shall not exceed 12 feet in height; d. The architectural character and exterior building materials must be in keeping with the adjacent townhomes and other buildings if present; e. Access to the site shall be from the side streets; will be off the east leg of the roundabout and another access drive off Street C between the roundabout and County Road D; and to County Road D at a shared driveway with the adjacent furniture store site; f. All ground-mounted and roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened according to ordinance; g. Overstory trees must be planted along the south side of the extension of Street B at an average of 30 feet ? 40 feet on center. h. Adequate separation, buffering and screening must be provided for the multi-family residential units from the front doors, parking areas, loading areas, and mechanical equipment of this commercial building; 6 Packet Page Number 90 of 204 i. Noise levels shall be kept to that required by the city?s noise ordinance. The drive-up service window, if used, shall not have a menu board with p.a. system on the south or west sides of the building; j. The hours of operation and delivery times shall be worked out with staff. B. Approve the site/building design plans and the comprehensive sign plan date-stamped September 9, 2008, for proposed Legacy Shops at Maplewood retail center at Legacy Village. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall do the following: a. Revise the plans for staff approval for the rear elevation adding decorative caps or crowns on top of the brick columns. An example of these are those on Ashley Furniture next door. b. Revise the landscaping plan for staff approval to increase the plantings along the north and east frontages and to provide the over-story trees at 30 to 40 feet on center along the south frontage. c. Provide a roof-equipment screening plan showing how roof-mounted equipment will be screened from the residential views from the south and northwest. If the proposed building parapet is not tall enough, screening must be provided. The applicant shall comply with the city code in this respect. d. Provide a screening plan for any utility meters for staff approval. e. Provide a lighting plan with details showing the proposed light fixtures for staff review and approval. There shall not be any site lights on the back of the building that shine toward the south, however, decorative lights on the back of the building shall only be down illuminating. f. Site lights south of the building shall be pole mounted and aim toward the building, not toward the south. The style of freestanding lights shall match or be compatible with those in Legacy Village. 3. Before getting a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: a. Comply with or complete all aspects of these plans or any required revisions. b. Provide roof-equipment screening as required by code. c. Provide in-ground lawn irrigation as shown on the plans. d. Comply with all requirements of the fire marshal, building official and police departments as noted in the staff report. 7 Packet Page Number 91 of 204 4. Before obtaining a building permit, the applicant shall provide an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of completing landscaping and other site improvements. This irrevocable letter of credit shall include the following provisions: a. The letter of credit must clearly indicate that it is an irrevocable letter of credit in the name of the City of Maplewood, payable on demand. b. The letter of credit shall have a stipulation indicating automatic renewal, with notification to the city by certified mail a minimum of 60 days prior to its expiration. 5. The community design review board shall review any major changes to these plans. Minor changes may be approved by staff. 6. The color of the awnings shall be compatible with the color scheme of the building. There shall be no garish colors. Colors are subject to staff approval. 7. The applicant shall modify the area above the columns on the back of the building to provide a contrast to the main wall color to break up the expansive large back wall. 8 Packet Page Number 92 of 204 REFERENCE INFORMATION SITE DESCRIPTION Site size: 2.04 acres Existing Use: Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USES North: County Road D and Slumberland Furniture South: Wyngate Townhomes East: Ashley Furniture West: Heritage Square Second Addition Townhomes PLANNING Land Use Plan: BC (business commercial) Zoning: PUD (planned unit development) APPLICATION/DECISION DEADLINE We received the complete application and plans for this proposal on June 30, 2008. State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications. Staff, however, extended the required review deadline an additional 60 days in accordance with state statute to October 28, 2008. The applicant subsequently agreed to a second extension to November 30, 2008. p:sec3\Legacy Shops\Legacy Shops PUD & Design 9 08 #2 Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Legacy Village PUD Concept Plan 3. Previously-Approved Site Plan dated September 27, 2005 4. Proposed Site Plan 5. Proposed Building Elevations (perspective drawings and elevations) 6. Applicant?s Letter of Request dated June 30, 2008 7. Engineering Report dated August 12, 2008 8. September 27, 2005 CDRB Minutes 9. February 19, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes 10. March 24, 2008 City Council Minutes 11. PUD Revision Resolution 12. September 16, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes 13. September 23, 2008 Community Design Review Board Minutes 14. Plans date-stamped September 9, 2008 (separate attachment) 9 Packet Page Number 93 of 204 Packet Page Number 94 of 204 Packet Page Number 95 of 204 Packet Page Number 96 of 204 Packet Page Number 97 of 204 Packet Page Number 98 of 204 Packet Page Number 99 of 204 Packet Page Number 100 of 204 Packet Page Number 101 of 204 Packet Page Number 102 of 204 Packet Page Number 103 of 204 Packet Page Number 104 of 204 Packet Page Number 105 of 204 Packet Page Number 106 of 204 Packet Page Number 107 of 204 Packet Page Number 108 of 204 Packet Page Number 109 of 204 Packet Page Number 110 of 204 Packet Page Number 111 of 204 Packet Page Number 112 of 204 Attachment 11 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REVISION WHEREAS, Frank Janes, of the Hartford Group, applied for a conditional use permit revision to revise the planned unit development requirements of the retail site at Legacy Village at Maplewood. WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property located south of County Road D, between Flandrau Street and Bittersweet Lane. The legal description is: Lot 3, Block 2, Legacy Village of Maplewood WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit revision is as follows: 1. On September 16, 2008, the planning commission held a public hearing. The city staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission also considered the reports and recommendation of city staff. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve this permit. 2. On __________, 2008, the city council considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council __________ the above-described conditional use permit, because: 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. 4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. Packet Page Number 113 of 204 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to the following conditions (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Retail/Commercial (Outlot A): a. The retail/commercial site is planned in concept only within the PUD and will come in for design review and approval at a later date, but the use is allowed as long as the provisions of the BC zoning district and conditions outlined here are met; b. The building(s) on the retail/commercial site shall be set back as shown on the site plan approved by the city council, approximately 83 feet, from the north lot line; should be sited on the north side of the parcel within 15? of the County Road D right-of-way with all parking to the south; c. The applicant shall submit a comprehensive sign plan. One criteria to be established, however, is that pylon signs shall not be allowed. Monument signs may be allowed, but shall not exceed 12 feet in height; d. The architectural character and exterior building materials must be in keeping with the adjacent townhomes and other buildings if present; e. Access to the site shall be from the side streets; will be off the east leg of the roundabout and another access drive off Street C between the roundabout and County Road D; and to County Road D at a shared driveway with the adjacent furniture store site; f. All ground-mounted and roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened according to ordinance; g. Overstory trees must be planted along the south side of the extension of Street B at an average of 30 feet ? 40 feet on center. h. Adequate separation, buffering and screening must be provided for the multi-family residential units from the front doors, parking areas, loading areas, and mechanical equipment of this commercial building; i. Noise levels shall be kept to that required by the city?s noise ordinance. The drive-up service window, if used, shall not have a menu board with a p.a. system on the south or west sides of the building; j. The hours of operation and delivery times shall be worked out with staff. The Maplewood City Council __________ this resolution on _________, 2008. 2 Packet Page Number 114 of 204 DRAFT Attachment 12 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008 V. PUBLIC HEARING a. 7:01 p.m. ? Legacy Shops, Legacy Village, County Road D Planned Unit Development (PUD) Revision The Special Assessments Escrow Agreement The Release of Development Agreement Planner Tom Ekstrand presented the staff report for the request for approval of plan revisions for the Legacy Shops at Maplewood. Mr. Ekstrand explained this revision request is to relocate the proposed building to the middle of the site rather than placing it with the PUD required 15-foot maximum setback from the County Road D right-of-way. Commissioner Hess asked staff for the exact setback measurement from the property line that is proposed and also whether the tenants for this center are known. Staff responded showing the proposed plan for the building. Commissioner Trippler asked staff if this plan is different from what the applicant?s presented to the commission in February. Mr. Ekstrand responded the February meeting was informational for the applicant to receive input and comments from the commission and that tonight?s request is a formal submittal. Mr. Trippler said he feels this plan was approved three years ago and everyone knew the design and if it was good enough when they first signed on it is good enough now. Chair Fischer asked for comments from the applicant. The applicant was not present. Commissioner Yarwood asked if a drive-through remains part of this proposal. Mr. Ekstrand responded that a drive-through is included in this plan. Mr. Ekstrand said the applicant hopes to have a coffee shop as a tenant. Mr. Ekstrand explained the driveway lane would follow across the back of the building to the drive-through window. Commissioner Yarwood said he does not have a problem with moving the building to the center of the site and that it might help to break up the area visually, but said he would like to table this request until the applicant can be at the meeting. Commissioner Martin agreed the applicant should be at the meeting to answer questions. The developer, Frank James of Hartford Group, arrived at the meeting. Mr. James explained plans to relocate the building on the site and said he would be happy to answer questions from the commission. Commissioner Hess followed up with his question requesting details of the floor plan. Mr. James explained the tenant spaces have not been finalized so the space sizes are still tentative. Mr. Hess asked the plans for lighting. Mr. James responded they are familiar with the lighting requirements in this situation and will work with the city so the type of lighting that is installed casts minimum light onto the street and across to the townhomes. Commissioner Desai asked how the parking requirements will be affected by not knowing the tenants going into the building. Mr. James responded that there is a finite amount of parking that needs to be balanced with the uses. Mr. James said the business owner will want to know that there will be enough parking for the use and this is generally worked out between the tenant and the owner. Packet Page Number 115 of 204 Planning Commission -2- Minutes of 09-16-08 Commissioner Hess asked where deliveries will be made. Mr. James responded that the deliveries will use the drive-through area after hours. Commissioner Yarwood asked for clarification on traffic moving through the drive-through lane. Mr. James explained the traffic will move counter clockwise through the drive-through area. Mr. Yarwood asked staff what restrictions will be in place for the drive-through area use. Mr. Ekstrand responded this has not yet been set but could be accomplished through the PUD. Mr. Ekstrand explained the main concern would be not to impact the residents to the south late at night or early morning. Commissioner Desai pointed out that in the past this kind of a use with a P.A. system taking orders has been a noise consideration for the neighbors and asked staff what will be required. Mr. Ekstrand responded that limiting the hours of operation and seeing the center is closed by an appropriate hour. Mr. Ekstrand said it would be customary to add a condition with language requiring that P.A. systems be set appropriately. Mr. James commented this topic has been discussed with the owner of the center and he is aware of this issue and wants to be a good neighbor and will cooperate to see that the neighbors are not disturbed. Mr. James said the proposed center?s owner is familiar and used to dealing with these issues, since he does only retail developments. Mr. James said the owner wanted to be at the meeting tonight, but is sick and unable to be at the meeting. The public hearing was opened for comments from the public. Jim Hinitz of the Ashley furniture stores said they are in agreement with moving this building back to the center of the site. Mr. Hinitz said that placing this building in the front would further hide the Ashley building and affect their identity and ability to be profitable in the community. There were no further public comments; the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Pearson questioned whether original plans for a roundabout in this area are still feasible. Mr. Ekstrand explained the roundabout was considered with the original planning, but was never made a part of the approved plan. Commissioner Martin asked staff to explain the original building and parking lot plan as opposed to the current plan. Mr. Ekstrand explained that after a consultant?s study and the city council review, it was evident the city was looking for the reduced setback concept for the Legacy Village site. The reduced setbacks were reflected in the written conditions required. Commissioner Pearson said he does not have a problem with this plan or the increased setback. Mr. Pearson said this parcel is on the far northeast corner and all of the other developable pieces are in the interior area of Legacy Village and there is a greater importance to maintain style of the architecture. Mr. Pearson said moving the setback further back would give them more of an entrance and would be more attractive from County Road D. Commissioner Hess moved to adopt the resolution approving the revision of the planned unit development (PUD) for the Legacy Shops retail site at Legacy Village at Maplewood. This revision would allow the placement of the proposed retail shops building a specific distance from the County Road D right-of-way as shown on the site plan. Approval is subject to the findings required by ordinance and subject to the following conditions (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): Packet Page Number 116 of 204 Planning Commission -3- Minutes of 09-16-08 Retail/Commercial (Outlot A): a. The retail/commercial site is planned in concept only within the PUD and will come in for design review and approval at a later date, but the use is allowed as long as the provisions of the BC zoning district and conditions outlined are met; b. The building(s) on the retail/commercial site shall be set back as shown on the site plan approved by the city council, approximately 83 feet, from the north lot line should be sited on the north side of the parcel within 15? of the County Road D right-of-way with all parking to the south; c. The applicant shall submit a comprehensive sign plan. One criteria to be established, however, is that pylon signs shall not be allowed. Monument signs may be allowed, but shall not exceed 12 feet in height; d. The architectural character and exterior building materials must be in keeping with the adjacent townhomes and other buildings if present; e. Access to the site shall be from the side streets; will be off the east leg of the east leg of the roundabout and another access drive off Street C between the roundabout and County Road D; and to County Road D at a shared driveway with the adjacent furniture store site; f. All ground-mounted and roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened according to ordinance; g. Overstory trees must be planted along the south side of the extension of Street B at an average of 30?-40? on center. h. Adequate separation, buffering and screening must be provided for the multi-family residential units from the front i. Noise levels shall be kept to a minimum at the drive-through along with hours of operation and delivery times to be determined by staff working with the developer. Commissioner Pearson seconded Ayes ? Desai, Fischer, Hess, Martin, Pearson, Walton, Yarwood Nay ? Trippler The motion passed. Packet Page Number 117 of 204 DRAFT Attachment 13 MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 IV. DESIGN REVIEW a. Legacy Shops at Legacy Village, County Road D City Planner Tom Ekstrand presented the staff report explaining the request for approval of plan revisions for the Legacy Shops at Maplewood, a 14,616 square-foot retail center at Legacy Village. Mr. Ekstrand reviewed design plans of the building. Mr. Ekstrand said he feels the assortment of materials selected is attractive, good-quality products and should be compatible with the other developments in the neighborhood. Mr. Ekstrand said the applicant has not submitted the lighting fixture designs and these should be provided for review. Mr. Ekstrand said they are requiring that there not be any lighting facing south as a consideration to the residents at Wyngate. Mr. Ekstrand introduced Patrick Sarver of the Hartford Group, who is the master developer of this development. Mr. Ekstrand said Todd Geller of Hartford Group, who will be the owner and operator of this center, will also be attending this meeting. Boardmember Olson asked staff if the townhomes to the south have screening. Mr. Ekstrand responded the townhomes are landscaped for site beautification, but are not screened. Boardmember Wise asked staff about the previous site elevations and asked for clarifications on the staff?s suggestion regarding brick to the roof on the decorative columns. Mr. Ekstrand showed the original plan elevations and said the applicant did not feel it was a functional design, even though the building looked nice. Mr. Ekstrand said the suggestion for installing brick upward toward the roof on the columns was inspired by the caps on the adjacent Ashley Furniture and other buildings in the area. Boardmember Demko asked staff if a photometric or lighting plan was submitted with this request. Mr. Ekstrand responded that a photometric plan showing the foot candles of light intensity around the property was received and that their plan met city code. Mr. Ekstrand said they have not submitted a lighting fixture design plan. Boardmember Ledvina suggested the board limit its consideration to the design issues under its purview which are germane to the board?s discussion. Patrick Sarver, director of development with Hartford Group, presented samples of the proposed building materials for the board?s review. Todd Geller introduced himself saying he is with Victory Capital and working with the Hartford Group on this development and the redesign of this project. Mr. Geller said the applicant is willing to work with staff in designing the column caps with designs similar to buildings adjacent to this site. Boardmember Olson asked Mr. Geller to address the brick and split face masonry proposed around the building. Mr. Geller responded that they took the previous design of the building and then created similar design applications. Mr. Geller said the difference is they have taken the glass off the back of the building and upgraded it with stucco materials to make it as complementary as possible to the back side of the building on the south and to add as much landscaping as possible. Packet Page Number 118 of 204 Community Design Review Board 2 Minutes 09-23-2008 Boardmember Shankar mentioned the awning colors were listed as blue, but the sample on the materials board is not blue. Mr. Sarver responded that the awnings will be complementary but a specific tenant might want to make a modification to an awning to complement their signage. Mr. Shankar asked if the three samples on the materials board could be any color. Mr. Sarver responded affirmatively and noted it would be tastefully done to match the design architecture and adjacent properties. Boardmember Shankar asked if there are two different colors of stucco shown on the board. Mr. Sarver responded affirmatively noting they will be used to create variety and interest along the building. Mr. Shankar said it appears from the elevations that there will be one color of stucco used on three sides of the building and a second color used on the south side. Mr. Sarver explained the lighter color one stucco will be used on the field areas and the darker color two will be used on the cornices. Boardmember Olson asked Mr. Sarver to comment on the lighting plan since the board has not received a copy of the plan. Mr. Sarver explained the final lighting fixtures have not been selected yet, but similar fixtures represented on the samples board show they will be an up or down light fixture. Mr. Sarver said since they are the master developer for the entire area, the final fixtures selected will be consistent with those already in place in the area. Boardmember Olson asked Mr. Geller if the lighting on the south side of the building could be down lights only. Mr. Geller responded affirmatively. Boardmember Olson asked if the channel signage will be backlit. Mr. Geller responded the signage will be backlit. Boardmember Shankar asked if the roof top units would be screened or if they will be visible. Mr. Sarver responded the number of rooftop units has not yet been determined, but the perimeter wall of the building is designed with a central parapet that extends to screen any rooftop units. Mr. Sarver explained they are in agreement with staff?s landscaping request to screen with over story trees 30-40 feet on center along the south side of the building between the townhomes would be appropriate to create the street scape along Village Trail East. Boardmember Shankar asked what parking use is planned for the south parking lot area. Mr. Sarver explained the south parking lot area will be used primarily by employees. Boardmember Shankar asked where the gas and electric meters would be mounted. Mr. Sarver said they will be located in the back near the center of the building by the mechanical room. Boardmember Olson asked for comments on the staff request for increasing the landscaping at the front of the building. Mr. Sarver said they have concerns with upgrading the landscaping on the north side of the building and planting too much so that it becomes a future visibility problem at the front of the building. Mr. Ekstrand responded staff had requested additional landscaping at the front of this building, but this has been a past issue when developments plant mature trees that then grow too large for the area. Mr. Ekstrand explained Ashley Furniture is concerned the Legacy Shops not obscure their store?s visibility and they actually prefer the new location proposed for the Legacy Shops. Mr. Ekstrand said he would be happy to work with the applicant to devise a landscape plan that is attractive and lower profile. Mr. Sarver noted the corners of the building architecturally have been intended to have signs that frame the corners and would have two sides. Mr. Sarver said as a matter of clarification they would like to have the two signs on the taller piece on both sides of the corner. Mr. Ekstrand said the Packet Page Number 119 of 204 Community Design Review Board 3 Minutes 09-23-2008 condition on signage in the report was drafted off of the original report and will need to be revised. Mr. Ekstrand said they did not receive a sign plan from the applicant and asked whether they might have signage criteria to present at this meeting. The applicant responded they did not have signage criteria at this time, but will be created as they finalize the design of the building. Boardmember Ledvina moved approval of the revised site and building design plans date-stamped September 9, 2008 for proposed Legacy Shops at Maplewood retail center at Legacy Village. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 2. Before getting a building permit, the applicant shall do the following: Review the plans for staff approval for all elevations adding decorative caps or crown on top of the brick columns. Revise the landscaping plan for staff approval to increase the plantings along the north and east frontages and to provide the over story trees at 30 to 40 feet on center along the south frontage. Provide a roof-equipment screening plan showing how roof-mounted equipment will be screened from the residential views to the south. If the proposed building parapet isn?t tall enough, screening must be provided. The applicant shall comply with the city code in this respect. Provide a screening plan for any exterior utility meters for staff approval. Provide a lighting plan details showing the proposed light fixtures for staff?s review and approval. There shall not be any lights on the back of the building. Site lights south of the building shall be pole-mount lights that aim toward the building. Freestanding light fixtures shall be consistent with existing light fixtures for Legacy Village development, subject to staff approval. Lighting on the south elevation shall be only down lighting. 3. Before getting a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: Comply with or complete all aspects of these plans or any required revisions. Provide roof-equipment screening as required by code. Provide in-ground lawn irrigation as shown on the plans. Comply with all requirements of the fire marshal, building official and police departments as noted in the staff report. 4. A comprehensive sign plan must be submitted subject to approval by the community design review board. Packet Page Number 120 of 204 Community Design Review Board 4 Minutes 09-23-2008 5. Before obtaining a building permit, the applicant shall provide an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of 150 percent of the cost of completing landscaping and other site improvements. This irrevocable letter of credit shall include the following provisions: The letter of credit must clearly indicate that it is an irrevocable letter of credit in the name of the City of Maplewood, payable on demand, to assure compliance with the terms of the developer?s agreement. The letter of credit must allow for partial withdrawals as needed to guarantee partial project payments covered under the terms of the letter of credit. The letter of credit shall be for a one-year duration and must have a condition indicating automatic renewal, with notification to the city a minimum of 60 days prior to its expiration. 6. The community design review board shall review any major changes to these plans. Minor changes may be approved by staff. 7. The color of awnings shall be consistent/compatible with the color scheme of the building (no garish colors) and subject to staff approval. 8. The applicant shall modify the area above the columns on the back of the building to provide a contrast to the main wall color to break up the expansive large back wall. Seconded by Boardmember Wise Boardmember Shankar questioned whether condition d. of Item A relating to the PUD conflicts with the board?s motion. Boardmember Olson said she is okay with the board?s motion since it is quite a general statement and is under the purview of the board. Boardmember Shankar suggested a friendly amendment might be added to the motion requiring brick be extended to the bottom of stucco color two on the six columns. The board discussed with Mr. Sarver the amendment to require the brick extension on the six central columns. Mr. Sarver asked whether an alternative of doing something different with the stucco such as changing the color or adding reveals might be used instead of the brick. Mr. Sarver said they previously explored extending the brick, but it did not look right and thought it might be because it then isn?t consistent with the front of the building. It was suggested that using a EIFS color change might provide the aIternative desired. It was decided t the applicant would work with staff to come up with an alternative design for the six columns. Boardmember Ledvina accepted the friendly amendment to his motion to modify the color of six of the interior columns on the south elevation of the building to change the EIFS color to provide more prominence in breaking up the expanse of the lighter tan EIFS. As the second to the motion, Boardmember Wise accepted the friendly amendment to the motion. The board then voted: Ayes - all The motion passed. Packet Page Number 121 of 204 AGENDA ITEM L6 MEMORANDUM To: Chuck Ahl, Acting City Manager From: Karen Guilfoile, Director Citizen Services Date: October 20, 2008 Subject: Maplewood Community Center Request for Proposal (RFP) for Food Catering Services Introduction From its inception until 2006, the Maplewood Community Center utilized Suzanne?s Cuisine as the exclusive liquor and food provider. In 2006 staff proposed, and council approved, agreements with five caterers for catering services and one sole liquor provider. These agreements began as of January 1, 2007 and are three year agreements but have termination clauses in their Terms of Agreement. It has become apparent that going from an exclusive food provider to having five caterers did not produce the results that staff at that time had hoped. The Agreement with Prom Catering as the sole beverage provider has worked well and staff is recommending no change in this area. Background The Maplewood Community Center banquet facility can accommodate up to 350 individuals and annually hosts approximately 25 wedding receptions, 6 large community events and over 500 meetings/events. Currently our catering agreement for food and beverage provides the city with a percentage of revenue from gross sales as follows: 8% Monday ? Thursday, 6:00 am - 4:30 pm 12% Monday ? Thursday, 4:30 pm - 11:30 pm 15% Friday ? Sunday and Holidays, 6:00 am - 11:00 pm The percentage rate established for beverage service is 25% of all gross sales. After managing the current contracts for almost two years, it is staffs recommendation to modify the catering options to include three caterers so that the process is more manageable. In addition to reducing the number of caterers, staff is suggesting that food minimums for wedding events be implemented in the new agreements by requiring food options starting at $15.00 per person, either plated or buffet style. The regular room rental fee will still apply. Recommendation Staff recommends the city council adopt the attached request for proposal for food catering services for the MCC effective January 1, 2009. Packet Page Number 122 of 204 City of Maplewood Maplewood Community Center FOOD CATERER REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL October 2008 Packet Page Number 123 of 204 Purpose of Proposal The City of Maplewood is seeking proposals to enter into an Agreement with of three (3) exclusive food service providers to provide catered food service in the Maplewood Community Center (MCC) hereinafter, ?exclusive caters?. The intent is to select three (3) Exclusive Caterers to supply food for banquets, special events, meetings and other functions conducted at the MCC. The City shall contract with three exclusive caterers in 2008 and they shall be available for food service contracts January 1, 2009.MCC event holders will be able to choose any one of the three (3) Exclusive Caterers selected to handle food service needs for their event. Until January 1, 2009, MCC event holders in search of food service will be provided the current listing of Exclusive MCC Caterers. As of January 1, 2009, exclusive caterers selected herby will be the only food service providers available to MCC event holders. Community Center Banquet Room Information The MCC has been in the meeting and event business for nearly fifteen (15) years, books dozens of wedding receptions and has in excess of 500 meetings per year. Our banquet facility can accommodate 350 guests, and can be subdivided into four (4) rooms for separate functions at the same time. The MCC also houses several other meeting and event spaces. The facilities and other amenities available make the MCC a premier facility for weddings, meetings, fundraisers, tradeshows, corporate events and community special events. Weekday events include business luncheons, workshops and seminars, team banquets, recitals, senior luncheons/suppers and more. Weeknight events at the MCC include insurance meetings, financial seminars and town home association meetings. About the Maplewood Community Center?s Customers The MCC customers are diverse in age and background, and have high expectations and varying needs. Caterers are required to offer food appealing to all customers, including vegetarian, ethnic and kosher options. MCC requires Exclusive Caterers selected to adhere to a minimum low end per plate/person offering to keep quality of food and reputation of the MCC high. Packet Page Number 124 of 204 Kitchen and Responsibilities Catering Kitchen will be made available to Exclusive Caterer for their events. The Exclusive Caterers selected will supply food, service staff, tableware, plate ware, glassware and linens for events that they are selected for. The selected Exclusive Caterers must secure their property as well as their employee?s, property, while providing service at the events that are catering for. The MCC will not be responsible for lost or stolen items. Financial Arrangements The MCC shall collect a percentage of the revenues generated through food service, beverage service and other services provided, including rental items and decorations. The percentage shall be based on the final gross bill. Exclusive Caterers must include in their response to the RFP, the following percentages: 8% of all gross sales for service scheduled Monday through Thursday, 6:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 12% of all gross sales for service scheduled Monday through Thursday, 4:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. 15% of all gross sales for service scheduled Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays 6:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. Menu Pricing Requirements The MCC has placed the following food minimums for wedding events: Food options must start at $15.00 per person (either plated or buffet style). The regular room rental fee still applies. Accounting Procedures The collection of deposits and fees for all catering charges is the sole responsibility of not the Caterer. Non-payment by a client to the caterer for services rendered will negate payment to the MCC. The MCC will require a detailed abstract of services provided including but not limited to food selection, decorations, other rental items provided and all other miscellaneous items billed for. The MCC shall also be copied on the final invoice sent to the event holder. The abstract is due within 14 days of the conclusion of the event. Payment is due along with the statement. An MCC representative will collect the room rental fee, room deposit, security officer and additional MCC fees. Packet Page Number 125 of 204 Caterer(s) Responsibilities Provide professional staff that will maintain a consistently high level of service and appearance. Provide pre-event customer service in a timely and professional manner. Provide food tasting for current and potential MCC customers. Wait staff must be able to distribute and clean up alcoholic beverages at tables as part of a service (if asked) Provide multi-level price list with wait staff, tableware and linens included. Provide varied menus to meet customer?s needs and accommodate small and large events. Provide appropriate staffing to prepare, serve and host food events. Provide sufficient daytime staff when necessary. Provide MCC with a copy of the current Health Department License and Certified Food Managers License during the term of the contract. Provide MCC with proof of liability insurance and bonding, if any. Work with customer directly to provide food service for their event. Provide marketing/menu information to assist MCC with potential renters. Designate an on-site coordinator for each event to work with MCC staff throughout the event. Adhere to standards set forth in Minnesota Statues and the Department of Health. Work cooperatively with beverage service provider at events, including clearing drinks/bottles off tables. Responsible for keeping the kitchen, storage areas, and receiving areas clean. Assist with cleaning and maintenance of banquet room as needed. Provide a detailed accounting of events held at the MCC and make fee payments to MCC in a timely manner. Provide a minimum of two sponsored City events, at cost, with no commission due the MCC. Maplewood Community Center Responsibilities Provide Catering kitchen with existing equipment MCC will provide all event scheduling. Charge and collect facility fees to event holders and schedule events. Provide tables and chairs for banquet room set-ups and set the room in an accurate and uniform fashion. Custodial service for cleaning and setup. Provide overhead expenses; lights, heat, air conditioning, etc. Provide necessary cleaning supplies for the maintenance of the MCC kitchen. License the kitchen with the Minnesota Department of Health. Arrange meetings with Exclusive Caterers and Exclusive Beverage Provider as needed. Provide additional event support (i.e. A.V. equipment and sound). Packet Page Number 126 of 204 References Caterer shall include at least five (5) event references that demonstrate a full range of Caterers experience. Experience must include wedding receptions and/or banquets. Each event should include: type of event, menu, who event was for, where it was hosted and the total number of people in attendance. Please include any extraordinary elements of the event. In consideration of being allowed to use the MCC, the Caterers hereby voluntarily assume all risks of accident or damage to its property and to the persons and property of its employees. The Caterers hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Maplewood and Maplewood Community Center, respective officers, employees, agents and insurers from damages solely caused by the intentional action of the Caterers representatives and employees. Responses The respondent shall supply Five (5) copies of the Request for Proposal suitable for reproduction and distribution to appropriate City officials. Responses are to be delivered to Maplewood City Hall, no later than 1:00 p.m. on Thursday, November 20, 2008; Maplewood City Hall is located at 1830 County Road B East, Maplewood, MN 55109. Note: Faxes and e- mailed responses will not be accepted. Responses are to be received no later than 1:00 p.m. on November 20, 2008. Responses are to include the following: Name, address, phone, fax, e-mail and website address of responding company Detailed description of catering service History of company Revenue percentages as described in the section titled ?Financial Arrangements? Sample Menus as described in the section titled ?Fees/Costs?; include current menu and menus for the previous year References as described in the section titled ?References? Statement of intent to provide requested services for the MCC Statement of licensing, bonding and insurance Statement of marketing plan with goals and objectives Send responses to: Karen Guilfoile Questions to: Pauline Staples Maplewood City Hall Maplewood Community Center 1830 County Road B East 2100 White Bear Avenue Maplewood, MN 55109 Maplewood, MN 55109 651-249-2002 651-249-2103 A pre-proposal question and answer meeting will be held on November 13, 2008, at 2:00 p.m. at the Maplewood Community Center, 2100 White Bear Ave. A tour of the banquet and kitchen facilities will start at 2:00 p.m. We will not be scheduling individual tours outside of this date. Packet Page Number 127 of 204 No Contact Proposing Caterers and their representatives are prohibited from contacting any elected official for purposes of lobbying to secure this contract. Acceptance/Rejection of Proposals The City of Maplewood intends to enter into a contract with Caterers that best satisfy the needs of the City. The City of Maplewood reserves the right to reject any and all proposals and to act in the best interest of the City and its citizens. This RFP does not commit the City to award contract or share in any expenses of preparing these proposals, or travel expenses related to the proposal or interview process. The city council will consider the submitted RFP?s at their regular council meeting scheduled at 7:00 p.m. on December 8, 2008. Packet Page Number 128 of 204 Agenda Item L7 AGENDA REPORT TO: Chuck Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: DuWayne Konewko, Deputy Director of Public Works SUBJECT:Approval of Joint Powers Agreement with North St. Paul for the Maintenance of a Segment of the Lake Links Trail DATE: October 16, 2008 INTRODUCTION The council should consider approving a joint-powers agreement with the City of North Saint Paul for the purpose of maintaining a segment of the Lake Links Trail between Helen Street and Lake Boulevard and adjacent to St. Mary?s Cemetery. This segment of the trail is located within the Lydia Avenue Right-of-way in the City of North Saint Paul. Please refer to attachment 1. DISCUSSION The City of North Saint Paul authorized the execution of the Joint-Powers Agreement between the City of Maplewood and the City of North Saint Paul for the maintenance of a segment of the Lake Links Trail at their October 7, 2008 City Council meeting. The joint-powers agreement provides language that identifies the City of Maplewood as the responsible party for conducting routine regular maintenance on this trail segment. The maintenance includes routine inspections of the trail, sweeping and trash removal as well as snow removal, drainage control and making necessary repairs of the trail. The City of Maplewood is also responsible for updating the GIS based trail mapping component and will provide these updates to the City of North Saint Paul. This updated GIS trail map revision will also be provided to Ramsey County for inclusion into the regional trail network system. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached joint powers agreement with the City of North Saint Paul and authorize the mayor and city manager to sign the agreement signifying City Council approval. Attachments 1. Proposed Joint-Powers Agreement with Exhibit Packet Page Number 129 of 204 Agenda Item L7 Attachment 1 JOINT-POWERS AGREEMENT City of Maplewood/City of North Saint Paul Lake Links Trail Connection - Helen Street to Trunk Highway 120 THIS JOINT-POWERS AGREEMENT made and entered in this ______day of ________, 2008, by and between the City of Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota, and the City of North Saint Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood and the City of North Saint Paul, pursuant to the provision of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 471.59, are authorized to enter into agreements to exercise jointly the governmental powers and functions each has individually; and, WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood is proposing to construct a bituminous trail segment along Lydia Avenue-Joy Road from Helen Street to Trunk Highway 120 as part of the Joy Park Phase 1 Improvements Project, City Project 08-14; and, WHEREAS, a portion of this trail segment between Helen Street and Lake Boulevard and adjacent to St. Mary?s Cemetery, is located within the Lydia Avenue Right-of-Way in the City of North Saint Paul. This portion of the trail extends from Station 0+00 to Station 7+42.35 as shown in Exhibit 1; and, WHEREAS, the Cities of Maplewood and North Saint Paul wish to improve the overall trail system in their cities and in the region to provide improved recreational opportunities for area residents and improved connections to destinations including the Maplewood Mall area and the Gateway Trail; and, WHEREAS, the Cities of Maplewood and North Saint Paul have been working with the City of Oakdale, Minnesota Department of Transportation and Ramsey County to coordinate related trail improvements along Trunk Highway 120 that will further enhance the overall trail system in the region. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows, to wit: 1. The City of Maplewood agrees to pay for construction of the proposed trail segment as part of the Joy Park Phase 1 Improvements project. 2. The City of Maplewood agrees to conduct regular maintenance including inspections, sweeping and trash removal, tree pruning through coordination with - 1 - 10/2/08 Packet Page Number 130 of 204 Agenda Item L7 Attachment 1 St. Mary?s Cemetery and scheduling maintenance tasks. Maplewood will conduct training of employees having responsibilities for trail maintenance. 3. The City of Maplewood agrees to conduct necessary trail repair, replacement, snow removal, weed control, drainage control and signage maintenance on an as- needed basis. 4. The City of Maplewood agrees to create updated GIS-based trail system mapping and provide these trail mapping files to North St. Paul. 5. The City of Maplewood and the City of North Saint Paul agree to indemnify each other and hold each other harmless from any and all claims, causes of action, lawsuits, judgments, charges, demands, costs, and expenses, including, but not . limited to, interest involved therein and attorneysfees and costs and expenses connected therewith, arising out of or resulting from the failure of either party to satisfy the provisions of this agreement or for damages caused to other parties as a result of the manner in which the City of Maplewood or the City of North Saint Paul perform or fail to perform duties imposed on each party by the terms of this agreement. 6. This agreement shall remain in full force and effect until terminated by mutual agreement of the City of Maplewood and the City of North Saint Paul or by an independent arbitrator in the event that there is not a neutral agreement. 7. It is agreed that, except as specifically provided hereby the execution of this agreement, neither party relinquishes any rights or powers possessed by it, neither party is relieved of any responsibility, duty or obligation imposed on it by law or regulation. 8. Data Practices: a. The City of Maplewood and the City of North Saint Paul agree to comply with the Minnesota Data Practices Act and all other state and federal laws relating to data privacy or confidentiality; b. The City of Maplewood and the City of North Saint Paul will immediately report to each other any requests from third parties for information relating to this Agreement. - 2 - 10/2/08 Packet Page Number 131 of 204 Agenda Item L7 Attachment 1 c. The City of Maplewood and the City of North Saint Paul agree to promptly respond to each others inquiries concerning data requests. 9. Arbitration of Disputes: Any controversy claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement or breach thereof shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association. Judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by their respective duly authorized representatives. DatedCITY OF MAPLEWOOD _________________________ By ___________________________________ ItsMayor By ___________________________________ ItsCityManager DatedCITY OF NORTH SAINT PAUL _________________________ By ___________________________________ ItsMayor By ___________________________________ ItsCityManager Notice: City of Maplewood City of North Saint Paul 1830 County Road B East 2400 Margaret Street Maplewood, MN 55109 North Saint Paul, MN 55109 - 3 - 10/2/08 Packet Page Number 132 of 204 Packet Page Number 133 of 204 Agenda Item L8 AGENDA REPORT TO: Chuck Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: DuWayne Konewko, Deputy Director of Public Works SUBJECT:Consider Contract Change Order with MFRA for Completion of Comprehensive Plan DATE: October 16, 2008 INTRODUCTION On June 23, 2008 the City Council authorized the City Manager to extend the agreement for completion of the Comprehensive Plan with McCombs Frank Roos Associates (MFRA) at a cost of $28,420 for Phase III, Implementation for the Land Use Component of the Comprehensive Plan. DISCUSSION Completion of the Comprehensive Plan process, Phase III, was originally drafted with the intent of staff and consultants sharing this responsibility and working together to complete this phase. However, due to a number of issues the planning process was extremely time consuming and much more intensive than originally predicted. Some of these issues included, but were not limited to, departure of city staff, numerous additional meetings at all levels of the planning process, additional open house meetings, and additional tasks associated with data collections. These factors resulted in additional expenditures which exceeded the original budget allowance. When staff became aware of this, the City Manager directed MFRA to discontinue work on the Comprehensive Plan until staff had an opportunity to research why the budget was exceeded. In researching this issue, staff discovered that the original budget amount of $28,420 was exceeded by approximately $19,592. Obviously staff was very concerned and understood that this was unacceptable. Staff immediately began negotiations with representatives of MFRA to reconcile these differences and develop a plan to move forward and complete the Comprehensive Plan. Staff was able to reach an agreement with MFRA that resulted in the waiving of invoices totaling $19,592 thus leaving a net project balance of approximately $5,500 to be used to complete the plan. In summary, the city has a balance of $5,500 remaining out of the original $28,420 that was budgeted for this phase of the project. A copy of a letter dated October 15, 2008 from Mr. Tom Goodrum, Director of Planning Services with MFRA, is attached for your review. The letter confirms that MFRA will be paid for invoices 62884, 63261 & 62885 for a total of $ 22,617. MFRA is also requesting a Contract Change Order to reflect these outcomes and establish a budget not to exceed $5,500 for additional support to complete the plan moving forward. In order to finish the Comprehensive Plan, City Planner Mike Martin who was previously employed by MFRA and worked directly with the City on the plan will be taking on a leadership role in finishing the plan. This role will also include submitting the plan to the surrounding communities and agencies for their respective reviews. Mr. Martin?s other duties during this period will be shared with other staff so that the completion of this plan becomes his top priority. To this end, staff has attached a revised schedule for council?s review that takes us through the final proposed adoption date of May 2009. Packet Page Number 134 of 204 Agenda Item L8 Budget Impact The budget for this work was previously approved by council at the June 23, 2008 council meeting and no additional monies are being requested. The approved budget was as follows: $13,420 [MFRA Land Use]; Planning Budget [101-702-4490]; ($89,190 total budgeted) $15,000; Planning Budget; savings from 2 months of Ken Roberts salary/benefits Staff understands that there are elements of this Phase III contract work that likely will not be completed until sometime next May or June. Again as previously stated, staff?s first priority is to complete the Comprehensive Plan and start the community and agency review process which will begin in December of this year. During the required six month review period, staff will begin updating various ordinances and policies to reflect the outcomes of the plan. This process will likely take between twelve and sixteen months to complete. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to accept the Change Order with MFRA in an amount not to exceed $5,500 for the completion of the Comprehensive Plan. No additional monies are being requested. Attachments 1. MFRA letter dated October 15, 2008 2. Revised schedule for completion of Comprehensive Plan Packet Page Number 135 of 204 Agenda Item L8 Attachment 1 Packet Page Number 136 of 204 Agenda Item L8 Attachment 2 9RHIVWXERHMRKERH%TTVSEGL 8LIJSPPS[MRKQIIXMRKWERHXEWOWEVIRIGIWWEV]XSGSQTPIXIXLI4PERERHQSZIJSV[EVH[MXLMQTPIQIRXEXMSRWXITWMR XLIGSQQYRMX] 1IIXMRKW8EWOWERH1MPIWXSRIW 8'!8IGLRMGEP'SQQMXXII 4PERRMRK'SQQMWWMSR1IIXMRK7SYXL1ETPI[SSH4YFPMG,IEVMRK 4YFPMG1IIXMRK Agenda Item L9 AGENDA REPORT TO: Chuck Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: DuWayne Konewko, Deputy Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Requesting Council Approval for Distribution of SurFace Water Management Plan for Agency Review DATE: October 16, 2008 INTRODUCTION The City has completed a draft version of the Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP or Plan) that is ready for Agency review. The Plan builds on the City's existing plan, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit (NPDES) program and related Non-Degradation Plan and addresses several key issues related to storm water management that the City is likely to encounter in the coming years. Attached is the Executive Summary of the SWMP for council's review. Again, one of the key elements of successfully completing this plan update is to comply with the requirements of federal, state, and local regulatory agencies, and work cooperatively with adjacent cities ands counties to implement outcomes. The SWMP is a "stand-alone-document" that is referenced in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Similar to the Comprehensive Plan, the SWMP is also required to be reviewed by different agencies which include the Met Council and the three governing watersheds in the City -Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District, Valley Branch Watershed District, and Capital Regions Watershed District. The duration of the public comment period for this document is 60 days as opposed to the 6 month comment period for the Comprehensive Plan. Prior to beginning the process of updating the SWMP, staff met with the three watersheds to gain a better understanding of what concerns or issues they had and how the City would be addressing them. Staff believes that these discussions were constructive for both parties and that the City was able to share some of our future goals as well. In addition, a number of meetings were held internally with maintenance and engineering staff to solicit input and identify troublesome areas in the City. Staff also met with representatives of surrounding communities to address problematic areas and develop strategies to resolve these issues going forward. In putting this draft SWMP document together, staff met with the Environmental and Natural Resource Commission, Planning Commission and the City Council to discuss and solicit input regarding proposed changes to this plan. These discussions occurred on March 4, July 15, and July 9, 2008 respectively. DISCUSSION The purpose of the Surface Water Management Plan is to: • Guide the improvement and protection of surface water resources; • Help enhance the high environmental quality of the City; • Help to protect investments and private property; • Frame the context of surface water management issues in relation to land issues and land use policy; • Balance environmental enhancement needs with economic needs and capabilities; Packet Page Number 138 of 204 Agenda Item L9 Meet regulatory requirements; Identify opportunities to collaborate with surrounding cities and counties and watersheds. The key planning issues that were identified in the development of the plan were: • Addressing water quality and water impairments; • Managing localized flooding; • Maintaining the existing system; • Combining opportunities with the Natural Resource Plan; • Funding the program. The draft plan also identifies program priority projects and activities (refer to page 9, table ES-3 -Executive Summary) with proposed implementation dates. As an example, one of the priority projects that was identified in the table is "Updating the City's Storm Water Ordinance" to include the 1-inch infiltration requirement as well as incorporating additional strategies aimed at providing a framework for the development of the City's sustainable initiatives. Staff will be working on this particular revision this year and likely into next year. Staff is submitting the following proposed timeline for agency comment and council adoption: 1. October 27, 2008 -Council authorizes distribution of draft SWMP for agency review 2. November 4, 2008 -Distribute Plan to various agencies 3. January 5, 2009 -End of 60-day review period 4. January 5 - 23, 2009 -Respond to agencies and finalize document 5. January 23 -February 28, 2009 -Environmental and Natural Resource Commission review and prepare recommendation for council consideration 6. March 9, 2009 -Council considers adoption of Plan RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends council approval for the distribution of the Surface Water Management Plan for agency review. Upon completion of this review process, staff will work closely with the Environmental and Natural Resource Commission to review comments and provide recommendation to council for formal adoption. Attachments 1. Surface Water Management Plan Executive Summary Packet Page Number 139 of 204 Agenda Item L9 Attachment 1 Maplewood Minnesota Surface Wafer Management Plan City Review DRAFT SEH No. A-MAPLE0807.00 CITY No. Preliminary Draft August 11, 2008 Highlighted areas are still under refinement Packet Page Number 140 of 204 Agenda Item L9 Attachment 1 M a p l e w o o d M i n n e s o t a Surface Water Management Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Maplewood (City) has completed this Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP or Plan) to establish a more functional and up-to-date guide for future surface water management activities throughout the City. This Plan builds on the City's previous plan, its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit (NPDES) program and related Non-Degradation Plan and addresses several key issues related to storm water management that the City is likely to encounter in the coming years. This executive summary provides a brief description of the purpose and basis for this updated Plan, followed by a presentation of the overriding goals that were used to guide development of the Plan. This executive summary closes by highlighting the key issues the City intends to address as part of this Plan. Purpose of the Plan The purpose of this Plan is to establish the framework of a comprehensive program that does more than simply protect and improve the quality of existing water resources within the City. The Plan also recognizes that development and redevelopment must and will continue well into the future, and will serve as a guide for City staff to follow as they evaluate the potential impacts of a given project on these quality resources. The Plan will serve as a toolbox for the City that includes the best available water resource data at the time it was completed, up-to-date policies and design standards, and a process to adjust goals and policies as new data is collected and evaluated or as complimentary programs change. Wth this guidance specific to surface water as well as the broader guidance provide in the City's Comprehensive Plan, this Surface Water Management Plan will serve to: • Provide for the use, management, improvement and protection of the City's surface water resources • Contribute to the quality of life by preserving and enhancing the high environmental quality of the community • Protect public investments and private property related to or affected by surface water • Help to understand the larger context of surface water management issues in relation to land use and land use policy • Balance environmental protection and enhancement needs with economic needs and capabilities • Meet regulatory requirements City of Maplewood ES-2 Surface Water Management Plan Draft #1 -June 2008 Packet Page Number 141 of 204 Agenda Item L9 Attachment 1 Basis for the Plan There are two primary programs that establish the regulatory need to update the City's Surface Water Management Plan. First, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 103B.201 to 103B.255 and Minnesota Rule, Chapter 8410 comprise the State's Metropolitan Surface Water Management Program (MSWMP). These Statutes and Rules require the preparation of watershed plans by watershed management organizations (WMOs) and the preparation of local (i.e., city) water management plans that are consistent with the respective WMO plans. Second, upon adoption by Council, the policies and standards presented in this Plan become a part of the City's overall Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the MSWMP is that through policies and thoughtful program implementation, goals for proper water and wetland resource management can be realized and water quality can be protected. Through proper planning and implementation, informed decisions can be made which allow for the protection and/or enhancement of water quality, prevention of ground water degradation, and reduction of local flooding. A third regulatory program, very much related to the goals, policies and standards of this Plan, is the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II Storm Water Permit Program (Phase II Program). While this program is not directly a driving force for updating the City's Plan, similarities between the MSWMP and NPDES Phase II programs are such that the City intends to realize efficiencies in managing the two separate programs as a single comprehensive surface water management program. The NPDES Phase II Storm Water Permit Program is a federal regulatory program that requires owners of Municipally Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) and apply for the permit with the administrative agency. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) administers the MS4 program in the state. The City submitted their original permit application and SWPPP on March 10, 2003, and submitted an updated SWPP in 2006 to comply with the MPCA program requirements. The City has completed their NPDES program in conformance to the SWPPP since submittal in 2003, including conducting annual public meetings and completing a Loading Assessment and Nondegradation Report (November 2007) as required by the MS4 Permit. This SWMP incorporates the best management practices (BMPs) that were identified in the City's 2006 SWPPP as and Appendix to the Plan and also identifies several specific projects that are not specified in the City's NPDES Program SWPPP. Surface water management programs throughout the country, state and locally have seen significant changes in recent years and are expected to continue evolving as the regulatory programs expand and/or change. For example, the impaired waters and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) studies reaching as far downstream as Lake Pepin, changes to the wetland conservation act and a shift towards lower impact development approaches will likely have some ongoing impact on how Maplewood manages surface waters in the future. One local example is in the recent adoption of volume reduction and infiltration requirements by the City as part of the Maplewood Mall Area Transportation Improvements (MMATI) project. The City established a 1-inch infiltration standard for developments and city projects proposed in the area as a first step towards achieving enhanced storm water treatment. The local watershed organizations soon followed suit in adopting similar 1-inch infiltration and volume control standards. City of Maplewood ES-3 Surface Water Management Plan Draft #1 -June 2008 Packet Page Number 142 of 204 Agenda Item L9 Attachment 1 Plan Overview The Plan contains an Introduction (Section I), a brief Background and History and description of the existing physical environment (Section II); specific Goals and Policies (Section III) developed by the City; specific information regarding key Surface Water Resources within the City (Section IV) and an Implementation Plan (Section V) that summarizes some of the ongoing management activities and future projects for the protection and enhancement of the City's water and wetland resources. Using the goals summarized in Table ES-1, the Plan is intended to guide surface water and water resource management activities through about the year 2030. Table ES-1. Maplewood Storm Water Management Plan Goals Maintain or enhance the water quality of Maplewoods surface 1 Water Quality waters relative to current conditions and strive to achieve water quality improvements. Runoff Preserve, maintain, utilize and where practical, enhance the storm 2 Management and water storage and detention systems to control excessive volumes Flood Control and rates of runoff, control flooding, protect public health and safety, and to minimize necessary public capital expenditures. Achieve no net loss of wetlands, including acreage, functions and 3 Wetlands values. Where practicable, improve the functions, values, biodiversity and acreage of wetlands and their buffer areas. Erosion and Protect capacity of storm water system, prevent flooding and 4 Sediment Control maintain water quality by preventing erosion and sedimentation from occurring, and correct existing erosion and sedimentation problems. Protect the quality and quantity of groundwater resources and 5 Groundwater develop a cooperative program with the watershed district to identify infiltration-sensitive areas. Individual Sewage Protect the public health, safety and welfare through a g Treatment Systems comprehensive ISTS ordinance that requires properly designed and (ISTS) maintained ISTS systems. Education and Increase public and city official awareness, understanding and ~ Public Involvement involvement in water and natural resource management issues. g Financing Establish and maintain funding sources to finance surface water management activities. Preserve function and performance of public infrastructure through continued implementation of a maintenance and inspection program. Maintenance and Develop acity-maintenance plan for the inspection of all ponds, 9 Inspection outlet structures and inlet facilities and consider initiating a pond delta removal program. Such a program should consider improvements to reduce sediment loads to ponds, wetlands and lakes to help prioritize critical improvement areas. Regulatory Maintain primary responsibility for managing water resources at the 10 Responsibility local level but continue coordination and cooperation with other agencies and organizations. City of Maplewood ES-4 Surface Water Management Plan Draft #1 -June 2008 Packet Page Number 143 of 204 Agenda Item L9 Attachment 1 Though long term in focus, the Plan has numerous future decision points related to recommended capital improvements and ongoing inspection, maintenance and monitoring activities. The Plan was developed recognizing the need for proper land utilization and growth and, at the same time, emphasizing the need to prioritize management actions and decisions based on the assigned category of a receiving water body (i.e., lake or wetland). This updated SWMP addresses each of the required elements in Minnesota Statutes and Rules and is consistent with the Metropolitan Council's guidelines for Water Management Plans. The Plan is also consistent with the watershed districts having jurisdiction in portions of Maplewood: the Ramsey-Washington-Metro Watershed District (RWMWD); the Capitol Region Watershed District (CRWD); and the Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD). The criteria set forth in this Plan, as a minimum, establish the degree of performance necessary to achieve the City's water quality and water quantity management goals and meet the applicable regulatory requirements. These criteria are not intended to dictate or preempt the design process, but rather provide guidelines to proper development and redevelopment. Key Water Resources Issues This Plan identifies several key issues related to storm water management that the City is likely to encounter in the coming years. These issues include: meeting the requirements of nondegradation standards and impaired waters programs; addressing localized flooding problems and meeting the challenges of an increased need for maintenance of the public and private stormwater system and coordinating efforts with natural resource improvement areas to find more cost-effective approaches. The issues equate to a need for continued long-term financial commitments and likely increased funding for the surface water management program into the future. Water Quality and Impaired Waters This Plan is being completed in conjunction with the City's 2008 update to its Comprehensive Plan. As part of this Comprehensive Plan, the City is conducting a preliminary evaluation of the entire storm water system and building on recent efforts under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), Municipally Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit program, including the Loading Assessment and Non-Degradation Report (Non-Deg Report) completed by the City in November 2007. The Non-Deg Report concluded that • The City will experience a reduction in total phosphorus (TP) and total suspended solids (TSS) load by the year 2020, but will experience an increase in the runoff volume. • The reduction in loading of TP and TSS through 2020 relates directly to continuing to implement the 1-inch volume control standard on new and redevelopment projects. Runoff Volume reduction is a relatively new area to the storm water management arena while the potential adverse effects still being studied and debated. The most common impacts cited in connection with the runoff volume increase are a pronounced degradation of the natural stream banks and more frequent inundation of the wetlands. No significant issues were known at the time of finalizing the Non-Deg report. Since completion of the Non-Deg Report, input has been obtained from staff and watershed representatives that there may be some volume-related issues to address in south Maplewood and other localized areas. City of Maplewood ES-5 Surface Water Management Plan Draft #1 -June 2008 Packet Page Number 144 of 204 Agenda Item L9 Attachment 1 Relative to impaired waters, Maplewood has twelve waters on the 2008 draft list prepared by the MPCA and that was submitted to the US Environmental Protection Agency for approval. Table ES-2 provides a summary of the affected use and impairments for each of these waters. Table ES-2. Draft 2008 TMDL Listed Impaired Waters in Maplewood Kohlman Aquatic Consumption Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOs) in Fish Tissue Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Yes Biological Indicators Gervais Aquatic Consumption Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOs) in Fish Tissue Aquatic Consumption Mercury in Fish Tissue Spoon Aquatic Consumption Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOs) in Fish Tissue Keller Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Yes Biological Indicators Aquatic Consumption Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOs) in Fish Tissue Wakefield Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Yes Biological Indicators Round Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Yes Biological Indicators Aquatic Consumption Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOs) in Fish Tissue Phalen Aquatic Consumption Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOs) in Fish Tissue Beaver Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Yes Biological Indicators Aquatic Consumption Mercury in Fish Tissue Tanners Aquatic Consumption Mercury in Fish Tissue Battle Creek Aquatic Life Chloride Battle Creek Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Lake Biological Indicators Carver Lake Aquatic Recreation Nutrient/Eutrophication Biological Indicators Aquatic Consumption Mercury in Fish Tissue City of Maplewood ES-6 Surface Water Management Plan Draft #1 -June 2008 Packet Page Number 145 of 204 Agenda Item L9 Attachment 1 Of the listed pollutants in Table ES-2, the City is really only in a position to address the nutrient (i.e., phosphorus) impairments and the chloride impairments. PFO impairments are still very new to the impaired waters program and the City will need to maintain contact with MPCA and the local watershed organizations as more information is available on the plan for these impairments. According to the MPCA's Statewide Mercury TMDL Study, most of the mercury in Minnesota's fish comes from atmospheric deposition, with approximately 90 percent originating from outside the state. Because mercury has regional TMDL implications, little effort will be placed on TMDL recommendations related to mercury for these waters as part of this planning effort. The City will continue to review recommendations for mercury that may be offered by EPA and/or MPCA to see if the regional approach to mercury has any future implications on the City. More detail on the progress of the statewide mercury TMDL process can be found on the MPCA's website. Statewide, approximately 8 percent of Minnesota's river miles and 14 percent of Minnesota's lakes have been tested for pollution problems. Approximately 40 percent of those tested are polluted with human and animal waste, phosphorus, suspended solids, mercury and other pollutants. As more of the states' surface waters are tested for pollution problems, it is reasonable to assume that more waters will be listed as impaired in subsequent biennial cycles. When Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) studies are completed, the TMDLs will likely be used by the MPCA and local entities to further prioritize management actions and establish additional regulatory controls. The City will consider the listing of the lakes in Table ES-2 in future management decisions and actively manage the activities in the contributing watersheds to limit the delivery of these pollutants (primarily nutrients, sediment and chlorides) to these waters. Infiltration best management practices have a higher level of total phosphorus removal than the traditional wet stormwater ponds and the City's infiltration requirement will help with the reduction of phosphorus entering the receiving waters. Flooding and Maintenance of the System The City will need to continue to address localized flooding areas to protect life and property and reduce the burden of maintaining the system. As weather trends are showing higher intensity storm events, the potential far localized flooding will continue, if not increase. Along with this realization is that it places a higher level of urgency on the need to maintain the storm water conveyance system so that it functions well during these events. While some debris blockages of pipes and structures will almost certainly continue to occur, the efforts placed on identifying problem areas and conducting maintenance and/or installing physical improvements, will reduce the potential for problems. Coordinating Efforts with Natural Resources The City of Maplewood intends to achieve its vision and goals for natural resources using a comprehensive approach. Coordinating surface water management needs and opportunities with natural resources management and improvement projects will help to maximize the overall environmental benefits and the return on City investments. There are four main parts to the Natural Resource Plan. ^ Natural Area Greenways. Natural Area Greenways are large contiguous areas of habitat that cross ownership boundaries. They protect and expand ecosystem services and habitat for species that are gone or are disappearing from the City. City of Maplewood ES-7 Surface Water Management Plan Draft #1 -June 2008 Packet Page Number 146 of 204 Agenda Item L9 Attachment 1 ^ Local Habitats. Local Habitats are individual natural areas and backyard habitat connections. They serve the needs of people wanting to enjoy and learn about wild habitat near their homes and also provide ecosystem services and wildlife habitat locally. ^ Active Parks and Trails. Active Parks and Trails connect greenways and preserves but also give people places to play sports, picnic, and bike. Natural Resource Issues. Other natural resources issues are addressed city-side through individual programs. Partnerships and Funding The final critical area of focus will be the continued close coordination with the local watershed organizations, Ramsey County, and other project-specific partners to take full advantage of opportunities to gain water quality improvements and enhance other natural resources at the same time. These efforts will be needed and a priority for the City on public capital improvement projects, storm water system and utility maintenance activities, public outreach and education activities and on private development projects. This cooperative approach will allow the City to leverage the limited funding that is currently available. Maintain a financing strategy for surface water improvements relates very closely to the cooperative approach to projects and activities. The City will need to continue using a combination of environmental utility fees, special assessments, connection charges, and storm water program grant funds to realize the goals of this Plan. The City will need to evaluate the need for increases in storm water utility charges that serves as the primary dedicated source for funding the wide range of storm water program activities and capital projects. Implementation Plan Development of the implementation program follows the guidelines in Minnesota Rules Chapter 8410, the WMOs and Metropolitan Council. City staff identified a wide range of issues or problems related to the various goal sections, developed solutions or approaches to addressing each of the issues, and development specific action steps, including identification of possible resources, measurements, approximate schedules and planning level costs. The overall implementation program includes a mixture of capital improvement projects, studies, ongoing maintenance, inspection, monitoring and other management activities recommended over the next 10 or more years. Estimated planning-level costs of recommended actions are provided with a cautionary note that they are not intended to set unrealistic expectations of the actual costs of projects and/or activities. The costs provided are intended to serve as an order- of-magnitude look at what the activity may require. Notations are also provided where the activity can be completed by City staff. The City's water bodies and wetlands are truly exceptional resources for City residents and thus water quality is one of the priority areas for future program efforts. City lakes and water resources offer a range of recreational opportunities and some are truly exceptional resources from a water quality perspective. Others are impaired for various pollutants and have a reduced value due to those impairments. One of the most recognized and valued resources is Lake Phalen, which is one of the four lakes in the City not impaired for excess nutrients (i.e., phosphorus). One of the City's challenges in the years ahead will be to successfully implement this Plan to maintain the quality of lakes like Phalen, and at the same time work towards improvements in the seven lakes that are impaired for excess nutrients (phosphorus). City of Maplewood ES-8 Surface Water Management Plan Draft #1 -June 2008 Packet Page Number 147 of 204 Agenda Item L9 Attachment 1 Water Quantity, or flooding, issues are another key area for the City to focus efforts on in the coming years. While no major flooding-related issues exist, there are several areas throughout the City where localized flooding can be addressed by infrastructure improvements associated with street reconstruction and/or development projects. These localized flooding improvements are in areas like Valley View in south Maplewood that was hit with localized flooding from extreme rainfall events in the fall of 2005. Except for the activities that are taken from the City NPDES SWPPP, the Implementation Plan is not a hard and fast commitment to complete each and every activity in the time frame suggested. Rather, it is a suggested course of action that will accomplish the major goal of this plan; to accommodate new development, in-fill development and redevelopment in the community while protecting and improving Maplewood's surface water resources. Infrastructure replacements and/or additions will be reviewed, approved and administered in accordance with Maplewood's Capital Improvement Program. Table ES-3. Implementation Program Priority Projects and Activities Explore opportunities for water quality Identity where water quality Annual 1 improvement projects and install BMPs in improvements can be made beyond key watersheds the minimum required of public and private projects. RWMWD, VBWD and CRWD 2 Update storm water ordinance Standards, Codify 1-inch infiltration 2008 requirements 3 Update wetland ordinance Complete update to wetland ordinance, classifications and buffer standards 2008 Review Chloride use and management Review Shingle creek study results and 4 alternatives for the Battle Creek work with watershed district to 2009-2012 watershed area implement best practices in drainage areas Work with watershed organizations to Annual 5 Participate in TMDL Studies develop feasible implementation programs Intent to get ahead of volume control 6 Complete infiltration feasibility study for with a more cost effective 2009-2010 future street recon areas implementation effort and possibility of banking credits Explore opportunities for discharge rate Evaluate flows coming from the east 7 reductions or hydrograph modifications in 2010-2011 the Fish and Snake Creek Systems 8 Compile hydrologic models in key 2009-2010 Hydrologic Model Development areas not covered by watershed models 9 Implement Annual wetland mitigation site Track ongoing monitoring and Annual monitoring and maintenance program maintenance needs on created wetlands, establish ongoing budget. 10 Develop and implement a refined system Inspection form and data in GIS format 2009 to track and record NPDES pond and for more efficient Annual BMP maintenance activities City of Maplewood ES-9 Surface Water Management Plan Draft #1 -June 2008 Packet Page Number 148 of 204 Agenda Item L9 Attachment 1 Amendments to the Plan The NPDES SWPPP activities will be reviewed and evaluated annually in a public meeting and the permit program itself is scheduled to be updated in 2011 and every five years after that. For this Plan to remain dynamic, an avenue must be available to implement new information, ideas, methods, standards, management practices, and any other changes which may affect the intent and/or results of the Plan. Amendment proposals can be requested any time by any person or persons either residing or having business within the City. Proposed amendments are reviewed by staff, and if determined to be a reasonable and necessary amendment the need for a public hearing shall be considered at a regular or special Council meeting. Council and the watershed organizations have an opportunity to determine whether or not to approve of the proposed amendments. Annual Report to Council An annual report will be completed by City staff summarizing water resource management activities that have been completed over each calendar year. To the extent practicable, and to avoid duplication of efforts, the annual report will be coordinated with preparation of the NPDES MS4 program annual report that must be submitted to MPCA by June 30'h of each year. The NPDES annual report includes a public notice, meeting and comment process prior to finalizing the annual report. The City will use this annual reporting process to evaluate the overall storm water management program. Staff's intent is to revisit the goals, policies, tools and progress of the Plan on a three to five year basis. Water quality trends will be reviewed with input from the Watershed Districts, the effectiveness of regulatory programs will be evaluated, and the success of public improvement projects will be assessed. Based on these subsequent reviews, the SWMP will be updated to produce a truly dynamic plan. City of Maplewood ES-10 Surface Water Management Plan Draft #1 -June 2008 Packet Page Number 149 of 204 Agenda L10 AGENDA REPORT To: Acting City Manager Chuck Ahl From: Chief of Police David J. Thomalla Subject: Consider Approval of Donation to the Police Department Reserves From the 3M Foundation Date: October 13, 2008 Introduction The Police Reserves have received a donation from the 3M Foundation, and City Council approval is needed before this donation can be accepted. Background Joal (Storm) McAlister, who is a member of the Police Department's Police Reserves, is an employee of 3M; and the 3M Foundation has made a $200 donation to the Reserves in recognition of her volunteerism to her community. 3M has stipulated that the funds from this donation be used only for the Police Reserves and, to ensure fiscal responsibility, they may monitor the expenditures made with this money. We have also been told that 3M may make future regular donations to the Police Reserves. The amount received would be based upon the number of hours of participation by their employee(s) in our program. City Council approval is required to accept the current $200 donation to the Maplewood Police Reserves. Budget Impact The necessary budget adjustments would have to be made to expend these funds for the stated purpose. Recommendation It is recommended that City Council approval be given to accept this donation from the 3M Foundation for participation by their employee in the Police Reserves. Action Required Submit to the City Council for review and approval. DJT:js Attachment: Resolution Authorizing Gift to City Packet Page Number 150 of 204 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING GIFT TO CITY WHEREAS, Maplewood is AUTHORIZED to receive and accept grants, gifts and devices of real and personal property and maintain the same for the benefit of the citizens and pursuant to the donor's terms if so-prescribed, and; WHEREAS, the 3M Foundation wishes to grant the City of Maplewood the following: $200, and; WHEREAS, the 3M Foundation has instructed that the City will be required to use the aforementioned for: the Maplewood Police Reserves, and; WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood has agreed to use the subject of this resolution for the purposes and under the terms prescribed, and; WHEREAS, the City agrees that it will accept the gift by afour-fifths majority of its governing body's membership pursuant to Minnesota Statute §465.03; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, pursuant to Minnesota Statute §465.03, that the Maplewood City Council approves, receives and accepts the gift aforementioned and under such terms and conditions as may be requested or required. The Maplewood City Council passed this resolution by two-thirds or more majority vote of its membership on , 20 Signed: Signed: Witnessed: (Signature) (Signature) Mayor Chief of Police (Title) (Title) (Date) (Date) (Signature) City Clerk (Title) (Date) Packet Page Number 151 of 204 AGENDA NO. L11 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council FROM: Finance Director RE: APPROVAL OF CLAIMS DATE: October 27, 2008 Attached is a listing of paid bills for informational purposes. The City Manager has reviewed the bills and authorized payment in accordance with City Council approved policies. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: $ 234,543.12 Checks # 76656 thru # 76712 dated 10/09/08 thru 10/14/08 $ 282,991.63 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 10/03/08 thru 10/10/08 $ 633,295.32 Checks # 76713 thru # 76751 dated 10/13/08 THRU 10/21/08 $ 133,390.29 Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 10/09/08 thru 10/17/08 $ 1,284,220.36 Total Accounts Payable PAYROLL $ 559,012.00 Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 10/17/08 $ 3,885.62 Payroll Deduction check # 1006135 thru # 1006136 dated 10/17/08 $ 562,897.62 Total Payroll $ 1,847,117.98 GRAND TOTAL Attached is a detailed listing of these claims. Please call me at 651-249-2902 if you have any questions on the attached listing. This will allow me to check the supporting documentation on file if necessary. kf attachments Packet Page Number 152 of 204 Check Register City of Maplewood 10/10/2008 Check Date Vendor Description Amount 76656 10/09/2008 00499 DANIEL FAUST CONSULTING -WEEK ENDING 10/04 2,040.00 76657 10/09/2008 00499 DANIEL FAUST CONSULTING -WEEK ENDING 10/09 2,040.00 76658 10/09/2008 04046 SANDRA LEE PINSKI RED CROSS INSTRUCTOR 09/13 165.00 76659 10/14/2008 01949 GARYLFISCHLER&ASSOC PA CANDIDATE SCREEN/PSY TESTING 515.00 76660 10/14/2008 00687 HUGO'S TREE CARE INC STREET CLEARANCE STORM DAMAGE 4,056.50 10/14/2008 00687 HUGO'S TREE CARE INC REMOVAL OF BLVD ELM 819.84 10/14/2008 00687 HUGO'S TREE CARE INC PROJ 07-25 B & HAZELWOOD TREE 800.63 10/14/2008 00687 HUGO'S TREE CARE INC PROJ 07-15 SANDHURST AVE STUMP 106.75 76661 10/14/2008 01337 RAMSEY COUNTY-PROP REC & REV TREES FOR PLANTING @PUBLIC 2,188.58 10/14/2008 01337 RAMSEY COUNTY-PROP REC & REV PROJ 07-01 RAINGARDENS BROOKVIEW 1,118.25 76662 10/14/2008 01337 RAMSEY COUNTY-PROP REC & REV RADIO FLEET SUPPORT - 1/1 - 4/30 1,784.64 76663 10/14/2008 01047 3M ROLL GOODS FOR SIGN FABRICATION 462.36 10/14/2008 01047 3M ROLL GOODS FOR SIGN FABRICATION 288.23 76664 10/14/2008 04008 AM ERITAS MONTHLY PREMIUM - OCT 9,446.04 76665 10/14/2008 00111 ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES INC PATROL & BOARDING FEE 8/22 - 9/14 2,404.87 76666 10/14/2008 00116 APPEARANCE PLUS CAR WASH CAR WASH FEE AUG &SEPT 437.72 76667 10/14/2008 03890 APPLE GLASS REAR GLASS REPLACEMENT-TOOLCAT 80.00 76668 10/14/2008 00159 PAUL BARTZ REIMB UNIFORM 8/14 71.64 76669 10/14/2008 03870 BASIAGO LAW OFFICE ABSTRACTING & REVIEW OF 750.00 76670 10/14/2008 00216 BRIGGS & MORGAN, P.A. 2008A ISSUANCE COSTS 12,500.00 10/14/2008 00216 BRIGGS & MORGAN, P.A. 2008B ISSUANCE COSTS 4,500.00 76671 10/14/2008 00230 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS, INC. CLASS 2 RIP RAP FOR STORM SEWER 363.39 76672 10/14/2008 00240 C.S.C. CREDIT SERVICES APPLICANT BACKGROUND CHECKS 50.00 76673 10/14/2008 04139 CHECK DIVERSION PROGRAM NSF 232439 CAROL SZULIM BILLING FEE 25.00 76674 10/14/2008 04031 COM PAR, INC. CF-30 PANASONIC LAPTOPS 97,183.11 76675 10/14/2008 00384 DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SRVS LEASE ON RICOH MPC2500 292.36 76676 10/14/2008 00358 DGM INC. TOW CHARGES-SEPTEMBER 870.04 76677 10/14/2008 00412 DONALD SALVERDA & ASSOCIATES BOOK FOR ADV EFFECTIVE MGMT 98.09 76678 10/14/2008 00103 EARL F ANDERSON INC REPLACEMENT PARTS FOR 216.29 76679 10/14/2008 00543 GE CAPITAL LEASE ON RICOH 3500 COPIER 352.28 76680 10/14/2008 04152 ISD COMMUNITY EDUCATION VOLLEYBALL STANDARD PARTS/JOHN 75.00 76681 10/14/2008 03952 K C CUSTOM INC BEDROOM & KITCHEN LOCKERS 4,492.75 76682 10/14/2008 00393 DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY MONTHLY SURTAX -SEPT 5009123035 1,988.58 76683 10/14/2008 03756 DIANA LONGRIE REIMB-MEALS,PARKING,INT 3/8-9/8 182.78 76684 10/14/2008 02336 M A TAYLOR INC FITNESS CONSULTANT SRVS 1,500.00 76685 10/14/2008 00932 MAPLEWOOD BAKERY BAKERY ORDERS-RENTAL GROUPS 211.93 76686 10/14/2008 00936 MAPLEWOOD HISTORICAL SOCIETY PMT FOR VENTING WORK 28C6217 6,400.00 10/14/2008 00936 MAPLEWOOD HISTORICAL SOCIETY PART PMT NEW WING/FLOOR 28C6217 2,982.41 76687 10/14/2008 01951 MEDICARE REFUND REFUND MEDICARE AMB 082426 330.28 76688 10/14/2008 03838 MN FIAM BOOK SALES FUNDAMENTALS OF FIREFIGHTING 685.70 76689 10/14/2008 04143 MOTOROLA, INC. SERIES 2500 MODEL II 800 MHZ RADIOS 11,850.00 76690 10/14/2008 01961 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS NEXTEL CHGS 7/10 - 9/09 10,425.82 76691 10/14/2008 01202 NYSTROM PUBLISHING CO INC OCT NEWSLETTER & HALLOWEEN 5,071.00 76692 10/14/2008 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REIMB R OLSEN PROJ 06-16 DRIVEWAY 1,237.50 76693 10/14/2008 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REFUND CENTURY ROOFING 80 % 88.50 76694 10/14/2008 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REFUND A SOWADA AMB 082426 82.57 76695 10/14/2008 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REIMB B NEUBAUER PROG CANCELLED 65.00 76696 10/14/2008 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR P MARTIN OCT WINNER RECYCLING 50.00 76697 10/14/2008 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REFUND G OLSON ADMISSION 7.46 76698 10/14/2008 00396 DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY HAZARDIOUS WASTE GENERATOR FEE 25.00 76699 10/14/2008 01341 RAMSEY CTY FIRE CHIEFS ASSN IN HOUSE FFI TRAINING 1,100.00 76700 10/14/2008 03446 RICK JOHNSON DEER & BEAVER INC DEER PICKUP-SEPT 200.00 76701 10/14/2008 04070 ROBERTO RODRIGU EZ HOSE TEST LUNCH 72.58 76702 10/14/2008 03398 SHAM ROCK GROUP MDSE FOR RESALE 191.00 76703 10/14/2008 02705 DAVE SWAN REIMB-M EAL,PARKING & UNIFORM 9/14- 65.75 76704 10/14/2008 01574 T.A. SCHIFSKY& SONS, INC HAZELWOOD FIRE STATION PROJ 14,338.03 76705 10/14/2008 04154 TARGETSAFETY ON LINE TRAINING 6,600.00 76706 10/14/2008 03598 PAUL THEISEN REIMB FOR MEALS & UNIFORM 4/10-10/1 255.49 76707 10/14/2008 01616 PAUL THIENES SECURITY OFFICER WEDDING MCC 10/4 245.00 76708 10/14/2008 01649 TRI-STATE BOBCAT, INC. EXCAVATOR RENTAL-STORM SEWER 1,401.00 76709 10/14/2008 00449 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC PROJECT MGMT & TOP- LICENSE FEES 3,500.00 10/14/2008 00449 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC PROJECT MGMT & TOP- LICENSE FEES 1,954.62 76710 10/14/2008 01730 W.W. GOETSCH ASSOCIATES, INC. OVERHAUL SEWAGE PUMP-LIFT #6 9,119.45 76711 10/14/2008 01750 THE WATSON CO INC MDSE FOR RESALE 175.68 76712 10/14/2008 03247 WINNICK SUPPLY INC WOODLYNN STORM SEWER PROJ 1,545.63 57 Checks in this report. 234.543.12 Packet Page Number 153 of 204 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Disbursements via Debits to Checking account Transmitted Settlement Date Date Payee Description Amount 10/03/08 10/06/08 Mon MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk) 15,258.75 10/03/08 10/06/08 MN Dept of Natural Resources DNR electronic licenses 300.00 10/03/08 10/06/08 ICMA (Vantagepointe) Deferred Compensation 3,658.23 10/06/08 10/07/08 Tue MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk) 21,692.50 10/06/08 10/07/08 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk) 4,392.00 10/06/08 10/07/08 PERA PERA 73,355.43 10/06/08 10/07/08 US Treasurer Federal Payroll Tax (FICA) 90,493.86 10/07/08 10/08/08 Wed MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk) 17,413.19 10/07/08 10/08/08 MN Dept of Revenue Sales Tax 17,869.27 10/07/08 10/08/08 WI Dept of Revenue State Payroll Tax 1,005.77 10/07/08 10/08/08 Labor Unions Union Dues 2,014.00 10/07/08 10/08/08 ARC Administration HRA Flex plan 1,442.43 10/07/08 10/08/08 Pitney Bowes Postage 2,985.00 10/0808 10/09/08 Thurs MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk) 15,329.59 10/09/08 10/10/08 Fri MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk) 13,589.00 10/09/08 10/10/08 ARC Administration DCRP & Flex plan payments 2,192.61 TOTAL 'Detailed listing of VISA purchases is attached. ~u~,aa~i.os Packet Page Number 154 of 204 Check Register City of Maplewood 10/20/2008 Check Date Vendor Description Amount 76713 10/13/2008 04153 STEPHEN N DEROUX INSTRUCTOR SRVS K-2 SOCCER 9/8-10/9 900.00 76714 10/13/2008 00384 DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SRVS COPIER LEASE 543.14 76715 10/15/2008 02464 US BANK FUNDS FOR ATM 8,000.00 76716 10/15/2008 03785 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO, INC Pmt No. # (Final) Proj 07-08 19,404.75 76717 10/21/2008 01973 ERICKSON OIL PRODUCTS INC CAR WASHES -SEPT 46.86 76718 10/21/2008 01018 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT AUTO PAWN SYSTEM -AUGUST 499.00 76719 10/21/2008 01337 RAMSEY COUNTY-PROP REC & REV JAN-APRIL FEE FOR 800 MHZ RADIOS 1,347.84 10/21/2008 01337 RAMSEY COUNTY-PROP REC & REV MAY-AUG FEE FOR 800 MHZ RADIOS 1,347.84 76720 10/21/2008 01190 XCEL ENERGY ELECTRIC UTILITY 12,941.44 10/21/2008 01190 XCEL ENERGY ELECTRIC UTILITY 2,946.13 10/21/2008 01190 XCEL ENERGY ELECTRIC & GAS UTILITY 2,637.89 10/21/2008 01190 XCEL ENERGY EQUIP LOAN 494.06 10/21/2008 01190 XCEL ENERGY ELECTRIC UTILITY 386.64 10/21/2008 01190 XCEL ENERGY ELECTRIC & GAS UTILITY 295.68 10/21/2008 01190 XCEL ENERGY FIRE SIRENS 46.23 76721 10/21/2008 00007 A M LEONARD INC MAINT CLEAN-UP EQUIP 460.45 76722 10/21/2008 00111 ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES INC PATROL & BOARDING FEE 9/14 - 10/05 3,208.83 76723 10/21/2008 00211 BRAUN INTERTEC CORP. PROJ 07-27 PROF SRVS THRU 10/3 1,946.00 76724 10/21/2008 00279 GEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO. CONCRETE BLOCK- BARRICADE 335.48 76725 10/21/2008 00309 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING FEES 1,268.63 76726 10/21/2008 03939 LUANNE CORTESI REIMB FOR MEAL & MILEAGE 10/9 30.82 76727 10/21/2008 00103 EARL F ANDERSON INC REPLACEMENT PARTS AFTON 94.53 76728 10/21/2008 04156 ECOLAB CLEANING PRODUCTS 342.59 10/21/2008 04156 ECOLAB CLEANING PRODUCTS 192.15 76729 10/21/2008 00531 FRA-DOR INC. BLACK DIRT FOR RAIN GARDEN 167.73 76730 10/21/2008 00543 GE CAPITAL LEASE ON RICOH MP1100 897.77 76731 10/21/2008 00668 STEVEN HIEBERT REIMB FOR MEAL 10/6 12.84 76732 10/21/2008 03956 KATIE INCANTALUPO SEPT/OCT ZUMBA INSTRUCTOR FEE 1,497.60 76733 10/21/2008 02496 JAMAR TECHNOLOGIES INC TRAFFIC COUNTERS 2,053.62 76734 10/21/2008 03581 BRETT KROLL REIMB FOR SHOES 3/12 100.00 76735 10/21/2008 00827 L M C I T CLAIM DEDUCTIBLE #11063104 29,831.27 76736 10/21/2008 03636 SCOTT LANGNER REIMB FOR TUITION 5/7 - 6/11 502.50 10/21/2008 03636 SCOTT LANGNER REIMB FOR TUITION 7/9 - 8/12 502.50 76737 10/21/2008 01089 MN UC FUND QUARTERLY UNEMPLOYMENT - 3RD 10,948.22 76738 10/21/2008 03740 PAMELA MOY REIMB FOR MEAL 10/9 8.00 76739 10/21/2008 04121 NODLAND CONSTRUCTION PROJ 07-24 ST PAULS MONASTERY 338,192.76 76740 10/21/2008 01175 CITY OF NORTH ST PAUL RELOCATION OF UTILITY POLE 550.00 76741 10/21/2008 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REFUND J SANFORD HP CREDIT 140.00 76742 10/21/2008 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REFUND G SCHNAITH UCARE BENEFIT 120.00 76743 10/21/2008 00001 ONE TIME VENDOR REFUND F BARNES UCARE BENEFIT 120.00 76744 10/21/2008 00396 DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 3RD QTR PMT 1,920.00 76745 10/21/2008 01359 REGAL AUTO WASH DETAIL XX CAR WASH FEE -SEPT 81.06 76746 10/21/2008 04074 ELAINE SCHRADE FALL SESSION TAI CHI INSTRUCTOR 390.00 76747 10/21/2008 01455 MICHAEL SHORTREED REIMB FOR MEALS & PARKING 10/4- 48.62 76748 10/21/2008 01836 CITY OF ST PAUL RADIO SERVICE &MAINT -SEPT 130.25 76749 10/21/2008 01574 T.A. SCHIFSKY & SONS, INC PROJ 07-27 UPPER AFTON PARTPMT#3 175,067.49 10/21/2008 01574 T.A. SCHIFSKY & SONS, INC MATERIALS FOR HAZELWOOD FIRE 9,526.83 10/21/2008 01574 T.A. SCHIFSKY & SONS, INC VARIOUS BITUMINOUS MATERIALS 113.03 76750 10/21/2008 01753 WEATHER WATCH, INC. WINTER WEATHER SERVICE 619.00 76751 10/21/2008 01828 KRIS A WEAVER REIMB FOR MEALS & MILEAGE 10/9 37.25 39 Checks in this report. 633.295.32 Packet Page Number 155 of 204 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD Disbursements via Debits to Checking account 10/09/08 10/10/08 Fri MN Dept of Natural Resources DNR electronic licenses 346.50 10/10/08 10/14/08 Tues MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk) 11,918.75 10/10/08 10/14/08 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk) 14,703.63 10/11/08 10/14/08 MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk) 4,503.75 10/14/08 10/15/08 Wed MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk) 10,219.75 10/15/08 10/16/08 Thur MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk) 14,287.83 10/15/08 10/16/08 US Bank VISA One Card' Purchasing Card Items 63,124.53 10/15/08 10/16/08 MN Dept of Revenue Fuel Tax 239.85 10/15/08 10/16/08 MN Dept of Revenue Sales Tax 7,520.20 10/16/08 10/17/08 Fri MN State Treasurer Drivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk) 6,525.50 TOTAL 'Detailed listing of VISA purchases is attached. '133,3y0.1y Packet Page Number 156 of 204 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD CHECK # CHECK DATE EMPLOYEE NAME AMOUNT 10/17/08 HANSEN, JOHN 155.00 10/17/08 HJELLE, ERIK 416.42 10/17/08 JUENEMANN, KATHLEEN 416.42 10/17/08 NEPHEW, JOHN 416.42 10/17/08 ROSSBACH, WILLIAM 416.42 10/17/08 BURLIlVGAME, SARAH 1,080.01 10/17/08 CHRISTENSON, SCOTT 1,902.91 10/17/08 FARR, LARRY 2,467.88 10/17/08 JAHN, DAVID 1,737.97 10/17/08 MORIN, TROY 140.25 10/17/08 ARNOLD, AJLA 1,280.00 10/17/08 RAMEAUX, THERESE 2,856.83 10/17/08 FORMANEK, KAREN 1,678.43 10/17/08 MITTET, ROBERT 3,468.22 10/17/08 ANDERSON, CAROLE 1,768.25 10/17/08 COLLIlVS, CAROL 2,400.00 10/17/08 DEBILZAN, JUDY 1,118.14 10/17/08 JACKSON, MARY 2,039.09 10/17/08 KELSEY, CONNIE 2,422.56 10/17/08 CAREY, HEIDI 2,309.35 10/17/08 GUILFOILE, KAREN 6,564.46 10/17/08 KROLL, LISA 1,731.70 10/17/08 MORSON, JOHN 298.56 10/17/08 PENN, CHRISTINE 702.00 10/17/08 SCHMIDT, DEBORAH 2,214.91 10/17/08 SPANGLER, EDNA 1,221.93 10/17/08 CORTESI, LUANNE 1,200.53 10/17/08 JAGOE, CAROL 1,811.33 10/17/08 KELLY, LISA 1,075.20 10/17/08 CARSON, MICHELLE 1,107.23 10/17/08 MECHELKE, SHERRIE 986.25 10/17/08 MOY, PAMELA 996.33 10/17/08 OSTER, ANDREA 1,781.21 10/17/08 WEAVER, KRISTINE 1,759.03 10/17/08 CORCORAN, THERESA 1,776.55 10/17/08 PALANK, MARY 1,778.86 10/17/08 POWELL, PHILIP 2,800.78 10/17/08 SVENDSEN, JOANNE 2,000.80 10/17/08 THOMALLA, DAVID 4,699.27 10/17/08 YOUNG, TAMELA 1,776.55 10/17/08 ABEL, CLINT 2,812.86 10/17/08 ALDRIDGE, MARK 3,143.47 10/17/08 BAKKE, LONN 2,640.32 10/17/08 BARTZ, PAUL 3,094.34 Packet Page Number 157 of 204 10/17/08 BELDE, STANLEY 2,725.90 10/17/08 BENJAMIN, MARKESE 2,025.61 10/17/08 BIERDEMAN, BRIAN 3,608.42 10/17/08 BOHL, JOHN 3,200.74 10/17/08 BUSACK, DANIEL 3,125.78 10/17/08 COFFEY, KEVIN 2,615.23 10/17/08 GROTTY, KERRY 3,001.20 10/17/08 DEMULLING, JOSEPH 1,979.20 10/17/08 DOBLAR, RICHARD 3,288.38 10/17/08 FRITZE, DEREK 2,123.73 10/17/08 GABRIEL, ANTHONY 3,017.24 10/17/08 HAWKINSON JR, TIMOTHY 2,059.76 10/17/08 HEINZ, STEPHEN 3,200.67 10/17/08 HER, PHENG 1,775.17 10/17/08 HIEBERT, STEVEN 2,983.81 10/17/08 JOHNSON, KEVIN 4,560.46 10/17/08 KALKA, THOMAS 798.28 10/17/08 KARIS, FLINT 3,322.03 10/17/08 KONG, TOMMY 2,652.37 10/17/08 KREKELER, NICHOLAS 693.08 10/17/08 KROLL, BRETT 2,591.58 10/17/08 KVAM, DAVID 3,864.56 10/17/08 LANGNER, TODD 2,506.28 10/17/08 CARSON, DANIEL 2,809.06 10/17/08 LU, JOHNNIE 2,591.58 10/17/08 MARINO, JASON 2,804.41 10/17/08 MARTIN, JERROLD 2,737.80 10/17/08 MCCARTY, GLEN 2,779.53 10/17/08 METRY, ALESIA 2,828.06 10/17/08 NYE, MICHAEL 2,548.80 10/17/08 OLSON, JULIE 3,014.97 10/17/08 PALMA, STEVEN 2,932.77 10/17/08 RABBETT, KEVIN 3,864.56 10/17/08 RHUDE, MATTHEW 2,928.91 10/17/08 SHORTREED, MICHAEL 3,768.98 10/17/08 STEFFEN, SCOTT 3,455.31 10/17/08 STEINER, JOSEPH 2,262.58 10/17/08 SYPNIEWSKI, WILLIAM 2,608.97 10/17/08 SZCZEPANSKI, THOMAS 2,737.80 10/17/08 TRAN, JOSEPH 2,591.58 10/17/08 WENZEL, JAY 2,712.64 10/17/08 XIONG, KAO 2,568.50 10/17/08 BERGERON, JOSEPH 4,562.46 10/17/08 DUGAS, MICHAEL 3,283.35 10/17/08 ERICKSON, VIRGINIA 2,884.03 10/17/08 FLOR, TIMOTHY 3,093.85 10/17/08 FRASER, JOHN 3,308.57 10/17/08 LANGNER, SCOTT 2,786.54 10/17/08 THEISEN, PAUL 2,714.72 10/17/08 THIENES, PAUL 2,939.02 10/17/08 AMBORN, JASON 1,331.21 10/17/08 BASSETT, BRENT 1,060.89 10/17/08 BADMAN, ANDREW 1,998.35 10/17/08 BECK, PATRICK 788.34 Packet Page Number 158 of 204 10/17/08 BECK, YANCEY 788.34 10/17/08 BIAGINI JR, JOSEPH 387.00 10/17/08 BRUCKNER, KEVIN 531.00 10/17/08 BUCHE, JOETTE 2,383.99 10/17/08 CARDINAL, NICHOLAS 693.00 10/17/08 CRUMMY, CHARLES 1,483.44 10/17/08 DANUKOS, DAVID 144.16 10/17/08 DAWSON, RICHARD 2,826.03 10/17/08 DOLLERSCHELL, ROBERT 293.39 10/17/08 EVANS, JASON 1,027.12 10/17/08 EVERSON, PAUL 2,523.22 10/17/08 FERGUSON, ROBERT 1,024.89 10/17/08 FITZGERALD, EDWARD 995.58 10/17/08 FOSSUM, ANDREW 2,110.33 10/17/08 GARZA, BRANDON 470.71 10/17/08 GOOD, BROCK 889.65 10/17/08 HAGEN, MICHAEL 975.19 10/17/08 HAKSETH, NATHAN 900.96 10/17/08 HALWEG, JODI 2,748.08 10/17/08 HEFFERNAN, PATRICK 2,414.45 10/17/08 HJELLE, ERIK 2,053.39 10/17/08 IMM, TRACY 907.65 10/17/08 JOHNSON, JAMES 2,006.34 10/17/08 JUNGMANN, BERNARD 3,037.77 10/17/08 KALKA, THOMAS 2,199.21 10/17/08 KANE, ROBERT 2,423.71 10/17/08 KARNOWSKI, SANDRA 2,520.65 10/17/08 KORTUS, WILLIAM 1,150.04 10/17/08 LIDBERG, MICHAEL 1,031.58 10/17/08 LOCHEN, MICHAEL 2,171.39 10/17/08 MAHONEY, KENNETH 795.03 10/17/08 MILLER, NICHOLAS 1,655.69 10/17/08 MORGAN, JEFFERY 1,377.00 10/17/08 NALIPINSKI, STEPHEN 1,135.19 10/17/08 NAVARRO, ANTHONY 468.00 10/17/08 NOVAK, JEROME 2,826.03 10/17/08 NOWICKI, PAUL 1,889.85 10/17/08 O'GRADY, BENJAMIN 848.86 10/17/08 OLSON, JAMES 2,398.37 10/17/08 OPHEIM, JOHN 2,832.81 10/17/08 PERBIX, CHARLES 2,050.01 10/17/08 PETERSON, MARK 1,556.36 10/17/08 PETERSON, ROBERT 2,646.80 10/17/08 PODOBINSKI, LAURENCE 1,412.29 10/17/08 POKORNY, EDWARD 141.86 10/17/08 RAINEY, JAMES 1,476.75 10/17/08 RAVENWALD, CORINNE 806.34 10/17/08 REYNOSO, ANGEL 1,258.02 10/17/08 RICE, CHRISTOPHER 964.04 10/17/08 RICHARDSON, ANDREA 1,998.35 10/17/08 RIDER, JEFFREY 845.65 10/17/08 RIEMENSCHNEIDER, RONALD 520.25 10/17/08 RODRIGUEZ, REBECCA 774.80 Packet Page Number 159 of 204 10/17/08 RODRIGUEZ, ROBERTO 1,509.14 10/17/08 ROMANIK, JAMES 1,901.16 10/17/08 SCHULTZ, JEROME 1,199.40 10/17/08 SCHWARTZ, SHAWN 871.65 10/17/08 SEDLACEK, JEFFREY 2,573.29 10/17/08 STREFF, MICHAEL 2,018.89 10/17/08 SVENDSEN, RONALD 2,669.88 10/17/08 WHELEHAN, ROBERT 1,488.91 10/17/08 WHITE, JOEL 1,098.09 10/17/08 GERVAIS-JR, CLARENCE 3,342.04 10/17/08 LUKIN, STEVEN 4,260.90 10/17/08 ZWIEG, SUSAN 2,147.22 10/17/08 AHL, R. CHARLES 5,253.00 10/17/08 FINWALL, SHANK 2,820.55 10/17/08 KNUTSON, LOIS 1,796.55 10/17/08 KONEWKO, DUWAYNE 3,963.44 10/17/08 NIVEN, AMY 1,332.42 10/17/08 PASSI, CRYSTAL 712.50 10/17/08 PRIEFER, WILLIAM 2,936.37 10/17/08 BRINK, TROY 2,237.25 10/17/08 BUCKLEY, BRENT 1,657.35 10/17/08 DEBILZAN, THOMAS 2,006.15 10/17/08 EDGE, DOUGLAS 2,006.15 10/17/08 HAMRE, MILES 1,056.00 10/17/08 JONES, DONALD 2,006.15 10/17/08 MEISSNER, BRENT 1,579.75 10/17/08 MEYER, GERALD 2,096.59 10/17/08 NAGEL, BRYAN 3,015.02 10/17/08 OSWALD, ERICK 2,280.27 10/17/08 RUNNING, ROBERT 2,118.95 10/17/08 TEVLIN, TODD 2,016.15 10/17/08 BURLINGAME, NATHAN 1,710.97 10/17/08 DUCHARME, JOHN 2,401.96 10/17/08 ENGSTROM, ANDREW 2,108.55 10/17/08 GAYNOR, VIRGINIA 2,182.95 10/17/08 JACOBSON, SCOTT 2,108.55 10/17/08 JAROSCH, JONATHAN 2,367.75 10/17/08 KREGER, JASON 1,794.18 10/17/08 KUMMER, STEVEN 2,727.01 10/17/08 LINDBLOM, RANDAL 2,561.17 10/17/08 LOVE, STEVEN 2,599.03 10/17/08 O'CONNOR, DONOVAN 48.80 10/17/08 THOMPSON, MICHAEL 3,094.28 10/17/08 ZIEMAN, SCOTT 171.60 10/17/08 EDSON, DAVID 2,046.68 10/17/08 HINNENKAMP, GARY 2,016.95 10/17/08 MARUSKA, MARK 3,000.18 10/17/08 NAUGHTON, JOHN 2,006.15 10/17/08 NORDQUIST, RICHARD 2,006.15 10/17/08 NOVAK, MICHAEL 2,006.15 10/17/08 SCHINDELDECKER, JAMES 2,008.46 10/17/08 BERGREN, KIRSTEN 90.00 10/17/08 BIESANZ, OAKLEY 1,407.13 10/17/08 DEAVER, CHARLES 685.10 Packet Page Number 160 of 204 10/17/08 GERNES, CAROLE 617.63 10/17/08 HAYMAN, JANET 1,262.25 10/17/08 HUTCHINSON, ANN 2,472.00 10/17/08 SOUTTER, CHRISTINE 156.32 10/17/08 WACHAL, KAREN 774.03 10/17/08 FRY, PATRICIA 1,844.46 10/17/08 HALL, KATHLEEN 211.50 10/17/08 SINDT, ANDREA 1,974.09 10/17/08 THOMPSON, DEBRA 710.62 10/17/08 EKSTRAND, THOMAS 3,600.06 10/17/08 MARTIN, MICHAEL 1,782.32 10/17/08 BRASH, JASON 1,798.95 10/17/08 CARVER, NICHOLAS 3,027.38 10/17/08 FISHER, DAVID 3,938.72 10/17/08 RICE, MICHAEL 2,414.97 10/17/08 SWAN, DAVID 2,486.15 10/17/08 WELLENS, MOLLY 1,368.23 10/17/08 JOHNSON, GENE 1,600.00 10/17/08 BERGER, STEPHANIE 254.25 10/17/08 BJORK, BRANDON 198.00 10/17/08 FRANK, PETER 250.00 10/17/08 JANASZAK, MEGHAN 810.00 10/17/08 KOHLMAN, JENNIFER 283.50 10/17/08 MILTON, SCOTT 138.00 10/17/08 ROBBINS, AUDRA 2,439.86 10/17/08 RYCHLICKI, NICHOLE 188.50 10/17/08 SHERRILL, CAITLIN 436.50 10/17/08 TAUBMAN, DOUGLAS 3,115.54 10/17/08 TAYLOR, JAMES 2,007.26 10/17/08 ADAMS, DAVID 1,506.95 10/17/08 GERMAIN, DAVID 2,015.39 10/17/08 HAAG, MARK 2,006.15 10/17/08 NADEAU, EDWARD 3,384.17 10/17/08 SCHULTZ, SCOTT 2,251.15 10/17/08 ANZALDI, MANDY 1,695.12 10/17/08 BERGLUND, DANIEL 262.75 10/17/08 BRENEMAN, NEIL 1,741.11 10/17/08 CRAWFORD - JR, RAYMOND 726.00 10/17/08 DICKS, JOHN 220.50 10/17/08 EVANS, CHRISTINE 1,168.93 10/17/08 FABIO-SHANLEY, MICHAEL 266.48 10/17/08 GLASS, JEAN 1,982.54 10/17/08 GROPPOLI, LINDA 523.51 10/17/08 HANSEN, LORI 2,490.13 10/17/08 HER, CHONG 324.00 10/17/08 HER, PETER 170.20 10/17/08 HIX, MELINDA 209.00 10/17/08 HOFMEISTER, MARY 898.84 10/17/08 NAGEL, BROOKE 354.00 10/17/08 PELOQUIN, PENNYE 510.14 10/17/08 SCHOENECKER, LEIGH 542.75 10/17/08 STAPLES, PAULINE 3,212.78 10/17/08 VANG, KAY 120.00 Packet Page Number 161 of 204 10/17/08 VANG, TIM 388.00 10/17/08 AICHELE, MEGAN 81.00 10/17/08 BAUDE, SARAH 204.00 10/17/08 BEITLER, JULIE 102.00 10/17/08 BENJAMIN, AYLA 56.70 10/17/08 BIGGS, ANNETTE 93.75 10/17/08 BRUSOE, AMY 173.25 10/17/08 BRUSOE, CRISTINA 113.48 10/17/08 CAMPBELL, JESSICA 90.00 10/17/08 CLARK, PAMELA 117.00 10/17/08 DEMPSEY, BETH 122.50 10/17/08 DEVRIENDT, KARA 97.50 10/17/08 DUNN, RYAN 947.07 10/17/08 ERICKSON-CLARK, CAROL 47.50 10/17/08 FLACKEY, MAUREEN 95.75 10/17/08 FONTAINE, KIM 855.76 10/17/08 GIEL, NICOLE 34.00 10/17/08 GRUENHAGEN, LINDA 226.35 10/17/08 HOLMBERG, LADONNA 374.00 10/17/08 HORWATH, RONALD 2,439.86 10/17/08 JASKEN, NICHOLAS 646.00 10/17/08 JOHNSON, JAMES 214.94 10/17/08 JOSSART, ANGELA 17.00 10/17/08 KOGLER, RYAN 99.50 10/17/08 KRONHOLM, KATHRYN 669.87 10/17/08 LAMEYER, ZACHARY 139.40 10/17/08 MATESKI, WAYNE 112.00 10/17/08 MATHEWS, LEAH 218.93 10/17/08 MCCANN, NATALIE 54.00 10/17/08 MCCARTHY, ERICA 155.38 10/17/08 OBRIEN, JULIE 99.00 10/17/08 OLSON, SANDRA 133.00 10/17/08 PEHOSKI, JOEL 78.00 10/17/08 PROESCH, ANDY 653.88 10/17/08 RHODY, DIANE 288.00 10/17/08 RICHTER, DANIEL 124.25 10/17/08 RICHTER, NANCY 1,281.51 10/17/08 RONNING, ISAIAH 267.75 10/17/08 SCHAEFER, NATALIE 35.00 10/17/08 SCHREIER, ROSEMARIE 170.00 10/17/08 SCHUNEMAN, GREGORY 104.30 10/17/08 SKUNES, KELLY 70.88 10/17/08 SMITH, ANN 248.55 10/17/08 TUPY, ELIANA 17.00 10/17/08 TUPY, HEIDE 169.60 10/17/08 TUPY, MARCUS 330.75 10/17/08 WARNER, CAROLYN 201.20 10/17/08 WEDES, CARYL 98.00 10/17/08 WICKNER, KRISTY 88.88 10/17/08 WOLFGRAM, TERESA 138.60 10/17/08 WOODMAN, ALICE 138.00 10/17/08 YOUNCE, BLAISE 101.50 10/17/08 ZALK, IDA 81.18 10/17/08 BOSLEY, CAROL 280.25 Packet Page Number 162 of 204 10/17/08 FITZENBERGER, VALERIE 122.00 10/17/08 HER, SHILLAME 86.25 10/17/08 HOLMGREN, STEPHANIE 110.00 10/17/08 LANGER, CHELSEA 17.50 10/17/08 BATTLER, MELINDA 22.00 10/17/08 BEHAN, JAMES 1,939.87 10/17/08 DOUGLASS, TOM 1,240.12 10/17/08 GROPPOLI, JOE 312.75 10/17/08 PATTERSON, ALBERT 1,264.44 10/17/08 PRINS, KELLY 1,162.62 10/17/08 REILLY, MICHAEL 1,807.75 10/17/08 VALERIO, TARA 235.63 10/17/08 AICHELE, CRAIG 2,081.67 10/17/08 PRISM, STEVEN 2,256.55 10/17/08 WOEHRLE, MATTHEW 1,922.15 10/17/08 BERGO, CHAD 2,499.19 10/17/08 FOWLDS, MYCHAL 2,996.06 10/17/08 FRANZEN, 2,083.07 1006073 10/17/08 LONGRIE, DIANA 473.15 1006074 10/17/08 DEFLORIN, ROXANNE 1,027.50 1006075 10/17/08 THOMFORDE, FAITH 210.00 1006076 10/17/08 WELCHLIN, CABOT 2,737.80 1006077 10/17/08 ANDERSON, BRIAN 1,901.90 1006078 10/17/08 BAHL, DAVID 1,398.66 1006079 10/17/08 BOURQUIN, RON 1,495.49 1006080 10/17/08 CAPISTRANT, JOHN 1,329.44 1006081 10/17/08 DITTEL, MICHAEL 1,317.58 1006082 10/17/08 DUELLMAN, AMY 596.87 1006083 10/17/08 FASULO, WALTER 1,227.58 1006084 10/17/08 HALE, JOSEPH 2,671.57 1006085 10/17/08 HERLUND, RICK 2,416.84 1006086 10/17/08 HUTCHINSON, JAMES 1,609.33 1006087 10/17/08 KOEHN, CORY 549.56 1006088 10/17/08 KONDER, RONALD 912.18 1006089 10/17/08 MALLORY, GORDON 1,720.73 1006090 10/17/08 MCGOVERN, JOHN 1,165.81 1006091 10/17/08 MELANDER, JON 1,860.43 1006092 10/17/08 NOLAN, PAUL 1,208.66 1006093 10/17/08 RICE, DANIEL 549.56 1006094 10/17/08 ROBERTSON, STEVEN 1,020.43 1006095 10/17/08 SKOK, STEPHEN 1,119.42 1006096 10/17/08 SOLHEID, DALE 664.41 1006097 10/17/08 CHAMBERLAIN, JAMIE 45.00 1006098 10/17/08 ERICKSON, AMANDA 78.00 1006099 10/17/08 ERICKSON, AMY 78.00 1006100 10/17/08 KING, KYLE 64.00 1006101 10/17/08 KING, TYLER 60.00 1006102 10/17/08 KRENZ, CASSANDRA 52.00 1006103 10/17/08 KRINGS, JENA 48.00 1006104 10/17/08 KRINGS, JESSICA 48.00 1006105 10/17/08 LINDA, KELLIE 227.25 1006106 10/17/08 MASON, LAURA 64.00 1006107 10/17/08 MEISSNER, MICHAEL 15.00 Packet Page Number 163 of 204 1006108 10/17/08 MILTON, TIMOTHY 90.00 1006109 10/17/08 MULLEN, REBECCA 39.00 1006110 10/17/08 PETERSON, EMILY 30.00 1006111 10/17/08 ROBBINS, CAMDEN 63.00 1006112 10/17/08 RUBBELKE, JAMIE 26.00 1006113 10/17/08 VUE, LOR PAO 227.00 1006114 10/17/08 BUESING, DYLAN 63.00 1006115 10/17/08 FENGER, JUSTIN 200.04 1006116 10/17/08 GRANT, MELISSA 299.11 1006117 10/17/08 HANSON, MATTHEW 274.50 1006118 10/17/08 LAMSON, KEVIN 94.50 1006119 10/17/08 MCLAURIN, CHRISTOPHER 351.40 1006120 10/17/08 MORIS, RACHEL 84.38 1006121 10/17/08 NWANOKWALE, MORDY 77.39 1006122 10/17/08 PIEPER, THEODORE 25.00 1006123 10/17/08 ROGNESS, TRYGGVE 48.49 1006124 10/17/08 ROSTRON, ROBERT 249.76 1006125 10/17/08 SAUCERMAN, MICHAEL 162.48 1006126 10/17/08 SCHAEFER, JAMES 70.69 1006127 10/17/08 SCHMIDT, JOHN 111.04 1006128 10/17/08 ARKSEY, EMILY 14.00 1006129 10/17/08 MCDONALD, JESSALYNN 134.75 1006130 10/17/08 ZAGER, LINNEA 166.75 1006131 10/17/08 BOWMAN, MATTHEW 200.00 1006132 10/17/08 KOELNDORFER, JAMILYN 87.00 1006133 10/17/08 SCHULZE, KEVIN 333.50 1006134 10/17/08 STEFFEN, MICHAEL 42.00 TOTAL 559,012.00 Packet Page Number 164 of 204 Trans Date Posting Date Merchant Name Trans Amount Name 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES $965.00 R CHARLES AHL 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 PARTY CITY #768 $44.97 MANDY ANZALDI 09/16/2008 10/10/2008 NUCO2 $93.01 JIM BEHAN 09/25/2008 09/29/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $24.03 JIM BEHAN 09/26/2008 10/10/2008 NUCO2 $56.52 JIM BEHAN 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 TARGET 00011858 $37.13 JIM BEHAN 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 TARGET 00011858 ($32.01) JIM BEHAN 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 TARGET 00011858 $42.69 JIM BEHAN 10/01/2008 10/10/2008 NUCO2 $62.39 JIM BEHAN 10/05/2008 10/06/2008 UPS"1Z650T290392121829 $25.98 JIM BEHAN 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 ADAMS PEST CONTROL $149.93 JIM BEHAN 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 GOPHER BEARING COMPANY $105.83 JIM BEHAN 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 PAYPAL "SUPPLIERHK $31.98 CHAD BERGO 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 ESRI INC $93.07 CHAD BERGO 10/06/2008 10/08/2008 SMARTPHONE EXPERTS ($24.90) CHAD BERGO 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 FRONTIER PRECISION INC $4,307.93 CHAD BERGO 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 KNOWLANS #2 $23.66 OAKLEY BIESANZ 10/04/2008 10/06/2008 RAINBOW FOODS 00088526 $125.06 RON BOURQUIN 10/02/2008 10/06/2008 SPORTSMITH FITNESS PARTS $74.99 NEIL BRENEMAN 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 CUB FOODS, INC. $24.91 NEIL BRENEMAN 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 PETSMART INC 461 $18.09 NEIL BRENEMAN 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 SPRINT AQUATICS $157.13 NEIL BRENEMAN 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 PETSMART INC 461 $23.84 NEIL BRENEMAN 10/07/2008 10/09/2008 THE SPORTS AUTHORITY #701 $25.59 NEIL BRENEMAN 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 SPORTS IMPORTS $35.20 NEIL BRENEMAN 09/29/2008 09/30/2008 FASTENAL CO-RETAIL $82.67 TROY BRINK 09/29/2008 10/01/2008 HUB HOBBY CENTER- LI $22.23 TROY BRINK 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 SAINT PAUL AREA CHAMBER $250.00 HEIDI CAREY 09/29/2008 10/01/2008 INNOVATIVE COLOR PRINTING $134.47 HEIDI CAREY 10/01/2008 10/03/2008 INNOVATIVE COLOR PRINTING $42.30 HEIDI CAREY 10/01/2008 10/03/2008 INNOVATIVE COLOR PRINTING $92.10 HEIDI CAREY 10/02/2008 10/06/2008 INNOVATIVE COLOR PRINTING $154.43 HEIDI CAREY 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 DEX EAST COLORADO $34.53 HEIDI CAREY 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 VZWRLSS"APOCC VISN $99.94 HEIDI CAREY 09/25/2008 09/29/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $61.97 SCOTT CHRISTENSON 09/29/2008 10/01/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 ($35.80) SCOTT CHRISTENSON 09/30/2008 10/02/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $25.25 SCOTT CHRISTENSON 10/01/2008 10/03/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $12.78 SCOTT CHRISTENSON 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 WW GRAINGER 938 $55.58 SCOTT CHRISTENSON 10/06/2008 10/08/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 ($17.06) SCOTT CHRISTENSON 10/06/2008 10/08/2008 SEARS ROEBUCK 1122 $16.63 SCOTT CHRISTENSON 10/06/2008 10/08/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $17.06 SCOTT CHRISTENSON 10/08/2008 10/10/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $9.80 SCOTT CHRISTENSON 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 ERIKS BIKE SHOP $19.20 SCOTT CHRISTENSON 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 G & K SERVICES 006 $45.30 CHARLES DEAVER 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 MENARDS 3022 $12.37 CHARLES DEAVER 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 OAKDALE RENTAL CENTER $196.08 DOUG EDGE 10/02/2008 10/03/2008 ELECTRO WATCHMAN INC $2,670.39 LARRY FARR 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 NORTHLAND MECHANICA $378.00 LARRY FARR 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 CABLING SERVICES CORPORA $1,997.52 LARRY FARR 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 G & K SERVICES 006 $730.58 LARRY FARR 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 WMS"WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY $514.32 LARRY FARR 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 WMS"WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY $381.11 LARRY FARR 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 WMS"WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY $1,049.64 LARRY FARR 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 G & K SERVICES 006 $335.90 LARRY FARR 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 COMMERCIAL FURNITURE SRVC $411.60 LARRY FARR 09/28/2008 09/29/2008 FEDEX SHP 09/25/08 AB# $30.33 KAREN FORMANEK Packet Page Number 165 of 204 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 USPS 2663650015 $16.50 KAREN FORMANEK 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 USPS 2663650015 $7.40 KAREN FORMANEK 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 CDW GOVERNMENT $2,614.35 MYCHAL FOWLDS 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 COMCAST CABLE COMM $108.00 MYCHAL FOWLDS 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 SPRINT "SPRINTNEXTELWB $1,726.90 MYCHAL FOWLDS 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 AT&T "8310000707190 $2,065.90 MYCHAL FOWLDS 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 CITY OF ROSEVILLE CITY HA $865.00 MYCHAL FOWLDS 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 QWESTCOMM"TN651 $132.90 MYCHAL FOWLDS 10/08/2008 10/08/2008 COMCAST CABLE COMM $108.00 MYCHAL FOWLDS 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 CTO"GOTOMYPC.COM ($943.63) MYCHAL FOWLDS 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 GOVDOCS.COM, INC. $820.00 MYCHAL FOWLDS 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 CDW GOVERNMENT $311.20 NICK FRANZEN 10/04/2008 10/06/2008 SYX"TIGERDIRECT.COM $52.62 NICK FRANZEN 10/06/2008 10/08/2008 OFFICE MAX $69.33 NICK FRANZEN 10/09/2008 10/09/2008 BITS LIMITED $146.85 NICK FRANZEN 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR $130.09 NICK FRANZEN 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 HP SERVICES $76.03 NICK FRANZEN 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 SYX"TIGERDIRECT.COM $72.94 NICK FRANZEN 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 BACHMAN'S INC #0004 $372.02 VIRGINIA GAYNOR 10/04/2008 10/06/2008 COUNTY MARKET $7.58 VIRGINIA GAYNOR 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 USPS 2663650009 $27.00 CAROLE GERNES 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 KNOWLANS #2 $9.07 CAROLE GERNES 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 DEGE GARDEN CENTER $19.50 CAROLE GERNES 10/01/2008 10/03/2008 MICHAELS #2744 $8.70 JEAN GLASS 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 PAYPAL "POS BARCODE $419.00 KAREN E GUILFOILE 09/27/2008 09/29/2008 COMCAST CABLE COMM $89.86 LORI HANSON 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 CLOVER SUPER FOODS $160.01 LORI HANSON 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 TARGET 00011858 $30.11 PATRICK HEFFERNAN 09/27/2008 09/29/2008 CUB FOODS, INC. $82.63 PATRICK HEFFERNAN 09/27/2008 10/02/2008 MENARDS 3059 ($6.70) PATRICK HEFFERNAN 10/04/2008 10/06/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $5.30 RICK HERLUND 10/04/2008 10/06/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $77.68 RICK HERLUND 10/04/2008 10/06/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $79.00 RICK HERLUND 10/06/2008 10/08/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 ($5.30) RICK HERLUND 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 MOGREN LANDSCAPE SUPPLY L $25.00 GARY HINNENKAMP 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 MOGREN LANDSCAPE SUPPLY L $17.25 GARY HINNENKAMP 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 LAKESHORE LEARNING #41 $18.10 RON HORWATH 10/06/2008 10/08/2008 ORIENTAL TRADING CO $106.33 RON HORWATH 09/29/2008 10/01/2008 SAINT ELIZABETH GIFT SHO $26.75 ANN E HUTCHINSON 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 KNOWLANS #2 $29.63 ANN E HUTCHINSON 09/27/2008 09/29/2008 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $925.10 DAVID JAHN 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $163.48 DAVID JAHN 10/01/2008 10/03/2008 MILLS FLEET FARM #27 $70.04 KEVIN JOHNSON 09/29/2008 09/30/2008 PHILIPS MEDICAL SYSTEMS $480.90 BERNARD R JUNGMANN 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 USPS 2663650015 $19.99 BERNARD R JUNGMANN 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 PAYPAL "NATIONALEMS $260.00 BERNARD R JUNGMANN 10/06/2008 10/08/2008 OXYGEN SERVICE CO INC $75.00 BERNARD R JUNGMANN 10/06/2008 10/08/2008 CENTURY COLLEGE-BO $75.00 BERNARD R JUNGMANN 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 ALL SAFE $531.86 BERNARD R JUNGMANN 10/02/2008 10/03/2008 THE UPS STORE #2171 $12.38 TOM KALKA 09/29/2008 10/01/2008 CPS INC-DARECATALOUGE.COM $435.88 FLINT KARIS 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 THE UPS STORE #2171 $18.19 NICHOLAS KREKELER 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $90.55 LISA KROLL 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 SHRED-IT $20.25 LISA KROLL 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWSPAPE $461.38 LISA KROLL 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 ARVEY PAPER & OFFICE PRO $2,283.71 LISA KROLL 10/01/2008 10/03/2008 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $60.96 LISA KROLL 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 PEI WEI #0113 Q02 $178.27 LISA KROLL Packet Page Number 166 of 204 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWSPAPE $412.71 LISA KROLL 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 REED BUS INFO ACCT REC $645.84 LISA KROLL 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 PARABEN CORPORATION $2,759.67 DAVID KVAM 10/06/2008 10/08/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $21.32 RANDY LINDBLOM 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 FOREST PRODUCTS SUPPLY $32.03 STEVE LUKIN 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 VIKING ELEC-CREDIT DEPT. $68.21 STEVE LUKIN 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 SHERWIN WILLIAMS #3127 $19.08 STEVE LUKIN 09/29/2008 09/30/2008 MOGREN LANDSCAPE SUPPLY L $10.99 STEVE LUKIN 09/29/2008 10/01/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 $13.90 STEVE LUKIN 09/30/2008 10/02/2008 AIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL $1,152.12 STEVE LUKIN 09/30/2008 10/02/2008 AIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL $86.40 STEVE LUKIN 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 DALCO ENTERPRISES, INC $458.92 STEVE LUKIN 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 ASPEN MILLS INC. $44.95 STEVE LUKIN 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 ASPEN MILLS INC. $117.00 STEVE LUKIN 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 WMS"WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY $1,116.29 STEVE LUKIN 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 WMS"WASTE MGMT WMEZPAY $371.51 STEVE LUKIN 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 PREMIER LIGHTING $108.56 GORDON MALLORY 10/02/2008 10/06/2008 AMSTAR OF BAXTER MINNE $31.57 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE $260.98 MARK MARUSKA 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 LTG POWER EQUIPMENT $110.27 MARK MARUSKA 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 G & K SERVICES 006 $362.72 MARK MARUSKA 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 SHRED-IT $20.25 ROBERT MITTET 09/27/2008 09/29/2008 ARROWWOOD RESORT & CONF C $325.89 ROBERT MITTET 09/28/2008 09/29/2008 COMCAST CABLE COMM $139.93 ROBERT MITTET 10/02/2008 10/02/2008 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFIC $415.00 ROBERT MITTET 10/02/2008 10/03/2008 FSH COMMUNICATION01 OF 01 $63.90 ROBERT MITTET 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 METROCALL/ARCH WIRE $15.97 ED NADEAU 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 TARGET 00011858 $37.35 ED NADEAU 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 MIKES LP GAS INC $35.10 BRYAN NAGEL 10/06/2008 10/09/2008 CINTAS FIRST AID#431 $107.74 BRYAN NAGEL 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 G & K SERVICES 006 $770.42 AMY NIVEN 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 G & K SERVICES 006 $369.81 AMY NIVEN 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 G & K SERVICES 006 $150.10 AMY NIVEN 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 MOGREN LANDSCAPE SUPPLY L $10.67 ERICK OSWALD 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 MOGREN LANDSCAPE SUPPLY L $91.57 ERICK OSWALD 09/29/2008 10/01/2008 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 ($255.52) MARY KAY PALANK 10/01/2008 10/03/2008 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 $172.09 MARY KAY PALANK 09/29/2008 10/01/2008 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $15.10 ROBERT PETERSON 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 STERLING TEK INC $17.98 PHILIP F POWELL 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 TAYLOR & FRANCIS-CRC $84.95 PHILIP F POWELL 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 U OF M CPHEO CONTINUING $190.00 PHILIP F POWELL 09/30/2008 10/02/2008 ADVANCED GRAPHIC SYSTEMS $422.82 PHILIP F POWELL 10/09/2008 10/09/2008 HARKINS SAFETY INC $34.60 PHILIP F POWELL 09/25/2008 09/29/2008 S S TREE AND HORTICULTUR $613.80 WILLIAM J PRIEFER 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 GE CAPITAL $331.99 WILLIAM J PRIEFER 09/25/2008 09/29/2008 GILLUND ENTERPRIZES $74.71 STEVEN PRIEM 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 HYDRAULIC SPECIALTY COMPA $127.25 STEVEN PRIEM 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS #19 $174.74 STEVEN PRIEM 09/26/2008 09/30/2008 BAUER BULT TRE33200023 $264.76 STEVEN PRIEM 09/26/2008 09/30/2008 BAUER BULT TRE33200023 $175.48 STEVEN PRIEM 09/29/2008 10/01/2008 TOUSLEY FORD 127200039 $303.28 STEVEN PRIEM 09/30/2008 10/02/2008 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $107.51 STEVEN PRIEM 09/30/2008 10/02/2008 ASPEN EQUIPMENT C/O CINDY $458.64 STEVEN PRIEM 09/30/2008 10/03/2008 MINNESOTA FALL EXPO $75.00 STEVEN PRIEM 10/01/2008 10/03/2008 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP $158.91 STEVEN PRIEM 10/02/2008 10/03/2008 POLAR CHEVROLET MAZDA PAR $52.28 STEVEN PRIEM 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 BOYER TRUCK PARTS $135.12 STEVEN PRIEM 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 PERFORMANCE TRANSMI $86.99 STEVEN PRIEM Packet Page Number 167 of 204 10/06/2008 10/08/2008 TOUSLEY FORD 127200039 10/06/2008 10/08/2008 TOUSLEY FORD 127200039 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 POLAR CHEVROLET MAZDA PAR 10/07/2008 10/09/2008 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS #19 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 ASPEN EQUIPMENT C/O CINDY 10/08/2008 10/09/2008 OXYGEN SERVICE CO INC 10/08/2008 10/10/2008 KATH AUTO PARTS NSP 10/08/2008 10/10/2008 BAUER BULT TRE33200023 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 THE UPS STORE #2171 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 SHRED-IT 10/02/2008 10/03/2008 ACCURINT EOM AUTO P 10/02/2008 10/03/2008 BUY.COM 10/02/2008 10/06/2008 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 10/04/2008 10/06/2008 ADVANCED PUBLIC SAFETY 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 HEALTHEAST TRANSPORTATN 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 GE CAPITAL 10/03/2008 10/06/2008 HILLYARD INC MINNEAPOLIS 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 INT'L CODE COUNCIL INC 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 TARGET 00000687 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 TARGET 00011858 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 UNITED RENTALS #D09 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 MENARDS 3059 10/02/2008 10/06/2008 MIDWEST FENCE 10/02/2008 10/06/2008 MILLS FLEET FARM #27 10/07/2008 10/09/2008 MIDWEST FENCE 10/02/2008 10/02/2008 LABEL CITY INC 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 UNITED RENTALS #D09 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER 09/25/2008 09/29/2008 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 09/26/2008 10/02/2008 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 BOEHM'S CYCLING, FITNE 09/30/2008 10/01/2008 BOEHM'S CYCLING, FITNE 10/01/2008 10/03/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 10/01/2008 10/03/2008 THE HOME DEPOT 2801 10/01/2008 10/03/2008 TOPPER WORLD OF MN 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 BOEHM'S CYCLING, FITNE 10/06/2008 10/07/2008 BATTERIES PLUS 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 ABIKESTORE.COM 10/07/2008 10/09/2008 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 10/07/2008 10/09/2008 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC 10/08/2008 10/10/2008 THE KAHLER GRAND HOTEL 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 APA MEMBERSHIPS AND SUBS 10/08/2008 10/10/2008 OFFICE DEPOT #1090 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 KOHL'S #0055 10/02/2008 10/03/2008 CUB FOODS, INC. 10/09/2008 10/10/2008 CUB FOODS, INC. 09/26/2008 09/29/2008 THE SPORTS AUTHORITY #701 10/01/2008 10/02/2008 T-MOBILE RECURRING PMT 09/30/2008 10/02/2008 STRAUSS SKATE & BICYCLES 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 SPORTS IMPORTS 10/04/2008 10/06/2008 PANERA BREAD #1301 10/07/2008 10/08/2008 FRESH WATER SOCIETY TOTAL $32.40 $154.70 $49.46 $261.44 ($458.64; $271.58 $107.49 $581.62 $67.37 $109.89 $30.00 $121.30 $1, 546.72 $148.38 $264.12 $43.77 $1,216.39 $180.00 $119.81 $45.57 $231.65 $16.54 $145.18 $46.93 $65.66 $443.75 $117.32 $57.77 $224.01 $119.23 $2,964.75 $815.70 $8.53 $129.01 $489.98 $211.77 $106.53 $387.93 $255.00 $255.00 $206.46 $185.00 $131.55 $160.11 $19.26 $28.79 $106.71 $334.96 $1,956.50 $704.00 $239.02 $20.26 $63,124.53 STEVEN PRIEM STEVEN PRIEM STEVEN PRIEM STEVEN PRIEM STEVEN PRIEM STEVEN PRIEM STEVEN PRIEM STEVEN PRIEM KEVIN RABBETT KEVIN RABBETT KEVIN RABBETT KEVIN RABBETT KEVIN RABBETT KEVIN RABBETT KEVIN RABBETT TERRIE RAMEAUX MICHAEL REILLY MICHAEL RICE AUDRA ROBBINS AUDRA ROBBINS ROBERT RUNNING JAMES SCHINDELDECKER JAMES SCHINDELDECKER JAMES SCHINDELDECKER JAMES SCHINDELDECKER DEB SCHMIDT SCOTT SCHULTZ SCOTT SCHULTZ MICHAEL SHORTREED MICHAEL SHORTREED MICHAEL SHORTREED MICHAEL SHORTREED MICHAEL SHORTREED MICHAEL SHORTREED MICHAEL SHORTREED MICHAEL SHORTREED MICHAEL SHORTREED MICHAEL SHORTREED MICHAEL SHORTREED MICHAEL SHORTREED MICHAEL SHORTREED ANDREA SINDT ANDREA SINDT PAULINE STAPLES JOANNE M SVENDSEN JOANNE M SVENDSEN DOUGLAS J TAUBMAN DOUGLAS J TAUBMAN JAMES TAYLOR JAMES TAYLOR KAREN WACHAL KAREN WACHAL Packet Page Number 168 of 204 Agenda No. M1 MEMORANDUM TO: Chuck Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk RE: Gambling Resolution -Hill-Murray Mother's Club - 5-8 Tavern DATE: October 15, 2008 Introduction Hill-Murray Mother's Club needs to renew their Lawful Gambling License with the State of Minnesota, which requires a resolution from the City of Maplewood. Their gambling is conducted at 5-8 Tavern, 2289 Minnehaha Avenue. RESOLUTION BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, that the premises permit for lawful gambling is approved for Hill-Murray Mother's Club to operate at 5-8 Tavern, 2289 Minnehaha Avenue, Maplewood, Minnesota. FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council waives any objection to the timeliness of application for said permit as governed by Minnesota Statute §349.213. FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council requests that the Gambling Control Division of the Minnesota Department of Gaming approve said permit application as being in compliance with Minnesota Statute §349.213. NOW, THEREFORE, be it further resolved that this Resolution by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, be forwarded to the Gambling Control Division for their approval. Recommendation Approve the above resolution to renew Hill-Murray Mother's Club lawful gambling license at 5-8 Tavern. Packet Page Number 169 of 204 Agenda Item M2 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Michael Martin, AICP, Planner SUBJECT: Heritage Square 2"d Addition-Planned Unit Development Review APPLICANT: K Hovnanian Homes DATE: October 21, 2008 INTRODUCTION The conditional use permit (CUP) for the Heritage Square 2nd Addition planned unit development (PUD) at Legacy Village is due for its annual review. The PUD allowed this 81-unit, 7.7-acre townhouse development. Refer to the attachments. BACKGROUND July 14, 2003: The city council approved the Legacy Village PUD, land use plan changes, preliminary plat and tax-abatement financing. July 26, 2004: The city council approved the Heritage Square 2nd Addition's final plat, design plans and PUD within the Legacy Village PUD. August 22, 2005, August 14, 2006 and September 24, 2007: The city council moved to review this PUD again in one year. DISCUSSION The developer has completed construction and all site improvements have been finished. K Hovnanian Homes is meeting all city ordinances and all the conditions of approval. RECOMMENDATION Review the permit in the future only if a problem arises or if a major change is proposed to the site. P:\SEC3\Legacy Village\Heritage Square 2 CUP Rev 10 08.docAttachments: 1. Location Map 2. Legacy Village PUD 3. Heritage Square 2"d Addition Development Plan Packet Page Number 170 of 204 N BEAMAVE Attachment 1 BEAM 0 z 3 pA0A1 MESASI ASE ~, 2 Packet Page Number 171 of 204 Attachment 2 J a~ ~ o C* ~ ~.t~! ~ ~a 1 .dpi ,~ 1_"_• ~'" S .~ ,~ ,,~~~ t-~ C~~] r~ ~ W 1 ~ _..__ '- '4 ~ {i ¢ r i p~n {~ ;~ i ~ ~ ' ~ .' ~g ~~ii ~ ;l i ,~~ _... ., , "`~;u r :u i f~I _..~'. I _.,.h r ..~ I I ~~~ f ..; ~; e~.: ~~' s ~~ k .-° I '~ ~l r~ #° E ~~ a ,: ~dl ~ ~ ', a~ i u •. r 'LI1>>~ ~.~r a y ~V'~ - 1~~\' f - i ~ r .._ - ...., ~'- .~ I' 4 .. . ` 'S~ ` i ~ _ !R~ I tom' ~ 1 1~t a•,i A ~ 'r ~l ~ `1 I t .,rd r "n 1 xt ! .% W I _ _ ~ tL'. }?~~ r j ' a fir: '~ r ~` ~ 11 r - ~~lx ~ ~ L!S W ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ sn ~ I ^ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~~~-~,~ ~ O ~ ~ '~i~~ ~ = H 1 ti CV - ~ ~ ~„ ~ is r I - ) z e`.:x ~~ ~x . ~ ~ ~ ~' ,tom 1,~ ~ ~.,- y. s 3 r Packet Page Number 172 of 204 ~~ ~ ~)~ ~ ~ 11 ~~ ~~ jj~~ ~~~ ~ } ~ ~ ~ iE n 11 ii ~ ~ ~ r {I ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~iu:l3aii~~ iry ~I~E ~ t1'1 ~` ! ~~ ~1a ~'~~ ` i i~~. i ~~~~ ~;~~ ~ i~~# l~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~, Pr~4 ~F~E ~ ~~l~ 91~ ~ ' r ~'~ ~~~ :t'~~ :~ ~ r ~~~~ i~~~ ~iif',ii '~ ~tili E~E ~E ~ ~ ~~I ~a¢ ~'~~a i~ ~~ ~ ~iE: ~ f~i~l ~~~~, ~Y ~3~i ~!~ ~. i ~~ ~~i ~i~~ ~~~~r ~~ ,~ ~ ~sE~iE ~" A[~ ^n 999 ., . A i ~ . `. i i e i i i. ~, ~~ . ,.f.~n~~''''~` ~I~~l Y 1 ?F~f~ ~ ~ ~~~;~ 4 Attachment 3 E ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ a'1E~~ ~ 4 r ~~ :E i~ I ~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~I~ °E~'~~EE af~°~ ~ 3 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ { ~~~~~i~ "~~ ~~f ~r~ 1'•~kE E~iili ~ I o ~f ' y~ f ~. f[5/ p~~ ~J y ~~~ ~~~ ! s~3~ ~~dr ~f~i ~~ ~~~~~~1! iil~ ~~31 ~~~ ~~il!~ ~~li~~ ~" Packet Page Number 173 of 204 Agenda Item M3 MEMORANDUM TO: Chuck Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: Michael Martin, AICP, Planner SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit Review -Salvation Army Church LOCATION: 2080 Woodlynn Avenue DATE: October 2, 2008 INTRODUCTION The conditional use permit (CUP) for the expansion of the Salvation Army's adult day care center to also include a child day care center is due for review. The adult day care center caters to older adults with various health problems and is licensed for up to 38 persons. The child day care center caters to elementary and school-aged children and is licensed for up to 55 persons. BACKGROUND December 22, 1986: The city council changed the land use plan from R-1 (single dwelling residential) to C (church) and approved a CUP for a church and an adult day care facility. December 28, 1987 to January 28, 1991: The city council renewed the Salvation Army's CUP for one-year intervals. January 27, 1992: The city council renewed the Salvation Army's CUP for five years. October 8, 2001: The city council approved a CUP for the expansion of the Salvation Army's adult day care center (see the maps on pages 3 through 6). October 14, 2002: The city council reviewed the CUP and moved to review it again in one year. October 13, 2003: The city council moved to review the CUP only if the applicant proposes a change or if any problem arises. October 22, 2007: The city council approved a CUP revision for this site to allow for the addition of a child day care operation as part of its facility. June 9, 2008: The city council approved a CUP revision for this site to allow for the expansion of the Salvation Army's facility. DISCUSSION On June 9, 2008, the city council approved a revision to the Salvation Army's CUP to allow for an expansion of its facility. The expansion is adding space for administrative (office) functions and for storage space. The expansion construction is well underway and is in compliance with plans and conditions of approval. The June 9, 2008, approved CUP revision did not make any changes to the adult and child day care operations that this report is reviewing. The child day care operation is in compliance with the conditions of approval. Packet Page Number 174 of 204 The city council should review the two CUP revisions, granted on October 7, 2007 and June 9, 2008, at this time, to consolidate both issues. The council should review the CUP again in one year to check on the progress. RECOMMENDATION Review the conditional use permit for the Salvation Army in one year. p:sec2n\Salvation Army CUP_Review 100208 Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Zoning Map 3. Site Plan 4. October 22, 2007 CUP Conditions 5. June 9, 2008 CUP Conditions Salvation Army 2 October 2, 2008 Packet Page Number 175 of 204 Attachment 1 ~_ .~.,..w ~k.~, , ~~._ --- - .,y .~-~-~W-t- --- ~~- ~ `~" ~..'~_ _ ~f``'~ ~i €, ~~ ~11 ~ ~~ (~'` ~ , . ~ ~i . 1 1~1`li #I ~ ~ t I~ t 1~~ L®V~ A ~~Ir. ~~1' 3 ~~ ~~ ~} l ,. `? E ~, l ~ i ~A~~t i`% ~a ~- _. ~ ,~ ,, 7 j f ~ ~ ~ ~- - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ a a .. N ~ ~ f~l ,- , 5 25~ $ ~ j I-~t LL_.1l r h ~ :. ~' ~'~" ~' 3 ~ ~ .- M~~afc.vr©c,~cJ r ~_ t Packet Page Number 4 177 of 204 Attachment 3 4 Attachment 4 MINUTES MAPLEWOO^ CITY COUNCIL 7:00 p.m., Monday, October 22, 2007 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting Na. 19 J. NEW BUSINESS 1. Conditional Use Permit Revision -Salvation Army - 2080 Woodiynn Avenue. a. Senior Planner, Tom Ekstrand gave the presentation and answered questions of the council. b. Maur Don Tekautz, Salvation Army, 2080 Woadlynn Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the council and answered questions of the council. Mayor Longrie asked if anyone wanted to speak regarding this item. Robert Martin, Planning Commissioner, gave the planning commission report and recommendation. Councilmember Hjelle moved to a rove the Resolution A rovin a Revision #o the Conditional Use Permit for the Salvation Arm Church located at 2080 Woodl nn Avenue to ex and their Adult Da Care Facilit to include Child Da Care. A royal of this CUP revision is based on the findings required by the ordinance and subject to the fallowing conditions. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION RESOLUTION 0710-'185 WHEREAS, The Salvation Army applied for a revision to their conditional use permit to expand their adult day care facility to include child day .care. WHEREAS, this permit applies to 2080 Woodlynn Avenue. The.legai description is: NW'/ of the NE ~/ of the W 165 feet of the S 368 feet of Section 2, Township 29, Range 22, and also that part of NW ~/4 of the NE'/4 of the W 527.26 feet of the E 263.63 feet of the S 320 feet lying south of Woodiynn and E of Ariel alt in Section 2, Township 23, Range 22. (Property Identification Number: 02-29-22-12-0043) WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On October 2, 2007, the planning commission held a public hearing to review this request. City staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners as required by law. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff. 2. The city council reviewed this proposal and considered the planning commission's recommendation on October 22, 2007. The council also considered reports and recommendations ofi the city staff and those in attendance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE lT RESOLVED that the city council passed the above described conditional use permit revision #o allow the addition of child day care at the Salvation Army Church because: Packet Page Number 179 of 204 1. The use would be [orated, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. ' - 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding ~ area. - - 3. The use would not depreciate property values. 4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause - a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general . unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. - 5, The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 6. ~ The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Approval is subject to compliance with the following conditions (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): 1. A!1 construction shall follow the site plan~approved by the city. Ci staff ~e 2, The ro osed addition of child da care shall be started within one ear as re aired b ordinance. . The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit revision in one year- The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on October 22, 2007. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann. Ayes -All Packet Page Number 180 of 204 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 6:30 p.m., Monday, June 9, 2008 Council Chambers, City Hall Meeting No. 16-08 L. NEW BUSINESS At:~achment 5 Salvation Army Church Expansion (2080 Wood[ynn Avenue), a. Conditional Use Permit Revision b. Design Approval c. Planner, Ken Roberts gave the report and answered questions of the council. d. Planning Commissioner, Joseph Bessler gave the Planning Commission report. e. Project Architect, Ken Nordby, NAI Architects, 1959 Sloan Place, St. Paul, representing Salvation Army, addressed and answered questions of the council. Councilmember Hjelle moved to a rove the Conditional Use Permit Revision for the Salvation Army Facility Expansion at 2080 Woodlynn Avenue. RESOLUTION 08-D6-090 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION WHEREAS, The Salvation Army applied for a revision to their conditional use permit to expand their existing facility to add office and administrative space. WHEREAS, this permit applies to 2080 Woodlynn Avenue. The legal description is: NW'/ of the NE'/4 of the W 165 feet of the S 368 feet of Section 2, Township 29, Range 22, and also that part of NW'/ of the NE'/ of the W 527.26 feet of the E 263.63 feet of the S 320 feet lying south of Woodlynn and E of Ariel all in Section 2, Township 23, Range 22. {Property Identification Number: 02-29-22-12-0043} WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows: 1. On May 20, 2008, the planning commission held a public hearing to review this request. The city staff published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave persons at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The planning commission also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve the conditional use permit revision. 2. The city council reviewed this proposal and considered the planning commission's recommendation on June 9, 2008. The council also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and those in attendance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approved the above- described conditional use permit revision for the Salvation Army Church at 2080 Woodlynn Avenue because: Packet Page Number 181 of 204 1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City's Comprehensive flan and Code of Ordinances. 2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3. The use would not depreciate property values. ~. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets. 6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic features into the development design. 9. The use would cause minimal adverse environments[ effects. Approval is subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1. All construction steal[ follow the site plan dated April 21, 2008, as approved by the city. City s#aff may approve minor changes. 2. The owner or contractor shall start the proposed build'mg additions within one year as required by ordinance. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit revision in one year. The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on June 9, 2008. Seconded by Councilmember Nephew. Ayes -All The motion passed. . Councilmember Juenemann moved to approve the Design Approval #or the pro[ect plans dated A,pril.,2,1_ 2008, for the remodeling and expansion of the Sa[~ation Army Lakewood Chapel at 2080 Woodl nn Avenue. The cit bases this a naval on the findin s re uired b the code. This gppr~val is subject to fihe applicant ar contractor doing the followin 1. Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. Packet Page Number 182 of 204 2. Complete the following before the city issues a grading or building permit: a. Have the city engineer approve final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include: grading, utility, drainage, erosion control, retaining wall, tree, sidewalk, driveway and parking lot plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions: (~) The erosion control plan shall be consistent with city code. {2) The grading plan shall; (a) Include building, floor elevation, water elevation and contour information. (b) Include contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb. (c) Show sedimentation basins or ponds as may be required by the watershed board or by the city engineer. The ponds or basins shall meet the city's design standards and shall include best management practices and rainwater gardens wherever practical. {d) Show al[ proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 on the proposed construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. This shall include covering these slopes with woad-fiber blankets and seeding them with a "no mow" native vegetation rather than using sod or grass. {e} Show all retaining walls an the plans. Any retaining walls more than four feet tall require a building permit from the city and a fence on the top to help prevent falls. The design and materials for the retaining walls are subject to staff approval. {f) Show all public and private sidewalks. (3) The tree plan shall: (a) Be approved by the city engineer or city environments[ planner before si#e grading or tree removal. (b) Show where the developer will remove, save or replace large trees. This plan shall include an inventory of all existing large trees on the si#e. {c) Show the size, species and location of the replacement trees. The spruce and pine trees shall be at least eight feet tall and shall be Austrian Pines or Black Hills spruce. (d) Show no tree removal beyond the approved grading and tree limits. (4} Make all the changes and meet all the conditions as required by the city engineer and as noted by Steve Kummer in the memo dated May 8, 2008. b. Submit a certificate of survey far all new construction. c. Submit a revised landscape plan to staff for approval that incorporates ar shows the following details: {1) The loco#ion of all large trees on the site. {2} That all new trees would be consistent with city standards for size, location and species. {3) The plantings proposed around the building shown on the landscape plan date-stamped Packet Page Number 183 of 204 April 21, 20Q8, shall remain on the plan. {4) No landscaping being put in the Woodlynn Avenue boulevard. The contractor shall restore the boulevard with sod. d. If necessary, get the approvals and permits from the watershed district. e. Provide city staff with design details {height, depth and materials) about the proposed retaining walls, including any fencing for those that are more than four feet tall. f. Submit to the city a letter of credit or cash escrow for all required exterior improvements. The amount of the escrow shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. 3. Complete the following before occupying the building additions: a. Replace property irons that are removed because of this construction. b. Restore and sod damaged boulevards. Sod ail landscaped areas, except for the ponding areas, which may be seeded. c. Install ahandicap-parking sign for each handicap-parking space and an address on the building. In addition, the applicant shall install "no parking" signs along alf the driveways and drive aisles within the site and elsewhere, as may be required by staff. d. Paint any visible roof-top mechanical equipment to match the uppermost part of the building. {code requirement) e. Install on-site lighting for security and visibility that follows the approved site lighting plan. All exterior lighting shall follow the approved lighting plan that shows the light spread and fixture design. All light fixtures must have concealed lenses and bulbs to properly shield glare from the adjacent street right-of-ways and from adjacent properties. f. The developer or contractor shall: (1} Complete all grading for the site drainage and meet all city requirements. {2} Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. 4. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a. The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health, safety or welfare. b. The above-required fetter of credit or cash escrow is held by the city for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished landscaping by June 1 if the contractor finishes the new parking lot in the fall or winter or if the building additions are occupied in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of occupancy if the building additions are occupied in the spring or summer. c. The city receives an agreement that will allow the city to complete any unfinished work. 5. All work shall follow the approved plans. City staff may approve minor changes to the project plans. 6. This approval does not include signage. All proposed signs must be approved the community design review board and the applicant shall get sign permits from the city before the installation of any signs. Packet Page Number 184 of 204 - - ~ Seconded by Councilmember Hjelle. The motion passed. Ayes --All Packet Page Number 185 of 204 AGENDA NO. M4 AGENDA REPORT To: City Manager From: Finance Director Date: October 14, 2008 Re: Approval of rates for police and fire services provided to the City of Landfall for 2009. BACKGROUND Contracts were executed in 2005 between the cities of Maplewood and Landfall for the provision of police and fire services by Maplewood for Landfall. Rates were established at that time for the year, 2006, with provision for increases based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) or such other index as was deemed appropriate by the Maplewood Finance Department. Since that time, the CPI has been used. Based on the CPI Inflator, the following increases are required: 2008 Annual Rate 2009 Recommended Annual Rate Police Fire $115, 404.00 $10, 969.00 119, 480.00 11, 411.00 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the above rates for 2009. P:\COUNCIL FILESWGENDAS\Landfall Rates 2009.doc Packet Page Number 186 of 204 Agenda Item M5 AGENDA REPORT TO: Charles Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: Michael Thompson, Assistant City Engineer Steve Love, Civil Engineer II SUBJECT: Priory Public Improvements (St. Paul's Monastery), Project 07-24, Resolution for Modification of the Existing Construction Contract, Change Order No.1 DATE: October 17, 2008 INTRODUCTION The council will consider approving the attached resolution directing the modification of the existing construction contract. This change order reflects an increase in the construction contract due to the additions listed below. The council will also consider authorizing a reduction in the construction contract retainage since the majority of the project is now complete. BACKGROUND/ DISCUSSION On April 14, 2008, the council awarded a construction contract to Nodland Construction in the amount of $689,702.54. The construction contract included construction of Monastery Way, Benet Road, turn lanes off of Century Avenue and Larpenteur Avenue, and bituminous trail along Larpenteur Avenue. Change Order No. 1 is necessary for the following items: • Connect to existing storm MH 102 and 140 at a cost of $2,250.00 • Change MH 106 casting to curb inlet catch basin casting at a cost of $250.00 • Furnish and install advanced warning signs for Larpenteur Avenue closure at a cost of $1,440.00 • Furnish and install 3" minus rock in subgrade excavation at a cost of $3,784.20 • Furnish and install 4" water service stub to St. Paul's Monastery at a cost of $3,954.05 • Install 4" conduit crossings at a cost of $1,600.00 • Furnish, install, and maintain rock construction entrance at a cost of $1,500.00 • Furnish and install 60 LF of 8" DIP at sanitary manhole outside drop locations at a cost of $3,000.00 The project is completed with the exception of the final bituminous lift to be placed in the spring of 2009. BUDGET Change Order No. 1 will increase the current construction contract by $17,778.25 from $689,702.54 to $707,480.79. This increase to the project will be funded by the developer assessment and is included in the final assessment which is being considered for adoption on October 27, 2008. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the council approve the attached Resolution for the Modification of Existing Construction Contract, Change Order No.1, for City Project 07-24, in addition to authorizing reduction in the construction contract retainage. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Change Order No.1 3. Location Map Packet Page Number 187 of 204 Agenda Item M5 Attachment 1 RESOLUTION DIRECTING MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT PROJECT 07-24, CHANGE ORDER N0.1 WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered made Improvement Project 07-24, Priory Public Improvements (St. Paul's Monastery), and has let a construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and WHEREAS, it is now necessary and expedient that said contract be modified and designated as Improvement Project 07-24, Change Order No.1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that: The mayor and city engineer are hereby authorized and directed to modify the existing contract by executing said Change Order No.1 in the amount of $17,778.25. The revised contract amount is $707,480.79. 2. The retainage within the construction contract is hereby authorized to be reduced, at the discretion of the City Engineer, from 5% to 1 %. Packet Page Number 188 of 204 SEH CHANGE ORDER Agenda Item M5 Attachment 2 City of Maplewood, MN September 18, 2008 OWNER DATE 07-24 pWNER'S PROJECTNO. St. Paul's Monastery Public Improvements PROJECT DESCR1PTiON The following changes sha11 be made to the contract documents: Description: CHANGE ORDER NO. AMAPLE080600 SEH FILE NO. 1. Contractor to connect to existing storm MH 102 (2 times) and connect to existing MH 140 at a cost of $2,250.00. 2. Conctaactor to change MH 106 casting to curb inlet catch basin casting at a cost of $250.00. 3. Contractor to furnish and install advanced warning signs for Larpenteur Ave closure at a cost of $1,4~o.oa. 4. Contractor to furnish and install 3" minus rock in subgrade excavation at a cost of $3,784.2{}. 5. Contractor to furnish and install 4" water service stub to St. Paul's Monastery at a cost of $3,954.45. 6. Contractor to install 4 conduit crossings at a cost of $1,500.00 7. Contractor to ftarnish, install, and maintain rock entrance at a cost of $1,500.00 8. Contractor to furnish and install 60 LF 8" DIP at sanitary manhole outside drop locations at a cast of $3,000.00 Purpose of Change Order: Amend scope fa contract to include extra work as requested by City. basis of Cost.• ®Actual ^ Estimated Attachments (list supporting documents) 6 pages -change order claims from Nodland Construction Company Contract Status Mme Cost Original Contract $589,702.54 Net Change Prior C.O.'s to Change this C.O. N/A $17,778.25 Revised Contract $707,480.79 Recommended forApprovai.• Short Elliott Hendrickson inc: By °' ° , Steve Nef ,Project Manager Distribution Contractor 2 Owner ? Project Representative t SEN Once 1 s:~kolmlmagte\OSD60017-calafp\c6engc order I.doc 1104 Short Epiott Hendrickson Inc., 3535 Vadnais Center Dr+ve, St. Paul, MN 55110-519fi St=H is an equal opportunity employer ( wwwsehinc.com ~ 651.490.2000 ~ 800.325.2055 ~ 651.490.2150 fax Packet Page Number 189 of 204 Agenda Item M5 ' +' Attachment 2 CIC]tVTRUCT~C~~ ~C3M~A~'1f',~ ~~C. Re: St. Papi's Monastery Maplewood, Minr:esofa Cut Holes for Connections into Ex. MH's 782 (2Holesj and MH 948 & Cas9anq Cl~anae ~~~I~~~~ ~o~r~.~o,~raoRs SEIN~E~??S -WATER tt9AlttIS -DRAINAGE - FJECAV~E77DN 322 East Fairgrounds Road, P.O. Box 338 Telephone 320-763-5159 Aiexandria, Minnesota 563013 FAX No. 320-7fi3-5997 Packet Page Number 190 of 204 Re: St. Paul's Monastery Maplewood, Minnesota Aclditiona! Advanced iNatning-Signs SFtNERS - W/-1TER MA/r1lS - DRAI~-iAG,E - E3EGAVAT!©N 322 Easy Fairgrounds Road, P.O. Bax 338 Telephone 320-X63-5't 59 Alexandria, 11/Iinnesota 56308 FAX No. 320-763-5197 Packet Page Number 191 of 204 Invoice No. szosz 1NVQICE Customer ------ Name City of M____a~lewoad _ Date 8I19t08 Address --------- --_ ....... --- t7rder No. _ _~.._._. City __ State ZIP Phone __ __..__._. __. ____._._.,_..._ ReP FOB _~.. _._ ? QtY_ I .Units { Description t?nit Price i~-TOTAL ! .~" David Wegner ... , _ Authorized Sigr?ature So.oo "O'iAL~~. ~; $3,784.20 ~~~~1r~t~~. Ccp~r~e~~rt~:~~ SEl/VERS -WATER MAINS - DRAINACF - EXCAVATION 322 Eat Fairgrounds Road, P.O. Box 33$ Tolephan.e 320-763-5159 ,4lexartdria, Minnoso~a 563018: ~ FA}C Na. 320-763-5'197 Packet Page Number 192 of 204 Agenda Item M5. ` ~ Attachment 2 -GG7t'1F~T~#UCTLC~~ ~~D11/~pANY, ~i\CC. Invoice No. s2u5-a INV{)tGE Customer .----- ---- Name CitynfMaplewood Date 8/79708 A{ttlre5s___- OrderNo_ -_ -.---___._.._-- ~Y State 7JP .__.._......_....... _...._......_._____._~ ~ _._~~ ._... ._._..._ ---•-- P - __..........._.._. Phone Mpg _._---__~_.._w__~_._....._ _.~_.__..._...__.......___~__ _-_., • Units ; Description ~ .Unit Price T~TAI._ .._-_~~..--T-------_._._..~._..___ ~~ _ ____- ~ _ _~~ 8" x d` Tee 8" Sleeve 4" Gate Valve ~ Box 4" Sleeve 4" DiP CI.52 Crew Time Markup & Ove[head -.>:," ,:. :: 5795.00 : ;:': : 595.00 ~' .;'..` $496.00 _.;.:.. i $25.00 .... 576.75 $650:t3D - ! $575.75 SubTotal ~_..: David Wegner .. At1tF1nllZed StgnatUfe _,., ...:. ~ ~ $4.{30 ... ... .:_ . ..-TIQTAI.~ ~ $3,954.05 .... SEWERS - WATER tti/!AllVS - DRAIiVAGE - EXCAVATfDN 322 East Fairgrpunds Road, P_0. Box 338 Tetephone 32Q-7B3-5159 Alexandria, IVlinnesota 56308 FAX No. 32Q-?63-5197 Packet Page Number 193 of 204 Agenda Item M5 Attachment 2 Steve Heth/seh 'fa Tony KutzkeJseh@SEH 09!15/2008 03:25 PM cc bcc Subject Fw: Extras - Forwarded by Steve Heth/seh on 09/15/2008 03:25 PM ---- "Dave Wegner" ` <dwegner@rea-alp.com> fio "Steve Heth" cshethC7u sehinc.com> 09/95/2008 02:48 PM cc Please respond to "Dave Wegner" Subject Extras <dwegner@rea-alp.com> Steve, I talked with Tony and he requested two extras far the conduit crossings installed and the rock construction entrance. He wanted the prices to include on the change order. Here are the costs: Conduit Crossings 4 EA @-$400 = $1,600:.00 Rock Entrance w/Maim. 1 LS @ $1,500 = $1,500.00 Please include these cost on the pay request. If you have any questions let me know. Thank you. I am also going through the quantities and will have those put together later today. David Wegner Nodland Construction Packet Page Number 194 of 204 Agenda Item M5 Attachment. 2 Steve Neth/seh To Tony Kutzke/seh@SEH 09/15/2008 03:25 PM cc bcc Subject Fw: 8" DIP out of Orops -- Forwarded by Steve Heth/seh on 09/15!2008 03:25 PM ---- "Dave Wegner" <dwegnerLa7rea-aip.com> To "Steve Neth" <sheth@sehinc.com> 09/15/2008 03:20 PM ~ Please respond to Sub ect p "Dave Wegner" 1 8' O1P out of Oro s <dweg ner@rea-alp.com~ Steve, The original plans called for all 8" PVCtan the sanitary sewer. However, out of the drops it was required to insf'ali 8"DIP CI.52 20 LF out and then it trar-sitioned. Tate cost far the DIP is as follows: 8" DIP CI. 52 60 LF @ $50.00 per LF = $3,000.00 .Please include these costs as well on the next change order. David Wegner Nadland Construction Packet Page Number 195 of 204 ~ ~ z I I~~ I Z O H U O J H U W ~ ~ Agenda Item M5 Attachment 3 3~b .l?J(11N30 0 3~b' J.a(11N30 w m l,b'M ,1~131Sb'NOW a o ~ J Q C C O ~ Q O ~ N O p c U f~ ~~ ryry LL ° ~ ~U ~°~ ~ z ~ U o _1= a~ ~ •~ J ~ _ w _ _ _ p ~ J ~ ~ a ~ U _ h' z w ~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ 1S ONI~?J31S 1S ONI~L731S __ a0 OOOM3~I~f1 a0 OOOM3Nt~1 i 1S 3~1N,1W z 1S 3~1bJ.W ~ J a w ~ cU = a z J -O ~ L ~~ ~ ~ ~ r¢- Z o ~ z ~ o =a ~ a U ~ ~ a Qb 1HOINH~W 0~ 1HOINN~W Packet Page Number 196 of 204 Agenda Item M6 AGENDA REPORT TO: Chuck Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: DuWayne Konewko, Deputy Director of Public Works Bryan Nagel, Street Superintendent SUBJECT: Approve Purchase of GeoMelt 55 DATE: October 16, 2008 INTRODUCTION Last winter GeoMelt 55 was used on a trial basis in the snow and ice program with favorable results. GeoMelt 55 is a liquid agricultural by product produced from the extraction of sugar beets. When added to a dry chloride material such as road salt it improves the de-icing effectiveness of the salt. Benefits of pre-treating the road salt before stockpiling include the following: Environmentally friendly, reduces the environmental impact of salt Lowers the working temperature of the salt/sand mixture 30-40 degrees Prevents hardening of the stockpile Reduces corrosion of the equipment Reduces bounce or scatter loss when it hits the road surface from the spinner on the trucks Approximately 3,000 gallons of Geo Melt 55 are required to pre-treat the salt pile. GeoMelt 55 is currently selling for $2.45 a gallon. The total cost for treating the salt pile would be under $8,000. BUDGET IMPACT Funds are available in maintenance materials of the snow and ice program for the purchase of the GeoMelt 55. RECOMMENDATION Because of the favorable results from the use of GeoMelt 55 last year, staff is requesting that the City Council authorize the Street Superintendent to purchase up to 3,000 gallons of GeoMelt 55 in an amount not to exceed $8,000. Monies are available in the 2008 Snow and Ice Budget 101-514-4180 -line item maintenance materials to cover this expenditure. Packet Page Number 197 of 204 Agenda Item M7 AGENDA REPORT TO: Chuck Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: DuWayne Konewko, Deputy Director of Public Works Bryan Nagel, Street Superintendent SUBJECT: Consider Request for Additional Funds for 2008 Street Striping DATE: October 14, 2008 INTRODUCTION Each year the Ramsey County Public Works Department provides roadway pavement striping services to the various County municipalities. The cost of this service exceeds $10,000.00 and requires council approval to move ahead. BACKGROUND On March 24, 2008 the City Council approved the request for street striping in an amount not to exceed the $22,000.00 estimate. Ramsey County completed Maplewood's striping program in September. Due to the rising cost of fuel and materials the cost has increased from $.056 per foot to $.07 per foot thus exceeding the original estimate by $2,110.59. BUDGET IMPACT Funds are available in 101-502 (Street Maintenance) fees for service to cover this additional cost. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the additional payment of $2,110.59 from the Street Maintenance budget, 101 -502-4480 -fees for service, and authorize a payment to Ramsey County in the amount of $24,110.59. Monies are available in this budget line item to cover the increase in costs. Packet Page Number 198 of 204 Agenda Item N 1 AGENDA REPORT TO: Charles Ahl, Acting City Manager FROM: Michael Thompson, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: TH 61/ Frost Avenue Improvements, Project 07-30, Approve Resolution for Awarding Construction Contract DATE: October 21, 2008 INTRODUCTION Final plans and specifications for the improvements were approved by the council on July 28, 2008 and authorization was given to advertise for bids. Bids were opened on Friday, October 17, 2008 at city hall. The council should consider awarding a construction contract for the improvements and adjust the budget to reflect Ramsey County's increased contribution. BACKGROUND On June 11, 2007 the council authorized preparation of plans and specification for the improvements to the intersection of TH 61 and Frost Avenue. On March 24, 2008 the council then established financing and accepted Mn/DOT proposed funding in the amount of $245,000. On June 23, 2008 the council approved an agreement with Ramsey County and on August 11, 2008 entered into a cooperative agreement with Mn/DOT. The council authorized the ad for bids on July 28, 2008 and the original bid opening date was set for September 8, 2008 but the bid opening was delayed as a result of the review process conducted by Mn/DOT for the signal layout and plan approval. The city submitted to Mn/DOT on May 12, 2008 and received approval in mid-October. A majority of the work will likely be conducted in 2009 but some signal work may commence in 2008. BIDS The following five bids were received: Contractor Tower Asphalt, Inc. T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Hardrives, Inc. Park Construction Company Forest Lake Contracting, Inc. Base Bid Amount $ 507,146.55 $ 535,538.10 $ 545,432.14 $ 553,844.47 $ 597,596.00 The low bid by Tower Asphalt is approximately 12% under the engineer's estimate of $ 580,000.00. The city has worked successfully with Tower Asphalt in the past and also this year on the Hazelwood Street Improvements and Myrtle-Sterling Improvements. Packet Page Number 199 of 204 Agenda Item N 1 BUDGET IMPACT Source Original Revised MSA Bonds $406,120 $ 406,120 Ramsey County $ 58,875 $ 69,255 M n/DOT $245, 000 $ 245, 000 TOTAL $709,995 $ 720,375 Ramsey County's share increased slightly over the amount originally approved by the council and the budget should be adjusted to reflect that change. The increased share by the county was outlined in the joint-powers agreement approved by council. No other changes are needed at this time. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the city council approve the attached Resolution for the Award of Bid for TH 61/Frost Avenue Improvements, City Project 07-30, and authorize the finance director to adjust the budget to reflect the increased share by Ramsey County. Attachments: 1. Resolution: Award of Bid 2. Bid Letter: KHA 3. Location Map Packet Page Number 200 of 204 Agenda Item N 1 Attachment 1 RESOLUTION AWARD OF BID BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA, that the bid of Tower Asphalt Inc. in the amount of $507,146.55 is the lowest responsible bid for the construction of TH61/Frost Avenue Improvements-City Project 07-30, and the mayor and clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with said bidder for and on behalf of the city. The finance director is hereby authorized to make the financial transfers necessary to implement the financing plan for the project as provided in the table below: MSA Bonds $ 406,120 Ramsey County $ 69,255 M n/DOT $ 245, 000 TOTAL $ 720,375 Adopted by the council on this 27th day of October 2008. Packet Page Number 201 of 204 Agenda Item N 1 Attachment 2 October 20, 2008 Mr. Michael Thompson, P.E. Assistant City Engineer City of Maplewood 1902 East County Road B Maplewood, MN 55109 Re: Summary of Bids TH 61 and Frost Avenue Intersection Improvements City Project 07-30 S.P. 6222-154 Dear Mr. Thompson: On Friday, October 17, 2008 at 10:00 AM, bids were received and opened for the above-referenced project. Bids were received from five (5) contractors. The five (5) bids were as follows: Contractor Tower Asphalt, Inc. T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. Hardrives, Inc. Park Construction Company Forest Lake Contracting, Inc. Base Bid Amount $ 507,146.55 $ 535,538.10 $ 545,432.14 $ 553,844.47 $ 597,596.00 Engineer's Estimate $ 580,000.00 All bids were submitted with proper guarantees in the amount of five percent (5%) of the total bid as required by the Proj ect Manual. All bids acknowledged the four (4) addenda that were prepared for the project. A bid tabulation has been completed and all bids were found to be correct with the exception of the Tower Asphalt, Inc. bid. The errors in the Tower Asphalt, Inc. bid were small and did not affect the bid order. Tower Asphalt, Inc. is the low bidder with a total bid amount of $507,146.55. The low bid is approximately $73,000 or 12% less than Packet Page Number 202 of 204 Agenda Item N 1 Mr. Michael Thompson, P.E. Attachment 2 October 20, 2008 Page 2 of 2 the Engineer's Estimate of $ 580,000. A copy of the bid tabulation for the prof ect is enclosed for your information. Since this project is partially funded with 1VINDOT Cooperative agreement funds,lVINDOT concurrence with the bid award is required. The bid information has been submitted to 1VINDOT for their review and concurrence. We have worked with Tower Asphalt, Inc. on previous projects, including past work in the City of Maplewood, and believe they are qualified and capable of completing this project. Please call me if you have any questions or you need any additional information. Sincerely, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Andy T. Berg, E.LT. Project Engineer Enclosure: Bid Tabulation Copy: Jon Horn/Kimley-Horn File Packet Page Number 203 of 204 :~ f. :~: - ~~ ~. Y..T,+''~bty~ ~' a4 ~ -_ s ,,~ ~,V.~ W ... , . t ~- .. ~~~ ~ a ~A _ ~~ ~ .f~ w m.~. ~T .. ~. . U: Y.:. ~'y -.CSR r iq :. ~~ ~ ``~ p~Fi~ s?!L ~ } r~` ~ 4 ti; ~ ~1 'e~h ~. _ ~K. ~ ~ ' :.:. ~•s - .'".~R~..'..°. ~~ -'x, ,.sac .. -. - ~ _ .. .T. .,- ~.-.. .o,,, ~ _ _ _ [[ • 7~ ~ i~ . ~. r...-.~ ~d '3 .-ir':s'-x =via-n - ~~ +'3. P E'iV f 4 i~ 11 St ~~ ~ aq~~~ ~~ s ~f ~ 1 '~%[~r r yea :~.«.r ~ . ' ~~ .! ~~ ~ 1 i )~ ~~ ~ r~ ~~ ~9 ~~ a~ ~.} ~!~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,r - -- r' ~ .. ... ae ~ . I ~,~p ,i - .. -~ ~~ ,..>.. ~~ ter.,.,-,.~...~..~.....r..~,F'ii i~ 1(wE(.~r~R''++ ~b ;~ .~ .. •~~q _ R -yl.. _ _ ''SM Packet Page Number 204 of 204