HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010 09-27 City Council Packet
AGENDA
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 P.M. Monday,September 27,2010
City Hall, Council Chambers
Meeting No. 20-10
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. Before addressing
the council, sign in with the City Clerk. At the podium pleasestate your name and
address clearly for the record. All comments/questions shall be posed to the Mayor and
Council. The Mayor will thendirect staff, as appropriate, to answer questions or respond
to comments.”
D.APPROVAL OF AGENDA
E.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1.Approval of September 7, 2010, City Council Workshop Minutes
2.Approval of September 13, 2010, City Council Meeting Minutes
F.APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS
1.Resolution of Appreciation for Steven Gunn, Police Civil Service Commission
CONSENT AGENDA –
G.Items on the Consent Agenda are considered routine and non-
controversial and are approved by one motion of the council. If a councilmember requests
additional information or wants to make a comment regarding an item, the vote should be held
until the questions or comments are made then the single vote should be taken. If a
councilmember objects to an item it should be removed and acted upon as a separate item.
1.Approval of Claims
2.Approval of 2010 Budget Adjustments
3.Approval of Resolution Certifying Election Judges for the November 2, 2010, State
General Election
4.Approval of Temporary Gambling Permit – Church of the Presentation of the Blessed
Virgin Mary - Maplewood
5.Approval to Extend Joint Powers Agreement and Appoint Signing Authority Child
Sexual Predator Program
6.Approval of Resolution Accepting Donation to the Police Department From Residential
Mortgage Group
7. Approval of Resolution Accepting Donation to Volunteers in Police Service From
Qwest
8.Approval of Community Center Catering Provider Request for Proposal
9.Approval of Community Center Liquor Provider Request for Proposal
10.Approval of Historical Preservation Society Fee Waiver for Use of the Community
Center for Annual Event
11.Upper Afton Road Improvements, Project 07-27, Resolution Approving Final Financing
and Closure of Project Fund 589
12.White Bear Avenue/County Road D Improvements, City Project 08-13, Approval of
Cost-Share Agreement Amendment with Ramsey County
13.Approval of Sidewalk Improvement (County Road C East of White Bear Avenue),
Project 10-08
a.Report on Cost of Work Done by Day Labor
b.Resolution Accepting Work and Authorizing Budget Transfer
14.Approval of Community Center Trail Improvement (County Road B to Community
Center), Resolution Ordering Transfer of Funds for Purchase of Materials
15.Approval of Conditional Use Permit Review – Midwest Grounds Maintenance
Company, 1949 Atlantic Street
16.Approvalof Resolution Accepting Donation for Memorial Tree at Joy Park
17.Approval of Resolution Accepting Donation for Maplewood Nature Center
H.PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.White Bear Avenue/County Road D Improvements, Project 08-13
a.New Assessment Hearing 7:00 p.m.
b.Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll
I.UNFINISHED BUSINESS
J.NEW BUSINESS
1.Metro Transit Park and Ride Parking Ramp – Planned Unit Development, 1793 Beam
Avenue
2.Review of Recycling Proposals and Direct Staff to Begin Negotiations
3.Resolution of Support for the Submittal ofan Environmental Protection Agency
Brownfields Cleanup Grant for the Gladstone Savanna Restoration Project
4.Walser Automotive Used Car Sales – Conditional Use Permit, 2590 Maplewood Drive
5.Rezoning Within the Gladstone Neighborhood, Properties Near the Intersection of
Frost Avenue and English Street
6.Consider Approval to Purchase Approximately 2 Acres of Land From Gethsemane
Church for Proposed Park
K.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
L.AWARD OF BIDS
M.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
N.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
O.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
5:15 p.m., Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Council Chambers, City Hall
A.CALL TO ORDER
A meeting of the City Council was held in the City Hall Council Chambers and was called to order
at 5:17 p.m.by Mayor Rossbach.
B. ROLL CALL
Will Rossbach, Mayor Present
Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present
James Llanas, Councilmember Present
John Nephew, Councilmember Present
Julie Wasiluk, Councilmember Present
C.APPROVAL OF AGENDA
CouncilmemberNephew added D2. Citizen Forum update.
Councilmember Nephewmoved to approve the agenda as amended.
Seconded by CouncilmemberKoppen. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
D.UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1.DRAFT 2011 Budget Document Review
a.Assistant City Manager, Public Works Director, Chuck Ahlgave the presentation and
answered questions of the council.
b.Finance Manager, Gayle Bauman addressed and answered questions of the council.
c. Maplewood Police Chief, Dave Thomalla answered questions of the council.
d.Maplewood Fire Chief, Steve Lukin answered questions of the council.
e.City Clerk, Citizen Services Director, Karen Guilfoile answered questions of the council.
2.An informational Announcement on the Citizens Forum – Councilmember Nephew
Councilmember Nephew stated thatthe Citizens Forum will be held this Saturday, September
11, 2010, at 10:30 a.m. at the Ramsey County Libraryrather than at city hall.The speaker will
be Labor Relations Attorney, Chuck Bethel.
E.NEW BUSINESS
None.
September 7, 2010 1
City Council Manager Workshop Minutes
Packet Page Number 3 of 192
F. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Rossbachgave an updateregardingCity Manager, James Antonen. The city council
wished Mr. Antonen a quick recovery and stated if the public wanted to send any well wishes to
Mr. Antonen the staff would make sure to get them to him.
Mayor Rossbach adjourned the meeting at 6:14 p.m.
September 7, 2010 2
City Council Manager Workshop Minutes
Packet Page Number 4 of 192
Agenda Item E2
MINUTES
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:00 p.m., Monday,September 13, 2010
Council Chambers, City Hall
Meeting No.19-10
A.CALL TO ORDER
A meeting of the City Council was held in the City Hall Council Chambers and was called to order
at 7:02 p.m.by Mayor Rossbach.
B.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
C. ROLL CALL
Will Rossbach, Mayor Present
Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember Present
James Llanas, Councilmember Present
John Nephew, Councilmember Present
Julie Wasiluk, Councilmember Present
D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The following items were added or changed on the agenda by councilmembersand staff:
N1.Citizens Forum – Councilmember Nephew
N2.Emergency Preparedness Fair – Councilmember Nephew
N3.Plastic Water Bottles – Councilmember Juenemann
N4. Human Relations Commission Applications – Councilmember Llanas
Table J2. Recycling Proposals – Assistant City Manager, Public Works Director, ChuckAhlnoted
that staff will be requesting that this item be tabled.
CouncilmemberLlanasmoved to approve the agenda as amended.
Seconded by CouncilmemberJuenemann. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1.Approval of August 23, 2010, City Council Workshop Minutes
CouncilmemberJuenemannmoved to approve the August 23, 2010, City Council Workshop
Minutes as submitted.
Seconded by CouncilmemberKoppen. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
September 13, 2010 1
City Council MeetingMinutes
Packet Page Number 5 of 192
2.Approval of August 23, 2010, City Council Meeting Minutes
Councilmember Nephewmoved to approve the August 23, 2010, City Council Meeting Minutes
as submitted.
Seconded by CouncilmemberKoppen. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
F. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS
1.Swearing In of Police Officers Amy Nash and James (Ryan) Parker
a.Maplewood Police Chief, Dave Thomalla, introduced James (Ryan) Parker and Amy Nash
b.City Clerk, Director of Citizen Services, Karen Guilfoile administered the police oath to
James (Ryan) Parkerand then to Amy Nash.
2.Recognition of Julie Wasiluk’s Service as Councilmember
Mayor Rossbach presented Julie Wasiluk with a gift for her service as councilmember.Ms.
Wasiluk thanked the council for thegift and for the opportunity to serve the citizens of
Maplewood as councilmember.
G. CONSENT AGENDA
Councilmember Juenemannmoved to approve consent agenda items 1-9.
Seconded by CouncilmemberNephew. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
1. Approval of Claims
CouncilmemberJuenemannmoved Approval of Claims.
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE:
$ 1,573,158.96Checks #82045thru #82128
Dated 08/23/10 thru 08/24/10
$ 133,712.79Disbursements via debits to checking account
Dated 08/13/10 thru 08/20/10
$ 453,685.28Checks #82129thru #82190
Dated 08/27/10 thru 08/31/10
$ 319,005.97Disbursements via debits to checking account
Dated 08/20/10 thru 08/27/10
$ 264,565.90Checks #82191 thru #82235
Dated 08/30/10 thru 09/07/10
$ 205,600.10Disbursements via debits to checking account
Dated 08/27/10 thru 09/03/10
September 13, 2010 2
City Council MeetingMinutes
Packet Page Number 6 of 192
________________
$ 2,949,729.00Total Accounts Payable
PAYROLL
$ 522,451.25Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 08/20/10
$ 2,290.25Payroll Deduction check #1009347thru #1009349
dated 08/20/10
$ 517,774.40Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 09/03/10
$ 2,290.25Payroll Deduction check #1009392thru #1009394
dated 09/03/10
__________________
$ 1,044,806.15Total Payroll
GRAND TOTAL
$ 3,994,535.15
Seconded by Councilmember Nephew. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
2.Approval of County Road D Street Improvements (McKnight to Lydia), City Project 08-20,
Resolution Approving Final Payment and Acceptance of Project
CouncilmemberJuenemann moved toapprove the resolution for the County Road D Street
Improvements (McKnight to Lydia), City Project 08-20, Approving Final Payment and Acceptance
of Project.
RESOLUTION 10-09-452
APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT
CITY PROJECT 08-20
WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered Improvement
Project 08-20,the County Road D Street Improvements (McKnight to Lydia),and haslet a
construction contract pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer for the City of Maplewood has determined that the County Road D
Street Improvements, City Project 08-20,iscomplete and recommends acceptance of the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA, that
1.City Project 08-20is complete and maintenance of these improvements is accepted by
the city; and the final construction cost is$854,118.31. Final payment to T.A. Schifsky
and Sons, Incorporated, and the release of any retainage or escrow is hereby
authorized.
th
Approved this 13day of September, 2010.
Seconded by CouncilmemberNephew. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
September 13, 2010 3
City Council MeetingMinutes
Packet Page Number 7 of 192
3.Approval of Temporary Gambling Permit – North Star Chapter BCCA
Councilmember Juenemannmoved toapprove the temporary gambling permit resolution for the
North Star Chapter BCCA (Brewery Collectible Club of America at Aldrich Arena, 1850 White
Bear Avenue on October 9, 2010.
RESOLUTION 10-09-453
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, that the temporary
gambling permit for lawful gambling is approved for the North Star Chapter BCCA (Brewery
Collectible Club of America), 1060 McKnight Road, to be usedon October 10, 2009 at Aldrich
Arena, 1850 White Bear Avenue.
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 MaplewoodCity 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.
Seconded by CouncilmemberNephew. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
4.Approval of Authorization to Pay Additional Charges to Auditor
Councilmember Juenemannmoved toapprove payment of $15,645 to HLB Tautges Redpath,
Ltd.
Seconded by CouncilmemberNephew. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
5.Approval of Closure of Debt Service Funds
CouncilmemberJuenemannmoved toapprove transfers listed in the staff report and authorize
the finance manager to make the appropriate budget adjustments.
Seconded by CouncilmemberNephew. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
September 13, 2010 4
City Council MeetingMinutes
Packet Page Number 8 of 192
6.Approval of Authorization for Special Benefit Appraisal Services for Hills & Dales Area
Street Improvements, City Project 09-15, and City Project 10-14 (Western Hills Area Street
Improvements)
Councilmember Juenemannmoved toapprove and authorize the city engineer to enter into a
contract for services with Dalen, Dwyer & Foley, Inc. for special benefit appraisals services for the
Hills & Dales Area Street Improvements, City Project 09-15. And also authorize the city engineer
to enter into a contract for services with Dalen, Dwyer & Foley, Inc. for special benefit appraisals
services for the WesternHills Area Street Improvements, City Project 10-14.
Seconded by CouncilmemberNephew. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
7.Approval of Fall Clean-Up Event
Councilmember Juenemannmoved toapprove the Fall 2010 Clean-Up event October 16, 2010,
at Aldrich Arena from 8 a.m. to 1 p.m.
Seconded by CouncilmemberNephew. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
8.Approval of Ramsey County Recycling Container Grant Agreement
Councilmember Juenemannmoved toapprove the Be Active! Be Green! Recycling Container
Project Grant Agreement Resolution.
Resolution 10-09-454
Approve Be Active! Be Green! Recycling Container Project Grant Agreement
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners supports efforts to expand
opportunities for people to recycle away from homeand wish to respond to the public’s interest in
recycling in public spaces;
WHEREAS, funding is set aside to be used for the purchase of bins to be used in public spaces
including parks and public gathering places, and the County Board has kicked off a three year
program called “Be Active! Be Green! Recycling Container Project” beginning in 2010 that will
provide recycling containers to municipalities/townships to use in public spaces at no cost to the
city/township;
WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood supports the efforts to create more opportunities for people to
recycle while away from home;
THEREFORE, the City of Maplewood agrees to enter into an Agreement with Ramsey County to
place recycling bins purchased by the County next to trash bins in locations that are accessible to
the public such as in parks, along trails or other areas that are currently serviced by the City.
THEREFORE, the City of Maplewood also agrees to service and maintain the recycling bins,
insure recyclables are handled appropriately and delivered to a market, and promote the use of
the bins through City communication methods over the next five years.
th
Approved this 13day of September, 2010.
September 13, 2010 5
City Council MeetingMinutes
Packet Page Number 9 of 192
Seconded by CouncilmemberNephew. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
9.Approval of Conditional Use Permit Review – St. John’s Hospital, 1575 Beam Avenue
CouncilmemberJuemenannmoved toapprove the CUP for St. John’s Hospital again when
HealthEast decides to continue this project or if amajor change is proposed or a problem arises.
Seconded by CouncilmemberNephew. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
H. PUBLIC HEARING
None.
I.UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1.Rolling Hills of Maplewood Mobile Home Park Conditional Use Permit Discussion –
Clarification of the Restroom Requirement
a.Community Development and Parks Director, DuWayne Konewko introduced the item and
turned the discussion over to the city attorney.
b.City Attorney, Alan Kantrud gave the report and answered questionsof the council.
c. Assistant City Manager, Public Works Director, Chuck Ahl addressed the council.
Paul Ruby, President of the Resident Association of Rolling Hills addressed the council.
Councilmember Nephew moved that staff bring the CUP back for language clarification with the
intent of reinforcing any of the original conditions of the CUP that might be erroneously thought to
have been removed when it was revised. And to call for a public hearing for the clarified CUP.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen. Ayes - All
The motion passed.
J.NEW BUSINESS
1.Approval of Medical Direction/Education Contract
a.Maplewood Fire Chief, Steve Lukin gave the report and answered questions of the
council.
b.Emergency Medical DirectoratSt. John’s Hospital, Dr. Peter Tange, addressed the
council.
c. CEOofSt. John’s Hospital, Scott North addressed the council
d.Assistant Fire Chief/EMS, BJ Jungmann addressed the council.
Robert Lundgren, Maplewood, addressed the council.
Councilmember Nephewmoved to approve the Pre-hospital Medical Direction agreement
between the City of Maplewood and HealthEast Care System.
Seconded by CouncilmemberKoppen. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
September 13, 2010 6
City Council MeetingMinutes
Packet Page Number 10 of 192
2.Review of Recycling Proposals and Direct Staff to Begin Negotiations
table
CouncilmemberRossbach moved to the recycling proposals until September 27, 2010.
Seconded by CouncilmemberKoppen. Ayes – All
table
The motion to passed.
3.Consider Approval of Phase II Joy Park Improvements
a.Natural Resources Coordinator, Ginny Gaynor gave the report and answered questions of
the council.
Councilmember Koppenmoved to approve Phase II Joy Park Improvements for $300,000. And
that this project be funded from PAC fees as proposed in 2010 and 2011 CIP’s for Joy Park and
for Trail Development. And recommend that staff hire SEH, Inc. to complete detailed design and
specifications, not to exceed $35,000.
A friendly amendment was made to include all 3 items in one motion.
The motioner and seconder agreed to that.
Seconded by CouncilmemberLlanas. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
4.2011 Budget and Property Tax Levy
a.Consider Resolution Approving Proposed Maximum Tax Levy Payable in 2011
b.Set Public Hearing Dates on Proposed 2011 Budget and Property Tax Levy
1.Assistant City Manager, Public Works Director, Chuck Ahl gave the 2011 Budget and
Property Tax Levy report and answered questions of the council.
1.Bob Zick, North St. Paul, addressed the council.
2.Ralph Sletten, Maplewood, addressed the council.
3.Elizabeth Sletten, Maplewood, addressed the council.
Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the resolutionproviding preliminary approval of a
proposed tax levy payable in 2011 for $17,503,548.
RESOLUTION 10-09-455
PROVIDING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A
PROPOSED TAX LEVY PAYABLE IN 2011
WHEREAS, State law requires that the City Council give preliminary approval of a
proposed tax levy for 2010 payable in 2011 by September 15, 2010 and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed preliminary information on the Proposed 2011
Budget and has determined the amount of the proposed tax levy payable in 2011 which is the
maximum amountthat will be levied.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA THAT the proposed tax levy for 2010 payable in 2011 in the
amount of $17,503,548 is hereby given preliminary approval and shall be certified to the Ramsey
County Auditor.
September 13, 2010 7
City Council MeetingMinutes
Packet Page Number 11 of 192
Seconded by CouncilmemberJuenemann. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
Councilmember Nephewmoved to approve that the city hold the 2011 Budget and Tax Levy
Hearing (formerly referred to as the Truth in Taxation Hearing) on Monday, December 6, 2010, at
7:00 p.m. as part of a special city council meeting.
Seconded by CouncilmemberKoppen. Ayes – All
The motion passed.
K.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
1.Elizabeth Sletten, Maplewood. Ms. Sletten shared a compliment regarding the Citizens Forum
th
that was held Saturday, September 11at the Ramsey County Library. Human Relations
Attorney, Chuck Bethel gave the presentation. Ms. Sletten also expressed concerns that
residents do not get their questions answered by the city council or the staff.
2.Bob Zick, North St. Paul. Mr. Zick commented on checks issued to pay aformer employee
that worked on the Taste of Maplewood, the cost of color ink used to print the Maplewood
Monthly newsletter,and how the Citizens Forumwas handled by residents September 11,
2010, at the Ramsey County Library.
3.Robert Lundgren, Maplewood. Mr. Lundgren said something has to be done with the unfair lot
rent increases and the services that are not done covered anymore at the Rolling Hills Mobile
Home Park.
L.AWARD OF BIDS
None.
M.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS
1.Approval of Six-Month Review of Downtown Lav 52 Km, 1780 County Road D
a.Maplewood Police Chief, Dave Thomalla gave the report and answered questions of the
council.
N.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS
Citizens Forum
1.– Councilmember Nephew
Councilmember Nephew said he was the host for the Citizens Forum on Saturday,
September 11, 2010, at the RamseyCounty Library and the guest speaker was Human
Relations Attorney, Chuck Bethel. Councilmember Nephew said there were a lot of questions
regarding city employee issues, contract negotiationsandlabor laws. He felt the presentation
was very well done and Mr. Bethel answeredthe resident’s questions.
Emergency Preparedness Fair
2. – Councilmember Nephew
Councilmember Nephew said he attended a Ready or Not Emergency Preparedness Fair at a
church in Little Canada. Many representatives from different citieswere present.Ramsey
County and the Little Canada Fire Department had displaysandit was a nice event.
September 13, 2010 8
City Council MeetingMinutes
Packet Page Number 12 of 192
Councilmember Nephew said on the city’s behalf he accepted an American flag which he will
bring to the next meeting.
Plastic Water Bottles
3. – Councilmember Juenemann
Councilmember Juenemann discussed the use of plastic water bottlesat city buildings and
encouraged everyone to use reusable bottles to drink water fromto eliminate waste.
Human Relations Commission Applications
4.– CouncilmemberLlanas
Councilmember Llanas said the city is accepting applications to serve on the Human
Relations Commissionand that further information can be found on the website or by calling
city hall.
Mayor Rossbach received an invitation to ride in a commemorative parade in North St. Paul
September 17, 2010, at 6 p.m. all city representatives are invited to be in the parade. If any
councilmember is interested they should contact Mayor Rossbachfor further information.
O.ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Rossbachadjourned the meeting at 9:29p.m.
September 13, 2010 9
City Council MeetingMinutes
Packet Page Number 13 of 192
Agenda Item F1
MEMORANDUM
TO:
James Antonen, City Manager
FROM:
Terrie Rameaux, Human Resource Coordinator
Dave Thomalla, Police Chief
DATE:
September 14, 2010
SUBJECT:RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION FOR STEVEN GUNN
INTRODUCTION
Attached is a resolution of appreciation for Steve Gunn who has been a commissioner
on the Police Civil Service Commission for over 25 years. He recently resigned from
the commission as he has moved out of the city.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached resolution of appreciation for Steve Gunn.
Attachment – Resolution of Appreciation
Packet Page Number 14 of 192
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
WHEREAS, Steven Gunn has been a member of the Maplewood Police Civil Service
Commission since July 1985 and has served faithfully and continuously in that capacity until
August 2010; and
WHEREAS, the Commission and the City Council haveappreciated his vast experience,
insights, and good judgment; and
WHEREAS, he has freely given of his time and energy for over 25 years, without
compensation, for the betterment of the City of Maplewood; and
WHEREAS, he has shown sincere dedication to his duties and has consistently
contributed his leadership, time and effort for the benefit of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED for and on behalf of the City of
Maplewood, Minnesota and its citizens that Steven Gunn is hereby extended our heartfelt
gratitude and appreciation for his dedicated service, and we wish him continued success in the
future.
Passed by Maplewood
City Council on ____________________, 2010
__________________________________
Will Rossbach, Mayor
Attest:
________________________________
Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
Packet Page Number 15 of 192
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page Number 16 of 192
G-1
AGENDA NO.
AGENDA REPORT
TO:City Council
FROM:Finance Manager
RE:APPROVAL OF CLAIMS
September 27, 2010
DATE:
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:
$ Checks # 82236 thru # 82285120,333.64
dated 09/08/10 thru 09/14/10
$ Disbursements via debits to checking account296,155.21
dated 09/02/10 thru 09/9/10
$ Checks # 82286 thru # 823401,569,275.13
dated 09/16/10 thru 09/21/10
$ Disbursements via debits to checking account154,324.02
dated 09/10/10 thru 09/17/10
$2,140,088.00Total Accounts Payable
PAYROLL
$ 507,843.87Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 09/17/10
$ Payroll Deduction check # 1009426 thru # 10094282,290.25
dated 09/17/10
$ 510,134.12Total Payroll
$2,650,222.12GRAND 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.
sb
attachments
S:\FINANCE\APPROVAL OF CLAIMS\2010\AprClms 9-10-10 and 9-17-10
Packet Page Number 17 of 192
Check Register
City of Maplewood
09/10/2010
CheckDateVendorDescriptionAmount
8223602464FUNDS FOR ATMS8,000.0009/08/2010US BANK
8223702464UNDERCOVER OPERATION BUY MONEY300.00
09/09/2010US BANK
8223803576RECYCLING - AUGUST28,779.59
09/14/2010EUREKA RECYCLING
8223900519ROD FOR SEWER RODDING MACHINE2,715.37
09/14/2010FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL CO.
00519REPLACEMENT SKIDS FOR SEWER104.98
09/14/2010FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL CO.
8224000585NET BILLABLE TICKETS - AUGUST922.80
09/14/2010GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL
8224101360MDSE FOR RESALE396.61
09/14/2010REINHART FOODSERVICE
8224201190ELECTRIC UTILITY13,210.21
09/14/2010XCEL ENERGY
01190ELECTRIC UTILITY1,312.39
09/14/2010XCEL ENERGY
01190ELECTRIC UTILITY-85.53
09/14/2010XCEL ENERGY
8224301798CONTRACT DIESEL FUEL - AUGUST7,044.70
09/14/2010YOCUM OIL CO.
8224400504MDSE FOR RESALE393.25
09/14/20101ST LINE/LEEWES VENTURES LLC
8224503727ALUMINUM BLANK CLEANING880.60
09/14/2010ADVANCED WATERJET TECH INC
8224600058REIMB FOR MILEAGE 8/1922.00
09/14/2010CRAIG AICHELE
8224703437INSURANCE AGENT FEE 10-1112,000.00
09/14/2010ARTHUR J GALLAGHER RISK
8224801986SECURITY OFFICER MCC EVENT 9/4225.00
09/14/2010DANIEL BUSACK
8224900240APPLICANT BACKGROUND CHECKS60.00
09/14/2010C.S.C. CREDIT SERVICES
8225004572REPAIR & MAINT ON MCC ROOF4,477.00
09/14/2010ETTEL & FRANZ
8225104526ZUMBA INSTRUCTION - AUGUST67.60
09/14/2010HUGO GARRIDO
8225200612REPAIR & MAINT MCC EXERCISE EQUIP2,110.69
09/14/2010GYM WORKS INC
00612REPAIR & MAINT MCC EXERCISE EQUIP200.00
09/14/2010GYM WORKS INC
8225304306MDSE FOR RESALE166.28
09/14/2010INSTANT WHIP-MINNEAPOLIS, INC.
8225400789BULK OIL4,272.22
09/14/2010KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE CO
8225500393MONTHLY SURTAX - AUGUST 97011230352,621.46
09/14/2010 DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY
8225600857CLERKS ORIENTATION CONFERENCE70.00
09/14/2010LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
8225704507PROJ 09-15 TESTING5,539.50
09/14/2010NORTHERN TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
8225800001REIMB P SARNE - DRIVEWAY461.28
09/14/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8225900001REIMB R OLSEN - DRIVEWAY407.60
09/14/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8226000001REFUND B RESAY FAMILY MEMBERSHIP72.85
09/14/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8226100001REFUND S DUEDE HP BENEFIT40.00
09/14/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8226200001REFUND J SCHMIDT- IRRIGATION SYS40.00
09/14/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8226300001REFUND M LIEDER HP BENEFIT20.00
09/14/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8226400001REFUND M SALAH HP BENEFIT20.00
09/14/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8226500001REFUND C BRYNGELSON HP BENEFIT20.00
09/14/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8226601941END OF SEASON AWARDS1,537.52
09/14/2010PATRICK TROPHIES
01941END OF SEASON AWARDS399.08
09/14/2010PATRICK TROPHIES
01941END OF SEASON AWARDS266.06
09/14/2010PATRICK TROPHIES
8226701254MDSE FOR RESALE524.50
09/14/2010PEPSI-COLA COMPANY
8226804265ZUMBA INSTRUCTION - AUGUST291.00
09/14/2010MARIA PIRELA
8226901284ANNUAL BRM PERMIT FEE #4903000185.00
09/14/2010POSTMASTER
8227001345TIF ADMIN EXPENSES 20093,014.45
09/14/2010RAMSEY COUNTY
8227101340MEDICAL SUPPLIES161.41
09/14/2010REGIONS HOSPITAL
8227203446DEER REMOVAL - AUGUST200.00
09/14/2010RICK JOHNSON DEER & BEAVER INC
8227301391PROJ 09-15 TELEVISING211.84
09/14/2010ROTO-ROOTER SERVICES COMPANY
01391PROJ 09-15 TELEVISING211.08
09/14/2010ROTO-ROOTER SERVICES COMPANY
01391PROJ 09-15 TELEVISING181.84
09/14/2010ROTO-ROOTER SERVICES COMPANY
8227401409EECBG GRANT ACTIVITIES1,980.00
09/14/2010S.E.H.
01409EECBG GRANT ACTIVITIES596.31
09/14/2010S.E.H.
8227504574SUPPORT & MAINT AGREEMENT1,000.00
09/14/2010SIGNALSCAPE, INC.
8227601488REIMB FOR WORKSHOP FEE80.00
09/14/2010CHRISTINE SOUTTER
8227703236REGISTRATION FEES75.0009/14/2010CITY OF ST MICHAEL
8227800198KENNARD IRRIGATION73.7509/14/2010ST PAUL REGIONAL WATER SRVS
8227901836RECORD MGMT SOFTWARE FEE - SEPT3,798.0009/14/2010CITY OF ST PAUL
Packet Page Number 18 of 192
8228009/14/201004576SUNDE LAND SURVEYING, LLC.PROF SURVEYING SRVS1,579.10
8228109/14/201003598PAUL THEISENREIMB FOR TUITION 5/17 - 8/131,158.75
8228209/14/201004228TOP TEMPORARYOFFICE/ADMIN SRVS - MINUTES AUG292.50
8228309/14/201002464US BANKPAYING AGENT FEES431.25
09/14/201002464US BANKPAYING AGENT FEES431.25
09/14/201002464US BANKPAYING AGENT FEES431.25
09/14/201002464US BANKPAYING AGENT FEES431.25
8228409/14/201003932VALLEY CREEK EXPRESS INC.MULCH - MISSISSIPPI PLAYGROUND3,872.00
8228509/14/201003378MATT WOEHRLEREIMB FOR MILEAGE 8/11-8/1931.00
120,333.64
50Checks in this report.
Packet Page Number 19 of 192
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Disbursements via Debits to Checking account
TransmittedSettlement
DateDatePayeeDescriptionAmount
09/02/1009/03/10FriMN Dept of Natural ResourcesDNR electronic licenses709.50
09/02/1009/03/10ICMA (Vantagepointe)Deferred Compensation3,925.15
09/03/1009/07/10TuesMN State TreasurerDrivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk)17,605.40
09/03/1009/07/10Pitney BowesPostage2,985.00
09/02/1009/07/10PERAPERA85,743.93
09/02/1009/07/10US TreasurerFederal Payroll Tax (FICA)100,483.26
09/02/1009/07/10AUL AdministrationHRA Flex plan566.66
09/02/1009/07/10Labor UnionsUnion Dues1,888.00
09/02/1009/07/10MN State TreasurerState Payroll Tax21,076.71
09/07/1009/08/10WedMN State TreasurerDrivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk)20,747.87
09/08/1009/09/10ThursMN State TreasurerDrivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk)19,110.81
09/09/1009/10/10FriMN State TreasurerDrivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk)19,233.69
09/09/1009/10/10ARC AdministrationDCRP & Flex plan payments2,079.23
TOTAL296,155.21
Packet Page Number 20 of 192
Check Register
City of Maplewood
09/17/2010
CheckDateVendorDescriptionAmount
8228601083REGISTRATION FEES40.0009/16/2010M D R A
8228702464FUNDS FOR ATMS8,000.00
09/16/2010US BANK
8228800001CORRECT J MARTIN'S 9/17 PAYROLL215.5609/17/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8228901973CAR WASHES AUG 201076.00
09/21/2010ERICKSON OIL PRODUCTS INC
8229002347REGISTRATION FEE85.0009/21/201010,000 LAKES CHAPTER
8229101809LIMEROCK FOR TRAIL APPLEWOOD PRESERVE1,392.6209/21/2010AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES, INC.
8229200064REIMB FOR MEALS 8/30 - 9/0131.7809/21/2010MARK ALDRIDGE
8229302411SCBA COMPRESSOR MAINTENANCE1,820.0009/21/2010ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC
8229404047CHARITABLE GAMBLING1,000.0009/21/2010ASHLAND PRODUCTIONS
8229504471SOUND TECH & EQUIP MCC 9/17400.0009/21/2010B&B AVM INC.
8229600230BASE FOR CO RD C SIDEWALK PROJ220.6809/21/2010BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS, INC.
8229703486BLACK DIRT FOR BACKFILL TRAIL PROJ320.6309/21/2010BUBERL BLACK DIRT INC
8229804544ESC FUNDS RAIN GARDEN 2516 LINWOOD22,880.0009/21/2010C. MOGREN INC.
8229900279CO RD C SIDEWALK1,069.8209/21/2010CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO.
8230004200SOCCER CLINIC INSTRUCTION644.0009/21/2010PETER DEGRANDE
8230100103SUPERVISED INSTALLATION TOT-LOT1,200.0009/21/2010EARL F ANDERSON INC
8230204137KARATE INSTRUCTION370.0009/21/2010THE EDGE MARTIAL ARTS
09/21/2010THE EDGE MARTIAL ARTS04137KARATE INSTRUCTION297.50
8230300451NEW A/C COMP AT STATION 23,246.5709/21/2010EGAN COMPANIES INC
09/21/2010EGAN COMPANIES INC00451NEW A/C COMP AT STATION 2426.00
8230404374AMB FEE210.0009/21/2010EMS TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, LLC
8230504572PUBLIC WORKS ROOF REPAIR4,570.0009/21/2010ETTEL & FRANZ
09/21/2010ETTEL & FRANZ04572PUBLIC WORKS HAIL DAMAGE2,810.00
8230600531BLACK DIRT FOR RESTORATION56.1109/21/2010FRA-DOR INC.
8230704580REIMB FOR SHOES 9/1546.7409/21/2010NICHOLAS HENDRICKSON
8230800615AUDIT SRVS THRU 7/3121,605.5009/21/2010HLB TAUTGES REDPATH, LTD
8230903597REIMB FOR MILEAGE 7/30 - 8/2512.2509/21/2010MARY JO HOFMEISTER
8231003445PLAYGROUND EQUIP PARTS155.6109/21/2010LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES INC
8231100891MEETING 9/920.0009/21/2010M A M A
8231201043REGISTRATION FEE40.0009/21/2010M E H A
8231300936CHARITABLE GAMBLING3,040.0009/21/2010MAPLEWOOD HISTORICAL SOCIETY
8231404446GUITAR INSTRUCTION300.0009/21/2010MICHAEL H. MAY
8231504193FORFEITED VEHICLE STORAGE - AUG2,250.0009/21/2010MIDAMERICA AUCTIONS
8231601060REGISTRATION FEES625.0009/21/2010MN STATE FIRE CHIEFS ASSOC
8231704514WELLNESS SEMINARS 8/25 & 8/28300.0009/21/2010NUTRITIONAL WEIGHT & WELLNESS
8231801202MAPLEWOOD MONTHLY/SEASONS SEPT7,156.9809/21/2010NYSTROM PUBLISHING CO INC
8231902923REGISTRATION FEE460.0009/21/2010OAKDALE FIRE DEPARTMENT
8232000001REIMB WOODLAND HILLS IRRIGATION2,590.0409/21/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8232100001REIMB LAKEVIEW COMMONS IRREGATION481.5409/21/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8232200001REIMB J KEMP PROJ 09-15 DRIVEWAY85.6709/21/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8232300001REFUND MORTENSEN HP BENEFIT40.0009/21/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8232400001REFUND R BURESH PREFERRED ONE40.0009/21/2010ONE TIME VENDOR
8232501302REIMB FOR MILEAGE 8/1923.0009/21/2010STEVEN PRIEM
8232601359CAR WASHES - AUGUST146.9609/21/2010REGAL AUTO WASH DETAIL XX
8232704528ZUMBA INSTRUCTION - AUG5.0009/21/2010SARA ROSS
8232801391PROJ 09-13 TELEVISING418.2009/21/2010ROTO-ROOTER SERVICES COMPANY
09/21/2010ROTO-ROOTER SERVICES COMPANY01391PROJ 08-13 TELEVISING181.84
8232904578STAFF FOR TREE INVENTORY OF PARKS2,156.2509/21/2010S & S SPECIALISTS
09/21/2010S & S SPECIALISTS04578STAFF FOR TREE INVENTORY OF PARKS150.00
8233004074TAI CHI INSTRUCTION - 8/18 - 10/20195.0009/21/2010ELAINE SCHRADE
8233104579AFTON PARK BUILDING - REROOF3,800.0009/21/2010SELA ROOFING COMMERCIAL DIV.
8233201463MCC MASSAGES - AUG1,147.0009/21/2010SISTER ROSALIND GEFRE
8233301836RADIO SRVS & MAINT - AUGUST579.0009/21/2010CITY OF ST PAUL
8233301836RADIO SHOP SERVICES - AUGUST182.4109/21/2010CITY OF ST PAUL
8233401574PROJ 09-15 HILLS & DALE PARTPMT#41,221,970.3009/21/2010T.A. SCHIFSKY & SONS, INC
09/21/2010T.A. SCHIFSKY & SONS, INC01574PROJ 09-04 STILLWATER RD/TH 5 IMP222,814.84
09/21/2010T.A. SCHIFSKY & SONS, INC01574PROJ 08-20 CO RD D FINAL PMT #512,441.20
09/21/2010T.A. SCHIFSKY & SONS, INC01574BITUMINOUS MATERIALS - STREET667.01
8233501616SECURITY OFFICER FOR MCC 9/4227.5009/21/2010PAUL THIENES
8233603776STABILIZE TRAIL-APPLEWOOD PRESERVE9,370.0009/21/2010TRAILSOURCE LLC
8233701669FORFEITED VEHICLE TOWING - AUG636.9609/21/2010TWIN CITIES TRANSPORT &
8233801750MDSE FOR RESALE252.9709/21/2010THE WATSON CO INC
09/21/2010THE WATSON CO INC01750MDSE FOR RESALE166.80
09/21/2010THE WATSON CO INC01750MDSE FOR RESALE160.39
8233904402CLEAR CHARGES - AUGUST254.1009/21/2010WEST GOVERNMENT SERVICES
8234004381K9 FOOD FOR POLICE K9'S696.8009/21/2010ZEUS AND COMPANY
1,569,275.13
55Checks in this report.
Packet Page Number 21 of 192
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
Disbursements via Debits to Checking account
TransmittedSettlement
DateDatePayeeDescriptionAmount
09/10/1009/13/10MonMN State TreasurerDrivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk)16,817.52
09/10/1009/13/10MN Dept of Natural ResourcesDNR electronic licenses306.50
09/13/1009/14/10TuesMN State TreasurerDrivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk)24,581.13
09/14/1009/15/10WedMN State TreasurerDrivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk)19,545.00
09/10/1009/15/10US Bank VISA One Card*Purchasing Card Items33,922.73
09/14/1009/15/10VANCO servicesBilling fee81.00
09/15/1009/16/10ThursMN State TreasurerDrivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk)11,817.56
09/16/1009/17/10FriMN State TreasurerDrivers License/Deputy Registrar(city clrk)11,072.43
09/13/1009/17/10MN Dept of RevenueSales Tax5,751.00
09/16/1009/17/10ICMA (Vantagepointe)Deferred Compensation3,705.15
09/16/1009/17/10INGDeferred Compensation26,306.00
09/16/1009/17/10MN Dept of Natural ResourcesDNR electronic licenses418.00
TOTAL154,324.02
*Detailed listing of VISA purchases is attached.
Packet Page Number 22 of 192
TransactionDatePostingDateMerchantNameTransactionAmountName
08/28/201008/30/2010LITTLE CAESARS 1456109.26MANDY ANZALDI
08/30/201008/31/2010TARGET 000118586.96MANDY ANZALDI
08/27/201008/30/2010PRECOR77.99JIM BEHAN
08/27/201008/30/2010W W GOETSCH ASSOCIATES IN231.16JIM BEHAN
08/30/201008/31/2010BATTERIES PLUS #31(328.87)JIM BEHAN
08/30/201008/31/2010HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE43.89JIM BEHAN
08/30/201008/31/2010COLLEGE TOOL BOX22.60JIM BEHAN
08/30/201008/31/2010SHERWIN WILLIAMS #312735.71JIM BEHAN
08/31/201009/02/2010KMART 303425.34JIM BEHAN
09/01/201009/02/2010HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE31.02JIM BEHAN
09/02/201009/03/2010HORIZON POOL SUPPLY474.40JIM BEHAN
09/03/201009/06/2010SEELYE PLASTICS28.00JIM BEHAN
09/04/201009/06/2010PRECOR44.46JIM BEHAN
09/01/201009/01/2010U OF M CCE70.00TROY BRINK
09/09/201009/10/2010BROCK WHITE ST PAUL 180274.58TROY BRINK
08/31/201009/02/2010MIKES LP GAS INC33.00BRENT BUCKLEY
08/27/201008/30/2010OFFICE DEPOT #10907.33SARAH BURLINGAME
09/01/201009/02/2010GE CAPITAL43.92SARAH BURLINGAME
09/02/201009/06/2010OFFICE DEPOT #109060.57SARAH BURLINGAME
09/07/201009/08/2010CUB FOODS, INC.6.98SARAH BURLINGAME
09/08/201009/10/2010PSO148.45DAN BUSACK
08/30/201008/31/2010ADVANCED DUPLICATION SERV63.99HEIDI CAREY
09/03/201009/06/2010MINNESOTA PREMIER PUBLICA50.00HEIDI CAREY
09/06/201009/07/2010VZWRLSS*APOCC VISN134.42HEIDI CAREY
08/30/201008/31/2010VIKING ELEC-CREDIT DEPT.47.56SCOTT CHRISTENSON
08/30/201008/31/2010VIKING ELEC-CREDIT DEPT.107.77SCOTT CHRISTENSON
09/01/201009/02/2010VIKING ELEC-CREDIT DEPT.(28.35)SCOTT CHRISTENSON
09/01/201009/02/2010VIKING ELEC-CREDIT DEPT.116.53SCOTT CHRISTENSON
09/01/201009/02/2010DEY APPLIANCE A4.57SCOTT CHRISTENSON
09/01/201009/03/2010THE HOME DEPOT 280111.38SCOTT CHRISTENSON
09/07/201009/09/2010OAKDALE OPTICAL CENT189.21SCOTT CHRISTENSON
09/01/201009/02/2010MENARDS 30225.02CHARLES DEAVER
09/08/201009/09/2010G & K SERVICES 006113.25CHARLES DEAVER
09/08/201009/09/2010BEST BUY 0000007526.73MICHAEL DUGAS
08/27/201008/30/2010HIRSHFIELDS ST PAUL CSC1,104.24DAVE EDSON
08/27/201008/30/2010HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE17.77DAVE EDSON
08/31/201009/01/2010BROOKLYN PARK BOOKSTORE66.00PAUL E EVERSON
09/01/201009/02/2010BROOKLYN PARK TUITION OFF308.62PAUL E EVERSON
08/26/201008/30/2010BREDEMUS HARDWARE CO29.10LARRY FARR
09/01/201009/02/2010BEST BUY MHT 00000158125.31LARRY FARR
09/01/201009/02/2010CABLES TO GO40.33LARRY FARR
09/02/201009/03/2010MENARDS 3059614.43LARRY FARR
09/02/201009/06/2010THE HOME DEPOT 280134.73LARRY FARR
09/03/201009/06/2010CINTAS #47077.46LARRY FARR
09/03/201009/06/2010CINTAS #47036.33LARRY FARR
09/03/201009/06/2010CINTAS #47038.04LARRY FARR
09/07/201009/08/2010WM EZPAY132.60LARRY FARR
09/07/201009/09/2010ACME ELECTRONICS CENTER I159.77LARRY FARR
09/08/201009/09/2010G & K SERVICES 006914.79LARRY FARR
09/08/201009/09/2010G & K SERVICES 006541.85LARRY FARR
09/08/201009/10/2010SEARS ROEBUCK 1122194.90LARRY FARR
09/08/201009/10/2010KMART 710623.56LARRY FARR
09/09/201009/10/2010MENARDS 3059450.82LARRY FARR
09/02/201009/02/2010ACT*RAM/SWANA CONF140.00SHANN FINWALL
09/03/201009/06/2010DISPLAYS 2 GO20.02SHANN FINWALL
09/08/201009/10/2010WM EZPAY592.70DAVID FISHER
09/01/201009/02/2010CURTIS 1000 INC.46.38KAREN FORMANEK
09/01/201009/02/2010CURTIS 1000 INC.46.38KAREN FORMANEK
08/26/201008/30/2010MCLEOD USA TELECOM3,177.56MYCHAL FOWLDS
08/27/201008/30/2010IDU*PUBLIC SECTOR3,359.46MYCHAL FOWLDS
09/03/201009/06/2010IDU*PUBLIC SECTOR182.26MYCHAL FOWLDS
09/08/201009/09/2010CDW GOVERNMENT41.66MYCHAL FOWLDS
Packet Page Number 23 of 192
09/08/201009/09/2010IDU*PUBLIC SECTOR413.50MYCHAL FOWLDS
08/26/201008/30/2010ADVANCED GRAPHIC 00 OF 00122.05NICK FRANZEN
09/07/201009/09/2010OFFICE MAX25.70NICK FRANZEN
09/08/201009/09/2010KNOWLAN'S MARKET #228.28CAROLE GERNES
08/30/201009/01/2010OFFICE DEPOT #10903.36JEAN GLASS
09/03/201009/06/2010OFFICE DEPOT #109049.53JEAN GLASS
09/03/201009/06/2010OFFICE DEPOT #10908.14JEAN GLASS
09/08/201009/09/2010MENARDS 3022101.70MARK HAAG
08/30/201009/01/2010THE HOME DEPOT 280112.72MILES HAMRE
09/04/201009/06/2010COMCAST CABLE COMM180.20LORI HANSON
09/03/201009/06/2010MENARDS 30591.80PATRICK HEFFERNAN
09/07/201009/08/2010BEAR 36 AMSTAR6.00PATRICK HEFFERNAN
09/07/201009/09/2010GRUBERS POWER EQUIPMENT14.78PATRICK HEFFERNAN
09/02/201009/03/2010AMERICAN RED CROSS TWIN C231.00RON HORWATH
09/02/201009/06/2010THE HOME DEPOT 2801170.10RON HORWATH
09/07/201009/08/2010POOLSIDE81.90RON HORWATH
09/08/201009/09/2010POOLSIDE58.28RON HORWATH
09/08/201009/09/2010HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE19.60RON HORWATH
09/08/201009/09/2010MENARDS 305911.73RON HORWATH
09/02/201009/06/2010HEJNY RENTAL INC185.78ANN E HUTCHINSON
08/26/201008/30/2010THE HOME DEPOT 280123.96DAVID JAHN
09/02/201009/03/2010PHILIPS MEDICAL SYSTEMS534.30BERNARD R JUNGMANN
09/07/201009/08/2010RAINBOW FOODS 0008861712.83BERNARD R JUNGMANN
08/30/201008/31/2010THE UPS STORE #217112.12NICHOLAS KREKELER
09/07/201009/08/2010BATTERIES PLUS #318.10NICHOLAS KREKELER
08/27/201008/30/2010RAINBOW FOODS 0008861712.25LISA KROLL
09/02/201009/03/2010LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWSPAPE631.16LISA KROLL
09/08/201009/09/2010MENARDS 305910.68STEVEN KUMMER
08/27/201008/30/2010UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC111.03DAVID KVAM
09/02/201009/06/2010UNIFORMS UNLIMITED1,903.75DAVID KVAM
09/03/201009/06/2010UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC1,697.61DAVID KVAM
09/03/201009/06/2010UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC1,365.71DAVID KVAM
09/03/201009/06/2010SHRED-IT116.55DAVID KVAM
09/07/201009/09/2010UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC115.40DAVID KVAM
09/08/201009/10/2010UNIFORMS UNLIMITED INC18.17DAVID KVAM
09/01/201009/03/2010ASPEN MILLS INC.29.67STEVE LUKIN
09/05/201009/06/2010WM EZPAY169.18STEVE LUKIN
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION100.46MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION100.46MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION50.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION50.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION50.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION50.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION50.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION50.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION50.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION50.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION50.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION50.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION50.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION50.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION70.23MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010ON SITE SANITATION26.91MARK MARUSKA
09/08/201009/09/2010G & K SERVICES 006435.90MARK MARUSKA
09/08/201009/10/2010WM EZPAY773.63MARK MARUSKA
08/27/201008/30/2010CINTAS FIRST AID #43183.46BRYAN NAGEL
09/01/201009/01/2010U OF M CCE70.00BRYAN NAGEL
09/09/201009/10/2010MINNESOTA FALL EXPO225.00BRYAN NAGEL
08/31/201009/01/2010HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE17.06JOHN NAUGHTON
09/08/201009/09/2010G & K SERVICES 006936.85AMY NIVEN
09/08/201009/09/2010G & K SERVICES 006671.11AMY NIVEN
09/08/201009/09/2010G & K SERVICES 006227.79AMY NIVEN
09/06/201009/07/2010AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS40.39MICHAEL NYE
Packet Page Number 24 of 192
09/07/201009/08/2010OPTICS PLANET INC200.00MICHAEL NYE
09/09/201009/10/2010BEST BUY MHT 00000109(96.40)MICHAEL NYE
09/09/201009/10/2010BEST BUY MHT 0000010996.40MICHAEL NYE
09/09/201009/10/2010BEST BUY MHT 0000015832.12MICHAEL NYE
08/26/201008/30/2010ADVANCE SHORING COMPANY38.29ERICK OSWALD
08/30/201008/31/2010BROCK WHITE ST PAUL 18049.79ERICK OSWALD
08/27/201008/30/2010MIDWAY PARTY RENTAL321.38CHRISTINE PENN
09/03/201009/06/2010PARTY ZONES INC.691.12CHRISTINE PENN
09/07/201009/09/2010AESOP'S TABLE200.00CHRISTINE PENN
09/08/201009/09/2010RHODE ISLAND NOVELTY118.94CHRISTINE PENN
09/08/201009/09/2010CPD INDUSTRIES126.12PHILIP F POWELL
09/01/201009/02/2010GE CAPITAL333.16WILLIAM J PRIEFER
08/26/201008/30/2010UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC297.56STEVEN PRIEM
08/31/201009/02/2010KATH AUTO PARTS NSP8.11STEVEN PRIEM
08/31/201009/02/2010TOUSLEY FORD I27228006127.21STEVEN PRIEM
09/01/201009/02/2010HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE12.31STEVEN PRIEM
09/01/201009/03/2010KATH AUTO PARTS NSP246.12STEVEN PRIEM
09/02/201009/03/2010FACTORY MOTOR PARTS #1972.96STEVEN PRIEM
09/03/201009/06/2010KATH AUTO PARTS NSP31.81STEVEN PRIEM
09/03/201009/06/2010TOUSLEY FORD I2722800617.33STEVEN PRIEM
09/03/201009/06/2010FACTORY MTR PTS #172.96STEVEN PRIEM
09/03/201009/06/2010BAUER BUILT TIRE 1842.26STEVEN PRIEM
09/03/201009/08/2010TRI-STATE BOBCAT INC.197.20STEVEN PRIEM
09/03/201009/08/2010CATCO PARTS&SERVICE11.07STEVEN PRIEM
09/07/201009/08/2010FACTORY MTR PTS #1(72.96)STEVEN PRIEM
09/07/201009/08/2010CATCO PARTS&SERVICE11.07STEVEN PRIEM
09/08/201009/10/2010KATH AUTO PARTS NSP57.31STEVEN PRIEM
09/09/201009/10/2010FACTORY MTR PTS #236.92STEVEN PRIEM
09/09/201009/10/2010BOYER CREDIT51.46STEVEN PRIEM
08/30/201008/31/2010HILLYARD INC MINNEAPOLIS1,114.39MICHAEL REILLY
08/30/201008/31/2010TARGET 0001185843.17AUDRA ROBBINS
09/01/201009/02/2010CUB FOODS, INC.9.81AUDRA ROBBINS
09/01/201009/02/2010LITTLE CAESARS 145685.70AUDRA ROBBINS
09/01/201009/02/2010MAPLEWOOD PARKS AND RECRE10.00AUDRA ROBBINS
09/01/201009/02/2010MAPLEWOOD PARKS AND RECRE5.00AUDRA ROBBINS
09/01/201009/03/2010AMC ROSEDALE 101006519344.00AUDRA ROBBINS
09/01/201009/03/2010AMC ROSEDALE 101006519262.50AUDRA ROBBINS
09/07/201009/08/2010METRO FIRE127.45ROBERT RUNNING
08/26/201008/30/2010THE HOME DEPOT 2801117.54JAMES SCHINDELDECKER
09/01/201009/02/2010HENRIKSEN ACE HARDWARE43.35JAMES SCHINDELDECKER
09/02/201009/03/2010T-MOBILE.COM*PAYMENT31.32DEB SCHMIDT
09/02/201009/06/2010OFFICE DEPOT #1090124.46ANDREA SINDT
09/09/201009/10/2010JAKE'S CITY GRILLE - M30.00ANDREA SINDT
09/09/201009/10/2010ALLINA HEALTH SYSTEM50.00JOANNE M SVENDSEN
09/05/201009/07/2010KMART 71069.63RONALD SVENDSEN
09/02/201009/06/2010SPRINT STORE #22632.12JAMES TAYLOR
09/08/201009/10/2010DELTA AIR 0067919096545299.40DAVID J THOMALLA
08/31/201009/02/2010OFFICE MAX24.63FAITH THOMFORDE
09/08/201009/10/2010OFFICE MAX90.05FAITH THOMFORDE
09/09/201009/10/2010S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS50.06KAREN WACHAL
TOTA33,922.73
L
Packet Page Number 25 of 192
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
EMPLOYEE GROSS EARNINGS REPORT
FOR THE CURRENT PAY PERIOD
CHECK #CHECK DATEEMPLOYEE NAMEAMOUNT
09/17/10JUENEMANN, KATHLEEN416.42
09/17/10LLANAS, JAMES416.42
09/17/10NEPHEW, JOHN416.42
09/17/10ROSSBACH, WILLIAM473.15
09/17/10STRAUTMANIS, MARIS75.00
09/17/10AHL, R. CHARLES4,917.95
09/17/10ANTONEN, JAMES5,300.00
09/17/10BURLINGAME, SARAH1,861.60
09/17/10KANTRUD, HUGH184.62
09/17/10CHRISTENSON, SCOTT2,020.93
09/17/10FARR, LARRY2,885.65
09/17/10JAHN, DAVID1,840.37
09/17/10HENNING, KARISSA92.30
09/17/10RAMEAUX, THERESE3,030.67
09/17/10BAUMAN, GAYLE3,860.96
09/17/10FORMANEK, KAREN968.50
09/17/10MITTET, ROBERT3,554.40
09/17/10ANDERSON, CAROLE1,418.63
09/17/10DEBILZAN, JUDY1,234.16
09/17/10JACKSON, MARY2,102.98
09/17/10KELSEY, CONNIE2,569.24
09/17/10LAYMAN, COLLEEN5,735.23
09/17/10ARNOLD, AJLA1,464.49
09/17/10CAREY, HEIDI2,494.95
09/17/10GUILFOILE, KAREN4,176.43
09/17/10KROLL, LISA1,764.69
09/17/10NEPHEW, MICHELLE1,544.73
09/17/10SCHMIDT, DEBORAH2,589.83
09/17/10SPANGLER, EDNA1,054.89
09/17/10CORTESI, LUANNE1,194.86
09/17/10LARSON, MICHELLE1,709.35
09/17/10MECHELKE, SHERRIE1,170.00
09/17/10MOY, PAMELA1,096.89
09/17/10OSTER, ANDREA1,886.78
09/17/10RICHTER, CHARLENE
280.50
09/17/10SCHOENECKER, LEIGH1,356.81
09/17/10WEAVER, KRISTINE2,245.35
09/17/10CORCORAN, THERESA1,882.15
09/17/10KVAM, DAVID4,168.15
09/17/10PALANK, MARY1,886.77
Packet Page Number 26 of 192
09/17/10
POWELL, PHILIP2,903.67
09/17/10
SVENDSEN, JOANNE2,081.79
09/17/10THOMALLA, DAVID
4,936.26
09/17/10
YOUNG, TAMELA1,882.15
09/17/10ABEL, CLINT2,988.56
09/17/10ALDRIDGE, MARK3,226.20
09/17/10BAKKE, LONN2,888.66
09/17/10BARTZ, PAUL3,471.12
09/17/10BELDE, STANLEY3,319.64
09/17/10BENJAMIN, MARKESE2,676.09
09/17/10BIERDEMAN, BRIAN3,474.75
09/17/10BOHL, JOHN3,171.10
09/17/10BUSACK, DANIEL4,413.44
09/17/10COFFEY, KEVIN3,199.19
09/17/10CROTTY, KERRY3,575.20
09/17/10DEMULLING, JOSEPH2,435.28
09/17/10DOBLAR, RICHARD3,737.66
09/17/10DUGAS, MICHAEL5,735.71
09/17/10ERICKSON, VIRGINIA3,256.98
09/17/10FLOR, TIMOTHY2,685.73
09/17/10FRASER, JOHN3,151.94
09/17/10FRITZE, DEREK2,885.80
09/17/10GABRIEL, ANTHONY3,131.01
09/17/10HAWKINSON JR, TIMOTHY2,988.36
09/17/10HER, PHENG2,413.09
09/17/10HIEBERT, STEVEN2,888.66
09/17/10JOHNSON, KEVIN3,739.39
09/17/10KALKA, THOMAS896.28
09/17/10KARIS, FLINT4,133.87
09/17/10KONG, TOMMY2,843.99
09/17/10KREKELER, NICHOLAS803.20
09/17/10KROLL, BRETT3,004.81
09/17/10LANGNER, SCOTT3,293.35
09/17/10LANGNER, TODD2,773.06
09/17/10LU, JOHNNIE3,683.61
09/17/10LYNCH, KATHERINE1,887.11
09/17/10MARINO, JASON3,305.22
09/17/10MARTIN, JERROLD2,668.23
09/17/10MCCARTY, GLEN2,904.55
09/17/10METRY, ALESIA3,039.62
09/17/10NYE, MICHAEL3,451.60
09/17/10OLSON, JULIE3,039.62
09/17/10REZNY, BRADLEY3,801.60
09/17/10RHUDE, MATTHEW3,480.43
09/17/10SHORTREED, MICHAEL4,060.51
09/17/10SLINGER, AARON1,887.11
09/17/10STEINER, JOSEPH4,128.14
09/17/10SYPNIEWSKI, WILLIAM2,773.06
09/17/10SZCZEPANSKI, THOMAS3,299.11
Packet Page Number 27 of 192
09/17/10
TAUZELL, BRIAN2,169.83
09/17/10THEISEN, PAUL2,930.85
09/17/10THIENES, PAUL3,496.05
09/17/10TRAN, JOSEPH2,884.70
09/17/10WENZEL, JAY3,331.33
09/17/10XIONG, KAO2,935.19
09/17/10BAUMAN, ANDREW2,663.01
09/17/10DAWSON, RICHARD2,993.84
09/17/10DOLLERSCHELL, ROBERT293.39
09/17/10EVERSON, PAUL3,158.40
09/17/10FOSSUM, ANDREW3,324.24
09/17/10HALWEG, JODI2,982.32
09/17/10HENDRICKSON, NICHOLAS2,394.21
09/17/10JUNGMANN, BERNARD3,375.63
09/17/10KUBAT, ERIC2,348.06
09/17/10LINDER, TIMOTHY2,728.31
09/17/10NOVAK, JEROME2,924.74
09/17/10OLSON, JAMES3,140.65
09/17/10PETERSON, ROBERT3,165.99
09/17/10PLACE, ANDREA2,639.93
09/17/10SEDLACEK, JEFFREY2,944.82
09/17/10STREFF, MICHAEL3,070.95
09/17/10SVENDSEN, RONALD3,271.62
09/17/10GERVAIS-JR, CLARENCE3,679.63
09/17/10LUKIN, STEVEN4,475.33
09/17/10ZWIEG, SUSAN2,357.24
09/17/10KNUTSON, LOIS1,996.55
09/17/10NIVEN, AMY1,411.62
09/17/10PRIEFER, WILLIAM2,713.17
09/17/10BRINK, TROY2,244.55
09/17/10BUCKLEY, BRENT2,040.14
09/17/10DEBILZAN, THOMAS2,125.35
09/17/10EDGE, DOUGLAS2,498.08
09/17/10HAMRE, MILES1,278.00
09/17/10JONES, DONALD2,125.35
09/17/10MEISSNER, BRENT1,840.55
09/17/10NAGEL, BRYAN3,408.40
09/17/10OSWALD, ERICK2,441.93
09/17/10RUNNING, ROBERT2,333.35
09/17/10SETNES, SAMUEL560.00
09/17/10TEVLIN, TODD2,125.35
09/17/10BURLINGAME, NATHAN2,039.34
09/17/10DUCHARME, JOHN2,447.65
09/17/10EATON, MEGAN665.00
09/17/10ENGSTROM, ANDREW2,459.76
09/17/10JACOBSON, SCOTT2,218.39
09/17/10JAROSCH, JONATHAN2,842.52
09/17/10KREGER, JASON2,514.87
09/17/10KUMMER, STEVEN3,063.75
Packet Page Number 28 of 192
09/17/10LINDBLOM, RANDAL
2,713.98
09/17/10
LOVE, STEVEN3,140.31
09/17/10
THOMPSON, MICHAEL3,895.87
09/17/10
ZIEMAN, SCOTT241.40
09/17/10HELCL, JOHN
322.40
09/17/10
EDSON, DAVID2,175.99
09/17/10
HINNENKAMP, GARY2,131.98
09/17/10
MARUSKA, MARK3,183.11
09/17/10NAUGHTON, JOHN
2,125.35
09/17/10
NORDQUIST, RICHARD2,127.66
09/17/10
SCHINDELDECKER, JAMES2,129.97
09/17/10
BIESANZ, OAKLEY1,449.88
09/17/10DEAVER, CHARLES
586.94
09/17/10
GERNES, CAROLE322.89
09/17/10
HAYMAN, JANET1,268.31
09/17/10
HUTCHINSON, ANN2,622.79
09/17/10SOUTTER, CHRISTINE
626.09
09/17/10
WACHAL, KAREN958.63
09/17/10
GAYNOR, VIRGINIA3,211.95
09/17/10
BEHM, LOIS78.75
09/17/10FRY, PATRICIA
1,904.81
09/17/10
KONEWKO, DUWAYNE4,390.46
09/17/10
SINDT, ANDREA2,013.80
09/17/10
THOMPSON, DEBRA821.71
09/17/10EKSTRAND, THOMAS
3,800.52
09/17/10
MARTIN, MICHAEL2,606.15
09/17/10
BRASH, JASON2,154.15
09/17/10
CARVER, NICHOLAS3,211.95
09/17/10FISHER, DAVID
3,778.99
09/17/10
SWAN, DAVID2,738.95
09/17/10
WELLENS, MOLLY1,628.54
09/17/10
BERGER, STEPHANIE28.50
09/17/10BJORK, ALICIA
420.00
09/17/10
BJORK, BRANDON464.75
09/17/10
JANASZAK, MEGHAN922.62
09/17/10
ROBBINS, AUDRA2,847.74
09/17/10ROBBINS, CAMDEN
52.31
09/17/10SCHALLER, SCOTT172.00
09/17/10
SHERRILL, CAITLIN454.13
09/17/10TAYLOR, JAMES2,583.24
09/17/10THOMFORDE, FAITH1,461.80
09/17/10ADAMS, DAVID1,733.80
09/17/10GERMAIN, DAVID2,134.59
09/17/10HAAG, MARK2,452.47
09/17/10KLOOZ, AUSTIN
735.00
09/17/10SCHULTZ, SCOTT2,897.69
09/17/10ANZALDI, MANDY1,682.96
09/17/10BRENEMAN, NEIL2,036.93
09/17/10CRAWFORD - JR, RAYMOND496.79
Packet Page Number 29 of 192
09/17/10
EVANS, CHRISTINE1,257.27
09/17/10
GADOW, ANNA66.73
09/17/10
GLASS, JEAN2,103.67
09/17/10HANSEN, LORI
2,912.02
09/17/10
HER, PETER404.25
09/17/10
HOFMEISTER, MARY1,101.10
09/17/10
HOFMEISTER, TIMOTHY386.81
09/17/10KLUCAS, PETER
176.00
09/17/10
KULHANEK-DIONNE, ANN361.25
09/17/10
LAMB, JACQUELINE112.50
09/17/10
OLSON, SANDRA42.00
09/17/10PELOQUIN, PENNYE
510.86
09/17/10
PENN, CHRISTINE2,094.61
09/17/10
SMITH, TERRENCE220.00
09/17/10
STARK, SUE324.00
09/17/10VANG, KAY
256.69
09/17/10
VUE, LOR PAO109.31
09/17/10
ANDERSON, MAXWELL278.60
09/17/10
BAUDE, SARAH54.75
09/17/10BEITLER, JULIE
36.00
09/17/10
BRENEMAN, SEAN325.50
09/17/10
BUCKLEY, BRITTANY180.15
09/17/10
BUTLER, ANGELA119.00
09/17/10CAMPBELL, JESSICA
1,235.01
09/17/10
DEMPSEY, BETH183.75
09/17/10
DUNN, RYAN841.50
09/17/10
ERICKSON-CLARK, CAROL49.00
09/17/10FLACKEY, MAUREEN
271.25
09/17/10
FONTAINE, KIM382.00
09/17/10
GRAY, MEGAN29.40
09/17/10
GRUENHAGEN, LINDA215.05
09/17/10HANSEN, HANNAH
75.34
09/17/10
HEINRICH, SHEILA176.00
09/17/10
HOLMBERG, LADONNA369.00
09/17/10
HORWATH, RONALD2,589.01
09/17/10JOHNSON, BARBARA
193.50
09/17/10KOGLER, RYAN129.90
09/17/10
KOHLER, ROCHELLE34.00
09/17/10KRONHOLM, KATHRYN561.76
09/17/10LAMEYER, ZACHARY92.58
09/17/10MATHEWS, LEAH59.40
09/17/10MCCORMACK, MELISSA106.58
09/17/10NADEAU, KELLY234.03
09/17/10PROESCH, ANDY
707.29
09/17/10RENFORD, NICHOLAS72.50
09/17/10RICHTER, DANIEL54.00
09/17/10RICHTER, NANCY157.50
09/17/10RONNING, ISAIAH73.50
09/17/10RONNING, ZACCEUS18.25
Packet Page Number 30 of 192
09/17/10
SCHREIER, ROSEMARIE203.50
09/17/10
SCHREINER, MICHELLE305.51
09/17/10SJERVEN, BRENDA
119.00
09/17/10
SMITH, ANN98.50
09/17/10
SMITLEY, SHARON251.50
09/17/10
TAYLOR, JASON85.88
09/17/10TREPANIER, TODD
271.00
09/17/10
TUPY, ELIANA85.00
09/17/10
TUPY, HEIDE88.80
09/17/10
TUPY, MARCUS230.50
09/17/10WARNER, CAROLYN
290.40
09/17/10
WEDES, CARYL49.00
09/17/10
WOLFGRAM, MARY315.30
09/17/10
WOLFGRAM, TERESA211.60
09/17/10WOODMAN, ALICE
46.00
09/17/10
ZALK, IDA46.50
09/17/10
BOSLEY, CAROL380.80
09/17/10
GIERNET, ASHLEY326.25
09/17/10LANGER, CHELSEA
87.75
09/17/10
LANGER, KAYLYN164.25
09/17/10
SATTLER, MELINDA68.00
09/17/10
SAVAGE, KAREN50.00
09/17/10ZAGER, LINNEA
332.76
09/17/10
BEHAN, JAMES2,034.94
09/17/10
COLEMAN, PATRICK326.25
09/17/10
DOUGLASS, TOM1,381.95
09/17/10JOHNSON, JUSTIN
130.50
09/17/10
LONETTI, JAMES414.00
09/17/10
MALONEY, SHAUNA60.00
09/17/10
PRINS, KELLY1,255.66
09/17/10REILLY, MICHAEL
1,915.75
09/17/10
THOMPSON, BENJAMIN248.88
09/17/10
VALERIO, TARA235.60
09/17/10
WILLIAMS, DAELA179.44
09/17/10FINWALL, SHANN
3,138.95
09/17/10
HAIDER, THOMAS340.00
09/17/10
AICHELE, CRAIG2,178.95
09/17/10
PRIEM, STEVEN2,390.15
09/17/10WOEHRLE, MATTHEW2,179.75
09/17/10BERGO, CHAD2,651.63
09/17/10FOWLDS, MYCHAL3,469.86
09/17/10FRANZEN, NICHOLAS2,413.50
09/17/10JAGOE, CAROL1,836.00
09/17/10WELCHLIN, CABOT2,415.05
100940509/17/10KOPPEN, MARVIN416.42
100940609/17/10NASH, AMY690.36
100940709/17/10PARKER, JAMES690.36
100940809/17/10PUHL, MATTHEW672.00
100940909/17/10GRAVES, CONNIE71.25
Packet Page Number 31 of 192
100941009/17/10MARTIN, ARIELLE58.13
100941109/17/10MUELLNER, CHADD225.00
100941209/17/10VUKICH, CANDACE14.50
100941309/17/10HER, CHONG243.00
100941409/17/10CRANDALL, KRISTA237.73
100941509/17/10FLUEGEL, LARISSA94.25
100941609/17/10GIPPLE, TRISHA166.75
100941709/17/10JOYER, ANTHONY44.40
100941809/17/10LAMSON, KEVIN40.43
100941909/17/10MCLAURIN, CHRISTOPHER369.80
100942009/17/10MCMAHON, MICHAEL29.40
100942109/17/10ROSTRON, ROBERT470.85
100942209/17/10SCHMIDT, EMILY4.60
100942309/17/10DANIEL, BREANNA320.00
100942409/17/10SCHULZE, KEVIN474.60
100942509/17/10STEFFEN, MICHAEL87.00
507,843.87
Packet Page Number 32 of 192
Agenda Item G2
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager
FROM:
Finance Manager
RE
:2010Budget Adjustments
DATE:
September 22, 2010
BACKGROUND
Annually when the General Fund budget is prepared, revenueand expenditureaccounts
are analyzed and a re-estimate for the current year is prepared. This information is used to
forecast the ending fund balance for the current year. The size of this balance is an
important factor for the preparation of the budget for the next year.The proposed 2011
budget includes an estimated fund balance of $6,512,417 for 12-31-10.
RECOMMENDATION
After the budget for the next year is prepared, the re-estimates for the current year are
more important than the original budget. Therefore, it is recommended that the Council
authorize the Finance Managerto revise the 2010budget to reflectthe 2010re-estimates
for accountsthat are included in the proposed 2011budgetper the attached list.This will
help staff manage their budgets through the end of the year.
Attachments:
1.2010 Budget Adjustments
Packet Page Number 33 of 192
Agenda Item G2
2010 Budget Adjustments
Adjustments needed to achieve 2010 re-estimate numbers: Adjustments needed to account
for 2010 Internal IT charges:
101-101-000-4480 (5,000) Council - outside study 101-101-000-4580 1,700
101-102-000-4580 5,060
101-103-000-4970 (50,000) Judgements 101-116-000-4580 (310)
101-201-000-4580 (6,210)
101-201-000-4010 3,000 Finance Manager 101-301-000-4580 (14,990)
101-401-000-4580 (5,420)
101-201-000-4480 35,000 Audit & CIP assistance
101-202-000-4010 10,000 Reallocate Mary & error in 2010 budget 101-411-000-4580 (14,110)
101-501-000-4580 (10,620)
101-202-000-4020 7,000 Audit work - additional hours
606-203-000-4010 (5,500) Reallocate Mary 101-601-000-458015,160
101-701-000-4580 (19,490)
101-111-000-4010 (17,000) Reallocate budget for Carey wages 206-603-299-4580 (9,350)
601-508-000-4580 1,820
602-611-003-4010 17,000 Reallocate budget for Carey wages
101-301-000-4480 (16,000) Recodification 602-611-001-4580 (10,010)
604-512-000-4580 7,450
101-301-000-4490 (12,000) Cut consulting - part of Taste
101-301-000-4520 (2,000) Cut outside rentals 605-706-000-4580 630
606-203-000-4580 (1,450)
101-402-000-4010 (125,000) Vacancies/allocation 606-403-000-4580 61,580
101-409-000-4010 (35,000) Vacancies/allocation
1,440
101-404-000-4730 (20,000) Hold on purchase
101-404-000-4320 (15,000) Savings in utilities
101-602-000-4320 (15,000) Savings in utilities
101-503-000-4010 (33,980) Remove budget for Brash
601-508-000-4010 (3,150) Remove budget for Brash
101-601-000-4010 (55,500) Delay park manager
101-604-000-4020 4,000 Increase part time help
101-604-000-4025 5,000 Increase temp help
101-702-000-4480 (9,000) Cut cell tower study
101-702-000-4490 (9,000) Cut consulting fees
101-707-000-4480 (4,500) Cut fees
(351,630)
Packet Page Number 34 of 192
ITEM # G3
AGENDA REPORT
TO:Jim Antonen, City Manager
FROM:Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
DATE:September 22, 2010
RE:Resolution Certifying Election Judges for the November 2,2010StateGeneralElection
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING ELECTION JUDGES
RESOLVED
, that the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, accepts the following list of
Election Judges for the 2010 State GeneralElectionto be held on Tuesday, November 2, 2010.
Ahrens, Fran
Droeger, DianeHerber, Darlene
Albu, Josephine
DuCharme, FredHess, Harland
Albu, Verle
Duellman, AudreyHilliard, Barb
Anderson, BeverlyEickhoff, Carolyn
Hilliard, Emma
Anderson, ElsieErickson, Elizabeth
Hines, Constance
Anderson, SuzanneErickson, Eric
Hinnenkamp, Gary
Anderson, VivianErickson, Sue
Horgan, Gerald
Ansari, AhsanEvans, Carol
Horgan, Sharon
Arnold, Ajla
Evans, JoanHulet, Jeanette
Arnold, Carole
Feld, RobynHulet, Robert
Barrett, Marlis
Fernholz, JeanHutton, Marcia
Bartelt, Joan
Finch, RobertaIversen, Mildred
Bedor, David
Fischer, LorraineIversen, Thomas
Behr, Jeanette
Fischer, MaryJacobs, Scott
Belland, JaimeFischer, Peter
Jagoe, Carol
Berry, RobertFitzgerald, Delores
Janacek, Jeffrey
Bolden, DonitaFosburgh, Anne
Jefferson, Gwendolyn
Bollar, RobertFowler, Cynthia
Johannessen, Judith
Bortz, AlbertFrancis, Gretchen
Johansen, Kathleen
Bortz, JeanneFrancis, Robert
Johnson, Barbara
Breidenstein, Anna Marie
Franssen, Maryann
Johnson, Mary
Brooks, Jean Ann
Franzen, James
Johnson, Warren
Bunkowske, Bernice
Freer, Mary Jo
Johnson, Wendy
Cahanes, Lucille
Friedlein, Charlene
Jones, Julia
Carbone, Joyce
Friedlein, Richard
Jones, Shirley
Carle, Jeanette
Fritsche, Samantha
Jurmu, Joyce
Cleland, Ann
Fuller, Mary KatherineKirchoff, Harold
Cohn Madson, Debra
Galligher, PatriciaKnauss, Carol
Combe, Edward
Gebauer, MarilynKnutson, Lois
Connelly, Thomas
Gebauer, VictorKoch, Rosemary
Connolly, Colleen
Gierzak, Sister ClariceKramer, Dennis
Cotter, Cathleen
Golaski, Diane
Kramer, Patricia
D'Arcio, IndiaGudknecht, Jamie
Krause, Bruce
Davidson, MarianneGunn, Jaclynn
Krekelberg, Mona Lou
Davis, GregoryGuthrie, Rosie
Kroll, Lisa
Deeg, EdwardHaack, Donita
Kwapick, Clemence
Demko, FredHafner, Michael
Kwapick, Jackie
DeZelar, Phil
Hart, BarbaraLackner, Marvella
Dicks, Judy
Hecht, LloydLampe, Charlotte
Dickson, Helen Jean
Heininger, GordonLarson, Michelle
Page 1 of 2
Packet Page Number 35 of 192
Lauren, Lorraine
Newcomb, Winifred
Schroepfer, Harriet
LaValle, FayleneNichols, Miranda
Schultz, Louise
Lawrence, DonnaNieman, James
Shankar, Ananth
Lee, Debbie
Nieters, LouiseShores, Teresa
Leiter, Barbara
Nissen, Helen Skaar, Susan
Leo, Ann
Niven, AmySpangler, Bob
Leo , Pati
Norberg, Ann
Spies, Louis
Leonard, Claudette
Noyes, Douglas
Stafki, Tim
Lincowski, Steve
O'Brien, D. William (Bill)
Steenberg, Judith
Lincowski, ViOlson, Anita
Steenberg, Richard
Lockwood, JackieOlson, Lois
Stenson, Karen
Lodge, AudreyOlson, Norman
Stevens, Sandra
Loipersbeck, DarleneOslund, Kathryn
Stevenson, Emily
Loipersbeck, JulesOverstreet, Sherri
Storm, Mary
Lowe-Adams, ShariPaddock, Ken
Strack, Joan
Lowery, David
Parent, Dian
Sward, John
Lucas, Lydia
Pariana, Patrice
Taylor, Lorraine
Luttrell, Shirley
Pehl, David
Taylor, Rita
Lynne, Carole
Peitzman, Lloyd
Thormforde, Faith
Mahowald, Valerie
Peper, Marilyn
Tillman, Leila
Mahre, Jeri
Pickett, William
Tolbert, Franklin
Manthey,John
Popham, MikeTrippler, Dale
Marsh, Delores
Priefer, BillTschida, Micki
Maskrey, Thomas
Rahn, DelbertUrbanski, Carolyn
Mauer, Mary Lynn
Renslow, RitaUrbanski, Holly
Mauston, Shelia
Rodriguez, Vincent Urbanski, Michelle
McCann, John
Rohrbach, Charles
Urbanski, William
McCarthy, Peggy
Rohrbach, Elaine
VanBlaricom, Beulah
McCauley, Judy
Roller, Carolyn
Vanek, Mary
McCormack, Melissa
Rongstad, Fran
Vatne, Mary
Mechelke, Geraldine
Ronholm, Mary
Volkman, Phyllis
Mechelke, Mary Lou
Rowe, Charles
Walstead, Patricia
Meehan, James
Ruby, ShirleyWandersee, Gene
Meister-Westermann, Jean
Rudeen, ElaineWasmundt, Gayle
Miller, Charlotte
Sandberg, JanetWebb, Paulette
Moran, Joyce
Satriano, PaulineWeiland, Connie
Motz, Betty
Sauer, ElmerWhitcomb, Larry
Mudek, Dolores
Sauer, KathleenWilly, John
Mudek, LeoSauro, Janet
Witschen, Delores
Muraski, GerryScheunemann, Marjorie
Wood, Susan
Myster, ThomasSchiff, Marge
Yorkovich, Cindy
Neis, ClaraSchluender, Cynthia
Zacho, Karen
Nephew, ShellySchluender, David
Zian, Helen
Nettleton, Janet
Schneider, Mary Ann
Newcomb, Mary
Schoenecker, Sandra
Recommendation
of the approved list of election judges is requested. Approval of this Resolution
does not qualify individuals to serve as election judges. Appointments will be made from this list to fill
the needed positions but not everyone on this list will be appointed. Additionally, individuals that have
not completed the required election judge training and completed the paperwork required by the city will
not be permitted to work unless they have met these requirements.
Page 2 of 2
Packet Page Number 36 of 192
AgendaItem G4
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Introduction
RESOLUTION
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota, that the
temporary gambling permit for lawful gambling is approved for the Church of the Presentation
of the Blessed Virgin Mary, 1725 Kennard Street, to be used on November 20, 2010.
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
Packet Page Number 37 of 192
Packet Page Number 38 of 192
Packet Page Number 39 of 192
Packet Page Number 40 of 192
Packet Page Number 41 of 192
Packet Page Number 42 of 192
Packet Page Number 43 of 192
Packet Page Number 44 of 192
Jim Antonen, City Manager
Karen Guilfoile, Citizen Services Director
DuWayne Konewko, Parks & Recreation Director
Christie Penn, Banquet & Event Manager
September 17 for the September 27 City Council Agenda
Community Center Catering Provider Request for Proposal
The City of Maplewood is seeking proposals to enter into an agreement with a maximum of three
exclusive food service providers to supply food catering services for the Maplewood Community
Center. Selected Caterers will supply food service and/or non-alcoholic beverages for banquets,
meetings, special events and other functions conducted at the MCC. The Caterers will not be allowed
to provide alcoholic beverages for the MCC as this will be the sole responsibility of the Liquor
Provider. The intent is to have the selected Caterers available for service by January 1, 2011.
The Maplewood Community Center opened to the public in October 1994. The MCC boasts a
banquet facility that can accommodate up to 350 guests. Annually we host over 25 wedding
receptions, 6 large community events and over 500 meetings/events.
The City of Maplewood has entered into an exclusive catering agreement for food that provides the
City with a percentage of revenue from gross sales. The percentage rates established for food are as
follows:
10% Monday – Thursday
15% Friday – Sunday
The proposed RFP outlines the catering provider’s responsibilities, accounting procedures,
Community Center responsibilities and request for references.
The terms of the agreement will be for a three-year period running through December 31, 2012.
The City will be receiving proposals until 1:00PM on Monday, October 25, 2010. Following a
background check by the city police department and reference check by our department, we will be
providing a recommendation to the City Council for the caterers at the December 13 City Council
meeting.
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the request for proposal for catering providers as
outlined with the understanding that the City Council will be making a final selection at the December
13 City Council meeting.
Packet Page Number 45 of 192
City of Maplewood
MaplewoodCommunity Center
September 2010
Packet Page Number 46 of 192
Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal
The City of Maplewood is seeking proposals to enter into an agreement with a maximum of three (3)
exclusive food service providers (here in after referred to as “Caterers”) to supply food catering services
for the Maplewood Community Center (here in after referred to as “MCC”). Selected Caterers will supply
food service and/or non-alcoholic beverages for banquets, meetings, special events and other functions
conducted at the MCC. The Caterers will not be allowed to provide alcoholic beverages for the MCC as
this will be the sole responsibility of the Liquor Provider. The intent is to have the selected Caterers
available for service by January 1, 2011.
Those selected will be the only Caterers available to MCC event holders unless the event has been
booked prior to January 1, 2011 and an alternative food service contracthas been previously entered
into.
For the privilege of being an exclusive Caterer, the Caterers will be required to pay the MCC a
percentage of the revenues generated from MCC events on a monthly basis.
MCC has been in the meeting and event business for over 14 years and averages over 25 weddings and
more than 400 meetings per year. Able to accommodate up to 350 guests, MCC offers a central location
and easy accessibility in our beautiful 5,000 square foot banquet facility. The spacious dance floor,
sheltered patio, and 21-foot bay window all provide a special elegance to the venue, making it a premier
facility for weddings and other events.
Moreover, the MCC is actively marketed to maintain its popularity. The room is frequently booked 8 – 12
months in advance for weddings, meetings, fundraisers, tradeshows, and other special weekend events.
Weekday events include business luncheons, workshops and seminars.The MCC is primarily
responsible for marketing the facility; however, the selected Caterers will be responsible for providing
marketing support and assistance as well.
MCCcustomers are diverse in age and culture.Our customers have high expectations and varying food
needs. Caterers are required to offer food appealing toall customers and offer a wide price range of
menu options, including options that can be adapted to meet dietary needs, ethnic customs, etc.
The MCChas one licensed catering kitchen adjacent to the banquet room. Caterers can use this kitchen
to warm/servefood usingexisting equipment and shelving.Equipment brought in by the Caterer must
meet health department and city/state codes. It is the Caterers responsibity to provide, at their cost,
accommodations as required by authorizing agencies for such things as grills, pig roasters, etc.
Caterers will supply food, service staff, tableware and linens for banquets, buffets, meetings and special
events. The Catererwill not be responsible for providing alcoholic beverages but maybe asked to clear
alcoholic beveragesat tables as part of the meal function. The selected Caterers must secure all
property, as the MCCwill not be responsible for lost or stolen items.
The selected Caterers will be required to paythe MCCa percentage of the revenuesgenerated through
food service, beverage service and other services provided, including rental items and decorationsfrom
all MCC events. The percentage paid to the MCCwill be based on the final gross bill, excludingtax and
gratuity.Caterers mustinclude in their proposal the percentage payable tothe MCCas an exclusive
Packet Page Number 47 of 192
Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal
caterer. The MCCwill consider only those proposals that offer the MCCpercentages that are a minimum
of:
10% of all gross sales for service scheduled Monday through Thursday
15% of all gross sales for service scheduledFridaythrough Sundayand on Holidays
The event host must meet the food minimum purchase amount for their event. The minimum must be
met prior to tax or service charge. TheMCC has placed the following food minimums for weekend
events:
$15.00 Per Plate Served
If the minimum is not met the difference will be applied to the customer. The regular room rental fee still
applies regardless of the meetingofthis minimum and willnotbewaived.
The MCC Banquet and Event Manager will collect the room rental fee, room deposit, and rental
equipment fee. However, the collection of all deposits and fees for catering charges isthe sole
responsibility of the Caterer. Non-payment by a client to the Catererfor services rendered will not
negate payment of the commission revenue to the MCC.
The Catereragrees to pay the MCC the commission revenues based on the final gross billing for each
event. The Caterer will supply one copy of the final billing for each event in a given month to the
Banquet and Event Manager by the 15th of the following month, along with payment. Delinquent
payments will be charged $50 every 30 days, starting with the first day payment islate.
The City reserves the right to inspect all financial records for an event. Providers must provide
documentation within two business days upon request.
Provide professional staff that will maintain a consistently high level of both service and
appearance. Wait staff must be able to distribute and clean up alcoholic beverages at tables as
part of a meal function if requested.
Provide pre-event customer service in a timely and professional manner.
Providefood tasting for current and potential MCCcustomers.
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 andhost food events.
Provide sufficient daytime staff when necessary.
Provide MCCwith a copy of the current Health Department License and Certified Food Managers
License during the term of the contract.
Provide MCCwith proof ofbondingby the State of Minnesota.
Work with customers directly to provide food service for their event.
Provide marketing/menu information to assist MCCwith potential renters.
Designate an on-site coordinator for each event to work with MCCstaff throughout the event.
Coordinate set-up of room(s) with MCCstaff.
Follow all procedures and policies set by the MCCpertaining to the food operation.
Packet Page Number 48 of 192
Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal
Adhere to standards set forth in Minnesota Statues and the Department of Health.
Work cooperatively with beverage service provider at events, including clearing alcoholoff tables.
Keepthe 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 MCCand make fee payments to MCCin a
th
timely manner, per month by the 15of following month.
Provide no more than two sponsored City events, at cost, with no commission received by the City
of Maplewood.
Provide Catering kitchen with existing equipment(warming ovens, coolers, freezer, prep and
work area and rinsing dishwasher).
Charge and collect rental fees fromrental groups and schedule events.
Provide tables and chairs for banquet room set-ups and set the room in auniform fashion.
Provide basic custodial service for cleaning and setup.
Identify up to twoliquor providersfor full beverage service through a separate agreement.
Work cooperativelywith Caterers toensure successful events.
Provide overhead expenses; lights, heat, air conditioning, etc.
Provide necessary cleaning suppliesfor the maintenance of the MCC kitchen.
Licensethe kitchen with the Minnesota Department of Health.
Arrange meetings withCaterers and Beverage Provideras needed.
Provide additional event support; including, but not limited to (i.e. A.V. equipment and sound).
Caterers need to identify specific menu, cost per plate/person and any other extraneous fees
potential customers would be responsible for, i.e. tax, gratuity, etc.
Caterers need to identifyhow changes to menu items and fees will be handled allowing enough
lead time for MCCto keep their information current.Price changesneed the approval of the
Banquet and Event Manager before they can be implemented.Prices mayonly be increased
once per year at adesignated time each year.
Identify any service beyond that stated above that will benefit the MCCor MCCcustomers (i.e.
advertising, existing clientele base, sponsorship of special event(s),unique offerings,etc...)
Provide responses to the following scenarios:
Scenario I
You have a wedding reception that has a total count of 215 (which includes the head table).
Event budget is $6,500.00.
25 rounds, with eight per round, for a total of 200 guests – table coverings needed
4 standard 8-foot banquet tables for a head table of 15 – table coverings and skirting
needed
1 round cake table – table coverings and skirting needed
3 banquet tables for a T-style buffet – table coverings and skirting needed
2 banquet tables for beverages – table coverings and skirting needed
Salad
Packet Page Number 49 of 192
Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal
Dinner Rolls
Entrée
2 Side Options
Punch
Coffee
Water
Liquor Provider will be supplying two bars from 5:00PM – 12:00AM and will be hosting
pop throughout the event
Wedding party is providing cake but would the caterer to cut and serve.
Pleaseinclude a proposed menu andinclude all quantities for required items includingcost per
item, number of staff, gratuities, any up-charges, and the final grand total cost to the wedding
party.
Scenario 2
You have a wedding reception that has a total count of 160 (which includes the head table).
Event budget is $4,500.00.
19 rounds, with eight per round, for a total of 200 guests – table coverings needed
3 standard 8-foot banquet tables for a head table of 10 – table coverings and skirting
needed
1 round cake table – table coverings and skirting needed
3 banquet tables for a T-style buffet – table coverings and skirtingneeded
2 banquet tables for beverages – table coverings and skirting needed
Salad
Dinner Rolls
Entrée
2 Side Options
Punch
Coffee
Water
Wedding party is providing cake but would the caterer to cut and serve.
Pleaseinclude a proposed menu andinclude all quantities for required items includingcost per
item, number of staff, gratuities, any up-charges, and the final grand total cost to the wedding
party.
Packet Page Number 50 of 192
Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal
Caterer shallfurnish two dates between October25andDecember 3, 2010when they will be
providing catering servicesso that City of Maplewoodrepresentatives can attend to see first hand
how service staff performs. Please provide information on menus being served, number of
people attending and type of event.
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.
Caterer shall identify members of their staff that will provide catering service at events, their
background experience and number of years associated with the Caterer.
Caterer shall identify member(s) of their staff that will be responsible for supervising events, their
background experience and number of years associated with the Caterer.
Caterer shall furnish two dates between October 25andDecember 3, 2010 and prepare a meal
for the city representatives to sample a menu selection with meals priced at approximately $15.00
per person and $25.00per person, as they would be offered to banquet customers with additional
3 appetizers and 3 dessert options. The MCC Banquet and Event Manager will contact Caterers
to schedule times once the scope has been narrowed.
Non-performance: It is the Caterer’s responsibility to familiarize themselves and their staff as to the
requirements of the contract and to perform all tasks in an acceptable timely manner. It is not the City’s
responsibility to remind the Caterer of the contract requirements. This includes knowingand enforcing
facility rules pertaining to the grounds,room, or patiouse (i.e. decorating, candles,permitted
driving/access areas etc).
The agreement shall be effective January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2013. If the Caterer’s contract is not
chosen for the following contract period, Caterer will remain responsible for providing services to the
rentals booked at the MCC for which they had committed to before the time of contract termination.
The Banquet and Event Managerand the catering company owner (or owner’s representative) shall work
to positively resolve any service/performance issues that may arise. If the issue is not able to be
resolved within 30days, either party may terminatethis agreement with a thirty (30) day written
notification. The MCCreserves the right to terminate the contract with the Caterer with a 30 day written
notification if there are service, performance, health or safety issues that are impeding the success of
reserved events. At the discretion of theBanquet & Event Manager, the Caterer will remain responsible
for providing service to the rentals booked at the MCCfor which they had committed to prior to the time
of the written notification.
In consideration of being allowed to use the MCC, the Caterershereby voluntarily assumeall 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 Maplewoodand Maplewood
Community Center, respective officers, employees, agents and insurers from damages solely caused by
the intentional action of the Caterers representatives and employees.
The respondent shall supply fivecopies 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 1:00PM on Monday,October 25, 2010. Maplewood City Hall is located at 1830 East County Road
B, Maplewood, MN 55109. Note: Faxes and e-mailed responses will not be accepted.
1:00PM on Monday, October 25, 2010.
Packet Page Number 51 of 192
Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal
Responses are to include the following:
Name, address, phone, fax, e-mailand website addressof responding company
Name, address, phone, fax, e-mail of representative of responding company
Detaileddescription of catering service
History of company
Revenue percentages as described in the section titled “Financial Arrangements”
Price range proposals as listed in the section titled “Fees/Costs”
Sample Menus as described in the section titled “Fees/Costs”
Identify any additional services as listed in the section titled “Fees/Costs”
References as described in the section titled “References”
Statement of intent to provide requested services for the MCC
Statement of capability for licensing, bonding and insurance
Statement of marketing plan with goals and objectives
Send responses to:Christie Penn
Maplewood Community Center
2100 White Bear Avenue
Maplewood, MN 55109
Proposals may not be withdrawn for 60 days after the receipt of proposals without the consent of the City
of Maplewood.
Any interested responder may contact the following individual with questions. All questions must be
submitted in writing.
Christie Penn
Maplewood Community Center
2100 White Bear Avenue
Maplewood, MN 55109
Fax: 651-249-2249
Email: christine.penn@ci.maplewood.mn.us
A pre-proposal question and answer meeting will be held on October 18at 11:00AMat the
Maplewood Community Center, 2100 White Bear Ave. A tour of the banquet and kitchen
facilities will start at 11:00AM, with the meeting starting at 11:30AM. We will not be scheduling
individual tours outside of this date.
Proposing Caterers and their representatives are prohibited from contacting any elected official for
purposes of lobbying to secure this contract.Contact with City Council members during the pendency of
the award of the contract will result in immediate disqualification of the bid.
Packet Page Number 52 of 192
Maplewood Community Center Food Caterer Request For Proposal
The City of Maplewood intends to enter into a contract with Caterersthat best satisfies 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.
Packet Page Number 53 of 192
Packet Page Number 54 of 192
Packet Page Number 55 of 192
Packet Page Number 56 of 192
Packet Page Number 57 of 192
Packet Page Number 58 of 192
Packet Page Number 59 of 192
Proposals may not be withdrawn for 60 days after the receipt of proposals without the consent of the City
of Maplewood.
Packet Page Number 60 of 192
Item G10
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chuck Ahl, Assistant City Manager
FROM: Karen Guilfoile, Director Citizen Services
DATE: September 22, 2010
SUBJECT: Fee Waiver for Use of the Community Center
Background
On October 22, 2010 the Historical Preservation Commission will be holding their Halloween
Hoe Down which is their annual fundraising event.
The Maplewood Preservation’s Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the use of the Bruentrup
Heritage Farm Site was approved in July of 2009. Prior to the July 2009, CUP approval the use
of the Community Center with the fee waived for the event was included as a condition of the
permit.
However, this provision was removed in the July 2009, CUP.
Charlotte Wasiluk, on behalf of the Commission, is requesting that the fee for use of the
Community Center banquet room and the childcare or craft room for the Hoe Down be waived.
Normal cost for this rental would be $750 for banquet room and approximately $240 for the
use of the craft room or child care room.
Consideration
Council is requested to considering reducing or waiving the fee for this annual event.
Packet Page Number 61 of 192
Agenda Item G 11
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
James Antonen, City Manager
FROM:
Michael Thompson, City Engineer/Dep. Public Works Director
Steven Love, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT:Upper Afton Road Improvements, Project 07-27, Resolution Approving
Final Financing and Closure of Project Fund 589
DATE:
September 10, 2010
INTRODUCTION
The contractor, T.A. Schifsky and Sons, has completed the project improvements, the project has been
accepted, and final payment has been made. The council will consider adopting the final financing plan
in order to close out the project fund.
BACKGROUND
This project involved the reconstruction of Upper Afton Road lying between McKnight Road and
Century Avenue totaling approximately 0.97 miles. The project included the reconstruction of the
street, storm sewer structure repair, sanitary sewer structure repair, replacement of damaged concrete
curb and gutter, and replacement of damaged concrete walk panels. On June 9, 2008 the council
awarded the contract in the amount of $698,896.40. During construction there were no change orders
and the final amount earned by the contractor was $614,422.49.
BUDGET
The approved budget for the project is $1,091,300.00. To date, the total project cost is $842,116.32.
Staff is recommending the following financing plan and closure of the project.
Final Financing Plan
Current Financing Plan
$ 735,100.19
MSA Bond Sale Proceeds $ 650,290.00
$ 33,972.71 (approved & levied)
Special Assessments $ 41,010.00
$ 33,458.95
Sanitary Sewer Fund $ 200,000.00
$ 33,458.95
Environmental Utility Fund $ 200,000.00
$ 6,175.52
Interest on Investments -
$ -
Driveway Program -
$ 842,166.32
TOTAL $ 1,091,300.00
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the council authorize the finance director to implement the final financing plan,
transfer any excess funds to the PIP fund account, and to close project fund 589 for City Project 07-27.
Attachments:
1. Resolution
2. Location Map
Packet Page Number 62 of 192
Agenda Item G 11
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION
APPROVING FINAL FINANCING AND CLOSURE OF PROJECT FUND 589
WHEREAS, the City Council of Maplewood, Minnesota has heretofore ordered
improvement to City Project 07-27, Upper Afton Road Improvements, and the City Council
accepted the project and approved final payment on February 23, 2009. The total project cost
is $614,422.49.
NOW, THEREFORE, BIT IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA, that the finance director is hereby authorized to make the financial transfers
necessary to implement the final financing plan and transfer any excess funds to the PIP
Account:
Final Financing Plan
$ 735,100.19
MSA Bond Sale Proceeds
$ 33,972.71 (approved & levied)
Special Assessments
$ 33,458.95
Sanitary Sewer Fund
$ 33,458.95
Environmental Utility Fund
$ 6,175.52
Interest on Investments
$ -
Driveway Program
$ 842,166.32
TOTAL
TH
Approved this 27 day of September 2010
Packet Page Number 63 of 192
Agenda Item G 11
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 64 of 192
Agenda Item G 12
AGENDAREPORT
TO:
James Antonen, City Manager
FROM:
Michael Thompson, City Engineer / Dep. Public Works Director
SUBJECT: White Bear Avenue / County Rd D Improvements, City Project 08-13,
Approval of Cost-Share Agreement Amendment with Ramsey County
DATE:
September 15, 2010
INTRODUCTION
The council will also consider approving a cost-share agreement amendment with Ramsey
County in order for the city to be fully reimbursed by Ramsey County for the consulting services
contract.
BACKGROUND
On November 24, 2008 the city council approved a cost-share agreement with Ramsey County
for Project 08-13. The city contracted with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for final design of
the project and Ramsey County agreed to reimburse the city for the consulting services
provided by Kimley-Horn.
On October 12, 2009 an amendment to the original cost-share agreement was approved by the
council for site planning to assist with the Ramsey County’s Right of Way acquisition process;
additional final design services for the reconstruction of County Road D (Flandreau Street to
White Bear Avenue); and additional final design services for White Bear Avenue at a cost not to
exceed $275,000.
The County and the City of Maplewood wish to make a second amendment to the cost-share
agreement for additional services provided by Kimley-Horn in the amount of $160,000 for
additional design, inspection, right-of-way acquisition services, and other services defined in the
services agreement. The City is administering the contract with Kimley-Horn on behalf of the
County.
BUDGET
No adjustments to Maplewood’s contribution are expected at this time.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the city council approve the cost-share agreement amendment with
Ramsey County and authorize the mayor, city manager, and city attorney to execute the
agreement on behalf of the city.
Attachments:
1. RAMCO Cost-Share Agreement
Packet Page Number 65 of 192
Agenda Item G 12
Attachment 1
SECOND AMENDMENT TO COST SHARE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN RAMSEY COUNTY
AND THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
WHEREAS, Ramsey County (“County”) and the City of Maplewood (“City”) entered into
Agreement PW 2008-16 on December 12, 2008 (“Cost Share Agreement”) for cost sharing for final
Professional Engineering Services for the Reconstruction of White Bear Avenue from County Road
D to Radatz Avenue (“Project”) to be provided by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (“Consultant”)
under contract with the City of Maplewood in the sum of $767,440; and
WHERAS, The City amended its contract with the Consultant for additional Professional
Engineering Services at an increased cost of $275,000; and
WHEREAS, The County and the City executed an Amendment to the Cost Share
Agreement on November 24, 2009, to increase the cost of the Professional Engineering Services by
the Consultant for the Project by $275,000, resulting in a total contract amount of $1,042,440.00;
and
WHEREAS, The County, in cooperation with the Minnesota Department of Transportation
and the City of Maplewood, has prepared a preliminary layout plan for the Project for the
interchange of I-694 and White Bear Avenue and for County Road D from Flandreau Street to
White Bear Avenue; and
WHEREAS, The City has amended its contract for Professional Engineering Services with
the Consultant for additional site planning to assist with the County’s Right of Way acquisition
services, additional final design services, and construction administration services for the Project
for an additional cost not to exceed $160,000, resulting in a total contract of $1,202,440.00; and
WHEREAS, The County and the City wish to amend the Cost Share Agreement for cost
sharing for the additional services to be provided by the Consultant under its amended agreement
with the City of Maplewood; Therefore
The parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows:
1. The City shall administer its contract with Kimley-Horn for the additional services and shall
make payment for all services rendered.The County will reimburse the City for the cost of
the additional services to be provided by Kimley-Horn through Individual Project Order
30H. Amendment to the Agreement with the City of Maplewood, up to a maximum not to
exceed sum of $160,000. The County will reimburse the City for all payments made for
these services upon submission by the City of a properly documented invoice.
2. Except as modified herein, the terms of the Cost Share Agreement, as amended, shall
remain in full force and effect.
Second Amendment to Cost Share Agreement with City of Maplewood Reconstruction of WBA Co Rd D-Radatz Page 1 of 2
Packet Page Number 66 of 192
Agenda Item G 12
Attachment 1
WHEREFORE, this Second Amendment is duly executed on the last date written below.
RAMSEY COUNTY THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
By:
Julie Kleinschmidt, County Manager Print Name:
Title: Mayor
Date: _______________________________ Date: ______________________________
Approval recommended:
By: ________________________________
Kenneth G. Haider, Director Print Name: _________________________
Public Works Department Title: City Manager
Date: ______________________________
Approved as to form and insurance: Approved as to form:
___________________________________
Assistant County Attorney City Attorney
Second Amendment to Cost Share Agreement with City of Maplewood Reconstruction of WBA Co Rd D-Radatz Page 2 of 2
Packet Page Number 67 of 192
Agenda Item G13
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
James Antonen, City Manager
FROM:
Michael Thompson, City Engineer / Dep. Public Works Director
Steven Love, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: Sidewalk Improvement (County Rd C East of White Bear Ave), Project 10-08
1. Report on Cost of Work Done by Day Labor
2. Resolution Accepting Work and Authorizing Budget Transfer
DATE:
September 15, 2010
INTRODUCTION
The city council will consider adopting a resolution accepting work done by day labor for the sidewalk
improvement along English Street.
DISCUSSION
The city had previously received requests to install a section of sidewalk connecting the existing
sidewalk on the east side of White Bear Avenue to the existing sidewalk on the north side of County
Road C. This improvement completed the pedestrian connection from McKnight Road to White Bear
Avenue. Council gave approval to proceed with this work at the July 26, 2010 regular meeting.
The project was estimated to be well under $25,000 and under MN Statute 429, the City is allowed to
utilize City Forces (staff) to complete the work.
BUDGET
The original estimate for total project costs with contingencies was $8,500.00. A certified itemization of
actual project materials and labor costs is provided in the attached report. The final amount is
calculated at $7,803.21. This public improvement project utilizes excess Public Improvement Project
(PIP) Funds. Excess PIP Funds in the amount of $8,500.00 have been transferred from Carsgrove
Meadows Area Street Improvements, City Project 08-10, into the Street Maintenance budget 101-502-
000-4180. It is recommended that finance director adjust the budget to reflect the total costs to
complete work based on the Report on Cost of Work Done by Day Labor.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommend that the city council approve the attached Report on Cost of Work Done by Day Labor
for the Sidewalk Improvement (County Road C East of White Bear Ave), City Project 10-08, and also
approve the resolution for accepting the work and authorizing a budget transfer.
Attachments:
1. Report on Cost of Work Done by Day Labor
2. Resolution Accepting Work & Budget Transfer
Packet Page Number 68 of 192
Agenda Item G13
Attachment 1
REPORT ON COST OF WORK DONE BY DAY LABOR
CITY PROJECT 10-08
TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA:
As the registered engineer in charge, I hereby certify that the improvements for the Sidewalk
Improvement (County Road C East of White Bear Ave), City Project 10-08, have been completed
according to the plans and specifications approved by the council on July 26, 2010 and that the
$7,803.21
complete cost of the work is itemized as follows:
$ 2,611.65
A. Materials: Base, concrete, pedestrian ramp, other:
$ 5,191.56
B. Public Works Streets Department Day Labor 2010:
Total = $ 7,803.21
Only minor deviations from the plans and specifications were required for the work completed.
Steven W. Love, P.E., P.L.S.
Maplewood Assistant City Engineer
Reg. No. 41349
Packet Page Number 69 of 192
Agenda Item G13
Attachment 2
RESOLUTION
ACCEPTING WORK AND AUTHORIZING BUDGET TRANSFER
CITY PROJECT 10-08
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the city council on July 26, 2010, ordering the
Sidewalk Improvement (County Road C East of White Bear Ave), City Project 10-08, city staff has
satisfactorily completed the improvement in accordance with the approved plans and specifications,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that:
1. The work completed under said contract is hereby accepted and approved by the City.
2. The finance director is authorized and directed to make the necessary budget
adjustments to reflect the total cost to complete the work as outlined by the Report on
Cost of Work Done by Day Labor.
th
day of September, 2010.
Approved this 27
Packet Page Number 70 of 192
Agenda Item G14
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
James Antonen, City Manager
FROM:
Michael Thompson, City Engineer / Dep. Public Works Director
Steven Love, Assistant City Engineer
Jon Jarosch, Staff Engineer
SUBJECT: Community Center Trail Improvement (County Road B to Community
Center), Resolution Ordering Transfer of Funds for Purchase of Materials
DATE:
September 16, 2010
INTRODUCTION
The city council will consider adopting a resolution ordering the transfer of funds for the purchase of
materials for the construction of a trail connecting County Road B and the Community Center along the
west side of the City Hall entrance road.
DISCUSSION
In the interest of providing a safe route for pedestrians to access the Community Center from County
Road B, staff has designed a trail connecting the two locations along the west side of the City Hall
entrance drive (see attached plan sheet). This trail is 8-feet wide and incorporates the Americans with
Disabilities Act standards for accessible routes. Other items included with the design of the trail are
grading, turf restoration, a rainwater garden near the Parks Maintenance building, and plant
installations. If approved the majority of the trail improvements will occur this October.
BUDGET
A preliminary estimate for materials is $10,795. An itemization of actual project costs will be provided
to the council when the work is completed. This proposed project will utilize the Park Development
funds for the purchase of materials. Assuming a 10% contingency, it is recommended that $12,000 in
funds be transferred from the Park Development Fund into the Street Maintenance budget (101-502-
000-4180) for the purchase of materials.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the council approve the attached Resolution ordering the transfer of funds for
purchase of materials for the Community Center Trail Improvement (County Road B to Community
Center).
Attachments:
1. Resolution Ordering Transfer of Funds for Purchase of Materials
2. Plan Sheet
Packet Page Number 71 of 192
Agenda Item G14
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION
ORDERING TRANSFER OF FUNDS FOR PURCHASE OF MATERIALS
th
WHEREAS, on this 27 day of September 2010, the city engineer has presented plans and
specifications for the Community Center Trail Improvement (County Road B to Community Center),
AND WHEREAS adoption of the resolution ordering transfer of funds for purchase of materials
shall signify approval of plans and specifications,
AND WHEREAS, the project is currently estimated at $12,000.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA:
1. The city engineer shall proceed under the direction of the council, as given from time to
time, to carry on all work in connection with such improvement in accordance with the plans and
specifications herein approved.
2. The finance director is hereby authorized to transfer $12,000 into the Street
Maintenance budget (101-502-000-4180) from the Park Development Fund, in order to purchase
materials to construct the trail improvement.
Packet Page Number 72 of 192
Agenda Item G14
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 73 of 192
Agenda Item G15
MEMORANDUM
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Michael Martin, AICP, Planner
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
SUBJECT:
Conditional Use Permit Review—Midwest Grounds Maintenance
Company
LOCATION:
1949 Atlantic Street
DATE:
September 17, 2010
INTRODUCTION
The conditional use permits(CUP) for Midwest Grounds Maintenance Company located at 1949
Atlantic Street (Gladstone neighborhood)aredue for review.The CUPswererequired for exterior
storage and the constructionof a metal building within the business commercial zoning district.
BACKGROUND
February 9, 2004: The city council approved a minor subdivision to subdivide 1949 Atlantic Street
into two separate lots and also approved three CUPs as follows: 1) exterior storage for Ohlson
Landscaping at 1949 Atlantic Street; 2) construction of a 3,264-square-foot metal building within the
business commercial zoning district at 1949 Atlantic Street for Ohlson Landscaping; and 3) exterior
storage for Oehrlein Property Maintenance at the newly subdivided and vacant lot located north of
1949 Atlantic Street. Refer to the attached city council minutes (Attachment 3).
August 22, 2005: The city council reviewed Ohlson Landscaping’sCUPs. The city council waived
the requirement to pave Ohlson Landscaping’s parking lot for one year (August 22, 2006) pending
the outcome of the Gladstone redevelopment concept plan. The city council required the owners to
complete all other exterior improvements including fencing,landscaping, and grading by October 31,
2005, with review again in November 2005 to ensure this completion.
November 28, 2005: The city council reviewed Ohlson Landscaping’s CUPsand requested review
again to ensure completion of all required exterior improvementswhich were not installed by the
November 2005 deadline as specified above.
November 27, 2006: The city council reviewed the CUPsand requested review again in two years to
ensure completion of the parking lot.
DISCUSSION
Farid Atiyehpurchased the property at 1949 Atlantic Street in December 2005 from Erik and
Stephanie Ohlson. The Ohlson’soriginally applied for and received the CUPs.Mr. Atiyeh operated a
similar landscaping business as Ohlson Landscaping – which the CUPsallow. The CUPsrun with
the property regardless of the current owner. The purchase agreement between Mr. Atiyeh and the
Ohlson’s stated that Mr. Atiyeh was responsible for the paving of the parking lot. Mr. Atiyeh sought a
waiver for this requirement from council in 2006. The waiver request was rejected meaning the
paving of the parking lot is still a requirement of the CUPsfor 1949 Atlantic Street. The council
required the parking lot to be paved within two years.
Packet Page Number 74 of 192
Since the council’s last review, Mr. Atiyeh haspassed away leaving the property to his wife, Erin
Atiyeh. Ms. Atiyeh has no intention or desire in continuing operating a business on this site or
maintaining ownership of the property. The property is currently for sale and has been for a
considerable amount of time. Staff has worked with Ms. Atiyeh’s family on researching the property’s
history and provided documents and plans the city has on file to assist with the sale. Ms. Atiyeh
currently has a purchase agreement for the property with an individual who intends to operate a
business on the site similar to Mr. Atiyeh and as Ohlson Landscaping. The closing date for the
purchase of this property has been set for September 28, 2010.
Staff has spoken several times with the potential buyer and the buyer’s mortgage company regarding
the conditions attached to the CUPsfor this site. The buyer and his mortgage company are fully
aware of the paving requirement, as well as the other requirements ofthe CUPS for this site. Staff
feels with the unexpected death of the current landowner and the property current not in use, it is
reasonable to give a new property owner 18 months to complete the paving requirement to meet the
conditions of the CUP. Staff feels 18 months is appropriate since the council had previously given
the current owner two yearsto complete the paving. With a new owner coming in; staff wants to
work with the new occupant to ensure all conditions of the CUPs, including but not limited to the
paving of the parking lot, are being met.Staff has made it clear to the current and potential future
property owners that allconditions of theCUPsmust be met within 18 months or be faced with
potentialcouncil action, which could include revocation.
Staff acknowledges the site has a ragged look and is overgrown with weeds currently, but the site
has also been vacant for quite some time. Staff feels it will be a benefit to the neighborhood to
continue working with the current owner and the potential new owner to get the site occupied again.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the conditional use permits for 1949 Atlantic Streetand review again in March 2012 to
ensure completion of the required parking lot pavement.
P:Sec16\Midwest Grounds Maintenance\1949AtlanticCUP Review_092710
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2.Landscape Plan
3.February 9, 2004, City Council Minutes
2
Packet Page Number 75 of 192
Packet Page Number 76 of 192
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 77 of 192
Attachment 3
MINUTES
MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL
7:07 P.M., Monday, February 9, 2004
Council Chambers, Municipal Building
Meeting No. 04-03
H.PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 7:10 p.m. Ohlson Landscaping-1949 Atlantic Street
Lot Division
Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Storage
Conditional Use Permit for Metal Building
Conditional Use Permit for exterior storage within the Business Commercial
Zoning District
Design Approval
a.City Manager Fursman presented the staff report.
b.Associate Planner Finwall presented specifics from the report.
c.Commissioner Desai presented the Planning Commission Report.
d.Boardmember Ledvina presented the Community Design Review Board Report.
e.Mayor Cardinal opened the public hearing, calling for proponents or opponents.
The following person was heard:
Stephanie Jacques, the applicant, 1706 Barclay Street, Maplewood
f. Mayor Cardinal closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the lot division request to subdivide the
property at 1949 Atlantic Street into two lots based on the following conditions:
a. Provide a certified land survey showing the existing and proposed property lines
and proposed building and parking lot.
b. Deeds describing the two new legal descriptions, which must be stamped by the
city. Ramsey County requires the city acknowledgment of approval to record the
deeds. City code requires that the deeds be recorded with Ramsey County within
one year of the date of lot division approval (February 9, 2005) or the lot division
becomes null and void.
c. There are pending assessments on this property. In order for the city to approve
the lot division the applicants must submit confirmation that the payment of
assessments are resolved between the two property owners to the satisfactionof
the city engineer.
1
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
Packet Page Number 78 of 192
Seconded by Councilmember JuenemannAyes-All
Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following resolution approving a
conditional use permit for Thor and Jenny Oehrlein for exterior storage within the
Business Commercial (VC) zoning district in order to store lawn are maintenance
vehicles on Parcel A (north parcel)at 1949 Atlantic Street:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 04-02-019
WHEREAS, Thor and Jenny Oehrlein applied for a conditional use permit for exterior
storage within the business commercial zoning district for their property maintenance business;
WHEREAS, this permit applies to property located at 1949 Atlantic Street, Maplewood,
Minnesota. The legal description is:
The northerly ½ of the following lot: Vacated alley adjacent and accruing and except the
South 10 feet, the East 8.57 feet of Lot 14; also, the East 8.57 feet of Lots 11 through 13;
also Lot 6, except the South 10 feet of that part West of the East 103.57 feet of said Lot 6;
and all of Lots 7 through 10, all in Block 3, Lincoln Park, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Property Identification Number for this property is
16-29-22-14-0089;
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On January 20, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve the conditional use permit.
2. On February 9, 2004, the city council held a public hearing. City staff published a notice
in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The
council conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance to
speak and present written statements. The city council also considered reports and
recommendations from the city staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approves the above-
described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approved this
permit because:
1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the city’s comprehensive plan and Code of Ordinances.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
3.The use would not depreciate property values.
4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance
to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes,
water or air pollution, drainage, water runoff, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical
interference or other nuisances.
2
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
Packet Page Number 79 of 192
5.The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not
create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and
parks.
7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site’s natural and scenic
features into the development design.
9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval of the conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions:
1.Exterior storage is limited to vehicles associated with a property maintenance business.
All vehicles must be licensed and operable. No landscape material can be stored on the
property, including but not limited to, lawn clippings, landscape rock, etc.
2.A 6-foot-high, solid wood, screening fence must be installed and maintained on the north
property line.
3.There shall be no noise-making business activity conducted in the lot, or made by
vehicles entering or leaving the lot, between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m., Monday through Saturday,
or all day Sunday as required by city code.
4. The city council must approve a revision to this permit if the owner wants to put a
permanent building on the site.
5.The city council shall review this permit in one year.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All
Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following resolution approving Erik
Ohlson and Stephanie Jacques request for a conditional use permit to construct a 3,264-
square-foot metal building within the Business Commercial (BC) zoning district on
Parcel B (south parcel) at 1949 Atlantic Street:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 04-02-020
WHEREAS, Erik Ohlson and Stephanie Jacques applied for a conditional use permit for
the construction of a metal storage building that is 3,264 square feet in area and 25 feet in height
within the Business Commercial zoning district;
WHEREAS, this permit applies to property located at 1949 Atlantic Street, Maplewood,
Minnesota. The legal description is:
The southerly ½ of the following lot: Vacated alley adjacent and accruing and except the
3
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
Packet Page Number 80 of 192
South 10 feet, the East 8.57 feet of Lot 14; also, the East 8.57 feet of Lots 11 through 13;
also Lot 6, except the South 10 feet of that part West of the East 103.57 feet of said Lot 6;
and all of Lots 7 through 10, all in Block 3, Lincoln Park, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Property Identification Number for this property is
16-29-22-14-0089;
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On January 20, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve the conditional use permit.
2. On February 9, 2004, the city council held a public hearing. City staff published a notice
in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The
council conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance to
speak and present written statements. The city council also considered reports and
recommendations from the city staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approves the above-
described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approved this
permit because:
1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the city’s comprehensive plan and Code of Ordinances.
2.The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
3. The use would not depreciate property values.
4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance
to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes,
water or air pollution, drainage, water runoff, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical
interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not
create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and
parks.
7.The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site’s natural and scenic
features into the development design.
9.The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval of the conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions:
4
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
Packet Page Number 81 of 192
1.All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of
community development may approve minor changes.
2. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of city council
approval or the permit shall become null and void.
3. The conditional use permit shall be reviewed by the city council in one year.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All
Councilmember Rossbach moved to adopt the following resolution approving Erik
Ohlson and Stephanie Jacques request for a conditional use permit for exterior storage on
Parcel B (south parcel) at 1849 Atlantic Street:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION 04-02-021
WHEREAS, Erik Ohlson and Stephanie Jacques applied for a conditional use permit for
exterior storage within the business commercial zoning district for their landscape business;
WHEREAS, this permit applies to property located at 1949 Atlantic Street, Maplewood,
Minnesota. The legal description is:
The southerly ½ of the following lot: Vacated alley adjacent and accruing and except the
South 10 feet, the East 8.57 feet of Lot 14; also, the East 8.57 feet of Lots 11 through 13;
also Lot 6, except the South 10 feet of that part West of the East 103.57 feet of said Lot 6;
and all of Lots 7 through 10, all in Block 3, Lincoln Park, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Property Identification Number for this property is
16-29-22-14-0089;
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On January 20, 2004, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve the conditional use permit.
2. On February 9, 2004, the city council held a public hearing. City staff published a notice
in the Maplewood Review and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The
council conducted the public hearing whereby all public present were given a chance to
speak and present written statements. The city council also considered reports and
recommendations from the city staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approves the above-
described conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approved this
permit because:
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.
5
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
Packet Page Number 82 of 192
3. The use would not depreciate property values.
4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance
to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes,
water or air pollution, drainage, water runoff, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical
interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not
create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and
parks.
7.The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site’s natural and scenic
features into the development design.
9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval of the conditional use permit is subject to the following conditions:
1. Exterior storage is limited to four landscape bins (8 feet wide x 8 feet deep x 6 feet high
in size). Storage within the bins is limited to landscape goods or materials such as rock,
mulch, sand, woodchips, etc.
2. The four landscape bins must be placed on the southeast side of the lot and must be
screened from Atlantic Street with landscaping.
3. There shall be no noise-making business activity conducted in the lot, or made by
vehicles entering or leaving the lot, between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m., Monday through Saturday,
or all day Sunday as required by code.
4. The conditional use permit shall be reviewed by the city council in one year.
Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes-All
Councilmember Rossbach moved to approve the plans (grading, utility, and landscape
plans date-stamped November 18, 2003) FOR A 3,264 SQUARE FOOT METAL
BUILDING AT 1949 Atlantic Street with following conditions:
a.Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this
project.
b. Provide the following for city staff approval before the city issues a grading or
building permit:
6
City Council Meeting 02-09-04
Packet Page Number 83 of 192
1) A revised grading and drainage plan that addresses all engineering
conditions as outlined in the January 5, 2004, engineering review and
includes that the entire parking lot and driveway be paved. This plan must
be approved by the city engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit.
2) A revised utility plan, subject to the city engineer’s approval. The
applicants must sign a developer’s agreement with the City of Maplewood
to ensure proper extension of city sewer and water to the site.
3) A revised site plan showing the following:
a) The parking lot layout including the location of at least four striped
parking spaces, with one of those spaces handicap accessible as
required by the Americans with Disabilities Act.
b) The driveway with a width of at least 20 feet is paved between the
street and the parking lot. Any gate along this driveway must also
open to a 20-foot width.
c) The location of four landscape bins a maximum size of 8 feet wide
x 8 feet deep x 6 feet high.
4) Revised elevations showing one exterior faucet located on the building,
the proposed landscape bins to be constructed of concrete block, painted to
match the building, and the southern chain-link fence with beige colored
slats to match the building which creates an 80 percent opaque screen.
5) Building samples of metal panels, standing seam roof, trim, doors,
wainscot, and fence slats.
6) A revised landscape plan that shows the following:
a) Replacement of gravel on the north side of the building with grass
or native plantings.
b) Replacement of gravel on the west and south side of the building
with landscaping rock three feet out from the building and sod used
to cover the remaining ground.
c) An infiltration basin/rainwater garden planting plan showing an
adequate number of native plantings to address infiltration needs as
required by the city’s engineering department.
7) The requirement for underground irrigation is waived if the applicants sign
an agreement with the City of Maplewood stating that the owners will
hand-water all landscaping, and any required landscape material that dies
will be replaced.
8) A revised photometric plan showing the freestanding lights not to exceed
25 feet in height, including the base, and the light illumination from any
outdoor light not to exceed .4 foot candles at all property lines.
City Council Meeting 02-09-047
Packet Page Number 84 of 192
9) If trash is to be stored outside of the building, plans for a trash-dumpster
enclosure is required. The enclosure must have gates that are 100 percent
opaque, and the materials and colors of the enclosure shall be compatible
with those of the metal building.
10) A letter of credit or cash escrow for all required exterior improvements.
The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work.
c.Install all required exterior improvements including paving and striping the
parking lot, installation of landscaping, installation of beige fence slats,
installation of outdoor lighting, etc., before occupying the building.
d. If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if:
1) The city determines that the work is not essential to the public health,
safety or welfare.
2) The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City of
Maplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or
contractor shall complete any unfinished exterior improvements by June 1
if occupancy of the building is in the fall or winter, or within six weeks of
occupancy of the building if occupancy is in the spring or summer.
e.All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community
development may approve minor changes.
Seconded by Councilmember Koppen Ayes-All
City Council Meeting 02-09-048
Packet Page Number 85 of 192
Agenda Item G16
MEMORANDUM
TO:
James Antonen, City Manager
FROM:
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
SUBJECT:
Approval of Resolution Accepting Donation for Memorial Tree at Joy Park
DATE:
September 20, 2010 for September 27, 2010 Council Meeting
INTRODUCTION
Karen Schultz served as the Valley Branch Watershed District (VBWD) recording secretary from
October 1991 until her death in July 2009. She was a loyal worker and helped the watershed
district accomplish its vision. The VBWD managers would like to plant a tree to honor Ms.
Schultz on the site of a watershed district project and have selected Joy Park. VBWD has been
an important partner in the improvements at Joy Park, assisting in planning for wetland
mitigation and providing matching funds for Phase I shoreline restoration. The watershed
district managers have given the city a $250 donation for a memorial tree and plaque at Joy
Park to honor Ms. Schultz. City staff has found a location for the tree that fits well with the on-
going improvements at the park.
Minnesota State Statute 465.03 states that gifts to municipalities shall be accepted by the
governing body in the form of a resolution by a two-thirds vote.
CONSIDERATION
Approve the following resolution accepting the donation of $250 for a tree and memorial plaque.
RESOLUTION
ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION
WHEREAS
the City of Maplewood and the Community Development and Parks Department
has received a donation of $250 for a tree and plaque at Joy Park honoring Karen Schultz;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
that the Maplewood City Council authorizes the City of
Maplewood and the Community Development and Parks Department to accept this donation.
Packet Page Number 86 of 192
Agenda Item G17
MEMORANDUM
TO:
James Antonen, City Manager
FROM:
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
Ann Hutchinson, Lead Naturalist
SUBJECT:
Approval of Resolution Accepting Donation to Maplewood Nature Center
DATE:
September 21, 2010 for September 27, 2010 Council Meeting
INTRODUCTION
The Maplewood Nature Center received a 1-1/2” diameter bur oak tree from the Modern
Woodmen Youth Group. This group of adults and teens purchased and planted the tree in the
Nature Center play area. The tree was purchased from Bachman’s for $119.13 by the group
leader, Cathy Standish. This tree is planted in honor of Rob Rolfing, a Green Beret soldier from
Sioux Falls.
Minnesota State Statute 465.03 states that gifts to municipalities shall be accepted by the
governing body in the form of a resolution by a two-thirds vote.
CONSIDERATION
Approve the following resolution accepting the donation of this tree in honor of Rob Rolfing,
Green Beret from Sioux Falls.
RESOLUTION
ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION
WHEREAS
the City of Maplewood and the Community Development and Parks Department
has received a donation of a bur oak tree;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
that the Maplewood City Council authorizes the City of
Maplewood and the Community Development and Parks Department to accept this donation.
Packet Page Number 87 of 192
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page Number 88 of 192
Agenda Item H1
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
James Antonen, City Manager
FROM:
Michael Thompson, City Engineer/ Dep. Public Works Director
SUBJECT: White Bear Ave / County Rd D Improvements, Project 08-13
a. New Assessment Hearing, 7:00 p.m.
b. Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll
DATE:
September 15, 2010
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 new hearing if they disagree
with the assessment amount; with the exception of those property owners that have already filed
objections for the first assessment hearing. This hearing was also published three times in the
designated local newspaper with the required advanced notice required by State Statute.
The council should conduct the new assessment hearing, receive any additional objections, refer those
objections to the staff for action at the October 11, 2010 council meeting and consider approving the
attached resolution adopting the assessment roll less those property owners who have submitted
objections.
BACKGROUND
On June 14, 2010 the council previously called for an assessment hearing to be held, and an
assessment hearing was then conducted on July 26, 2010. However a clerical mistake was made and
the published notice for the hearing in the local news occurred on July 14 and 21. Minn. Stat. §
429.061, subd. 1 requires two weeks of published notice before the hearing date and only twelve days
were provided; two short of the requirement. Thus the hearing held on July 26 is considered invalid.
A new hearing was called for at the August 23, 2010 council meeting to be held on September 27, 2010
which is consistent with Minnesota Statute § 429.071 Subd. 2. Reassessment; which is summarized as
follows:
When an assessment is, for any reason whatsoever, set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction
as to any parcel or parcels of land, or in event the council finds that the assessment or any part
thereof is excessive or determines on advice of the municipal attorney that the assessment or
proposed assessment or any part thereof is or may be invalid for any reason, the council may,
upon notice and hearing as provided for the original assessment, make a reassessment or a new
assessment as to such parcel or parcels.
All objections made by property owners at the previous assessment hearing (July 26) would not have to
object again unless desired; all eleven (11) of these previous objections remain valid for this project and
are listed below. The first five parcels listed were mailed statements giving credit for a previous storm
water assessment agreement. The remainder of properties for this project received a statement with
the same assessment amount.
Packet Page Number 89 of 192
Agenda Item H1
1. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0008– Denny’s Inc.; 3050 White Bear Avenue
Assessment roll reflects a reduction from $23,339.88 to $21,206.30 based on a past storm water
assessment agreement.
2. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0014 Jiffy Lube/Acapulco Restaurant; 3069/3073 White Bear Avenue
Assessment roll reflects a reduction from $12,199.97 to $8,083.55 based on a past storm water
assessment agreement.
3. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0016– (This PIN has been changed by Ramsey County to
02.29.22.21.0029), Maplewood Square Shopping Center; 3035 White Bear Avenue
Assessment roll reflects a reduction from $59,754.24 to $53,504.24 based on a past storm water
assessment.
4. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0027– Plaza 3000 Shopping Center; 3000 White Bear Avenue
Assessment roll reflects a reduction from $65,016.00 to $58,766 based on a past storm water
assessment agreement.
5. Parcel 02-29-22-24-0003– Maplewood East Shopping Center; 2950 White Bear Avenue
Assessment roll reflects a reduction from $46,761.48 to $40,511.48 based on a past storm water
assessment agreement.
6. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0015- MHN Restaurant Partnership, LLC, 3065 White Bear Avenue
7. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0019- Chung Hing Wong, 3070 White Bear Avenue
8. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0005- HLW LLC, 3094 White Bear Avenue
9. Parcel 02-29-22-23-0003- Sears Roebuck and Company, 3001 White Bear Avenue
10. Parcel 02-29-22-22-0013- Lai Ching Woo, 1900 County Road D East
11. Parcel 35-35-22-33-0008- Walter F. Whitney, 1905 County Road D East
Please refer to all objections which are attached as part of this report.
PROJECT BUDGET
The proposed amount identified in the feasibility study as Maplewood’s total project contribution is
$3,374,000, with special assessments currently listed as $1,701,817.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the council conduct the Assessment Hearing and approve the attached
Resolution for Adopting the Assessment Roll for the White Bear Avenue / County Rd D Improvements,
City Project 08-13.
Attachments:
1. Resolution: Adopting Assessment Roll
2. Objections
3. Assessment Roll
4. Location Map
Packet Page Number 90 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION
ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ROLL
WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on August 23, 2010, calling for
a Public Hearing, the assessment roll for the White Bear Avenue / County Rd D Improvements, City
Project 08-13, 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:
As of September 15, 2010 staff has received the followingobjections to the proposed assessments:
1. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0008– Denny’s Inc.; 3050 White Bear Avenue
Azure Properties is objecting to the assessment on behalf of Mogren Landscaping LLP, the
property owner, for the following reasons:
a) They do not feel that the property receives benefit from the improvement and the value will
not increase.
b) They feel that revenues will decrease during the construction process.
c) When the property owner settled the condemnation with Ramsey County they were told that
there would be little or no assessment.
2. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0014 Jiffy Lube/Acapulco Restaurant.; 3069/3073 White Bear Avenue
Azure Properties is objecting to the assessment on behalf of Woodring Company, the property
owner, for the following reasons:
a) They do not feel that the property receives benefit from the improvement and the value will
not increase.
b) They feel that revenues will decrease during the construction process.
c) The businesses have access from the ring road of Maplewood Mall and they do not feel that
they should be assessed for improvements to White Bear Avenue and County Road D.
3. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0016– Maplewood Square Shopping Center; 3035 White Bear Avenue
Azure Properties is objecting to the assessment on behalf of Maplewood Square Associates,
the property owner, for the following reasons:
a)They do not feel that the property receives benefit from the improvement and the value will
not increase.
b)They feel that revenues will decrease during the construction process.
c) When the property owner settled the condemnation with Ramsey County they were told that
there would be little or no assessment.
4. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0027– Plaza 3000 Shopping Center.; 3000 White Bear Avenue
Azure Properties is objecting to the assessment on behalf of Plaza 3000 Partnership, LLP, the
property owner, for the following reasons:
a) They do not feel that the property receives benefit from the improvement and the value will
not increase.
b) They feel that revenues will decrease during the construction process.
c) When the property owner settled the condemnation with Ramsey County they were told that
there would be little or no assessment.
5. Parcel 02-29-22-24-0003– Maplewood East Shopping Center.; 2950 White Bear Avenue
Packet Page Number 91 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 1
Azure Properties is objecting to the assessment on behalf of Maplewood East Associates, the
property owner, for the following reasons:
a) They do not feel that the property receives benefit from the improvement and the value will
not increase.
b) They feel that revenues will decrease during the construction process.
c) When the property owner settled the condemnation with Ramsey County they were told that
there would be little or no assessment.
6. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0015- MHN Restaurant Partnership, LLC, 3065 White Bear Avenue
MHN Restaurant Partnership, LLC, the owner of the Wedding Day Jewelers property, is
objecting to the assessment for the following reasons:
a) They do not feel that the property receives benefit from the improvement and the value will
not increase.
b) They feel that revenues will decrease during the construction process.
7. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0019- Chung Hing Wong, 3070 White Bear Avenue
Chung Hing Wong is objecting to the assessment for the following reasons:
a) They do not feel that the property receives benefit from the improvement and the proposed
special assessment exceeds the special benefits to the property derived from the local
public improvement.
b) They also feel that the City has failed to strictly comply procedurally with the terms and
conditions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429.
8. Parcel 02-29-22-21-0005- HLW LLC, 3094 White Bear Avenue
HLW LLC is objecting to the assessment for the following reasons:
a)They do not feel that the property receives benefit from the improvement and the proposed
special assessment exceeds the special benefits to the property derived from the local
public improvement.
b)They also feel that the City has failed to strictly comply procedurally with the terms and
conditions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429.
9. Parcel 02-29-22-23-0003- Sears Roebuck and Company, 3001 White Bear Avenue
Sears Roebuck and Company is objecting to the assessment and requesting that the
assessment be reduced to $0 for the following reasons:
a) They do not feel that the property receives benefit from the improvement and the proposed
special assessment exceeds the special benefits to the property derived from the local
public improvement.
b) They also feel that the City has failed to strictly comply procedurally with the terms and
conditions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429.
c) They feel that the proposed assessment violates City Code and other Minnesota law and
statutes.
d) They feel that the assessment form is not legal and that other properties that should have
been assessed were not assessed.
10. Parcel 02-29-22-22-0013- Lai Ching Woo, 1900 County Road D East
Lai Ching Woo is requesting that the assessment be cancelled and revised.
11. Parcel 35-35-22-33-0008- Walter F. Whitney, 1905 County Road D East
Walter F. Whitney is objecting to the assessment for the following reasons:
Packet Page Number 92 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 1
a)They do not feel that the property receives benefit from the improvement and the proposed
special assessment exceeds the special benefits to the property derived from the local
public improvement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD,
MINNESOTA:
1. That the City Engineer and City Clerk are hereby instructed to review the objections received
and report to the City Council at the regular meeting on October 11, 2010, as to their
recommendations for adjustments.
2. The assessment roll for the White Bear Avenue / County Rd D 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 2011 and
shall bear interest at the rate of 5.0 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, 2010. 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 October 27, 2010, pay the whole or partial (25%
minimum) of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of the payment,
to the city clerk (the city will accept no more than (2) payments), except that no interest shall be
charged on the amount paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and they may,
at any time after October 27, 2010, pay to the county auditor the entire amount of the
assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such
payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged
through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
5. The city engineer and city clerk shall forthwith after October 27, 2010 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
Adopted by the Maplewood City Council on this 27 day of September, 2010.
Packet Page Number 93 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 94 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 95 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 96 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 97 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 98 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 99 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 100 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 101 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 102 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 103 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 104 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 105 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 106 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 2
Packet Page Number 107 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 108 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 3
Packet Page Number 109 of 192
Agenda Item H1
Attachment 4
Packet Page Number 110 of 192
Agenda Item J1
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Manager
FROM: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
Metro Transit Park and Ride Parking Ramp—Planned Unit
SUBJECT:
Development
LOCATION: 1793 Beam Avenue
DATE: September 20, 2010
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Metro Transit, a division of the Metropolitan Council, is proposing to build a three-level (a
ground-floor level and two above-ground levels), 1,000-space parking ramp at the park and ride
site located west of Sears at 1793 Beam Avenue. The applicant would also construct a
sidewalk along the Southlawn Drive frontage. The current transit center consists of a 426 space
parking lot for the park and ride and a bus-transit hub. Refer to the plans.
Requests
To develop this site, the applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) for a
planned unit development (PUD). As part of this request, the applicant is also proposing:
A building-setback reduction on the Southlawn Drive side from 30 feet to 15 feet.
A parking space width reduction from 9 ½ feet to 8 ½ feet.
BACKGROUND
November 25, 2003: The community design review board approved the plans for the existing
park and ride facility.
June 8, 2009: The city of Maplewood adopted a resolution in support of Metro Transit’s funding
request for Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality-Transit Expansion grant financing.
DISCUSSION
PUD Criteria for Flexibility in Design
Section 44-1093(b) of the PUD ordinance states that the city council may consider flexibility
from strict code compliance in the internal and external design requirements of a proposed PUD
and may consider deviations from those requirements. Deviations may be granted for planned
unit developments provided that:
Packet Page Number 111 of 192
1. The proposed development and the surrounding neighborhood can be better served by
relaxing the code requirements that regulate the physical development or layout of the
project because of its unique nature.
2. The PUD would be consistent with the spirit, intent and purposes of this chapter.
3. The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or superior quality to
that which would result from strict adherence to this chapter.
4. The deviations would not constitute a significant threat to the property values, safety, health
or general welfare of the owners or occupants of nearby land or to the environment.
5. The deviations are required for the reasonable and practical physical development of the
project.
Building Setback Reduction
There has been support by the city council for reducing front setbacks elsewhere in the city.
The 80-acre Legacy Village development to the north along Southlawn Drive, was approved
with a requirement for reduced front setbacks. The predominant front setback approved at
Legacy Village is 15 feet from a street right-of-way line (front property line). The only exception
at Legacy Village is the Ramsey County Library which was allowed to move their building back
nearer the Sculpture Park to take advantage of the park view.
The city also approved a reduced front setback for the St. John’s Hospital parking ramp of six
feet at its closest point and a setback reduction for the Maplewood Toyota parking ramp of 15
feet.
Staff feels that the proposed setback reduction meets the above five criteria as follows:
1. The reduced front setback would better serve the development and the neighborhood
because it would provide a larger ramp with150 more parking spaces than it would by
maintaining a 30-foot setback. This would serve the community because it would meet the
goal of the Transportation Action Plan within the 2030 Comprehensive Plan by encouraging
and facilitating public transit.
2. The request for a reduced front setback would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance
and serve the community by maximizing the number of spaces in this proposed parking
ramp.
3. From an architectural point of view, reducing the front setback from 30 feet to 15 feet would
not make a superior project, however, staff does not feel it would negatively impact the
building appearance. But from the standpoint of meeting parking needs at the park and ride,
as mentioned above, reducing the setback to 15 feet would improve the usefulness of this
parking facility because it would result in a greater parking capacity.
4. The proposed setback reduction would not negatively impact property values, safety, health
or welfare.
5. The proposed setback reduction is needed for the most reasonable and practical layout of
the site because of the triangular shape of the property. A rectangular-shaped site would
2
Packet Page Number 112 of 192
lend itself to a more traditional parking ramp design rather than having to work within the
existing lot shape. Increasing the building setback to 30 feet would reduce the proposed
parking capacity and impact the efficient use of the parking ramp.
Parking Stall Width Reduction
The applicant pointed out in their narrative that, “it is Metro Transit’s belief that the intended
parking use of this project is not specifically addressed in the city’s zoning ordinance for low
turnover parking spaces.” They feel that the nature of the proposed parking ramp would provide
a covered, sheltered environment which would accommodate the activity of twice-a-day use vs.
a typical commercial low-turnover use that would have more activity. The applicant considers
the park and ride ramp as an “ultra-low turnover” parking use.
The applicant also provided a comparison chart showing what width spaces some metro
communities allow for a park and ride parking ramp. See page 8 of the narrative. According to
this data, Maplewood requires the widest spaces at 9 ½ feet. The other communities with park
and rides utilize 8 ½-foot-wide spaces.
Staff feels that 8 ½-foot-wide spaces are useable, but can be tight to maneuver within. As an
alternative to 9 ½-foot-wide spaces, the city does allow 9-foot-wide employee-parking spaces
for businesses. This is the closest parking scenario the city code provides to the proposed
parking facility. The community design review board, however, did support the proposed
8 ½-foot-wide spaces.
Building Official and Fire Marshal Comments
Dave Fisher, the Maplewood Building Official, reviewed the proposal and has the following
comments:
The applicant should have a pre-construction meeting with the building inspection staff
The city will require a complete building code analysis
Provide accessible parking spaces per 2006 IBC
Provide accessible bathrooms per 2006 IBC
Provide elevator per 2006 IBC
Provide address numbers on the building
All exiting must go to a public way
Provide adequate Fire Department access to the building
Butch Gervais, the city’s fire marshal and assistant fire chief, commented that this facility must
meet all applicable fire codes.
Engineering Comments from Maplewood Engineering, Ramsey County and SEH
This proposal was reviewed by Steve Kummer, staff engineer with the city, Erin Laberee,
Ramsey County Traffic Engineer and by George Calebaugh and Tom Sohrweide, traffic
engineers with the engineering consulting firm SEH.
The primary issue with this proposal centers on traffic impact with recommendations for
managing an increase in traffic congestion. Mr. Kummer’s report also discusses
3
Packet Page Number 113 of 192
grading/erosion control, utilities, the need for a pedestrian easement and other engineering
issues. Please refer to the attached reports.
SEH’s Review
The city regularly consults with the engineering staff of SEH to analyze traffic matters that
require in-depth study. Such is the case with this proposal and the review of the applicant’s
traffic impact study. The applicant should reimburse the city for all review expenses by SEH as
well as any costs incurred by the city’s engineering staff in the review of this proposal.
Summary
Staff is supportive of the request to reduce the building setback from Southlawn Drive. Staff is
not strongly opposed to the proposed 8 ½-foot-wide parking spaces, but the planning
commission and city council have historically not been supportive of narrower parking spaces in
the past. For that reason, staff did not recommend approval of the parking stall width reduction
to 8 ½ feet.
COMMISSION ACTION
August 24, 2010: The community design review board recommended approval of the proposed
site plan. The applicant will submit the architectural and landscaping plans later for review. The
CDRB commented that, with the reduced setback from Southlawn Drive, they expect to see
attractive architectural design when those plans are submitted. The board also recommended
approval of the 8 ½-foot-wide parking spaces.
September 7, 2010: The planning commission recommended approval of this request.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution approving a conditional use permit for a planned unit development for the
proposed Metro Transit parking ramp at the Maplewood Mall area park and ride facility. This
approval includes a reduction in the front setback for the proposed parking ramp of 15 feet from
the Southlawn Drive right-of-way line and a reduction in parking stall widths from 9 ½ feet to 9
feet. Approval is subject to the findings required by ordinance and subject to the following
conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the site plan date-stamped July 28, 2010. Staff may approve
minor changes.
2. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
3. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval
or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
4
Packet Page Number 114 of 192
4. Comply with the requirements of the city’s engineering department in consideration of their
review and the comments provided by the Ramsey County Traffic Engineer and the city’s
traffic consultant at SEH.
5. The applicant shall work with the building official and fire marshal to ensure compliance with
applicable codes.
6. This approval does not include landscaping, lighting or architectural plans which shall be
submitted for community design review board approval.
5
Packet Page Number 115 of 192
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 4.41 acres
Existing Use: Metro Transit Park and Ride Facility
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Maplewood Mall parking lot
South: Beam Avenue and Chili’s
East: Maplewood Mall parking and the Maplewood Mall
West: Southlawn Drive, Olive Garden and McDonald’s
PLANNING
Land Use Plan: C (commercial)
Zoning: BC (business commercial)
Criteria for CUP/PUD Approval
Section 44-1097(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards.
See findings 1-9 in the resolution.
APPLICATION/DECISION DEADLINE
The city received the complete application and plans for this proposal on August 11, 2010.
State law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications.
The deadline for city action on this proposal is October 10, 2010.
p:sec2N\Park and Ride Parking Ramp CC Report 9 10 te
Attachments:
1. Location/Zoning Map
2. Land Use Plan Map
3. Site Plan
4. Applicant’s Narrative date-stamped August 20, 2010
5. Engineering Report dated August 27, 2010
6. Letter from Erin Laberee dated August 27, 2010
7. Traffic Impact Study Review by SEH dated July 30, 2010
8. Resolution
9. Plans date-stamped July 28, 2010 (separate attachment)
6
Packet Page Number 116 of 192
Packet Page Number 117 of 192
Packet Page Number 118 of 192
Packet Page Number 119 of 192
Packet Page Number 120 of 192
Packet Page Number 121 of 192
Packet Page Number 122 of 192
Packet Page Number 123 of 192
Packet Page Number 124 of 192
Packet Page Number 125 of 192
Packet Page Number 126 of 192
Packet Page Number 127 of 192
Packet Page Number 128 of 192
Packet Page Number 129 of 192
Packet Page Number 130 of 192
Packet Page Number 131 of 192
Packet Page Number 132 of 192
Packet Page Number 133 of 192
Packet Page Number 134 of 192
Packet Page Number 135 of 192
Packet Page Number 136 of 192
Packet Page Number 137 of 192
Attachment 8
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Lindsay Sheppard, representing the Metropolitan Council, applied for a conditional
use permit for a planned unit development to construct a parking ramp at the Maplewood Mall area
Metro Transit Park & Ride facility.
WHEREAS, Section 44-6 of the city ordinance provides that a PUD can be a development
characterized by a unified site design with two or more principal uses or structures.
WHEREAS, Section 44-1093(b) of the city ordinance provides that the city council may
consider flexibility from strict code compliance in the internal and external design requirements
of the project dependent upon the following findings:
1. The proposed development and the surrounding neighborhood can be better served
by relaxing the code requirements that regulate the physical development or layout
of the project because of its unique nature.
2. The PUD would be consistent with the spirit, intent and purposes of this chapter.
3. The planned unit development would produce a development of equal or superior
quality to that which would result from strict adherence to this chapter.
4. The deviations would not constitute a significant threat to the property values, safety,
health or general welfare of the owners or occupants of nearby land or to the
environment.
5. The deviations are required for the reasonable and practical physical development of
the project.
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting that the city allow a building setback reduction for the
proposed parking ramp from the Southlawn Drive right-of-way line from 30 feet to 15 feet and
also a parking stall width reduction from 9 ½ feet to 8 ½ feet.
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property located at 1793 Beam Avenue. The legal
description is:
Lot 9, Block 1, Maplewood Mall Addition
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On September 7, 2010, 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 report and recommendation of
city staff. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve this
permit.
Packet Page Number 138 of 192
2. On September 27, 2010, 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 and building setback and parking stall width reduction to nine feet wide (not
8 ½ feet as proposed), because:
1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the City's Comprehensive Plan and this Code.
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 not exceed the design standards of any affected street.
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.
The use would cause no more than minimal adverse environmental effects.
9.
10. The proposed development and the surrounding neighborhood can be better served by
relaxing the code requirements that regulate the physical development or layout of the
project because of its unique nature.
11. The PUD would be consistent with the spirit, intent and purposes of this chapter.
12. The PUD would produce a development of equal or superior quality to that which would
result from strict adherence to this chapter.
13. The deviations would not constitute a significant threat to the property values, safety, health
or general welfare of the owners or occupants of nearby land or to the environment.
14. The deviations are required for the reasonable and practical physical development of the
project.
2
Packet Page Number 139 of 192
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city date-stamped July 28,
2010. Staff may approve minor changes.
2. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
3. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council
approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline
for one year.
4. Comply with the requirements of the city’s engineering department in consideration of
their review and the comments provided by the Ramsey County Traffic Engineer and the
city’s traffic consultant at SEH.
5. The applicant shall work with the building official and fire marshal to ensure compliance
with applicable codes.
6. This approval does not include landscaping, lighting or architectural plans which shall be
submitted for community design review board approval.
The Maplewood City Council __________ this resolution on ___________.
3
Packet Page Number 140 of 192
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2010
5. PUBLIC HEARING
b.
Conditional Use Permit/Planned Unit Development for Maplewood Mall Area Park-
and-Ride Parking Ramp, 1793 Beam Avenue
Mr. Ekstrand provided background and led discussion on this issue. A request is being made
by Metro Transit, a division of the Met Council, to build a three-level parking ramp at its
current park-and ride facility located at the southwest corner of Maplewood mall. The request
includes a ground-level and two upper parking levels. Metro Transit is requesting approval of
a conditional use permit (CUP) for a planned unit development (PUD) to build the structure.
The current facility consists of 426 stalls as well as the park and ride bus transit hub.
The proposal includes a request for two reductions from the city’s zoning ordinance for
setback and parking stall width. The setback reduction would reduce the setback from 30 feet
to 15 feet, and applicant is requesting a reduction in parking stall width from 9.5 feet to 8.5
feet. Staff explained that the PUD does allow for flexibility in design. Staff believes the
setback request does meet the five criteria imposed by the ordinance. Staff also noted that
the city has allowed reduced setbacks in the past for the Legacy Village PUD, St. John’s
Hospital’s parking ramp and for Maplewood Toyota’s parking ramp.
The applicant has shown that the requested width of 8.5 feet is commonly used in parking
ramps, although the city has a fairly conservative view on this issue with the code at 9.5 feet.
Staff is recommending approval of the PUD with the reduced setback and reduced stalls to 9-
feet wide.
Pat Jones, Tom Downs, Gary Milne Rojek all spoke in support of the proposal as
representatives of Metro Transit or their consultants and presented justification for the
setback and parking stall width reduction.
Audience member, Al Olson, 1221 Frost Avenue, addressed the commission explaining
having more stalls, even though at 8 ½ feet wide, gives him more options and a better chance
of finding a stall that he can park in easily.
The public hearing portion of this issue was closed and the commission continued their
discussion.
Commissioner Pearson moved that the Planning Commission table the resolution to approve
a CUP for a PUD for the proposed Metro Transit park-and-ride facility at the Maplewood mall
to allow the applicant time to review plans to designate some small and large reserved
parking spaces.
Commissioner seconded by Commissioner Martin.
Ayes: Pearson and Martin; Nays: Bierbaum, Fischer, Nuss, Yarwood. Motion fails.
September 7, 2010
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
1
Packet Page Number 141 of 192
Commissioner Yarwood moved to adopt the resolution to approve a CUP for a PUD for the
proposed Metro Transit park-and-ride facility including the proposed setback reduction from
30’ to 15’ from the Southlawn line right of way and reduced stall width from 9’6” to 9”.
Approval is subject to conditions 1 through 6.
Commissioner Nuss seconded the motion. Ayes: Bierbaum, Fischer, Nuss, Yarwood;
Nays: Pearson and Martin. Motion carries.
September 7, 2010
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
2
Packet Page Number 142 of 192
Agenda Item J.2.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
James Antonen, City Manager
FROM:
Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
Bill Priefer, Recycling Coordinator
SUBJECT:
Review of Recycling Proposals and Direct Staff to Begin Contract Negotiations
DATE:
September 21,2010 for the September 27 City Council Meeting
INTRODUCTION
The five-year recycling contract with Eureka Recycling will end on December 31, 2010. In order
to ensure a new recycling contract is awarded by January 1, 2011, the City submitted a request
for proposal (RFP) to interested recycling contractors which outlines the City’s recycling
requirements. The City received six proposals from the following contractors: Allied Waste,
Eureka Recycling, Highland Sanitation and Recycling, Inc., Tennis Sanitation, LLC, Veolia
Environmental Services, and Waste Management.
Background
February 1, 2010, the City Council held a workshop to discuss the recycling contract RFP
process and requirements.
March 15, 2010, the Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission held a recycling
contractor informational meeting. The intent of the meeting was to allow interested recycling
contractors an opportunity to present their recycling program to the City. Following are the
contractors who presented during the meeting:
Allied Waste
Eureka Recycling
Highland Sanitation and Recycling, Inc.
Tennis Sanitation, LLC
Waste Management
February 24 and March 24, 2010, the ENR Commission reviewed draft language proposed for
the City’s recycling contract RFP.
April 19, 2010, the ENR recommended approval of the draft recycling contract RFP.
April 26, 2010, the City Council held a workshop to review the recycling contract RFP.
May 10, 2010, the City Council approved the final version of the recycling contract RFP.
June 1, 2010, the recycling contract RFP was released to all interested contractors and the
public.
June 30, 2010, the City received six recycling proposals by the deadline of June 30.
July and August 2010 the Environmental Review Committee reviewed and ranked the six
proposals. The committee is made up of two ENR Commissioners appointed by the full
commission to evaluate the proposals (Commissioners Trippler and Yingling).
Packet Page Number 143 of 192
August 16, 2010, the ENR Commission reviewed the six proposals and the Environmental
Review Committee’s ranking.
DISCUSSION
Existing Recycling Contract
Our current contract with Eureka Recycling is for dual-stream recycling collection with a contract
term of five years, ending December 31, 2010. The City receives 60 percent revenue share
from the sale of paper and 50 percent revenue share from the sale of aluminum. The City also
shares in the processing costs of the recyclables and is charged a fuel surcharge. Over the
term of the contract Eureka Recycling has been committed to education, customer service, and
innovative recycling programs.
Review Process
The RFP states that the ENR Commission will appoint at least two commissioners to serve on
an Environmental Review Committee. The ENR Commission appointed Commissioners
Trippler and Yingling to serve on the Environmental Review Committee. The Environmental
Review Committee was charged with reviewing each proposal and scoring them based on the
RFP evaluation criteria and recommending the top three proposals, in rank order of priority, to
the ENR Commission. The RFP requires the ENR Commission to review the committee’s
recommendation, and make a recommendation of their top three choices to the City Council.
The City Council will review the Environmental Review Committee’s and the ENR Commission’s
recommendations and authorize staff to begin contract negotiations with the City Council’s top
three proposal choices, in rank order of priority. Staff then begins negotiations with the first
ranked contractor. If those negotiations fail, staff would proceed to the next ranked contractor,
and so on. Staff will bring the draft contract back to the City Council for approval in October.
The schedule for completion of the recycling proposal and contract reviews is as follows:
September 27, 2010: City Council reviews recycling proposals and authorizes staff to
begin negotiations on a recycling contract.
October 25, 2010: City Council approves a recycling contract.
January 1, 2011: New recycling contract begins.
RFP Requirements
The RFP requested dual-stream recycling collection proposals, with single-stream proposals
permitted as an alternative. The single-stream versus dual-stream debate was discussed at
length by the ENR Commission during the creation of the RFP.
As you recall, single-stream recycling collection involves the collection of all residential
recyclables including cans, glass, plastic, and paper combined and collected together. Dual-
stream recycling collection involves separating and processing cans, glass, and plastic from
paper. While dual-stream recycling may not be as convenient for residents as single-stream
recycling because of the sorting requirements, studies reflect that the residual rate for single-
2
Packet Page Number 144 of 192
stream can be as high as 30 percent. The residual rate in Maplewood with our dual-stream
collection is currently less than 1 percent.
The term “residual” is defined as the recycled material that is collected, but damaged or
contaminated during collection or processing to the point that it is no longer marketable. It was
the commission’s goal to continue to promote the dual-stream method of recycling to ensure all
materials that can be recycled such as glass, wet-strength cardboard, and milk cartons and
juice boxes, are being recycled.
The RFP calls out the term of the contract as a three-year contract, with two one-year
extensions possible.
Proposal Summaries
The City received six proposals, one for dual-stream collection and five for single-stream.
Additionally, one of the proposals was for an alternative five-year contract. Following is a brief
summary of the proposals.
Allied Waste:
Single-stream recycling with collection every-other-week.
“Recycle Bank” rewards program as an incentive to recycle.
Recycling will be sorted and processed at either their Minneapolis or Inver Grove
Heights facility.
Glass-to-glass recycling.
No fuel surcharge.
Eureka Recycling:
Dual-stream recycling with collection every week.
Revenue from the sale of recyclable materials shared with the City. Revenue is based
on published market indices.
Processing costs shared by Eureka and the City.
Recycling will be sorted and processed at their recycling facility in Minneapolis.
Glass-to-glass recycling.
No fuel surcharge.
Highland Sanitation and Recycling, Inc.:
Single-stream recycling with collection every-other-week.
Recycling is sent to various local recycling facilities.
No glass-to-glass recycling. (Glass is used in road base and other alternative
applications.)
No fuel surcharge.
Tennis Sanitation, LLC:
Single-stream recycling with collection every week.
Five pricing options submitted:
Option 1 – Tennis-owned carts, $.25 credit per month per household
o
Option 2 – City-owned carts, $.25 credit per month per household
o
Option 3 – City-owned carts, no credit
o
Option 4 – Use existing City recycling bins, $.25 credit per month per household
o
Option 5 – Use existing City recycling bins, no credit
o
3
Packet Page Number 145 of 192
Recycling will be sorted and processed at their facility in St. Paul Park.
Glass-to-glass recycling. In addition, broken glass recycled to Class 5 road material.
No fuel surcharge.
Veolia Environmental Services:
Single-stream recycling with collection every-other-week.
Recycling is sent to Allied Waste in Minneapolis or Inver Grove Heights for sorting and
processing.
Glass-to-glass recycling as well as glass-to-fiberglass.
Fuel surcharge charged to City.
Waste Management:
Single-stream recycling with collection every-other-week.
Revenue from the sale of recyclable paper materials shared with the City for single-
family dwellings only. Revenue is based on actual sales of recyclable material, as
received by Waste Management.
Total processing fee charged to City.
Recycling will be sorted and processed at their facility in Minneapolis.
Requesting an alternative five-year contract.
Glass shipped to Chicago for optical sorting.
Fuel surcharge charged to City.
Evaluation Criteria
The RFP states that the City will objectively evaluate the proposals submitted to determine the
best value for the City and its residents. The evaluation criteria are a system of points that are
awarded to each variable of a proposal. There were a total of 100 points possible - 40 points for
cost criteria, 30 points for environmental and education criteria, and 30 points for strength of
qualifications and responsiveness criteria. The evaluation criteria and relative point values for
each area are as follows:
Cost Criteria – 40 Points Possible
Per household per month price for recycling collection services (30 points)
Projected amount of revenue from the sale of recyclable materials shared with the City
(10 points)
Environmental/Education Criteria – 30 Points Possible
Public education (5 points)
Pollutio reduction efforts (7 points)
n
Glass-to-glass recycling (5 points)
Additional recycling services (drop-off sites, etc.) (5 points)
Innovative approaches to increase recycling rates (5 points)
Opportunities for additional materials to be collected throughout the contract (3 points)
Strength and Responsiveness Criteria – 30 Points Possible
Strength of qualifications of the vendor (25 points)
Responsiveness of the vendor to all provisions of the RFP (5 points)
TOTAL POINTS POSSIBLE = 100
4
Packet Page Number 146 of 192
Environmental Review Committee’s Recommendation
The Environmental Review Committee ranked all six proposals based on the evaluation criteria
described above. The average of the two committee member scores was used to determine the
rankings. In the chart below, staff has listed the overall rankings (100 points possible), and also
separated the rankings into the three evaluation criteria which include cost (40 points possible),
environmental/education (30 points possible), and strength/responsiveness (30 points possible).
Based on the overall points listed below, the Environmental Review Committee recommended
the top three contractors in rank order or priority to the ENR Commission as Eureka Recycling
(83.25 points), Tennis Sanitation, LLC (Options 4 and 5) (74.25 points), and Veolia
Environmental Services (63 points).
CONTRACTOR POINTS
Environment/ Strength/
Cost EducationResponsivenessOverall
(40) (30)(30)(100)
83.25
1. Eureka Recycling 24.5 29.0 29.75
2. Tennis Sanitation, LLC
74.25
a. Option 4 30.0 17.0 27.25
(existing City bins, $.25
credit per house/mo.)
74.25
b. Option 5 30.0 17.0 27.25
(existing City bins)
63.00
3. Veolia Environmental Services 23.5 15.5 24.0
4. Tennis Sanitation, LLC
61.75
a. Option 2 17.5 17.0 27.25
(City owned bins, $.25
credit per house/mo.)
61.75
b. Option 3 17.5 17.0 27.25
(City owned bins)
5. Tennis Sanitation, LLC
56.25
a. Option 1 12.0 17.0 27.25
(Tennis owned bins,
$.25 credit per house/mo.)
48.5
6. Waste Management 7.5 11.5 14.0
44.25
7. Allied Waste 0.0 17.5 26.75
36.75
8. Highland Sanitation and Recycling 20.25 10.0 12.0
Criteria Descriptions and Ranking
Environmental/Education Criteria
The environmental/education criteria was added to the evaluation to reflect the City’s recycling
goals: maximizing the fullest recovery possible of recyclable materials and improving public
education of all City residents about recycling services so as to improve participation and
recovery rates. Thirty points were available for these criteria including pollution reduction
efforts, glass-to-glass recycling, additional recycling services (drop-off sites, etc.), public
education, innovative approaches to increase recycling rates, and opportunities for additional
materials to be collected throughout the contract. Based on the environmental/education points
5
Packet Page Number 147 of 192
listed above, the Environmental Review Committee’s top three contractors in rank order of
priority in this category are Eureka (29 points), Allied Waste (17.5 points), and Tennis (17
points).
Strength and Responsiveness Criteria
The strength/responsive criteria were added to the evaluation to measure the qualifications of a
contractor (particularly how the contractor will be able to meet the needs of the City of
Maplewood) and determine how well they respond to the RFP. Based on the
strength/responsiveness points listed above, the Environmental Review Committee’s top three
contractors in rank order of priority in this category are Eureka (29.75 points), Tennis (27.25
points), and Allied Waste (26.75 points).
Cost Criteria
The Environmental Review Committee scored the proposals based on the two cost criteria:
price per household per month and revenue share. Based on the original cost analysis (prior to
revisions made for this report) the Environmental Review Committee’s top three contractors in
rank order of priority in this category are Tennis (30 points), Eureka (24.5 points), and Veolia
(23.5 points).
Cost Analysis
Mary Chamberlain of R. W. Beck is assisting the City in the recycling collection procurement
process as part of R. W. Beck’s technical assistance contract with Ramsey County. Ms.
Chamberlain conducted a cost analysis of the six proposals to determine the total three-year
contract costs to the City based on variables such as processing costs, revenue share,
recycling credit, fuel surcharge, costs of City-supplied carts, etc. The Environmental Review
Committee used this cost analysis to rank the cost criteria for each proposal.
Review of Cost Analysis
Once the overall cost estimates were published for the September 13 city council meeting, staff
questioned the analysis used to estimate the cost of the revenue share proposals (Eureka and
Waste Management). To ensure a fair and accurate portrayal of all the recycling contract costs,
staff recommended that the City Council table the recycling proposal review item until
September 27, 2010, in order to give staff additional time to review the analysis. Following is a
summary of that review:
1. RFP Revenue Share Formula: Based upon staff’s review, it was determined that the
consultants estimated total contract costs for the revenue share proposals (Eureka and
Waste Management) on the following formula:
Revenue Divided Between the City and the Contractor
Minus Processing Fee from the City’s Portion of the Revenue
Equals Final Contract Cost
2. City Revenue Share Formula: This method conflicts with the formula used by the city in
our current contract with Eureka which is as follows:
6
Packet Page Number 148 of 192
Processing Fee Taken From Overall Revenue
Remaining Revenue Share Divided Between the City and the Contractor
Equals Final Contract Cost
An example of the RFP revenue share formula versus the City revenue share formula
can be found on Attachment 1.
The text of the RFP defines the revenue share formula as described in example 1 above.
However, the Recycling Collection Price Worksheet in the RFP, which is required to be
submitted by each contractor as part of the proposal, leaves the revenue share formula open for
interpretation.
Regardless of how the consultants or the contractors interpreted the revenue share formula, the
RFP does allow alternate pricing formulas to be submitted as an Alternate Proposal Scenario.
Eureka Recycling submitted an alternative proposal by attaching their annual tonnage and
revenue report, which reflects the revenue share formula as defined in example 2 above. This
is the formula the city has been using over the last five years of our current contract. Eureka
was simply following our standard operating procedure. Based on this review, it is clear that
Eureka Recycling’s total contract cost should have been analyzed differently than Waste
Management’s total contract cost.
Based on this new information, the consultants and staff have re-evaluated the cost analysis for
Eureka Recycling and reflected that new cost on the total contract cost table below. Previous
cost analysis for the Eureka Recycling contracts are shown in italics. The table reflects total
costs of each proposal based on a three-year contract. Proposals that included a revenue
share arrangement were analyzed based on high, low, and average published market prices in
order to provide the City with average, best, and worst case scenarios.
Contractor Contract Cost Ranking
Tennis Sanitation, LLC - Option 4 $ 976,752 1 (tie)
Tennis Sanitation, LLC - Option 5 $ 976,752 1 (tie)
Eureka (high market prices) $ 984,816 2
Previous Eureka (high)$1,195,657 3
Difference -210,841
Veolia Environmental Services* $1,187,471 3
Eureka (average market prices) $1,209,709 4
Previous Eureka (average) $1,380,281 6
Difference -170,572
Highland Sanitation $1,263,231 5
Tennis Sanitation, LLC - Option 2 $1,306,766 6 (tie)
Tennis Sanitation, LLC - Option 3 $1,306,766 6 (tie)
Eureka (low market prices) $1,385,349 7
Previous Eureka (low)$1,555,006 9
Difference -169,657
Tennis Sanitation, LLC – Option 1 $1,395,360 8
Waste Management (high market prices)* $1,454,326 9
Waste Management (average market prices)* $1,760,227 10
Allied Waste $1,899,576 11
Waste Management (low market prices)* $2,535,899 12
7
Packet Page Number 149 of 192
*Fuel Surcharge: Waste Management and Veolia are requesting a fuel surcharge in
their proposals. The cost analysis does not include the fuel surcharge which is
proposed in both proposals when diesel fuel goes over $3.00 per gallon. Ms.
Chamberlain estimated that an increase in diesel over $3.00 per gallon could have an
impact on Waste Management’s proposal by $11,535 to $53,426 per year and on
Veolia’s proposal by $3,721 to $37,210 per year, depending on fuel price and each
contractor’s proposed fuel surcharge.
Revised Cost Criteria
The Environmental Review Committee scored the proposals based on the previous cost
analysis, ranking the top three proposals for cost as follows: Tennis (30 points), Eureka (24.5
points), and Veolia (23.5 points). Had they been given the revised Total Contract Cost analysis
as defined above they would have seen Eureka’s high market costs ranked second, rather than
third; average market costs ranked fourth, rather than sixth; and low market costs ranked
seventh, rather than ninth. Based on this information the Environmental Review Committee
may have increased the points in the cost category for Eureka for the decrease in the estimated
three-year contract cost. But this increase would not have been large enough to change the
overall rankings.
Revenue as a Variable
Under the City’s current recycling contract, the revenue from the sale of the material recycled in
the City is shared with the City to be used locally to reduce the cost of the program and support
other waste reduction efforts. Since this revenue is shared between the contractor and the City,
it is fair to say that a contractor may work harder than a contractor who does not share revenue
in order to capture as much of the City’s recyclables as possible. Additionally, in order to obtain
the highest value for the recyclables, this contractor would also ensure that recyclables are kept
free from contamination. Alternatively, a contractor who charges a flat rate per household may
not have an incentive to capture more recyclables and keep them free of contamination.
Over the life of the City’s current five-year recycling contract with Eureka Recycling, the City has
received an average of $64,500 per year in revenue share. This reflects the high market share
of $106,000 one year and the low market share of $14,000 another year. The proposals that
included revenue share were analyzed based on high, low, and average published market
prices in order to provide the City with average, best, and worst case scenarios.
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Recommendation
On August 16, 2010, the ENR Commission reviewed the Environmental Review Committee’s
ranking and agreed with their assessment. The ENR Commission recommends the top three
contractors in rank order of priority: Eureka Recycling, Tennis Sanitation (Options 4 and 5), and
Veolia Environmental Services (refer to attached minutes – Attachment 2).
SUMMARY
The RFP called for dual-stream recycling collection proposals as the city’s first choice, with
single-stream recycling collection allowed as an alternate. The City received only one proposal
for dual-stream from Eureka Recycling, and the other five proposals were for single-stream. If
the City opts for single-stream in our next contract, it should be noted that it would be difficult or
impossible for the City to go back to the dual-stream method. Over the life of the City’s current
8
Packet Page Number 150 of 192
five-year contract, Eureka Recycling and the City have educated our residents on the dual-
stream method. Implementing single-stream will require a transitional phase by the City and the
new contractor to ensure education and marketing of the new system.
The Environmental Review Committee and the ENR Commission both recommended Eureka
Recycling as their top ranked proposal. During review of their proposal, the committee and
commission both reflected on the positive aspects of Eureka’s work with the City to date and the
work proposed in the new contract as follows:
Maplewood citizens have been educated on the dual-stream recycling collection method
for the last five years.
Low residual rates seen in the dual-stream recycling collection method.
Recyclables put to their highest and best use.
Strong educational campaigns.
Strong customer service.
Revenue share creates an incentive for Eureka Recycling to maximize the recycling
tonnage in our City.
Promotion of organic recovery.
Textile recovery.
Promotion of public space recycling.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the Environmental Review Committee’s and the Environmental and Natural
Resources Commission’s recommendations, staff recommends that the City Council direct staff
to proceed with recycling contract negotiations in ranking order as follows 1) Eureka Recycling;
2) Tennis Sanitation, LLC: and 3) Veolia Environmental Services. Staff will begin negotiations
with the top ranked vendor, Eureka Recycling. If those negotiations fail, staff will proceed to the
next ranked vendor, and so on. Staff will bring a draft contract back to the City Council for
approval in October.
Attachments:
1. August Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Minutes
2. Revenue Share Example Calculations
9
Packet Page Number 151 of 192
Attachment 1
REVENUESHARECALCULATIONEXAMPLES
RFPMETHODCITYMETHOD
Revenue$20,500Revenue$20,500
RevenueShare%X50%LessProcessingCosts9,000
NetRevenue10,250NetRevenue11,500
LessProcessingcosts9,000RevenueShare%X50%
CityRevenueShare$1,250CityRevenueShare$5,750
Packet Page Number 152 of 192
Attachment 2
(Partial) MINUTES
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
7:00 p.m., Monday, August 16, 2010
Council Chambers, City Hall
1830 County Road B East
1. CALL TO ORDER
A meeting of the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Chair Trippler.
2. ROLL CALL
Dale Trippler, Chair Present
Randee Edmundson, Commissioner Present
Judith Johannessen, Commissioner Present
Carole Lynne, Commissioner Absent
Carol Mason Sherrill, Commissioner Absent
Bill Schreiner, Commissioner Present
Ginny Yingling, Commissioner Present
Staff Present
Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner
Councilmember Liaison Present
Kathleen Juenemann, Councilmember
5. NEW BUSINESS
a. Recycling Proposals
The city’s five-year contract with Eureka Recycling will end on Dec 31, 2010. An RFP outlining
the city’s recycling requirements was submitted to interested contractors. The city received
proposals from: Allied Waste, Eureka Recycling, Highland Sanitation, Tennis Sanitation, Veolia
Environmental Services, and Waste Management.
The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) reviewed the proposals and is recommending its
top three in rank order to the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission (ENRC). The
ENRC will then recommend their top three to the City Council at the September 13, 2010,
meeting. On October 11, 2010, the City Council will approve a recycling contract.
The ERC reviewed the proposals based on criteria described in the RFP. 100 points were
divided as follows: 40 based on cost, 60 points based on environmental education and vendor
qualifications.
Chair Trippler and Commissioner Yingling were the ERC members who submitted score sheets.
The average of the two scores for each vendor was being used to determine the top three. The
ERC is recommending the following three vendors in rank order:
August 16, 2010 1
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes
Packet Page Number 153 of 192
Eureka: 83.25 pts
Tennis (options 4 and 5) 74.25 pts for each option
Veolia 63.00 pts
The confidential cost analysis completed by Mary Chamberlain is included in the staff report.
Bill Preifer assisted in answering questions regarding the cost analysis, including the annual
revenue projections.
Commission Schreiner noted that to use options 1 and option 2 of the Tennis proposal would
require a significant investment by the city to purchase the new recycling bins.
Commissioner Yingling commented that not all vendors have glass to glass recycling. Some
proposals are not clear as to where the recycled glass actually goes.
Commissioner Johannessen noted that Eureka has a very strong education program as part of
their service.
Chair Trippler noted that Tennis is making a greater effort to find buyers for plastics that are not
currently being recycled.
Councilmember Liaison Juenemann stepped to the podium and questioned whether or not the
costs were analyzed or just taken straight from the proposal. Staff explained that proposal costs
were analyzed and clarified with the vendor where necessary.
Commissioner Edmundson asked that additional information be requested from Tennis regarding
the strength of the markets for the wide range of plastics including plastics listed with #3, #4, and
#5.
The ENRC recommends the following three vendors in rank order:
Eureka Recycling
Tennis Sanitation
Veolia Environmental Services
Commissioner Yingling moved that the ENRC adopt the vendor recommendations of the ERC as
ranked and recommend these three vendors to the City Council.
Commissioner Johannessen seconded the motion.
Ayes all, motion passed.
The proposal from Eureka Recycling, Tennis Sanitation and Veolia Environmental Services will
be presented to the City Council on September 13, 2010. Commissioner Yingling will attend the
meeting to represent the ENRC.
August 16, 2010 2
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes
Packet Page Number 154 of 192
Agenda Item J.3.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Jim Antonen, City Manager
FROM:
Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
SUBJECT:
Resolution of Support for the Submittal of an Environmental Protection Agency
Brownfields Cleanup Grant for the Gladstone Savanna Restoration Project
LOCATION:
Gladstone Savanna - Frost Avenue and English Street
DATE:
September 21, 2010 for the September 27 City Council Meeting
INTRODUCTION
City staff is requesting that the City Council adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 1). This
resolution is required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of the city’s
application for a Brownfield Cleanup Grant. The EPA Brownfields Cleanup Grant program was
established by the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (Brownfields
Law, P.L. 107-118) and provides funds for cleanup of brownfields, including former railroad
maintenance and other industrial properties that are being restored for natural, recreational, and
open space uses.
The city is requesting a grant from EPA in the amount of $200,000 (the maximum amount that can
be requested) in order to help fund the cleanup of contaminated soil at the Gladstone Savanna.
The contaminated soil has been documented to be present at concentrations above regulatory
criteria based on previous environmental investigations of the site. These investigations were
conducted by previous prospective developers, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA),
and the city.
The soil cleanup activities are necessary in order to safely restore the site for future use and to
obtain regulatory approval from the MPCA Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) Program. A
Response Action Plan (cleanup plan) prepared by the city as part of a Phase II Environmental
Assessment has been submitted and approved by the MPCA VIC Program.
BACKGROUND
The site is located at the core of the Gladstone Neighborhood and previously supported a railroad
repair and maintenance facility that operated from the late 1940s until the 1980s. The site was
then purchased by Whirlpool-Seeger Company and used for the storage and shipping of
household appliances. The buildings on the site were demolished in 1979 and 1980. The site was
subsequently acquired by the Trust for Public Land (TPL) in 1994 for a pass-through sale to the
city as part of the city’s open space referendum. The city has conducted an extensive planning
process that explored a number of redevelopment and restoration alternatives for the site. Based
on information gathered during the planning process, a set of key objectives to guide the master
plan for the site emerged, including the following:
Create an urban preserve in the center of a vibrant neighborhood.
Improve the site so that it becomes a stronger asset to the neighborhood and is usable to
the community while retaining its natural open space character.
Restore native plant communities to the site including oak savanna, prairie, and oak wood
land.
Implement stormwater improvements that will serve the site and neighboring properties.
Packet Page Number 155 of 192
Integrate the stormwater improvements in a way that will enhance site ecology and
aesthetics.
Create opportunities for historical interpretation and education regarding natural and
ecological systems.
Clean up remnant pollutants related to historical industrial uses.
DISCUSSION
EPA has available Brownfields Cleanup Grant funds of $29.5 million for fiscal year 2011. These
funds are available for communities seeking funding for the cleanup of brownfields redevelopment
or restoration projects that meet the required eligibility criteria and overall goals and objectives
outlined by EPA in guidelines, based on the Brownfields Law. The proposals will be evaluated by
EPA, among other factors, on the extent to which the city demonstrates:
•
economic and environmental need;
•
a vision for reuse and capability to achieve the vision;
•
partnerships and leveraged resources necessary to complete the project; and
•
the economic, environmental, and social benefits associated with the project.
The city is an eligible applicant and the project meets all of the necessary criteria for receiving
funds from EPA. The EPA grant selection process is very competitive and involves the review of
applications from across the country. As part of the application process city staff is seeking letters
of support from the MPCA, TPL, Ramsey-Washington Watershed District, and Ramsey County
(Parks and Trails). The EPA grant requires that the city provide a 20 percent match ($40,000) for
the project. The source of these funds can come in the form of money, labor, materials, or
services from non-federal sources. The grant funds are required to be spent within three years
following the grant award.
As part of the grant process, EPA requires that a resolution be adopted by the City Council in
support of the grant application. This resolution and the application must be submitted to EPA no
later than October 15, 2010. The EPA awards grant funds in early 2011.
Another requirement of the grant process is community notice of the city’s intent to apply. City staff
has published a notice in the Maplewood Review announcing the September 27, 2010, City
Council review of the grant application. The grant process further requires that the City Council
allow an opportunity for the public to review the cleanup proposal during the meeting and consider
public comment.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Allow an opportunity for public comment on the EPA Brownfields Grant application for the
Gladstone Savanna. Any comments received will be forwarded with the application.
2. Adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 1) showing the city’s intent to apply for an EPA
Brownfields Cleanup Grant in the amount of $200,000 to conduct cleanup activities on the
Gladstone Savanna.
Attachment:
1. Resolution of Support
2
Packet Page Number 156 of 192
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. ___________
CITY OFMAPLEWOOD,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE CITY’S INTENT TO APPLY FOR
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY BROWNFIELDS CLEANUP FUNDING AND
AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS
WHEREAS
the City of Maplewood is eligible to apply for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Brownfields Cleanup Grant funds prior to the application deadline of October 15, 2010 for
the Gladstone Savanna; and
WHEREAS
the city has identified a proposed project within the city that meets the purposes and
criteria of EPA Brownfields Cleanup Grant proposal guidelines and is consistent with and
promotes the purposes of the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act
(Brownfields Law, P.L. 107-118); and
WHEREAS
the city has the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure adequate
project administration; and
WHEREAS
the city certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations, including
those in the Brownfields Law and described in the EPA Brownfields Cleanup Grant proposal
guidelines.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
that, after appropriate examination and due
consideration, the governing body of the city:
1. Finds that it is in the best interests of the city’s goals and priorities for the proposed project
to occur at the Gladstone Savanna at this particular time.
2. Authorizes its city staff to submit on behalf of the city an application for the EPA
Brownfields Cleanup Grant funds in the amount of $200,000 in order to help fund the
cleanup of contaminated soil at the Gladstone Savanna and to execute such agreements
as may be necessary to implement the grant application.
th
Adopted this 27 day of September, 2010.
___________________________________ ___________________________________
Mayor City Clerk
Packet Page Number 157 of 192
Agenda Item J4
MEMORANDUM
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
Walser Automotive Used Car Sales—Conditional Use Permit
SUBJECT:
LOCATION: 2590 Maplewood Drive
APPLICANT: Don Schilling
DATE: September 21, 2010
INTRODUCTION
Don Schilling, representing Walser Automotive Group, is requesting approval of a conditional
use permit (CUP) to sell and repair used cars at the former Mitsubishi dealership building
located at 2590 Maplewood Drive. The city ordinance requires a CUP to sell only used cars
(the sale of new and used cars are permitted, however) and also for auto repair.
BACKGROUND
Past Action
On August 7, 1980, the city council approved a special exception, an earlier version of a
conditional use permit, for an auto-dealership on this property. The original use was a Datsun
dealership. The special exception was conditioned upon water being extended to the site and
closing the driveway to Highway 61 upon completion of the frontage road.
On January 12, 1993, the community design review board approved plans for a showroom
addition and a parts room addition.
On June 28, 2007, the city staff approved plans for the refurbishing of the building exterior. The
exterior improvements included replacing the existing standing seam fascia with an architectural
composite metal, repaving and striping the parking lot, repairing the dumpster enclosure and
adding landscaping.
City Zoning Code Requirements
Section 44-512(5) requires a CUP for the sale and leasing of “used” motor vehicles. Such used
auto sales must also be at least 350 feet away from property that the city is planning for
residential use.
Section 44-512(8) requires a CUP for maintenance garages.
Packet Page Number 158 of 192
DISCUSSION
Conditional Use Permit
The proposed used car sales operation would meet the requirements for CUP approval outlined
in the city ordinance. This proposal would utilize the existing facility and would require no
expansion or alteration of the building or site.
After the site was developed for an auto dealership in 1981, the ordinance was amended to
require a 350 foot separation from property zoned for residential. There is a home 225 feet to
the northeast from this site. The existing building is grandfathered in since it was built under
another set of guidelines.
COMMISSION ACTIONS
September7, 2010: The planning commission recommended approval of this CUP with the staff
recommendation.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution approving a conditional use permit to allow the sale of used cars and a
vehicle garage at 2590 Maplewood Drive. Approval is based on the findings required by
ordinance and subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the site and landscaping plans approved by the city date-
stamped August 11, 2010. Staff may approve minor changes.
2. The proposed use must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the
permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
3. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
4. All activity shall be confined to the site. There shall be no loading or unloading of vehicles
on the street rights-of-way.
5. The applicant shall comply with and observe the city’s noise ordinance as it relates to PA
systems or any other business activity.
6. Comply with all city ordinance requirements for signage and parking.
2
Packet Page Number 159 of 192
REFERENCE INFORMATION
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 3.12 acres
Existing Use: The former Mitsubishi Auto Dealership building
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Polaris, Victory & Suzuki Motorcycles
South: Highway 61 Frontage Road and vacant property owned by Maplewood Imports
East: Frontage Road and undeveloped property planned for residential use (although these
are wetlands and not buildable)
West: Highway 61
PLANNING
Land Use Plan: C (commercial)
Zoning: M1 (light manufacturing)
Criteria for CUP Approval
Section 44-1097(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards.
See findings 1-9 in the resolution.
APPLICATION/DECISION DEADLINE
We received the complete application and plans for this proposal on August 11, 2010. State
law requires that the city take action within 60 days of receiving complete applications. The
deadline for city council review, therefore, is October 10, 2010.
p:sec9\Walser Used Car Sales CUP CC 9 10 te
Attachments
1. Location/Zoning Map
2. Land Use Plan Map
3. Site Plan
4. Applicant’s Letter of request date-stamped August 24, 2010
5. Conditional Use Permit Resolution
6. Plans date-stamped August 11, 2010 (separate attachment)
3
Packet Page Number 160 of 192
Packet Page Number 161 of 192
Packet Page Number 162 of 192
Packet Page Number 163 of 192
Packet Page Number 164 of 192
Packet Page Number 165 of 192
Attachment 5
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Mr. Don Schilling, representing Walser Automotive Group, applied for a conditional
use permit to sell used cars and operate a vehicle maintenance garage.
WHEREAS, Section 44-512(5) of the city ordinances requires a conditional use permit for the
sale and leasing of used motor vehicles.
WHEREAS, Section 44-512(8) of the city ordinances requires a conditional use permit for
maintenance garages.
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property located at 2590 Maplewood Drive. The legal
description is:
Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 2, Speiser’s Arbolada; and the South 3 feet of Lot 10, W.H. Howard’s
Garden Lots.
(Torrens Property—Certificate of Title No. 295761)
That part of Lot 14, W.H. Howard’s Garden Lots lying Westerly and Northwesterly of the center line
of Duluth Street, according to the recorded plat thereof.
(Abstract Property)
That part of Lot 15, of W.H. Howard’s Garden Lots which lies Northwest of the following described
line;
A line running parallel to and 50 feet Northwest of the following described line:
Beginning at a point on the North line of Section 9, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, distant
1,586.86 feet East of the North quarter corner thereof; thence run Southerly at an angle of 90
degrees 46’45” with said North section line (measured from East to South) for 1,028.82 feet;
thence deflect to the right on a 20’ 00” curve (delta angle 64 degrees 45’ 24”) for 323.78 feet;
thence on a tangent to said curve for 226.35 feet; thence deflect to the left on a 20 degree 00’
curve (delta angle 48 degrees 17’ 35”) for 241.27 feet; thence on a tangent to said curve for 503.38
feet; thence deflect to the right on a 1 degree 00’ curve (delta angle 5 degrees 16’ 30”) for 527.50
feet and there terminating.
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On September 7, 2010, 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 report and recommendation of
city staff. The planning commission recommended that the city council approve this
permit.
Packet Page Number 166 of 192
2. On September 27, 2010, 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 this Code.
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 not exceed the design standards of any affected street.
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.
The use would cause no more than minimal adverse environmental effects.
9.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city date-stamped August 11,
2010. Staff may approve minor changes.
2. The proposed use must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the
permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
3. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
4. All activity shall be confined to the site. There shall be no loading or unloading of
vehicles on the street rights-of-way.
5. The applicant shall comply with and observe the city’s noise ordinance as it relates to PA
systems or any other business activity.
6. Comply with all city ordinance requirements for signage and parking.
The Maplewood City Council __________ this resolution on ___________.
2
Packet Page Number 167 of 192
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2010
5. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Conditional Use Permit for Use Car Sales, 2590 Maplewood Drive, Don Schilling,
Walser Automotive Group
Mr. Ekstrand provided the following background information on this matter. Mr. Schilling of
Walser Automotive Group (Walser) is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
to be allowed sell used cars from the former Mitsubishi site referenced above. Walser
Automotive would like to commence operations of used car sales. City code allows for the
sale of new and used cars, but not used cars only; therefore, a CUP is required. Staff
supports approval of this CUP with the usual provisions and zoning requirements, including
complying with signage requirements and restricting the loading and unloading of vehicles to
the site property.
In response to a question from Commissioner Martin, Staff explained that it is not necessary
for the CDRB to review this application because the application refers only to the use and not
to the design.
Visitor Don Schilling of Walser commended Staff on his presentation of the issues and offered
to answer any questions.
The public hearing portion of this issue was closed.
Commissioner Pearson moved to adopt the staff’s recommendation to approve CUP to allow
the sale of used cars at 2590 Maplewood Drive. Approval is based on the findings required
by ordinance and subject to the conditions 1 through 6.
Commissioner Nuss seconded the motion. Ayes all; motion carries.
This matter will go before the City Council at its meeting scheduled for September 27, 2010.
September 7, 2010
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
1
Packet Page Number 168 of 192
Agenda Item J5
MEMORANDUM
TO: James Antonen, City Manager
FROM: Michael Martin, AICP, Planner
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
Rezonings withinthe Gladstone Neighborhood
SUBJECT:
LOCATION: Properties near the intersection of Frost Avenue and English Street
VOTE REQUIRED:Simple Majority Required for Approval
DATE: September 17, 2010
INTRODUCTION
On January 25, 2010, the city council adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. This is the
update of the city’s comprehensive land use plan required of all metro area cities every ten
years. By approving this plan, the city council reestablished the long-range land use guide for
the city. State law requires that the city now revise our zoning map and zoning ordinance
controls to be in conformance with the newly approved land use classifications throughout the
city.
The city has nine months (by October 25, 2010) to make all necessary zoning map and zoning
ordinance changes to coincide with the land use policies and land use maps in the approved
2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Proposal
The last area to be rezoned to coincide with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan is the Gladstone
Neighborhood. This area, which is generally defined as properties surrounding the intersection
of Frost Avenue and English Street, is guided as mixed use and medium density residential
(refer to attached Gladstone Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map).
The mixed use land use is intended for commercial retail or service businesses, offices and
high-density housing (6 to 31 units per net acre). The medium density residential land use is
intended for moderately higher densities ranging from 6.1 to 10 units per net acre. Housing
types in this land use category would typically include lower density attached housing and
higher density single family detached housing units. Some forms of stacked housing
(condominiums and apartments) could be integrated into medium density areas, but would need
to be surrounded by additional green space.
The Gladstone Neighborhood is currently zoned several different zoning districts including M1
(light manufacturing), BC (business commercial), BC-M (business commercial modified), R-3
(multiple dwelling residential), R1S (small-lot single-dwelling)and R-2 (double-dwelling
residential),(refer to attached Gladstone Neighborhood Zoning Map). The zoning must be
changed to reflect the Comprehensive Plan designations, as well as meet the goals and
objectives of the Gladstone Neighborhood Master Plan.
Request
Rezone the properties withinthe Gladstone neighborhood to the appropriate zoning districts.
Packet Page Number 169 of 192
BACKGROUND
November 2003the City of Maplewood received an $8,000 Livable Communities Demonstration
Account (LCDA) grant from the Metropolitan Council in order to hire a planning consultant to
create a redevelopment concept plan for the Gladstone Neighborhood.
December 4, 2006, the Metropolitan Council awarded a $1.8 million LCDA grant to the City of
Maplewood for public improvements associated with Phase I redevelopment of the Gladstone
Neighborhood. Phase I included the redevelopment of the St. Paul Tourist Cabin site (940 Frost
Avenue) with a 180-unit senior housing development.
On February 5, 2007, city staff presented a brief introduction to the proposed Gladstone zoning
ordinance during a city council workshop. The zoning approach included a form-based
ordinance which would have enabled the city to articulate and achieve the desired pattern and
character of uses within the Gladstone Neighborhood. Form-based ordinances regulate
building facades and site frontages based on an overall district character and the interface
between development and the public domain (which is most commonly a public street). The city
council took no action on the proposed form-based zoning ordinance.
March 2007 the city council approved the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan, which
is a guide to redevelopment in the Gladstone Neighborhood. The plan includes a conceptual
redevelopment plan, housing densities, and commercial components which are based on
market forces and other redevelopment variables existing at the time of adoption.
On December 9, 2009, the Metropolitan Council gave final approval to the 2030 Comprehensive
Plan.
December 31, 2009, the City of Maplewood rescinded the $1.8 million LCDA grant due to the
original redevelopment proposal for the St. Paul Tourist Cabin site falling through.
January 25, 2010, the city council adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, which reguides the
land use designation in the Gladstone Neighborhood to meet the use and density as proposed
in the Gladstone Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan.
July 12, 2010, the city submitted a new LCDA grant application for public improvements
associated with Phase I redevelopment of the Gladstone Neighborhood.Phase I includes the
development of the St. Paul Tourist Cabin site (940 Frost Avenue) with a new senior housing
project called The Shores at Lake Phalen. The grant application requests $1.4 million in order
to help fund the reconstruction and/or rehabilitation of Frost Avenue between Highway 61 and
Phalen Place; construction of stormwater improvements on or adjacent to The Shores at Lake
Phalen development site; and the extension of sanitary sewer along East Shore Drive to serve
the proposed The Shores at Lake Phalen development.
August 9, 2010, the city council approved a tax increment (TIF) financing housing district for The
Shores at Lake Phalen site (940 Frost Avenue). The city council determined that the TIF district
willafford maximum opportunity for the development of the housing district to occur by a private
enterprise.
August 9, 2010, the city council approved the land use permits associated with The Shores at
Lake Phalen(940 Frost Avenue). The development consists of a105 unit, three story low- to
moderate-income assisted living facility. This includes 32 memory care apartments and 73
Packet Page Number 170 of 192
assisted living units. Construction of the first phase is currently planned to begin in fall of 2010
and be complete by the end of 2011. A future phase of development isplanned on the southern
portion of the site.
DISCUSSION
Statutory Requirement
Section 473.865 subdivision 3 of the Minnesota State Statutes requires that cities amend their
official zoning controls within nine months of their adopting their revised comprehensive land
use plan. As stated above, the city council has until October 25, 2010 to amend all applicable
zoning maps and zoning ordinances.
Why the Proposed Revision to Mixed Use and Multiple Residential?
As stated above in the background section, the city council approved the Gladstone
Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan in March 2007.The plan is intended as a guide to
redevelopment in the Gladstone Neighborhood and includes aconceptual redevelopment plan,
housing densities, and commercial components which are based on market forces and other
redevelopment variables existing at the time of adoption. The forward statement on the plan
states “As a guide, the plan should be considered a flexible concept planwhich can be modified
basedon the changing market forces and redevelopment variables.”
The Master Plan was originally created by the Gladstone Task Force. The task force was made
up of 20 people representing the Maplewood council/commissions/boards, neighborhood
residents, business owners, and the community at large. The task force met with the city’s
planning consultants during several meetings throughout 2005 and 2006 to draft a
redevelopment plan for the area. The city council adopted an amended version of the task
force’s recommended plan. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan reguided the Gladstone
Neighborhood with a medium density and mixed use land use designation, which meets the
basic intent of the Gladstone Neighborhood Master Plan. As discussed at an earlier planning
commission meeting, staff will be working on developing a mixed use zoning district specific to
the Gladstone Neighborhood. The planning commission can expect to discuss this zoning
district at one of its future meetings.
Property Tax Impact
Property ownershave asked what would happen to their property taxes if their zoning changed.
The Ramsey County Tax Assessor’s office stated that:
“Zoning has no affect on property tax. Tax classifications are based on the current use of the
property, not on the zoning. The tax classification, along with the market value is used to
calculate taxes. If the current use is continued, the tax classification will not change. So, zoning
changes will not affect taxes.”
Packet Page Number 171 of 192
Conclusion
State statute requires that the city revise the zoning map to match the adopted land use guides
forthe Gladstone Neighborhood contained within the comprehensive plan. Therefore, staff is
recommending the city council revise the zoning map accordingly.
COMMISSION ACTIONS
September 7, 2010: The planning commission recommended approval of this rezoning.
RECOMMENDATION
Approvethe rezoning of the properties within the Gladstone Neighborhood, near the intersection
of English Street and Frost Avenue, fromR2 (double-dwelling), R1S (small-lot single-dwelling),
M1 (light manufacturing), BC (business commercial)and BCM (business commercial modified)
to R3 (multiple dwelling residential) and MU (mixed use).Please refer to the attached maps
and resolution for the specific rezonings.Theserezoningsarebased on Minnesota Statute
473.865 subdivision 3, requiring the city to bring the zoning of these properties into
conformance with the adopted comprehensive land use plan classification.
Packet Page Number 172 of 192
REFERENCE
AREADESCRIPTION
Number of Site:58 parcels
PLANNING
Land Use Plan Designation: Mixed Use and Medium Density Residential
Zoning: Current: R1S, M1,BC, BCMand R2; Proposed: MU and R3
p:Compplan\zoning follow-up to 2030 Plan\Rezoning Gladstone_CC_092710
Attachments:
1.Land Use Map
2.Current ZoningMap
3.Proposed Zoning Map
4.Draft Planning Commission Minutes, September 7, 2010
5.Rezoning Resolution
Packet Page Number 173 of 192
Packet Page Number 174 of 192
Packet Page Number 175 of 192
Attachment 3
English Street
DIETER ST
Packet Page Number 176 of 192
Attachment 4
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2010
5.PUBLIC HEARING
c.
Rezoning within the Gladstone Neighborhood to Multiple Dwelling and Mixed
Use.
Mr. Ekstrand introduced this item. This is the final zoning map revision to review as
a result of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update. Staff is recommending changing
certain zonings in the Gladstone Neighborhood to bring them into compliance with
the plan, which should result in mixed-use zoning or multiple dwelling zoning. The
changes proposed would change certain properties to R3 (multiple dwelling
residential) and MU (mixed use).
Al Olson, 1221 Frost Avenue, Ku Vang, 1310 Frost Avenue, and Victor Meysenburg,
1851 Ide Street, addressed the commission.
The public hearing for Gladstone Neighborhood Rezoning was closed.
Motion: Yarwood to approve the rezoning of properties within the Gladstone
Neighborhood, near the intersection of English Street and Frost Avenue, from R2
(double-dwelling), R1S (small-lot single-dwelling), M1 (light manufacturing), BC
(business commercial) and BCM (business commercial modified) to R3 (multiple
dwelling residential) and MU (mixed use). Please refer to the attached maps and
resolution for the specific rezonings. These rezonings are based on Minnesota
Statute 473.865 subdivision 3, requiring the city to bring the zoning of these
properties into conformance with the adopted comprehensive land use plan
classification.
Commissioner Pearson seconded the motion.
Ayes: Bierbaum, Fischer, Martin, Pearson, Yarwood
Nays: Nuss
Tanya apposed because she lacks background on the Gladstone Neighborhood
redevelopment matter and would have preferred that the matter would have been
tabled pending additional information.
This matter will goes before the City Council on September 27, 2010. Commissioner
Yarwood encouraged staff to try to protect and preserve the interests of the existing
businesses until such time that there is a development proposal for the area.
Packet Page Number 177 of 192
Attachment 5
REZONING RESOLUTION
WHEREAS
,the City of Maplewood city staffproposed severalchange to the city's
zoning map within the Gladstone Neighborhood;
WHEREAS
,
thezoning map changesto MU (mixed use) applies to propertieslocated
near the intersection of Frost Avenue and English Street.The property identification numbers
identifying the affected properties are:
PIN 15-29-22-23-0023,PIN 15-29-22-23-0016,PIN 15-29-22-23-0024,
PIN 15-29-22-32-0028, PIN 15-29-22-32-0077, PIN 15-29-22-23-0055,
PIN 15-29-22-32-0092, PIN 15-29-22-32-0076, PIN 16-29-22-14-0081,
PIN 16-29-22-14-0085, PIN 16-29-22-14-0070, PIN, 16-29-22-14-0084,
PIN 16-29-22-14-0092, PIN 16-29-22-14-0075, PIN 16-29-22-14-0071,
PIN 16-29-22-14-0080, PIN 16-29-22-14-0082, PIN 16-29-22-14-0076,
PIN 16-29-22-14-0072, PIN 16-29-22-14-0086, PIN 16-29-22-14-0079,
PIN 16-29-22-14-0083, PIN 16-29-22-14-0077, PIN 16-29-22-14-0091,
PIN 16-29-22-14-0074, PIN 16-29-22-14-0073, PIN 16-29-22-14-0078,
PIN 16-29-22-14-0087, PIN 15-29-22-23-0087, PIN 15-29-22-23-0054,
PIN 15-29-22-32-0038, PIN 15-29-22-23-0052, PIN 15-29-22-32-0091,
PIN 15-29-22-32-0093, PIN 15-29-22-23-0051, PIN 15-29-22-23-0094,
PIN 15-29-22-23-0015, PIN 16-29-22-14-0095, PIN 16-29-22-14-0097,
PIN 15-29-22-23-0100, PIN 16-29-22-14-0098, PIN 16-29-22-14-0096,
PIN 16-29-22-14-0099, PIN 15-29-22-23-0014, PIN 15-29-22-23-0038,
PIN 15-29-22-32-0090
WHEREAS
,
thezoning map changesto R3 (multiple residential) applies to properties
located near the intersection of Frost Avenue and English Street. The property identification
numbers identifying the affected properties are:
PIN 15-29-22-23-0056, PIN 15-29-22-23-0085, PIN 15-29-22-32-0094,
PIN 15-29-22-23-0011, PIN 16-29-22-42-0004, PIN 16-29-22-42-0002,
PIN 16-29-22-42-0001, PIN 16-29-22-42-0003, PIN 15-29-22-23-0086,
PIN 15-29-22-23-0013, PIN 15-29-22-32-0083, PIN 15-29-22-32-0095
WHEREAS
,On January 25, 2010, the city council adopted the 2030 Comprehensive
Plan that classified the land use plan for the above referenced properties to MU or MDR.
WHEREAS
,Section 473.865 subdivision 3 of the Minnesota State Statutes requires
that cities amend their official zoning map within nine months of their adopting their revised
comprehensive land use plan to match the new land use classification.
Packet Page Number 178 of 192
WHEREAS
, the history of this change is as follows:
1.OnSeptember 7, 2010, theplanning commission held a public hearingto consider
this rezoning. The city staff published a hearing notice in the Maplewood Review
and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission
gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements
prior to their recommendation.
2.On _________, 2010, the city council discussed the proposed zoning map change.
They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission
and city staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
that the city council ________the above-
described change in the zoning map based on Minnesota Statute 473.865 subdivision 3,
requiring the city to bring the zoning of this property into conformance with the adopted
comprehensive land use plan classification.
The Maplewood City Council ___________this resolution on ______, 2010.
Packet Page Number 179 of 192
Agenda Item J6
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
James Antonen, City Manager
Chuck Ahl, Assistant City Manager
FROM:
DuWayne Konewko, Community Development and Parks Director
SUBJ: Consider Approval to Purchase Approximately 2 Acres of Land
From Gethsemane Church for Proposed Park
DATE:
September 20, 2010 for September 27, 2010 Council Meeting
INTRODUCTION
At the May 10, 2010 City Council meeting, council authorized staff to extend the current
lease agreement with Gethsemane Church for four months (thru September 2010) and
directed staff to enter into negotiations with Gethsemane Church for the purchase of two
acres of land. To that end, staff was able to reach an agreement with Gethsemane
Church for the purchase of approximately two acres of land for $372,400. The actual
purchase price was $395,000 minus a credit of $22,600 which corresponds to one-half
of the total lease payments made by buyer to seller pursuant to the existing lease over
the past 2.5 years and extending out thru September 2010 (refer to attachment #1 for a
copy of the Purchase Agreement). The legal description for the property identified as
Parcel B is the south 319.45 feet of the east 271.50 feet of Tract B, Registered Land
Survey No. 582, files of the Register of Titles, Ramsey County, Minnesota (refer to
attachment #2 for a copy of the legal description and drawing).
In addition to the agreement between both parties regarding the purchase of said
property, staff and Gethsemane Church reached an agreement on leasing the remaining
eight acres. The City will pay $1.00 a year commencing on the effective date of
agreement to purchase property and continuing through December 31, 2012 (refer to
attachment #3 for a copy of Exhibit A to Purchase Agreement – Amendment No. 4 to
Lease). In addition, Gethsemane Church has agreed to work with City staff through the
permitting process to secure access to utilize the ball fields. The City will continue to
provide maintenance and be responsible for general upkeep.
BACKGROUND
The original lease agreement with Gethsemane Church was required to bridge the
period prior to the construction of a proposed Senior Housing project on six of the 10
acres. The remaining 4 acres was proposed to be sold to the City for a park. At this
point, the Senior Housing Project has not started. However, Gethsemane Church is
committed to seeing this project through and is currently in discussions with various
entities regarding funding.
At the April 21, 2010 Park Commission meeting, the commission moved to not support
the extension of the lease with Gethsemane Church on a 6 -3 vote. The lease payment
that was brought forward to the Parks Commission was $1,800 a month. The Park
Commission concerns were two-fold. First, per original purchase agreement,
Gethsemane Church had exclusive use during specified times and secondly, the further
Packet Page Number 180 of 192
along the city continued with this lease agreement, the more difficult it would become to
severe this lease agreement because of the financial commitment.
The minority opinion indicated a park was needed in this area and the City should
continue with the lease agreement and explore all other options prior to severing this
agreement. The concern here is that the residents in this area would no longer have
access to a park which is in conflict with one of the goals of the 2030 Comprehensive
Plan. Chapter six of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan - Parks, Trails and Open Space
states “All residents should be within a ½ mile of a park, which could be active or
passive and is independent of ownership”. Staff believes that compelling arguments can
be made to support both of these positions. Maplewood’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan
discusses Gethsemane Park and concludes that “If agreement is not met for the
preservation of this park, an active park replacement should be identified to adequately
provide park facilities to this neighborhood”.
FINANCING
A detailed review of the Park Development Fund (Fund #403) by the Finance Manager,
has determined that the 2010 Budget called for a $460,000 expenditure for the
Gladstone Savanna in 2010, while the proposed 2011 – 2015 CIP also called for a
$600,000 expenditure for the Gladstone Savanna. Obviously, this is an error in the
projections and double counts the expenditure. Therefore, there is an additional
$460,000 that can be applied to the purchase of this property. The projected 2010 year
end fund balance for the Parks Development Fund is $771,466. If you add back this
$460,000 - the fund balance works out to be $1,231,466. Similarly, the projected 2011
year end fund balance is $303,696 which would increase to $763,696 with the addition
of the $460,000. In other words, the purchase of this property from Gethsemane Church
will have no impact on the projects included in the 2011-2015 Capital Improvement Plan
that was adopted by council.
To that end, staff is proposing that the monies used for the purchase of this property in
the amount of $372,400 come directly from the Park Development Fund. Projects
identified in the 2011-2015 will not be impacted by this expenditure.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council approve the Purchase Agreement authorizing the
purchase of approximately two acres of land from Gethsemane Church for a proposed
park. The monies in the amount of $372,400 would come directly from the Park
Development Fund.
:
Attachments
1. Purchase Agreement Between Gethsemane Church and the City of Maplewood
2. Parcel B – Legal Description and corresponding drawing
3. Exhibit A to Purchase Agreement – Amendment No. 4 to Lease
2
Packet Page Number 181 of 192
Attachment 1
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
This Agreement is made as of the “Effective Date” (as defined in Section 13 below),
between Gethsemane Lutheran Church, a Minnesota non-profit corporation (“Seller”), and The
City of Maplewood, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“Buyer”).
In consideration of this Agreement, Seller and Buyer agree as follows:
1. Sale of Property. Seller agrees to sell to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to buy from
Seller, the following property (referred to herein as the “Property”):
Real property located in Ramsey County, Minnesota, described as the
south 319.45 feet of the east 274.50 feet of Tract B, Registered Land
Survey No. 582, files of the Registrar of Titles, Ramsey County,
Minnesota. Generally describe as South ½ of the most easterly 3.358
acres of Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 582 (being a vacant land
parcel situated in the northwest corner of Bartelmy Lane & 7th Street).
Buyer shall, at its cost, obtain a legal description of the Property prepared by a Minnesota
licensed surveyor, which description shall be reasonably satisfactory to Seller and
acceptable to the Ramsey County Registrar of Titles for recording. All survey costs shall
be Buyer’s responsibility to pay.
2. Purchase Price and Manner of Payment. The purchase price to be paid for the
Property is Three Hundred and Ninety-Five Thousand and no/100ths Dollars ($395,000.00). The
Purchase Price is payable as follows:
2.1 Buyer shall receive a credit equal to $22,600.00, which credit amount corresponds
to one-half of the total lease payments made by Buyer to Seller for parkland
pursuant to the existing lease between Buyer and Seller over the past
approximately 2.5 years through September 2010.
2.2 The balance of the Purchase Price in cash or by wire transfer of funds on the date
of Closing.
3. [Intentionally omitted.]
4. Closing. The closing of the purchase and sale contemplated by this Agreement
(“the Closing”) will occur at 9:00 a.m. on October 29, 2010, at the City offices of Buyer unless
another time or place is agreed upon in writing by both parties prior thereto. Seller agrees to
deliver possession of the Property to Buyer at the Closing.
4.1 Seller’s Closing Documents. On the date of Closing, Seller will execute and
deliver to Buyer the following (collectively, “Seller’s Closing Documents”):
4.1.1 Deed. A Warranty Deed conveying the Property to Buyer, which deed
shall include a statutory well certification and be subject to “Permitted
file://N:/PL/19903/19903-003/1109510.doc
Packet Page Number 182 of 192
Exceptions” as defined in Section 5 below.
4.1.2 Lease Amendment. An amendment to the current lease between Buyer
and Seller in form attached hereto as Exhibit A (the “Lease Amendment”).
4.2 Buyer’s Obligation. On the date of Closing, Buyer will deliver to Seller the
following:
4.2.1 Funds representing the Purchase Price less the amount contemplated by §
2.1; and
4.2.2 The Lease Amendment.
4.3 Prorations. Seller and Buyer agree to the following prorations and allocation of
costs regarding the Agreement.
4.4 Title Insurance and Closing Fee. Except as expressly provided below, Buyer will
pay all closing costs, including the cost to record the deed.
4.5 Deed Tax. Seller will pay all state deed tax payable to record the deed.
4.6 Real Estate Taxes and Special Assessments. The parties acknowledge that the
Property is not subject to real estate taxes nor any assessments. To the extent any
assessment(s) arise prior to Closing, Buyer shall assume responsibility for such
assessment(s) and take title subject thereto as a Permitted Exception hereunder.
5. Title Examination. Title Examination will be conducted as follows:
5.1 Title Evidence. Buyer shall, at Buyer’s cost, within 20 days after the date of this
Agreement, obtain evidence of title to the Property (the “Title Evidence”). Buyer
will deliver a copy of the Title Evidence to Seller.
5.2 Buyer’s Objections. Within 20 days after receiving the Title Evidence, Buyer
shall make written objections (“Objections”), if any, to the marketability of title to
the Property. Buyer’ failure to make Objections within the time period will
constitute waiver of Objections. Any matter shown on that Title Evidence and not
objected to by Buyer will be a ‘Permitted Exception” hereunder. Seller shall have
the right but not the obligation to cure any Objection. In the event Seller elects to
attempt to cure an Objection, Seller will notify Buyer thereof, whereupon Seller
will have 100 days after receipt of the objections to cure the Objections, during
which period the Closing will be postponed, if necessary. If the Seller elects not
to cure an Objection, or if all Objections are not cured within the 100 day period,
Buyer’s only remedies will be the following:
5.2.1 Terminate this Agreement; or
5.2.2 Waive the Objections (which shall then become “Permitted Exceptions”)
and proceed to Closing.
file://N:/PL/19903/19903-003/1109510.doc
Packet Page Number 183 of 192
For purposes hereof, the term “Permitted Exceptions” shall mean (a) all matters of record (to the
extent not cured by Seller if Objection thereto is made by Buyer, if applicable) (b) matters, if
any, as may be disclosed by an accurate survey of the Property; and (c) such other matters, if
any, as may be or become Permitted Exceptions pursuant to the terms of this Purchase
Agreement.
6. Operation Prior to Closing. During the period from the date of Seller’ acceptance
of this Agreement to the date of Closing, Buyer will operate and maintain the Property in the
ordinary course of business in accordance with prudent, reasonable business standards, including
the maintenance of adequate liability insurance, all in accord with the terms of the existing lease
between Buyer and Seller. Seller will execute no contracts, leases or other agreements regarding
the Property that are not terminable on or before the date of Closing without the prior written
consent of Buyer, which consent may be withheld by Buyer at their sole discretion.
7. Representations, Warranties and Certifications by Seller/AS-IS.
7.1 Existence; Authority. Seller represents, warrants and certifies to Buyer that Seller
is a fee owner in good standing, and/or has the requisite power and authority to
enter into and perform this Agreement and Seller’s Closing Documents; the
documents have been duly authorized by all necessary action; the documents are
valid and binding obligations of Seller, and are enforceable in accordance with
their terms.
7.2 AS-IS.Neither Seller nor any agent acting on behalf of Seller have made any
representations or warranty concerning any environmental or physical aspect of
the Property, and the Buyer is relying solely upon their own inspection,
investigation and review, if any. Notwithstanding any provision of this Purchase
Agreement to the contrary, the Property and any right, interest or title Seller may
or may not have therein is being sold AS–IS, WHERE IS, and without any
warranty or representation of any kind with respect to right, title, interest,
marketability, fitness, merchantability or any other matter, either express or
implied.
7.3 Wells. The Seller certifies that Seller does not know of any well on the Property
which comes within the meaning of Minn. Stat. § 103I and agrees that a statement
to that effect shall be included on the deed at Closing; this certification is intended
to satisfy the requirements of that statute.
7.4 Septic System. The Seller hereby represents and notifies Buyer of the non-
existence of a septic system in operation on the Property.
8. Broker’s Commission. Seller and Buyer represent to each other that they have
dealt with no other brokers, finders or the like in connection with this transaction, and agree to
indemnify and hold each other harmless from all claims, damages, costs or expenses of or for
any other such fees or commissions resulting from their actions or agreements regarding the
execution or performance of this Agreement, and will pay all costs of defending any action or
file://N:/PL/19903/19903-003/1109510.doc
Packet Page Number 184 of 192
lawsuit brought to recover any fees or commissions incurred by the other party, including
attorney’s fees.
9. Survival. All of the terms of this Agreement and warranties and representations
herein contained will survive and be enforceable after the Closing.
10. Notices. Any notice required or permitted will be given by personal delivery
upon an authorized representative of a party hereto; or if mailed in a sealed wrapper by United
States registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid; or if transmitted by
facsimile copy followed by mailed notice; or if deposited cost paid with a nationally recognized,
reputable overnight courier, properly addressed as follows:
If to Buyer: City of Maplewood
1830 County Road B, East
Maplewood, MN 55109
Fax Number: ______________
If to Seller: Gethsemane Lutheran Church
2410 Stillwater Road
Maplewood, MN 55109
Fax Number: ______________
Notices will be deemed effective on the date of receipt. Any party may change its address for
the service of notice by giving notice of such change 10 days prior to the effective date of the
change.
11. Miscellaneous. The paragraph headings or captions appearing in this Agreement
are for convenience only, are not a part of this Agreement, and are not to be considered in
interpreting this Agreement. This written Agreement constitutes the complete agreement
between the parties and supersedes any prior oral or written agreements between the parties
regarding the sale of the Property; it being acknowledged, however, that this Purchase
Agreement does not supersede, modify or limit the terms of the existing lease between the
parties, which is referenced on Exhibit A attached hereto, except to the extent of the terms of the
Lease Amendment once such terms take effect at closing; provided, further, that the credit set
forth in Section 2.1 shall be the only credit which Buyer shall be entitled to receive in connection
with its purchase of the Property, notwithstanding any term of said existing lease between the
parties (including addenda thereto) to the contrary. There are no verbal agreements that change
this Agreement, and no waiver of any of its terms will be effective unless in writing executed by
the parties. This Agreement binds and benefits the parties and their successors and assigns. This
Agreement has been made under the laws of the State of Minnesota, and such laws will control
its interpretation.
12. Remedies. If Seller defaults in the performance of its obligations
hereunder, then Buyer’s sole remedy will be to terminate the Purchase Agreement. If
Buyer defaults in the performance of its obligations hereunder, then Seller’s sole remedy
will be to terminate the Purchase Agreement. If in the event of termination of this
file://N:/PL/19903/19903-003/1109510.doc
Packet Page Number 185 of 192
Purchase Agreement, the parties agree that the existing lease over the parcel will survive
and continue.
13. Withdrawal of Offer. This Agreement will be deemed to be withdrawn, unless
accepted by Buyer, and a fully executed counterpart of this Agreement returned to Seller on or
before 4:30 p.m. on September 30, 2010. Provided this Agreement is accepted by Buyer and
fully executed and delivered to Seller on or before 4:30 p.m. on September 30, 2010. The
“Effective Date” of this Agreement shall be the date upon which Buyer delivers a fully executed
counterpart of this Agreement to Seller.
[Signatures on next page]
file://N:/PL/19903/19903-003/1109510.doc
Packet Page Number 186 of 192
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Seller and Buyer have executed this Agreement as of the date
first written above.
Dated as of the Effective Date (as defined above).
SELLER: BUYER:
GETHSEMANE LUTHERAN CHURCH THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
By: _______________________________ By: ______________________________
Its: _______________________________ ____________________, Mayor
City of Maplewood
Date of Seller’s1830 East County Road B
Execution: _________________________ Maplewood, MN 55119
And
By: ______________________________
________________, City Manager
City of Maplewood
1830 East County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55119
And
By: ______________________________
________________, City Attorney
City of Maplewood
1830 East County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55119
And
By: ______________________________
__________________, City Clerk
City of Maplewood
1830 East County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55119
Date of Buyer’s
Execution: _______________________
file://N:/PL/19903/19903-003/1109510.doc
Packet Page Number 187 of 192
Attachment 2
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED
(Per Commercial Partners Title, LLC, as agent for Chicago Title Insurance Company,
Commitment for Title Insurance File No. 29382, dated March 31, 2007)
Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 582, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
Torrens Property
Torrens Certificate No. 538967
(Note: Commitment covers additional property)
PROPOSED PARCEL A DESCRIPTION
Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 582, files of the Registrar of Titles, Ramsey County,
Minnesota, except the south 319.45 feet of the east 274.50 feet of said Tract B.
PROPOSED PARCEL B DESCRIPTION
The south 319.45 feet of the east 274.50 feet of Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 582, files
of the Registrar of Titles, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
Packet Page Number 188 of 192
Packet Page Number 189 of 192
Attachment 3
EXHIBIT A
TO
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO LEASE
THIS AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO LEASE ("Amendment No. 4") is made as of the ______
day of _________________, 2010 (“Effective Date”), by and between Gethsemane Lutheran
Church, a Minnesota non-profit corporation (“Landlord”), and The City of Maplewood, a
Minnesota municipal corporation (“Tenant”).
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant are parties to a certain Amended and Restated Lease
dated April 1, 2008 (the "Original Lease"), providing for Tenant’s leasing from Landlord of
certain “Premises” described in the Original Lease;
WHEREAS, the Original Lease was amended by a certain Addendum executed by
Landlord and Tenant (authorized by the City Council at the July 14, 2008 City Council Meeting),
and was further amended by a certain Addendum #2 executed by Landlord and Tenant
(authorized by the City Council at the April 27, 2009 City Council Meeting), and was further
amended by a certain Addendum #3 executed by Landlord and Tenant (authorized by the City
Council at the May 10, 2010 City Council Meeting) (the Original Lease, as so amended, is
referred to herein as the “Current Lease”);
WHEREAS, for good and valuable consideration, including but not limited to the parties’
execution, delivery and performance of the terms of this Amendment No. 4, a portion of the
Premises (referred to herein as the “Sale Parcel”) has on the date hereof been sold and conveyed
by Landlord to Tenant pursuant to a Purchase Agreement between Landlord, as seller, and
Tenant, as buyer, dated ________________, 2010, as evidenced by a deed from Landlord, as
grantor, to Tenant, as grantee, also of even date herewith (the “Deed”), the legal description of
which Sale Parcel is as set forth in the Deed;
WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Current Lease to, in part, modify the
description of the Premises to exclude the Sale Parcel, to extend the term of the Current Lease so
as to end on December 31, 2012, and to modify the rent to be paid by Tenant to Landlord;
NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the adequacy and receipt of
which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
1.Interpretation of Amendment. The Current Lease is hereby modified and
supplemented. Wherever there exists a conflict between this Amendment No. 4 and the Current
Lease, the provisions of this Amendment No. 4 shall control. Unless otherwise indicated,
file://N:/PL/19903/19903-003/1109487.doc
Packet Page Number 190 of 192
capitalized terms shall be defined in the manner set forth in the Current Lease. Except as
expressly modified or supplemented herein, the Current Lease has not been amended or revised
and is in full force and effect. The term “Lease” shall mean and refer to the Current Lease as
amended by this Amendment No. 4.
2.Premises. From and after the Effective Date, the Premises shall be as described in
the Current Lease but shall exclude the Sale Parcel.
3.Extension of Term. The parties agree that the term of the Lease is hereby
extended for an approximately twenty (20) month period such that the expiration date of the
Current Lease shall be December 31, 2012, and that the first sentence of Section 1 of the Current
Lease is superseded hereby. The parties agree that the last sentence of Section 1 of the Original
Lease is no longer in force and that the remaining terms of Section 1 of the Original Lease
remain in full force and effect.
4.Modified Rent. Rent for the period commencing on the Effective Date and
continuing through December 31, 2012 shall be $1.00 per annum due and payable on January 2
of each calendar year; provided, that rent payable for the partial calendar year from the Effective
Date through December 31, 2010 shall be $1.00, the payment of which rent for said partial year
is hereby acknowledged.
5.Use of Sale Parcel as a Park. Consistent with the terms of the Current Lease,
Tenant shall use the Sale Parcel only for the operation of a public park and athletic fields
consistent with the current scope of such use by Tenant. .
6.Purchase of Additional Land. In the event Landlord offers to sell to Tenant the
portion of the Premises comprised of the North ½ of the most easterly 3.358 acres of Tract B,
Registered Land Survey No. 582, Ramsey County (the “North Park Parcel”) in the context of
developing the remainder of the Premises as a senior housing or other project, Tenant agrees that
it will purchase said North Park Parcel on the offered terms and conditions to the extent they are
reasonably satisfactory to Tenant.
[Remainder of this page intentionally left blank.]
file://N:/PL/19903/19903-003/1109487.doc
Packet Page Number 191 of 192
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment No. 4 effective as
of the day and year first above written.
LANDLORD:TENANT:
GETHSEMANE LUTHERAN CHURCH THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
By: _______________________________ By: ___________________________________
Its: _______________________________ __________________________, Mayor
City of Maplewood
Date of Landlord’s1830 East County Road B
Execution: _________________________ Maplewood, MN 55119
And
By: ____________________________________
_____________________, City Manager
City of Maplewood
1830 East County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55119
And
By: ___________________________________
____________________, City Attorney
City of Maplewood
1830 East County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55119
And
By: ___________________________________
_______________________, City Clerk
City of Maplewood
1830 East County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55119
Date of Tenant’s
Execution: _______________________
file://N:/PL/19903/19903-003/1109487.doc
Packet Page Number 192 of 192