HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet_10-12-16CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
Regular Meeting of the City Council
City Hall
2077 West Larpenteur Avenue
AGENDA
October 12, 2016 at 7:00 P.M.
A. CALL TO ORDER:
B. ROLL CALL: LINDSTROM ___ HARRIS ____ BROWN THUNDER ___
FISCHER ___ GUSTAFSON___
STAFF PRESENT: THONGVANH____
C. PRESENTATIONS:
1. Aldo Sicoli –Superintendent of Roseville Area Schools
2. Common Bond Communities –Affordable Housing Proposal
3. Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
1. September 21, 2016 Special City Council Meeting Minutes
2. September 28, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes
E. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
F. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. General Disbursements through: 10/05/16 $140,962.01
Payroll through: 9/30/16 $18,407.72
2. Approval of City License(s)
3. City Administrator (Sack Thongvanh) 18 Month Step Adjustment
4. Vacate Easement for 1728 Lindig Street
5. Vacate Easement for 1725 Fairview Avenue
G: POLICY ITEMS:
1. Accepting Feasibility Report and Calling for Public Hearing for 2017 PMP
H. INFORMATION/ANNOUNCEMENTS:
I. COMMUNITY FORUM:
J. ADJOURNMENT:
BLANK PAGE
Page 1 of 138
Page 2 of 138
Page 3 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 4 of 138
April 2016
LCA-TOD PRE-DEVELOPMENT,
ZONING IMPLEMENTATION, AND SITE
INVESTIGATION GUIDE
2016 LIVABLE COMMUNITIES TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT GRANTS
Page 5 of 138
The Council’s mission is to foster
efficient and economic growth for
a prosperous metropolitan region.
Metropolitan Council Members
Adam Duininck Chair
Katie Rodriguez District 1 Lona Schreiber District 2
Jennifer Munt District 3
Deb Barber District 4 Steve Elkins District 5
Gail Dorfman District 6
Gary L. Cunningham District 7 Cara Letofsky District 8
Edward Reynoso District 9
Marie McCarthy District 10 Sandy Rummel District 11
Harry Melander District 12
Richard Kramer District 13 Jon Commers District 14
Steven T. Chávez District 15
Wendy Wulff District 16
The Metropolitan Council is the regional planning organization for the seven-county Twin Cities area. The Council operates the
regional bus and rail system, collects and treats wastewater, coordinates regional water resources, plans and helps fund regional parks, and administers federal funds that provide
housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income individuals and families. The 17-member Council board is appointed by and
serves at the pleasure of the governor.
This publication printed on recycled paper.
On request, this publication will be made available in alternative formats to people with disabilities. Call Metropolitan Council information at 651-602-1140 or TTY 651-291-0904.
The cover image is of Eastside Saint Paul Weehouse EcoVillage, a 2015 LCA-TOD Pre-
Development funded project. Page 6 of 138
Table of Contents
Section 1: General Information about LCA-TOD Pre-development, Zoning Implementation, and Site Investigation Grants ..................................................................................................................... 3 Purpose of Livable Communities Grants ............................................................................................. 3 Purpose of TOD Grants ...................................................................................................................... 3
Types of TOD Grants.......................................................................................................................... 3 Section 2: Eligible Applicants, Qualifying Sites, and Eligible Uses ................................................. 4
Who is eligible to apply for a TOD grant?............................................................................................ 4
What is a Metropolitan Council designated “Eligible TOD Area?” ....................................................... 4 Section 3: Eligible and Ineligible Uses of Grant Funds ..................................................................... 5
TOD Pre-Development and Zoning..................................................................................................... 5
TOD Site Investigation ........................................................................................................................ 6 Section 4: 2016 Schedule, Grant Requirements and Terms.............................................................. 7
2016 Schedule ................................................................................................................................... 7 2016 Grant Terms and Match Requirements ...................................................................................... 7 Section 5: Completing the LCA-TOD Pre-Development Application ................................................ 8
Accessing the Application ................................................................................................................... 8 Section 6: Evaluation Process for TOD grants .................................................................................. 9
Ranking Criteria for LCA TOD Pre-Development, Site Investigation, and Zoning Implementation
Proposals ........................................................................................................................................... 9 Key considerations for a successful LCDA TOD Pre-Development or Zoning Implementation application ........................................................................................................................................ 13 Section 8: Reporting Requirements .................................................................................................. 14 Section 9: Appendices ....................................................................................................................... 15
Page 7 of 138
3
Section 1: General Information about LCA-TOD Pre-development, Zoning
Implementation, and Site Investigation Grants
Purpose of Livable Communities Grants
The Metropolitan Livable Communities Act1 (LCA) created both the TBRA and LCDA to promote the purposes of the Act and the outcomes of Thrive MSP 2040:
1. Develop land uses in centers linked to the local and Regional transportation systems;
2. Efficiently connect housing, jobs, retail centers and civic uses;
3. Develop a range of housing densities, types and costs; and
4. Conserve, protect and enhance natural resources by means of development that is sensitive to
the environment.
Purpose of TOD Grants
The LCA Transit Oriented Development grants are extensions of the regular TBRA and LCDA grant programs. The Council’s TOD grants promote moderate to high density development projects located
within walking distance of a major transit stop that typically include a mix of uses such as housing, jobs, restaurants, shops, and entertainment.
Types of TOD Grants
1. LCDA-TOD Development – these grants are intended for applicants that are ready to begin a
development or redevelopment project and the land and/or infrastructure necessary to support it. This grant category includes site acquisition and site preparation.
2. TBRA-TOD Cleanup – these grants are intended for applicants that have recently completed
their cleanup site investigation and are seeking public funding to assist with the cost of implementing a cleanup plan and/or beginning redevelopment. TBRA-TOD Cleanup grants are
only eligible when applied for in conjunction with a LCDA-TOD Development grant.
3. LCDA-TOD Pre-development– these grants are intended for applicants that are defining their TOD project through such activities as design workshops, architectural work to generate site
plans, financial analyses, market studies, appraisals, project-specific stormwater management plans, soil testing, and environmental, fiscal, traffic, or gentrification impact analyses in support of an identified Future Development Project.
4. TBRA-TOD Site Investigation – Investigation grants are intended for applicants that have a redevelopment site with suspected or perceived contamination and are seeking public funding to determine the scope and severity of the contamination and to develop a cleanup plan as part
of the pre-development planning for a specific redevelopment project.
5. LCDA-TOD Zoning Implementation – these grants are intended for applicants that have plans
for transit stops or station areas and need to develop zoning or other local controls, such as
form-based codes to implement those plans. No development project is required for applications for this category of funding.
1 Minnesota Statutes section 473.25
Page 8 of 138
4
Section 2: Eligible Applicants, Qualifying Sites, and Eligible Uses
Who is eligible to apply for a TOD grant?
By state statute, applicants must be a local governmental unit, which may be a:
1. Municipality (a statutory or home rule charter city or township) currently participating in the
Metropolitan Livable Communities Housing Incentives Program
2. Metropolitan county 3. Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Economic Development Authority, Community Development Authority or Port Authority
Projects proposed by categories (2) and (3) must be located in participating municipalities with an eligible TOD Area.
Developers cannot apply and cannot be the grantee. However, developers are encouraged to
partner with eligible applicants to submit applications.
What is a Metropolitan Council designated “Eligible TOD Area?”
The LCA-TOD program leverages the Region’s public investment in its transit infrastructure by focusing on proposals that are located within Council designated “TOD Areas” described as within:
• A ½-mile radius of an existing station on the following transit lines:
o Blue and Green Light Rail Lines o Red and A Line Bus Rapid Transit Lines o Northstar Commuter Rail Line
• A ½-mile radius of stations in design on the Green Line Extension (excluding deferred stations) and the Orange Bus Rapid Transit Line
• A ½-mile radius of a bus stop or station on high-frequency express routes. High-frequency express service is defined as bus service on or outside the I494/694 freeways providing six or
more trips during at least one of the peak morning hours between 6:00 AM and 9:00 AM and
every 10 minutes during the peak morning hour
• Any spot within ¼-mile along high frequency local bus lines, defined as those routes providing
service at least every 15 minutes and running between 6:00 AM to 7 PM on week days and between 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM on Saturdays.
Page 9 of 138
5
Section 3: Eligible and Ineligible Uses of Grant Funds
TOD Pre-Development and Zoning
Eligible Uses Ineligible Uses
Eligible uses to which future development
project criteria (see Definition of Terms
section) applies:
• Architectural work to generate site
plans or development staging plans for an identified parcel or multiple
contiguous parcels;
• Design workshops for development
alternatives;
• Financial analysis to determine the
feasibility of one or many development
scenarios for an identified parcel or multiple parcels, leading to the
development of a pro-forma, provided that the development scenario/s meet the Future Project Threshold Criteria
below;
• Market study to determine the demand
for the proposed development project;
• Appraisals;
• Project-specific stormwater management plans;
• Soil testing to determine feasible land uses for site (not environmental
testing); and
• Environmental, fiscal, traffic, or
gentrification impact analysis needed
to advance project through city and/or community planning process.
Eligible uses to which future development
project criteria DOES NOT apply:
• Creation of TOD implementation
zoning ordinances
• Corridor or station area plans;
• Station area analysis of alternatives for
market mix, land use mix, economic
feasibility, or for air, water, or energy uses; and
• Strategies for land banking and acquisition.
Page 10 of 138
6
TOD Site Investigation
Eligible Costs Ineligible Costs
Creating or updating environmental
investigation documents including *
o Phase I environmental site assessment
o Phase II environmental site
assessment work plans o Phase II environmental site
assessment o Hazardous building materials assessment
o Development of a Response Action Plan o Abatement plans
o Asbestos emissions control plans (ECP)
Limited demolition (as necessary to
assess contamination ONLY)
Environmental oversight
“Soft costs” such as:
o Administrative overhead, o Travel expenses, o Legal fees,
o Bonds, o Insurance, o Permits,
o Licenses or authorization fees, o Costs associated with preparing grant proposals or applications
or bids, o Applicant’s project coordination
costs, operating expenses,
planning costs, and prorated lease and salary costs.
Cleanup or abatement costs
Construction costs (e.g., geotechnical or structural assessments)
Costs for environmental assessments
outside of the redevelopment site (as identified in the application)
Environmental site investigation funding for costs already incurred
TBRA-TOD grants funds may also be used for recently-incurred environmental site investigation costs related to contaminated site cleanup.
• The investigation work must be done no more than 180 days prior to July 1, 2016.
• Eligible uses of funds include:
• Conducting Phase I and Phase II environmental site investigations and preparation
of RAPs developed in conjunction with the PCA for hazardous waste; or Development Response Action Plans (DRAPs) developed in conjunction with the
PCA for petroleum; or
• Preparing asbestos abatement plans that meet Asbestos Hazard Emergency;
• Response Act and Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) standards; or
• Preparing lead-based paint abatement plans that meet MDH standards and the Toxic
Substances Control Act.
• The costs for the investigation work will only be reimbursed if the TBRA-TOD applicant’s
overall TOD project is recommended for funding.
See Appendix 7 for a full list of all eligible LCA-TOD uses
Page 11 of 138
7
Section 4: 2016 Schedule, Grant Requirements and Terms
2016 Schedule
In 2016, the Council will offer two competitive rounds of Pre-Development, Site Investigation, and Zoning Implementation funding:
Application Type Month Activity
LCDA-TOD
Pre-Development
March 24 Notice of funding availability
June 6 Round 1 applications due
July 18 (tentative) Community Development Committee recommends grant awards
August 10 (tentative) Metropolitan Council awards Round 1 grants
September 2 (tentative) Notice of funding availability
November 1 (tentative) Round 2 applications due
November 21 (tentative) Community Development Committee recommends grant
awards
December 14 (tentative) Metropolitan Council awards Round 2 grants
2016 Grant Terms and Match Requirements
LCDA-TOD Pre-Development
And TBRA-TOD Site Investigation
LCDA- TOD Zoning
Implementation
Local match 25% 25%
Grant terms 2 years 2 years
Term extensions Not available Not available
Award limits $100,000 per round, per city
$50,000 cap on request – Site Investigation
$100,000 per round, per city
Number of
applications
No more than 3, combined
Page 12 of 138
8
Section 5: Completing the LCA-TOD Pre-Development Application
Accessing the Application
The Council has a web-based management system for grant application, evaluation, and payment requests. WebGrants is entirely online and will cover nearly all phases of grants management across every Council grant program. The 2016 LCDA Pre-Development and Zoning
Implementation application is only available through the WebGrants system. To begin the application process, visit https://metrocouncilgrants.org/index.do
If you are new to WebGrants, read the WebGrants User Guide first. The guide is available
online at http://www.metrocouncil.org/METC/files/48/48307f04-f1b7-4269-868c-76b87a4d3258.pdf
Each application requires a resolution of support from the City in which the TOD Project is
located. Two resolutions are attached to the funding opportunity in WebGrants: one for applicants submitting only one TOD grant application in this round of funding and another for applicants
submitting multiple applications. Applications for combined LCDA TOD and TBRA TOD funding
count as one application. Applicants submitting more than one application must rank their applications according to their own priorities. Applications from counties, economic development
authority or port authority for projects in an eligible community require a resolution of support from the county or authority. Resolutions are due within 30 days after submittal of the completed application in WebGrants. Resolutions can be uploaded through the “Attachments” application
form within WebGrants.
For assistance with questions regarding application interpretation or assistance, contact:
Erin Heelan at (651) 602-1633 or erin.heelan@metc.state.mn.us
Page 13 of 138
9
Section 6: Evaluation Process for TOD grants
Ranking Criteria for LCA TOD Pre-Development, Site Investigation, and Zoning Implementation Proposals
The evaluation process for pre-development and site investigation proposals will be
conducted by a staff evaluation team. Pre-development and site investigation proposals will be scored on the degree to which the proposed activities will enhance the potential for
a future development or redevelopment project to exemplify the goals of the LCA-TOD program.
LCDA-TOD Pre-Development, TOD Zoning Implementation and TBRA-TOD Site Investigation Threshold Criteria
Transit-Oriented Development Design Features in the TOD Area
• The development project must be comply with an approved station area plan or
small area plan that demonstrates the following TOD design features:
• Minimal building setbacks.
• Short blocks with pedestrian connections adjacent to the buildings.
• Optimal pedestrian convenience between station and other connecting transit.
• A range of housing densities, types and costs.
• Connections between housing, retail, employment centers and recreational uses
• Cycling and walking conveniences.
• Current and future employment opportunities within the TOD Area and within the
connecting transit corridor/corridors.
• Conservation, protection, and enhancement of natural resources.
• Residential and commercial parking is limited, shared between uses, located to the
rear of buildings, and/or is structured.
Pass Fail
Housing and Economic Diversity Considerations within the TOD Area
City has adopted a policy/plan/guideline or other official local control to:
Address both the preservation of existing subsidized and naturally occurring affordable housing units in the TOD Area and
• The addition of affordable housing units in the TOD Area.
or
• The addition of higher-value housing in lower-income areas to achieve a mix of
housing affordability.
Pass Fail
Address how the applicant will proactively and intentionally address gentrification. Pass Fail
Page 14 of 138
10
Evaluation Criteria for LCDA-TOD Pre-Development and TBRA-TOD Site
Investigation with an Identified Future Development Project
Possible
Points
Applications will be evaluated on the degree to which the proposed activities will enhance the potential for an associated development or redevelopment project to:
Transit Accessibility, Walkability, and Ridership
• Provide the opportunity for residents and/or employees in the TOD Area to live or work
there without relying on an automobile to meet daily needs by using transit or walking; to
reduce automobile ownership, vehicular traffic, and associated parking requirements that
would otherwise be necessary to support a similar level of more traditional development.
15
• Provide ridership impact.
Housing
• Produce affordable and/or life-cycle housing.
• Assist the city in meeting its affordable and life-cycle housing goals.
• The proposal’s ability to create or preserve a mix of housing affordability within the station
area. 15
Jobs
Create or preserve employment opportunities. 15
TOD Design
• Potential for TOD design features to be included in final design/project implementation.
• Intensify future use of the site. 15
Partnerships and Readiness
• The potential for meaningful and appropriate public engagement in carrying out the
activities funded by a TOD Pre-Development grant.
• Financial commitment for the pre-development and/or site investigation activities.
• Political commitment for the future development or redevelopment project.
• The extent to which the proposed project is ready and able to use the grant, if awarded,
within the 24-month grant term. (Higher points will be given for more advanced projects
on the pre-development continuum.)
10
TOD Model/Demonstration Value
• The project’s demonstration value and potential to provide area-wide benefits.
• The ability of the proposed pre-development activities to evolve into a future
development or redevelopment project that could be a model of TOD.
15
Catalyst
• The extent to which TOD funding-requested element will be a catalyst to implement the
project of which it is a part.
• The extent to which the proposed development project will catalyze additional
development and private investment to future project phases and/or to the immediate
area.
5
Total 90
Applications must score at least 54 of the total 90 available points
(Continued on next page)
Page 15 of 138
11
Evaluation Criteria for LCDA-TOD Pre-Development and TBRA-TOD Site
Investigation with an Identified Future Development Project
Possible
Points
Housing Performance Score
The applicant’s Housing Performance Score will be converted from a 100 point scale to a 10 point
scale. If a proposed project includes new affordable housing or if a significant amount of affordable housing is already located within the project site/area, the proposal will be held
harmless by assigning the higher of the community’s actual performance score or the average performance scores from all proposals being evaluated.
10
Overall Total 100
Page 16 of 138
12
Evaluation Criteria for Pre-Development TOD Implementation Zoning Ordinances Applications Possible Points
Applications will be evaluated on the degree to which the proposed activities will enhance the potential for the TOD Area to:
Transit Accessibility, Walkability, and Ridership
• Provide the opportunity for residents and/or employees in the TOD Area to live or
work there without relying on an automobile to meet daily needs by using transit or walking; to reduce automobile ownership, vehicular traffic, and associated parking requirements that would otherwise be necessary to support a similar level of more
traditional development.
20
• Provide ridership impact.
TOD Design
• Demonstrate TOD design features.
• Intensify future use of the site. 25
Partnerships and Readiness
• The potential for meaningful and appropriate public egagement in carrying out the
activities funded by an LCDA-TOD Pre-Development grant.
• Financial commitment for the pre-development and/or site investigation activities.
• Political commitment for the future development or redevelopment project.
• The extent to which the proposed project is ready and able to use the TOD grant, if
awarded, within the 24-month grant term. (Higher points will be given for more advanced projects on the predevelopment continuum.)
15
TOD Model/Demonstration Value
The ability of the proposed pre-development activities to evolve into a future development or redevelopment project that could be a model of TOD, highlighting TOD
design features.
20
Catalyst
• The extent to which TOD funding-requested element(s) will be a catalyst to implement the project of which it is a part.
• The extent to which the proposed project will catalyze additional development and
private investment to future project phases and/or to the immediate area.
10
Total 90
Applications must score at least 54 of the 90 available points
Housing Performance Score
The applicant’s Housing Performance Score will be converted from a 100 point scale to a
10 point scale. If a proposed project includes new affordable housing or if a significant amount of affordable housing is already located within the project site/area, the proposal will be held harmless by assigning the higher of the community’s actual performance
score or the average performance scores from all proposals being evaluated.
10
Overall Total 100
Page 17 of 138
13
Key considerations for a successful LCDA TOD Pre-Development or Zoning
Implementation application
1. Not every good future development or redevelopment project or zoning implementation consideration is a good subject for a LCA TOD Pre-Development or Zoning Implementation grant. To qualify for funds and score competitively, the application must
make it clear how the project will address statutory and Thrive LCA goals, which are:
• interrelating development or redevelopment and transit;
• interrelating affordable housing and employment growth areas;
• intensifying land use that leads to more compact development or redevelopment;
• involving development or redeveloping that mixes incomes of residents in housing,
including introducing or reintroducing higher value housing in lower income areas to
achieve a mix of housing opportunities; and/or
• encouraging public infrastructure investments which connect urban neighborhoods and
suburban communities, attract private sector development investment in commercial and residential properties adjacent to the public improvement, and provide project area
residents with expanded opportunities for private sector employment.
2. The application is designed to focus on a specific future development or redevelopment project that exemplifies LCA goals. As the program name implies, the future development
or redevelopment project needs to pursue an end result that can be demonstrated or
replicated elsewhere in the region. Examples include: Will the project utilize an innovative collaboration? Is it sited in a unique way? Is there some element of the project’s funding,
implementation or design that hasn’t been done locally? Can some quality, element, or portion of this project serve as an example elsewhere in the region? Fully address the appropriate questions within the application to claim the benefit of these elements.
3. When filling out the grant application, is it important to distinguish between the future development project and its constituent grant-funded activities. The future development project is the development or redevelopment work that through its design and execution
will deliver benefits such as housing, connections, and/or jobs to the region. The activities for which grant funds are requested are conducted in support of the overall project and
must be completed during the grant term.
Note that unless otherwise instructed, your answers should pertain only to the project that will be catalyzed by the Pre-Development project.
4. For important TOD specific criteria for projects seeking LCA-TOD funding and each of the
demonstration categories please refer to the Handbook for Transit –Oriented Development Grants:http://metrocouncil.org/Communities/Services/Livable-Communities-Grants/Transit-
Oriented-Development.aspx
5. Livable Communities staff will review submittals to ensure all required elements have been received. Incomplete applications may be disqualified.
Page 18 of 138
14
Section 8: Reporting Requirements
Grantees are required to submit periodic progress reports. The detail supplied with payment requests comprises the bulk of the progress reports, which are augmented with semi-annual
reports. A final progress report is required with the last payment request. When a grant is closed,
the grantee’s chief financial officer is required to certify to the appropriate expenditure of grant funds.
Grantees that have not fully implemented the required threshold criteria must also report regularly
on their progress towards doing so.
Recipients of LCDA-TOD Pre-Development grants must supply a copy of the final work product
funded by the grant award.
Page 19 of 138
15
Section 9: Appendices
Appendix 1: Using Make-a-Map Livable Communities is excited to announce the release of an updated Make-a-Map tool, which has been customized for LCA Grants. To access Make-a-Map, follow this link:
http://giswebsite.metc.state.mn.us/publicmaps/lca
How Create the Required Maps for LCDA and LCA-TOD
NOTE: the required 40-scale site plan for LCA-TOD design workshops will need to be generated by the
applicant outside of the Make-a-Map application.
1. Enter an address or landmark in the
search bar to navigate to your project
area.
2. Click “Sketch the Project” and select the
appropriate grant category, either Livable Communities Demonstration Account or Transit Oriented Development. Provide a
name for your project.
3. You may use the zoom and pan buttons
to navigate to your project site. Click
“Sketch a Boundary” and, using the crosshair as a guide, draw the project
boundary. A gray polygon with a red
outline will begin to appear. Once you have finished outlining the boundary,
double click to close the polygon. If there
are multiple, non-contiguous parcels that are part of your Project, you have the
option of sketching another boundary.
4. Click “Sketch walking route” and draw the most direct walking route between the project site and the TOD station. Only draw the walking route along publically-accessible
Page 20 of 138
16
(privately or publically-owned) paths, plazas, or other pedestrian areas. Do not draw the route across parking lots.
5. Double click to terminate the walking route. A linear distance is automatically calculated,
and depending on the number of stations available within ½-mile of the project, several station areas may appear. Click the drop-down menu and select the Named TOD-Eligible
Station for your project.
6. Select “Print” and “Create the maps.” The system will generate two maps for LCDA and
three maps for LCA-TOD. Please be patient – depending on your connection, it can take up to one minute to generate the maps.
7. Click each PDF to download
them separately.
If you have any questions about using
Make-a-Map, consult the Make-a-Map
help section or contact LCA staff.
Page 21 of 138
17
Appendix 2: Submittal instructions and required attachments
Applications and all attachments must be submitted by 5pm on Monday, June 6th (Round 1)
or Monday, October 31st (Round 2). No late submittals will be accepted. Convert all
attachments to PDF. There is no file size limit for attachments in WebGrants. Access WebGrants online at: https://metrocouncilgrants.org/index.do
For assistance with questions regarding application interpretation or assistance, contact:
Erin Heelan (651) 602-1633
erin.heelan@metc.state.mn.us
TOD-Required Attachments (LCDA-TOD Pre-Development) The following attachments are required for LCDA-TOD Pre-development, in compressed
PDF format:
• Parcel Map (from Make-a-Map)
• Aerial view (from Make-a-Map)
• Overview map (from Make-a-Map)
• Walk route map (from Make-a-Map)
• Site Plan The Site Plan must:
• Show the Project site in detail and how it relates to the Named TOD Area showing the location of all requested elements and all proposed TOD Project construction. Note: any references to TOD Project elements within the narrative must be
illustrated on the site plan. For example, if a trailhead is mentioned in the narrative,
the trailhead must be shown on the site plan. If rain gardens are being requested as a grant-funded activity, the location of each rain garden must be shown on the site
plan.
• Include the following basic elements: scale bar, north arrow, and a title block listing
the name of the project.
• Include the following naming convention: “Site plan – [TOD Project name]” and
present it in PDF.
• Resolution of Local Support
NOTE: See Appendix X for projects involving a city only; See Appendix X for an
application submitted by a county – a joint county-city resolution is required. The appropriate resolution may be submitted with the application or within 30 days after the
application due date.
Name the resolution “Resolution – [TOD Project name]” for a single application and “Resolution – City of XXXXX” if you are submitting more than one application.
• Elevation. Name the PDF file “Elevation – [TOD Project name].”
• If completed, a station area/small area plan, adopted by the City. Name the Excel file “Sources & Uses – [TOD Project name].”
Other Attachments
• Up to 5 additional, one-page renderings (perspectives, sections, diagrams, photos, etc.)
When all sections have been completed, review your application for accuracy and click “submit.” You will not be allowed to make any changes once the application has been submitted to the Council.
Page 22 of 138
18
Appendix 3: Applicant Resources
Transit-Oriented Development
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/about/conplan/pdf/Fostering_Equitable_and_Sustainable_TOD.pdf
Urban Land Institute: Ten Principles for Successful Development Around Transit, www.uli.org/ResearchAndPublications/Reports/~/media/Documents/ResearchAndPublications/Reports/ Ten
Principles/TP_DevTransit.ashx
Reconnecting America, Center for Transit-Oriented Development, www.reconnectingamerica.org/public/reports
“What Does Density Look Like?” http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups/public/@cped/documents/webcontent/convert_266012
.pdf Saint Paul Transit-Oriented Development Guidebook for the Central Corridor
http://www.stpaul.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/19527
Transit Corridors
Regional Transportation: http://www.metrocouncil.org/transportation/transportation.htm
METRO Green Line: http://metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Projects/Current-Projects/Central-Corridor.aspx METRO Blue Line: http://www.metrotransit.org/metro-blue-line
METRO Red Line: http://www.metrotransit.org/metro-red-line Northstar Commuter Rail: http://www.metrotransit.org/northstar
METRO Green Line Extension: http://www.metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Projects/Current-Projects/Southwest-LRT.aspx
METRO Blue Line Extension: http://www.metrocouncil.org/Transportation/Projects/Furture-Projects/Bottineau-Transitway.aspx
A Line Arterial BRT: http://www.metrotransit.org/snelling-BRT
Active Living and Complete Streets
Active Living Hennepin Communities: www.hennepin.us/activeliving Active Design Guidelines: http://www1.nyc.gov/site/ddc/about/active-design.page
Minnesota Complete Streets Coalition: www.mncompletestreets.org/
Soil Vapor Mitigation Risk-Based Guidance for the Vapor Intrusion Pathway: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/view-
document.html?gid=3162
Page 23 of 138
Appendix 4: Required Resolution from Applicants with a Single Application RESOLUTION NO.
CITY OF , MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR LIVABLE COMMUNITIES TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT FUNDING AND AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS
WHEREAS the City of is a participant in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act (“LCA”) Local Housing Incentives Program for 2016 as determined by the Metropolitan Council, and is therefore eligible to apply for LCA Livable Communities Demonstration Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account Transit Oriented Development (collectively, “TOD”) funds; and
WHEREAS the City has identified a proposed project within the City that meets TOD purposes and criteria and is consistent with and promotes the purposes of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act and the policies of the Metropolitan Council’s adopted metropolitan development guide; and
WHEREAS the City has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to adequately manage an LCA-TOD grant ;
and
WHEREAS the City certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement; and
WHEREAS the City acknowledges TOD grants are intended to fund projects or project components that can serve as models, examples or prototypes for TOD development or redevelopment elsewhere in the Region,
and therefore represents that the proposed project or key components of the proposed project can be
replicated in other metropolitan-area communities; and
WHEREAS only a limited amount of grant funding is available through the Metropolitan Council’s Livable Communities TOD initiative during each funding cycle and the Metropolitan Council has determined it is appropriate to allocate those scarce grant funds only to eligible projects that would not occur without the availability of TOD grant funding.
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 development goals and priorities for the proposed TOD Project to occur at this particular site and at this particular time.
2. Finds that the TOD Project component(s) for which Livable Communities TOD funding is sought:
(a) will not occur solely through private or other public investment within the reasonably foreseeable future; and
(b) will occur within the term of the grant award (two years for Pre-Development grants, and three years for Development grants, one year for Cleanup Site Investigation grants and three years
for Cleanup grants) only if Livable Communities TOD funding is made available for this project
at this time.
3. Authorizes its to submit on behalf of the City an application for Metropolitan Council Livable Communities TOD grant funds for the TOD Project component(s) identified in the application, and to execute such agreements as may be necessary to implement the TOD Project on behalf of the City.
Adopted this day of _, 2016.
Mayor Clerk
Page 24 of 138
Appendix 5: Required Resolution for Applicants with Multiple Applications RESOLUTION NO.
CITY OF , MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR LIVABLE COMMUNITIES TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT FUNDING AND AUTHORIZING APPLICATIONS FOR GRANT FUNDS
WHEREAS the City of is a participant in the Metropolitan Livable
Communities Act (“LCA”) Local Housing Incentives Program for 2016 as determined by the
Metropolitan Council, and is therefore eligible to apply for LCA Livable Communities Demonstration Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account Transit Oriented Development
(collectively, “TOD”) funds; and
WHEREAS the City has identified proposed projects within the City that meet TOD purposes and
criteria and are consistent with and promote the purposes of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act and the policies of the Metropolitan Council’s adopted metropolitan development guide; and
WHEREAS the City has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to adequately
manage an LCA-TOD grant; and
WHEREAS the City certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement; and
WHEREAS the City acknowledges Livable Communities TOD grants are intended to fund
projects or project components that can serve as models, examples or prototypes for TOD development or redevelopment elsewhere in the Region, and therefore represents that the
proposed projects or key components of the proposed projects can be replicated in other
metropolitan-area communities; and
WHEREAS only a limited amount of grant funding is available through the Metropolitan Council’s Livable Communities TOD initiative during each funding cycle and the Metropolitan Council has determined it is appropriate to allocate those scarce grant funds only to eligible projects that would not occur without the availability of TOD grant funding; and
WHEREAS cities may submit grant applications for up to three TOD Demonstration Account projects and up to six TOD Tax Base Revitalization Account during each funding cycle, but, using the city’s own internal ranking processes, must rank their projects by priority so the
Metropolitan Council may consider those priority rankings as it reviews applications and makes grant awards.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that, after appropriate examination and consideration, the governing body of the City:
1. Finds that it is in the best interests of the City’s development goals and priorities for
the proposed projects to occur at the sites indicated in the grant applications at this particular time.
2. Finds that the TOD Project components for which Livable Communities TOD funding is sought:
(a) will not occur solely through private or other public investment within the reasonably foreseeable future; and
(b) will occur within the term of the grant award (two years for Pre-Development grants,
and three years for Development grants, one year for Cleanup Site Investigation grants and three years for Cleanup grants) only if Livable Communities TOD funding
is made available for these projects at this time.
Page 25 of 138
3. Ranks the TOD Project funding applications, according to the City’s own internal priorities, in the following order: (List grant applications here; the total number of Development (including
combined Development and Cleanup) and Pre- Development grant applications from the City cannot exceed three. Funding requests for both TBRA and LCDA grant funds listed in
the same application will be counted as one application for purposes of the limit of numbers
of applications.)
Priority LCA_TOD Project Names Grant amount requested
1
2
3
4. Authorizes its to submit on behalf of the City applications for Metropolitan Council Livable Communities TOD grant funds for the TOD Project components
identified in the applications, and to execute such agreements as may be necessary to
implement the projects on behalf of the City.
Adopted this day of , 2016.
Mayor Clerk
Page 26 of 138
Appendix 6: Sample Resolution for County/EDA/Port Authority Applicants RESOLUTION NO. _______
COUNTY OF ___________________________, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING THE NEED FOR LIVABLE COMMUNITIES DEMONSTRATION ACCOUNT FUNDING AND AUTHORIZING APPLICATIONS FOR GRANT FUNDS
WHEREAS the County/EDA/Port Authority of ____________________ is eligible to apply for Livable
Communities Demonstration Account funds on behalf of cities participating in the Livable Communities Act’s Housing Incentives Program for 2016 as determined by the Metropolitan Council; and
WHEREAS the County/EDA/Port Authority has identified proposed projects within the City of
________________ that meet the Demonstration Account’s purposes and criteria and are consistent with and promote the purposes of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act and the policies of the
Metropolitan Council’s adopted metropolitan development guide; and
WHEREAS the County/EDA/Port Authority has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to ensure adequate project administration; and
WHEREAS the County/EDA/Port Authority certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement; and
WHEREAS the County/EDA/Port Authority agrees to act as legal sponsor for the projects contained in
the grant applications submitted on ____________________, 2016;
WHEREAS the County/EDA/Port Authority acknowledges Livable Communities Demonstration Account
grants are intended to fund projects or project components that can serve as models, examples or
prototypes for development or redevelopment projects elsewhere in the region, and therefore represents that the proposed projects or key components of the proposed projects can be replicated in
other metropolitan-area communities; and
WHEREAS only a limited amount of grant funding is available through the Metropolitan Council’s Livable Communities Demonstration Account during each funding cycle and the Metropolitan Council
has determined it is appropriate to allocate those scarce grant funds only to eligible projects that would
not occur without the availability of Demonstration Account grant funding.
THEREFORE, the County/EDA/Port Authority of ______________ authorizes its’ Executive Director to
submit an application for Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Demonstration Account grant funds for the project components identified in the application, and to execute such agreements as may be necessary to implement the projects on behalf of the City of ________________, where the project is
located.
Adopted this ___ day of ______________, 2016.
__________________________________ ___________________________________
Executive Director
Page 27 of 138
Appendix 6a: Required Resolution for Counties, EDAs, or Port Authorities
RESOLUTION NO.
CITY OF _, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION IDENTIFYING SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A LIVABLE COMMUNITIES DEMONSTRATION ACCOUNT (LCDA) GRANT SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF A COUNTY, EDA OR PORT AUTHORITY.
As a participant in the Metropolitan Council’s Livable Communities Local Housing Incentives Account program, the city of (name of city or township) supports the application, and any resulting funding award,
for the _(project name) being submitted by the (name of eligible county/EDA/Port Authority).
Adopted this day of , 2016.
Page 28 of 138
24
Appendix 7: LCA-TOD Eligible Items-Quick Reference Guide
LCA-TOD Grant Program LCA TOD Pre-Development LCA TOD Development and
Cleanup
Grant-Funded Activities
LCDA-TOD Pre-Development
LCDA-TOD Zoning Implementation
TBRA-TOD Site Investigation
TBRA-TOD Cleanup LCDA-TOD Development
Architectural work to generate site plans or development
staging plans
X
Design workshops for development alternatives X
Financial analysis of development scenarios X
Market study X
Appraisal X
Project-specific stormwater management plans X
Soil testing to determine feasible soil correction and/or structural limits for site (not environmental testing) X
Environmental, fiscal, traffic, or gentrification impact analysis X
Creation of TOD zoning ordinances X
Land acquisition after the date of award X
Land acquisition up to 12 months prior to application due date (see Application Guide) X
Holding costs X
Geotechnical work X
Conducting Phase I & Phase II environmental site assessments X X
Preparation of RAPs or DRAPs X X
Preparation of asbestos abatement plans that meet AHERA standards X X
Preparation of lead-based paint abatement plans X X
Lead-based paint removal or stabilization X
Asbestos and/or lead-based paint abatement or encapsulation X
Demolition and removal of obsolete structures (TBRA: contaminated areas only, as necessary to access contamination ONLY; LCDA: non-contaminated areas only)
X X X
Grading and soil correction (TBRA: contaminated areas only; LCDA: non-contaminated areas X X
Excavation, transportation, disposal fees for removal of contaminated soil, backfill and grading of clean soil X
Soil vapor mitigation X
Costs to document environmental monitoring systems or successful implementation of a RAP (e.g., technical writing) X X
New or realigned streets, including lighting and signage; sidewalks and benches X
Public-use or shared-use parking structures X
Extensions/modifications of local public sewer, water or telecommunication lines X
Public connecting elements, including sidewalks and trails that connect to transit and other surrounding public places X
Site-integrated transit shelters, permanent bike racks, or bridges X
Stormwater management improvements X
Placemaking functional elements X
Design and engineering for LCDA Development TOD eligible items X
Energy efficiency installations such as photovoltaic solar panels, geothermal pumps, wind turbines, or fuel cells X
Project coordination X
Page 29 of 138
25
Appendix 8: Definition of terms This grant category uses some terms that are specific to the category and may have other meanings
elsewhere. For the purposes of the application and evaluation of LCA-TOD Pre-Development and
Zoning Implementation grant category, the following definitions apply:
• Transit Oriented Development (TOD) refers to residential and commercial centers designed to
maximize access by transit and non-motorized transportation, and with other features to encourage transit ridership. A TOD neighborhood has a center with a rail or bus station,
surrounded by relatively high-density development, with progressively lower-density spreading
outwards.
• The Future Development Project is the development or redevelopment project that provides
the deliverables upon which the grant application is scored. The grant-funded activities do not comprise the project. All applicants seeking funding from the LCDA-TOD Pre-Development and
TBRA-TOD Site Investigation categories must be able to confirm that the proposal:
• will be located on specific, identified parcel(s)
• has an identified development program of uses (housing units, retail, office, institutional, etc.).
• includes a developer or development team that will lead the project
• is within a LCA TOD-eligible area
• The Grant-Funded Activities are components of the TOD Project described in the application for which funding is awarded (i.e., street construction, site acquisition, lead-based paint
abatement or the acquisition of a site for a future development delivering these same benefits).
• Affordable Housing is ownership or rental housing affordable to households earning
80% or less of Area Median Income (AMI). All Livable Communities Act affordable housing
grant applications that include affordable housing must have a minimum 15-year affordability term, and a mechanism to ensure affordability for that term, to be considered as affordable.
• A Living Wage is 130% of the poverty guideline for a family of four within the 48 contiguous states established annually by the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. The living
wage threshold for 2016 is $31,590.
• Areas of Concentrated Poverty are those in which 20% or more of the residents are living in
poverty
• Equitable Development creates healthy vibrant communities of opportunity where low income
people, people of color, new immigrants and people with disabilities participate in and benefit
from systems decisions, and activities that shape their neighborhoods.
Page 30 of 138
26
Appendix 9: TOD Project Requirements
All of the following are required to comprise an eligible TOD Project Pre-Development Applications:
• The applicant must be able to identify a future development project, as defined in the “Definition of Terms” section.
• The TOD future development project must involve new development, rehabilitation,
redevelopment or infill development addressing the program goals or the acquisition or preparation of a site for future development addressing those same goals. TOD projects
involving rehabilitation are eligible if they have other components that address one or more of the program goals.
• The TOD future development project must be located within a Council-identified TOD area, Regional park land is ineligible.
• Grant-funded activities for LCDA–TOD Pre-Development and Zoning Implementation projects
must be completed by December 31, 2017.
• The LCDA TOD Pre-Development or Zoning Implementation project, and their future development project must be consistent or be made consistent with the local comprehensive
plan that has been reviewed by the Council as well as being consistent with any area, neighborhood, corridor or other local plan adopted by the municipality in which the TOD project
is located.
• The future development project must be in compliance with an approved station area plan or
small area plan that will be in place within one year of completion of preliminary engineering for
the station’s transit line, that demonstrates the following TOD design features.* o minimal building setbacks, o short blocks with pedestrian connections adjacent to the buildings, o optimal pedestrian convenience between Station and other connecting transit, o a range of housing densities, types and costs,
o connections between housing, retail, employment centers and recreational uses, o cycling and walking conveniences, o current and future employment opportunities within the TOD Area and within the connecting
transit corridor/corridors, o conservation, protection, and enhancement of natural resources, and
o residential and commercial parking is limited, shared between uses, located to the rear of
buildings, and/or is structured.
*This threshold criterion DOES NOT apply to Pre-Development requests involving the creation of TOD implementation zoning ordinances.
• If housing is planned, the TOD future development project must help achieve one or more of the
affordable and lifecycle housing goals adopted by the applicant city (or the city in which the TOD
project is located if the applicant is a county or county development authority) under the Local Housing Incentives program of the Livable Communities Act.
Page 31 of 138
390 Robert Street North Saint Paul, MN 55101-1805
651.602.1000
TTY 651.291.0904 public.info@metc.state.mn.us metrocouncil.org
Follow us on: twitter.com/metcouncilnews
facebook.com/MetropolitanCouncil
youtube.com/MetropolitanCouncil
Page 32 of 138
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan (CSWMP) 2017 Update Presentation
Description
The City of Falcon Heights is starting to make updates to its CSWMP. In the past, these
plans were due within 2 years of a Watershed District plan update. Recent legislation
changed the timeline to coincide with City’s Comprehensive Plans. Staff will brief the
Council on the plan update. The goal of the CSWMP is to provide guidance for
conserving, protecting, and managing local water resources.
The City of Roseville recently hired Short Eliot Hendrickson (SEH) to updates its CSWMP.
Since the City of Roseville and City of Falcon Heights have similar plans and share
watersheds, staff requested SEH provide a cost to update Falcon Heights CSWMP. Since
some meetings can be shared there will be some cost savings to use SEH to update the
CSWMP.
Budget
Impact
The estimated cost of the SEH proposal is $16,000. There are available Money through the
Storm Sewer Fund.
Attachment • Power Point Presentation Slides
• 2008 CSWMP Document
• SEH Proposal
• Project Schedule
• Draft Survey Questions
Action(s)
Requested
Staff would recommend accepting the attached SEH Proposal.
Meeting Date October 12, 2016
Agenda Item Presentation C3
Attachment Supporting Documents
Submitted By Ryan Johnson, Environmental Specialist
Page 33 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 34 of 138
Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan
FALCON HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OCTOBER 12, 2016
Page 35 of 138
CSWMP Overview
Develop a comprehensive planning document to guide the City in conserving, protecting and managing it’s local water resources
Section 1: Executive Summary
Section 2: Introduction
Section 3: Land and Water Resources Inventory- Describes the physical environment including precipitation, topography, geology, groundwater, soils, surface water resources and land use within the City.
Section 4: Regulatory Agencies- A list of the agencies having roles in the management of surface water resources.
Section 5: Water Resource Management Agreements- Describes the ownership and maintenance responsibility for all of the storm sewer facilities within the City of Falcon Heights.
Section 6: Assessment- Provides an assessment of the existing controls and watersheds in the City and issues related to each area.
Section 7: Policies and Goals- A list of the Capitol Region Watershed District goals and policies adopted by the City of Falcon Heights.
Section 8: Implementation Program- Describes the City’s intent to implement capital improvements in cooperation with the Watershed Districts.
Section 9: Administration- Describes the processes to update this plan.
Page 36 of 138
Reason for Plan Update
Minnesota Rules were updated in July of 2015 and now require that:
◦Must be revised once every ten years
◦Aligned with Comprehensive Plan schedule
◦Must adopt the plan between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018.
Previous Versions of the City’s Surface Water Management Plan:
◦Original Plan – 2008
Page 37 of 138
Background/Scope of Work
1.Coordination with City Staff and Reviewing Agencies
2.Understand the City’s Current Surface Water Management Plan
3.Facilitation of an Effective and Meaningful Public Involvement Process
4.Goal Setting, Policies, Implementation Plan and Priorities
5.Development of Draft and Final Plan Document Deliverables
6.Follow-Through on Approvals
Page 38 of 138
2017 CSWMP Update
Plan Update focus
◦New/innovative implementation ideas
◦Update goals and policies and issues assessment
◦New issues/Issues Assessment Map
◦Resolved Issues Section
◦Education & Outreach
◦Alignment with 2 Watershed Districts
◦Inclusion of TMDL’s
Page 39 of 138
Current CSWMP Implementation Plan: Section 8
Year Project/ Program Amount
2009 City Hall Parking Lot Reconstruction $100,000
2010 Curtiss Field Pond Drainage review $15,000
2012 Pascal Street Drainage Review $15,000
Annually Drainage/ Curb and Gutter Maintenance $16,000-$17,000
Annually Streetsweeping $18,000
Annually Storm sewer structure repairs $2,500
Page 40 of 138
2017 CSWMP Update
Public Input Process
◦Electronic Survey
◦Public open house coordination with Comprehensive Plan update process
Page 41 of 138
Public Involvement
Filamentous algae Watermilfoil
Coontail Curly-leaf pondweed
Water Clarity
Shoreline Buffers
Page 42 of 138
CSWMP Update
Page 43 of 138
CSWMP Update
1.Prepare clear and concise static maps and graphics
2.Update background narrative content and data summary tables
3.Deliver progress drafts for staff and public comments
4.Compile and address staff and public comments
Page 44 of 138
Draft Schedule
PWETC Meeting #1 August 23rd
TAP Meeting #1 TBD
TAP Meeting #2 TBD
PWETC Meeting #2 October 25th
Draft Plan #1 Early January
PWETC Meeting #3 January 24th
Draft Plan #2 Late January
TAP Meeting #3 TBD
Agency Review Draft Mid-February
Agency Approvals Apr-17
Council Adopts Plan May-17
Page 45 of 138
Questions
Ryan Johnson
Environmental Specialist
651-792-7049
Ryan.Johnson@cityofroseville.com
Como Lake
August 2013
Page 46 of 138
Plan Update: Task 3 Goal Setting, Policies, Implementation Plan Priorities
1.Facilitate the establishment of goals and policies based feedback from public,
agencies, and staff. Build off Roseville process.
2.Identify and prioritize drainage and water quality issues - meeting with City staff
3.Develop specific implementation activities aligned with goals and policies to address
identified issues
4.Prepare for and Attend one City Commission Meeting to review draft plan
5.Establish performance measure, estimated costs/resources, and potential financing
mechanisms for implementation activities
Page 47 of 138
Current CSWMP Goals: Section 7
1.Coordinate with the CRWD and RCWD to pursue partnerships to provide effective, efficient and consistent water management activities
2.Utilize long-term planning, education and partnerships to minimize capital expenditures to address water resource management issues.
3.The City of Falcon Heights will work to manage water bodies consistent with CRWD and other regulatory agencies.
4.Reduce non-point source pollution loads to City water bodies.
5.Require retrofitting of existing stormwater management facilities and BMPs where necessary to achieve the
CRWD’s water quality standards.
6.Preserve existing flood levels on City water bodies at or below the 100-year flood elevations.
7.Reduce runoff rates to levels that allow for stable conveyance of flow throughout the water resources of the
City.
8.Coordinate wetlands management with CRWD and RCWD standards and requirements.
Page 48 of 138
Current CSWMP Goals: Section 7 (Con’t)
9.Protect groundwater resources and recharge areas consistent with the responsibilities identified in the
Ramsey County Groundwater Quality Protection Plan.
10.Encourage the infiltration of properly treated surface water into the groundwater system, where
appropriate.
11.Cooperate and coordinate with the CRWD to implement ‘Major Area VI – Stewardship’ of the CRWD
Water Resources Management Plan.
Page 49 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 50 of 138
Total Staff HoursEstimated Task Fee
Ta
s
k
1
-
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
W
I
T
H
C
I
T
Y
S
T
A
F
F
A
N
D
R
E
V
I
E
W
A
G
E
N
C
I
E
S
1,120 $
1
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
K
i
c
k
o
f
f
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
0
2
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
,
s
t
a
t
e
,
a
n
d
l
o
c
a
l
w
a
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
r
u
l
e
s
m
a
t
r
i
x
9
Ta
s
k
2
-
U
N
D
E
R
S
T
A
N
D
T
H
E
C
I
T
Y
'
S
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
W
A
T
E
R
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
2,240 $
1
R
e
v
i
e
w
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
C
S
W
M
P
a
n
d
c
o
m
p
i
l
e
n
e
w
b
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
d
a
t
a
/
r
e
p
o
r
t
s
/
s
t
u
d
i
e
s
s
i
n
c
e
2
0
1
3
9
2
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
u
p
d
a
t
e
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
C
S
W
M
P
a
n
d
s
t
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
9
Ta
s
k
3
-
G
O
A
L
S
E
T
T
I
N
G
,
P
O
L
I
C
I
E
S
,
I
M
P
L
E
M
E
N
T
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
A
N
D
P
R
I
O
R
I
T
I
E
S
5,340 $
1
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
t
h
e
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
m
e
n
t
o
f
g
o
a
l
s
a
n
d
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
b
a
s
e
d
f
e
e
d
b
a
c
k
f
r
o
m
p
u
b
l
i
c
,
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
,
a
n
d
s
t
a
ff
.
B
u
i
l
d
o
f
f
R
o
s
e
v
ill
e
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
.
8
2
I
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
a
n
d
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
z
e
d
r
a
i
n
a
g
e
a
n
d
w
a
t
e
r
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
i
s
s
u
e
s
-
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
C
i
t
y
s
t
a
f
f
8
3
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
m
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
a
l
i
g
n
e
d
w
i
t
h
g
o
a
l
s
a
n
d
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
t
o
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
i
s
s
u
e
s
10
4
P
r
e
p
a
r
e
f
o
r
a
n
d
A
t
t
e
n
d
o
n
e
C
i
t
y
C
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
t
o
r
e
v
i
e
w
d
r
a
f
t
p
l
a
n
8
5
E
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
,
e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
c
o
s
t
s
/
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
,
a
n
d
p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
n
g
m
e
c
h
a
n
i
s
m
s
f
o
r
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
8
Ta
s
k
4
-
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
O
F
D
R
A
F
T
A
N
D
F
I
N
A
L
P
L
A
N
D
O
C
U
M
E
N
T
D
E
L
I
V
E
R
A
B
L
E
S
4,260 $
1
P
r
e
p
a
r
e
c
l
e
a
r
a
n
d
c
o
n
c
i
s
e
s
t
a
t
i
c
m
a
p
s
a
n
d
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
24
2
U
p
d
a
t
e
b
a
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
n
a
r
r
a
t
i
v
e
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
a
n
d
d
a
t
a
s
u
m
m
a
r
y
t
a
b
l
e
s
8
3
D
e
l
i
v
e
r
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
d
r
a
f
t
s
f
o
r
s
t
a
f
f
a
n
d
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
1
4
C
o
m
p
i
l
e
a
n
d
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
s
t
a
f
f
a
n
d
p
u
b
l
i
c
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
4
Ta
s
k
5
-
F
O
L
L
O
W
-
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
O
N
A
P
P
R
O
V
A
L
S
2,880 $
1
D
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
A
g
e
n
c
y
D
r
a
f
t
t
o
r
e
v
i
e
w
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
f
o
r
4
5
/
6
0
d
a
y
r
e
v
i
e
w
p
e
r
i
o
d
s
2
2
C
o
m
p
i
l
e
a
n
d
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
a
g
e
n
c
y
r
e
v
i
e
w
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
i
n
t
o
f
i
n
a
l
p
l
a
n
12
3
D
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
f
i
n
a
l
p
l
a
n
c
o
p
i
e
s
t
o
a
g
e
n
c
i
e
s
,
o
b
t
a
i
n
f
i
n
a
l
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
s
,
a
n
d
c
o
u
n
c
i
l
a
d
o
p
t
i
o
n
4
4
P
r
e
p
a
r
e
h
a
r
d
-
c
o
p
y
a
n
d
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
p
l
a
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
f
o
r
p
o
s
t
i
n
g
o
n
l
i
n
e
a
n
d
f
o
r
f
i
n
a
l
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
8 132
To
t
a
l
L
a
b
o
r
15,840 $
To
t
a
l
E
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
160 $
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
T
o
t
a
l
L
a
b
o
r
a
n
d
E
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
$16,000
Ex
h
i
b
i
t
A
-
A
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
1
Co
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
S
u
r
f
a
c
e
W
a
t
e
r
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
H
o
u
r
s
a
n
d
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
C
o
s
t
s
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
T
o
t
a
l
H
o
u
r
s
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
T
a
s
k
s
/
W
o
r
k
I
t
e
m
s
Ci
t
y
o
f
F
a
l
c
o
n
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
Page 51 of 138
2016 CSWMP Update Timeline
S:\City Council\Agendas\2016 CC Agendas\10-12-16 CC Agenda\
C3(4) - Schedule
Deliverable/Task 8/
1
/
2
0
1
6
8/
8
/
2
0
1
6
8/
1
5
/
2
0
1
6
8/
2
2
/
2
0
1
6
8/
2
9
/
2
0
1
6
9/
5
/
2
0
1
6
9/
1
2
/
2
0
1
6
9/
1
9
/
2
0
1
6
9/
2
6
/
2
0
1
6
10
/
3
/
2
0
1
6
10
/
1
0
/
2
0
1
6
10
/
1
7
/
2
0
1
6
10
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
6
10
/
3
1
/
2
0
1
6
11
/
7
/
2
0
1
6
11
/
1
4
/
2
0
1
6
11
/
2
1
/
2
0
1
6
11
/
2
8
/
2
0
1
6
12
/
5
/
2
0
1
6
12
/
1
2
/
2
0
1
6
12
/
1
9
/
2
0
1
6
12
/
2
6
/
2
0
1
6
1/
2
/
2
0
1
7
1/
9
/
2
0
1
7
1/
1
6
/
2
0
1
7
1/
2
3
/
2
0
1
7
1/
3
0
/
2
0
1
7
2/
6
/
2
0
1
7
2/
1
3
/
2
0
1
7
2/
2
0
/
2
0
1
7
2/
2
7
/
2
0
1
7
3/
6
/
2
0
1
7
3/
1
3
/
2
0
1
7
3/
2
0
/
2
0
1
7
3/
2
7
/
2
0
1
7
4/
3
/
2
0
1
7
4/
1
0
/
2
0
1
7
4/
1
7
/
2
0
1
7
4/
2
4
/
2
0
1
7
5/
1
/
2
0
1
7
5/
8
/
2
0
1
7
5/
1
5
/
2
0
1
7
5/
2
2
/
2
0
1
7
Task 1 - COORDINATION WITH CITY STAFF AND REVIEW AGENCIES
Task 2 - UNDERSTAND THE CITY'S CURRENT SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
Project Kickoff Meeting
Develop federal, state, and local watershed rules matrix
Facilitate the establishment of goals and policies based feedback
from public, agencies, and staff
Conduct meetings with three watersheds and Metropolitan Council
Review current CSWMP and compile new background
data/reports/studies since 2013
Provide update recommendations for CSWMP and stormwater
management standards
Coordinate with City staff to develop public involvement approach
Prepare and facilitate two public engagement opportunities
Prepare and faciliate three PWETC meetings
Prepare hard-copy and electronic plan version for posting online and
for final distribution
Identify and prioritize drainage and water quality issues
Develop specific implememtation activities aligned with goals and
policies to address identified issues
Establish performance measure, estiamted costs/resources, and
potential financing mechanisms for implementation activities
Review and discuss interactive plan format options with City staff
Compile and address staff and PWETC comments
Deliver progress drafts for staff and PWETC comments
Update glossary of terms
Update background narrative content and data summary tables
Prepare clear and concise static maps and graphics
Distribute Agency Draft to review agencies for 45/60 day review
periods
Compile and address agency review comments into final plan
Attend three Watershed District board meetings and one City
Council meeting
Task 5 - DEVELOPMENT OF DRAFT AND FINAL PLAN DOCUMENT DELIVERABLES
Task 6 - DEVELOPMENT OF DRAFT AND FINAL PLAN DOCUMENT DELIVERABLES
Distribute final plan copies to agencies, obtain final approvals, and
council adoption
Jan FebNovSeptOctDecAug
Prepare and attend three TAP meetings
Task 3 - FACILITATION OF AN EFFECTIVE AND MEANINGFUL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROCESS
Task 4 - GOAL SETTING, POLICIES, IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND PRIORITIES
March April May
Page 52 of 138
The purpose of this survey is to receive input from the public regarding an update to the City’s
Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan (CSWMP). The City is currently updating the plans to
align with local, state and federal goals and policies and to meet the City’s water resources goals. These
plans are generally updated every 10 years to establish the overall goals and policies the City will follow
and to identify high priority activities and projects to incorporate into the plans. Therefore, we’d like
your input on a range of water resources topics addressed in the Plans, including lake water quality
goals, localized flooding, and wetland management.
1. Select the description that best describes you:
☐Resident
☐Lakeshore resident
☐Developer
☐Roseville business owner or representative
☐Advisory Commission Member
☐Elected Official
2. Please select what you feel should be the top three priorities in terms of water resources
management for the City of Roseville.
☐Flooding/Drainage
☐Lake/Surface water quality
☐Wetland protection
☐Groundwater protection
☐Erosion control
☐Sustainable development
☐Water resource monitoring
☐Stormwater system maintenance/inspection
☐Public education/outreach
☐Other
3. Are you aware of any drainage/flooding issues in your community?
☐No
☐Yes, Please describe
4. Do you live near or frequently use any of the following water resources within the City of
Roseville?
☐Bennett
☐Little Johanna
☐Josephine
☐Langton (North & South)
☐McCarrons
☐Owasso
☐Other
Page 53 of 138
a. How do you most frequently use this water body?
☐Wildlife viewing
☐Boating
☐Fishing
☐Swimming
☐Hiking trails
b. Do you have any of the following concerns in regards to this water body:
☐Poor clarity
☐Excessive growth of filamentous algae
☐Excessive growth of aquatic plants
☐Shoreline erosion
☐Other
5. How informed do you feel about the functions and values of wetlands within the City?
☐1- Uninformed
☐2
☐3
☐4
☐5 – Very informed
6. How important do you feel wetlands functions and values are?
☐1- Unnecessary
☐2
☐3
☐4
☐5 – Essential
7. How important do you feel vegetative buffers are to the function and value of the wetland?
☐1- Unnecessary
☐2
☐3
☐4
☐5 – Essential
8. In your opinion, what are the areas of greatest impact or threat to water resources in Roseville?
Erosion from construction sites 1 (low impact)– 5 (high threat)
Industrial Stormwater management 1 (low impact)– 5 (high threat)
Runoff from streets and parking lots 1 (low impact)– 5 (high threat)
Runoff from home landscapes 1 (low impact)– 5 (high threat)
Shoreland land uses 1 (low impact)– 5 (high threat)
Invasive Species 1 (low impact)– 5 (high threat)
Page 54 of 138
9. How informed do you consider yourself in water resource management?
☐1- Uninformed
☐2
☐3
☐4
☐5 – Very informed
10. What ideas do you have for the City to better educate and engage you and other community
members?
11. Have you completed any of the following to reduce your impact on Roseville’s water resources?
☐Changed the way your yard is landscaped or where your gutter downspouts are directed to
☐Installed a rain garden, rain barrel, porous pavement or native buffer/planting
☐Changed how often you water your lawn
☐Change how or what you use for pesticides, fertilizers, chemicals
☐Changed de-icing salt product or application rate
☐Participated in a volunteer event related to water resources
☐Other
- if yes to any of these, describe ______________________
12. What method(s) would you prefer to provide you more information on any of the activities
listed in 11?
☐Website
☐Social media
☐Newsletter
☐Training event/workshops
☐Other
13. Do you get the sense that the local water resource management efforts are over, adequately or
under funded from a local government (City of Roseville) level?
☐Over funded
☐Adequately funded
☐Under funded
☐Don’t know
14. Please describe any other specific issues, concerns, thoughts or suggestions you feel should be
addressed in the updated Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan.
Page 55 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 56 of 138
1 | Page
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
Regular Meeting of the City Council
City Hall
2077 West Larpenteur Avenue
MINUTES
September 21, 2016 at 7:00 P.M.
A. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 pm
B. ROLL CALL: LINDSTROM _X__ HARRIS _X__ BROWN THUNDER _X__
FISCHER _X__ GUSTAFSON_X__
STAFF PRESENT: THONGVANH__X__
C. PRESENTATIONS:
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
E. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
F. CONSENT AGENDA:
G: POLICY ITEMS:
1. Tri-City Work Group with the City of Lauderdale and City of Saint Anthony
City Administrator Thongvanh presented that the purpose and charge is to foster effective, fair,
and transparent police services for Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, and St. Anthony. The work
group will consist of diverse residents from all cities. They will be engaged in the systematic
review of the police department’s policies on officer-worn body cameras. The work group will
consist of two Falcon Heights residents and two City Council members. This work group
should have minimal impact to the budget because it is a St. Anthony initiative. Staff
recommends the approval of the resolution and to appoint Council Member Harris and Council
Member Fischer to be the liaisons. It has been presented that the co-chair of the work group
would be from Falcon Heights, and Mayor Lindstrom will be able to weigh in for that selection.
The anticipated time frame would be 6-8 months. Once it’s completed, the work group would
make a presentation to each of the three cities. Due to the work group members being
appointed by the Council, all meetings will be public meetings and follow open meeting laws.
The Council Members will not be voting members of the group, only the residents.
Mr. Bicking- 4200 Cedar Ave. Minneapolis Resident:
He thanks the Council that they allow public forum and that they have meetings in the evening.
He works with Communities United Against Police Brutality. They have worked with
Minneapolis and on body camera policy and want to be able to be of assistance. There was a
citizen group in Minneapolis that did excellent work, and that would be a great starting point.
Your city can make a difference of whether or not body cameras are just a substitute for any real
reforms or whether they are actually helpful to the people of Falcon Heights.
Page 57 of 138
2 | Page
Michelle Gross- President of Communities United Against Police Brutality:
They have studied body cameras and policies around body cameras extensively. She would also
urge Council to not only look at the League of Cities policies, but the policies of PERF (Police
Executive Research Forum). The Police Conduct Oversight Commission in Minneapolis has a
very definitive and thoroughly researched document. It would be very helpful to have more
insight into research-based best practices and they will submit that material to the Council. This
allows for an opportunity to create good policy, because body cameras never work without
good policy. She is pleased to see this particular proposal and she hopes it will pass.
Tabian (Taso):
What are you going to do about all this killing? We need to see action and not just talking.
John Thompson:
He believes that the policy items for the work group and the task force are a step forward. It
shows that you’re at least acknowledging and considering what you should do to try to figure it
out. That’s something he didn’t see when he first came to the Council meetings. He thinks that
everybody here can help change Minnesota so we can be an example for the nation. The Council
didn’t create the problem, but they can solve it with the help of everyone’s voices.
Joann Dell- 2025 Fairview Ave. Roseville Resident:
Why now with the work group and task force? She doesn’t know who the Council has been
meeting with, but what she has seen from the meetings she’s attended, this was not discussed.
What happens if there is discrepancy on policy between the three cities? Do all cities have to
agree on the policies? Why does it just focus on body cameras? There is so much more to this
than just body cameras. If the use of body cameras is based on the officer’s discretion, we have a
problem. The work group needs to expand beyond just two residents from Falcon Heights. You
need more opinions than just from the two residents. The way it is structured matters.
City Administrator Thongvanh states that the task force concept was created from discussions
with Administrators and Mayors from the other two cities. Mayor Lindstrom also brought up
the idea of a Falcon Heights Task Force. When they discussed the idea of reviewing policies and
procedures for the tri-city work group, St. Anthony had already narrowed down the focus to
reviewing the use of body cameras. This task will be just one cog in the wheel and doesn’t mean
that this will be the absolute for the Tri-City. There will be other systems that are included in the
decision making. There will be four members per community, and Falcon Heights decided on
two Council Members and two residents but the other cities may not use that same make up.
Sue Gehrtz- 2285 Folwell Ave:
She thanks everyone for speaking and helping us all learn. This has been an incredible learning
experience for her. She was on the Council when they contracted with the St. Anthony Police
after doing a needs assessment in the community. There were concerns and dissatisfaction with
the current model of policing and they wanted more visibility from their police. She thinks this
task force gives us the opportunity to look at that model again and decide what’s right for our
community. She also thinks that having a task force is the way to keep the spotlight focused on
this issue. She has a request that the Council ask Chief Mangseth to not have Officer Yanez
patrol the City of Falcon Heights.
Page 58 of 138
3 | Page
Rebecca Montgomery- 2222 Folwell Ave:
She believes in taking action to foster effective, fair police services. Reviewing the use of body
cameras does not go far enough and is only one piece of a bigger issue. She hopes the Council
will urge St. Anthony to do policing in a much broader way than just body cameras. They need
to look at the integrated whole.
Satara Strong:
She would like clarification on what the task force is doing. Talking about body cameras is not
enough, and why wouldn’t we take advantage of the videos that are already out there and do
something with that.
City Administrator Thongvanh:
There is a particular focus on this work group, because we as a city did not want to duplicate
what the Falcon Heights task force is going to do. Once this work group is completed, there
may be another item or topic that they will address.
Mayor Lindstrom:
In a few minutes we will talk about what the Falcon Heights Task Force will include, which is a
broad range of police issues.
Satara Strong:
She states that there isn’t work to be duplicated because nothing has been done. There are
plenty of videos, so it is a waste of time to talk about body cameras.
Rebecca Montgomery- 2222 Folwell Ave:
Having a Tri-City Work Group that goes beyond the body cameras topic is not duplicative of a
FH Task Force. St. Anthony needs to address issues in their police force and since we contract
with them we have a say in it. We need to use the FH Task Force to decide what kind of
policing we want and who we contract with.
Daveon Samsung:
How do you think a task force is going to heal the damage that has been done? This isn’t going
to help.
Speaker:
You are all unfazed by anything anyone is saying, and continue to nod your head. You can’t say
that these task forces matter when people are getting killed in the street and it’s on camera. The
Council policies say that you are supposed to address the concerns that people are bringing
before you, but the Council has not done that. If you think people are going to sit and wait
around for justice, that’s not feasible.
Mayor Lindstrom:
He agrees that a task force in itself does nothing. Let’s all collaborate and come up with some
concrete actions that can improve our community, region, and state.
Speaker:
Our answers can be considered by the Council. Who is going to take action?
Page 59 of 138
4 | Page
Melanie Leehy- 1865 Fairview Ave:
A lot of conversations have been going on since Philando was killed in order to come to
agreement on actions to be taken. She has seen people in this city and in leadership working
towards diversity in the city even before Philando was killed. We have to take action as quickly
as we can without skipping the steps. Philando isn’t here, but this is his legacy and she wants us
to get this right. This needs to be looked at generationally so we are not here again in a month
or years down the road. Her motto since the event has been “together we triumph”, because if
we fight against each other we won’t get it done. In order to implement body cameras, it is
required that there be a task force and public involvement in the policy making.
Bob Gehrtz- 2285 Folwell Ave:
He is disappointed with the discussion because he came to hear about the FH Task Force and
what we are going to do to discuss a police model. He thinks we should table the discussion
and get on to the FH Task Force agenda item.
Mel Reeves- Minneapolis Resident:
When we talk about body cameras it’s an issue after the event. How are we going to treat our
citizens like human beings? You’re hearing people’s frustration because they would like to hear
you say that you’re looking for justice. Justice in this case would include firing the Officer.
Every contract has a clause, and St. Anthony Police broke it. There’s a problem with your
budget is dependent on fines. You have the chance to do something different. Minneapolis said
that they’re going to consider the sanctity of life first. The task force should not be confined to
three cities.
Mayor Lindstrom:
The revenue for fines is about 2-3%. He thinks that considering the sanctity of life first is a good
step in the right direction for Minneapolis and one that we should consider as well.
Michelle Gross:
To clarify, her organization does not think body cameras are a good solution. They are an
expensive and the state has made it that most of the footage is private. What does your contract
say and allow you to opt out of? Do you want to have your money wasted on this technology
that brings no answers and does very little for the community? This Tri-City Work Group has
the potential to look at police policies across the board rather than just looking at body cameras.
John Thompson:
The police can turn off the camera. The cops continue to say they fear their life, and that’s what
gets them off free. You’re wasting your time with body cameras. You need to hear experiences
from members of the community with cops telling them they’ll turn off the cameras. We’re
trying to find a solution for people that we pay on our taxes. We can’t do anything but try to
prevent it from happening again.
William Moore:
When does the contract end with St. Anthony Police? Everyone is searching for an answer for
something, and you can’t find an answer if you’re not really sure what the question is. This
event gives you a unique opportunity to do something. Terminating the contract is a clear
statement. He is sad for what has been happening, and all police officers have to do is say they
Page 60 of 138
5 | Page
were fearful for their life. It’s not about the body camera, it’s about how we treat people. Think
about these things and what it means to make a clear statement.
Kristine Chitambra- 1941 Summer St:
At every meeting we’ve always heard, “terminate the contract”. Is this even on the table? Will
there be modifications? A Tri-City workgroup makes it seem as if we’re staying with St.
Anthony. If that’s the case, how did you come to that decision?
Mayor Lindstrom:
We are in year two of a five year contract. There is a clause for the Council to opt out by July of
each year to end it for the following year. Right now the current contract would go through the
end of year 2019. The Council will have to continue the discussion on the contract in months
ahead and whether or not to submit for a request for proposals. There would need to be a
motion from at least one of the Council members and a vote from the majority to end the
contract.
Tom Brace- 1433 Idaho Ave:
What was the process in determining who would be liaison on the Tri-City Work Group? He
believes that this is just a stepping stone in the right direction. He would suggest the Mayor
appoints himself and Council Brown Thunder to the work group.
Mayor Lindstrom:
Council Brown Thunder will be serving as an alternate to both of the task forces.
Dave Wark- 1588 Northrop St:
Can we get together and cooperate to come to a conclusion? It may involve firing a cop or
raising the budget.
Council Member Fischer:
Nobody wants this to ever happen again. He’s looking forward to the body camera group
because he feels it’s a small piece they can move forward on. He also feels the sense of urgency
to get something practical done while tackling the bigger issues.
City Administrator Thongvanh:
To clarify, this is a task force to review body camera policy. In no way does it say that the City
of Falcon Heights or St. Anthony will be going with body cameras. Just like anything else, there
needs to be discussion amongst the residents and experts along with thoughtful research.
Council Member Harris Moved, Approved 5-0
2. Falcon Heights Inclusion and Policing Task Force
Mayor Lindstrom:
The Council’s duty is to respond and to act without delay. He does feel a sense of urgency. He
realizes that the task force is not concrete in and of itself and that this doesn’t provide
immediate change. This task force will help us articulate our values around policing in Falcon
Heights. From this foundation, the Council will make concrete recommendations. The
President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing, released in May, 2015, provides a guideline.
This task force would meet at least monthly, maybe even every other week. The deadline to
create a report is May, 2017 but it could be sooner. There will also be an interim report in
Page 61 of 138
6 | Page
December on what recommendations they have already agreed upon that can be implemented.
This will include nine residents of Falcon Heights or business representatives and two Council
Liaisons. His hope is that there is representation from people of color, varying ages, long-time
residents, immigrants, homeowners, and apartment owners alike.
Along with these task forces, his hope is that we begin to have much broader conversations
about race and policing. There is a conversation being hosted by Falcon Heights United Church
of Christ on Thursday, September 29 at 7:30pm on policing issues.
Council Member Gustafson:
There’s a reason for the deliberativeness, because every decision has implications. Now is the
time to work together towards learning, sharing facts and things that we can do concretely. We
want to be fair regardless of gender, race, origin, nationality, and economic status. He is looking
forward to serving on this task force.
City Administrator Thongvanh:
He has met with many individuals and groups. Not one person has the answer, and there has
been thoughtfulness in the process to make sure that we can find out everything we can before
making a decision. He invites people to come talk to him and stop by City Hall to have even
further discussion.
Council Member Brown Thunder:
Systemic racism is something that has taken 100’s of years to happen. He is now in a position to
try to move this conversation further. He feels that we can put our best foot forward and
approach it in a way that considers everyone’s concerns. This is a process, and he wants to
make sure it is well thought out and that it will do something. He thinks this task force is a step
in that direction.
Council Member Harris:
This process has to be incremental in order for it to be effective. This is a good start for a
foundation. This is a way to harness people’s energies and talents. She is looking forward to
having people become involved and share their input.
Joanne Dell- Roseville Resident:
She is requesting that there are changes made in the language of the proposal. For example, can
“implicit bias” be changed to “implicit racial bias”? In regards to population, can students be
included since they’re highly affected.
Michelle Gross:
She agrees that the task force is a very good idea. She would urge the task force to not solely
follow the President’s 21st Century Policing Report. The President appointed Charles Ramsey,
Washington D.C. Police Chief, as chair. He was considered to be fairly brutal. The task force
never made it past two cities to get input. Most of the recommendations that came out of the
report were money for body cameras and recommendations that don’t get at the heart of the
problem. The framing of the report is police and community relations, but the real framing
should be police misconduct, the oppression that underpins it, and the lack of accountability
that allows it to occur and continue. There needs to be a focus on making justice a priority then
Page 62 of 138
7 | Page
gaining trust. We also need to talk about explicit bias, not just implicit bias. You have to start by
analyzing the root of the problems.
Melanie Leehy- 1865 Fairview Ave:
She believes that the task force will be able to address policing for residents and for guests that
pass through the city. She doesn’t want a task force that focuses on surface issues, and that’s
why you see both policing and inclusion being addressed. We do have to address trust and fear.
She is looking forward to those who do not work or live in Falcon Heights having lots of
opportunities to be involved. She would like to see a City Council Member as a co-chair and not
just a liaison. She also believes the task force would benefit from having young people included.
Rebecca Montgomery- 2222 Folwell Ave:
She is proposing to replace the wording of “Falcon Heights residents and business owners” to
“Falcon Heights residents, business owners, property owners, and those otherwise associated
with the city (i.e. visitors, students, and those employed by the city)”.
Cordin Nielson- Black Lives Matter St. Paul:
He wants to clarify about the comments on action not being quick enough. He sees two
dialogues, one addressing preventative efforts for the future and the comments on taking action
now. The action we are looking for is justice for Philando. He encourages the Council to figure
out a way to voice that justice. He is more than willing to help in any way that he can. We’re not
frustrated with the idea of the task force, we’re frustrated because we keep hearing the same
things.
Kay Andrews- 1471 California Ave:
She is in support of the task force, but she also has some major concerns. She believes it is going
to take a long time to get much done, and she thinks that the level of frustration is going to
grow. She is concerned on how we are going to recruit people for the task force, and how we
are going to encourage people of color to participate. She supports what Sue Gehrtz said about
taking action before the task force has to prepare a full report. She would encourage the Council
to take a strong step and say to the St. Anthony Police Department that we have a right to feel
comfortable with the police that serve our community. Our citizens do not feel comfortable with
this officer. Many of the residents would support doing this now, not in six months. That would
be one way of saying that the Council is taking this seriously. Some of it does take longer to
educate, communicate, and build respect, but in the meantime, this is something the Council
can do now.
Amanda Moore- North St. Paul:
If you start at a task force, it can just stop after the task force. You’ll have to keep at it. Her
people are scared every day, and this has to be taken seriously. At the end of the day we all
want the same things, peace and happiness.
Beth Mercer-Taylor- 2231 Folwell Ave:
She supports Montgomery’s amendment. One of the reasons why she supports it is that she,
being white, will have a different perspective than people of color who are living in the Twin
Cities Metro. They are a part of this broader community. She believes that perspective would
better reflect a real, lived knowledge of what institutional racial bias is. She also encourages
Page 63 of 138
8 | Page
people to watch the last St. Anthony Council Meeting. At one and a half minutes there’s a
proposal by Christine Lisda, a St. Anthony resident and attorney who has worked on
institutional ethnography, and there was a lot of deep discussion about the importance of
getting the work done.
Chuck Laszewski- 1713 St. Mary St:
He appreciates a couple of the changes that were made and said to the task force proposal. He
also appreciates that May 1, 2017 final deadline, and the idea of the interim report. Are the
Council Liaisons voting members in the task force?
Mayor Lindstrom response: no
Mr. Laszewski- 1713 St. Mary St: How long a will this be open for applications?
Mayor Lindstrom response: Two weeks and it will probably be online next week on Monday or
Tuesday.
Mr. Laszewski- 1713 St. Mary St: He thinks those are good time frames and supports
Montgomery’s amendment. He agrees that the Council should ask to not have Officer Yanez
patrol Falcon Heights. He also thinks that the Council should adjust the budget so that we will
collect no more fines. The only stops that should be made are for speeding, DWIs, and running
stop lights. Anything else is discretionary.
Sarah Chambers- 2170 Folwell Ave:
She also supports Montgomery’s amendment. There is a lot of experience and knowledge that
has been shared here. We’re all part of a broader community, and there are many people that
are interacting with our police on a regular basis. She also supports Sue Gerhtz’s
recommendation to remove Officer Yanez from patrolling Falcon Heights. Lastly, she supports
the recommendation made by Chuck Laszewski that we be budgeting in a way that will not
have fines for technical violations that are not public safety issues.
Sue Gehrtz- 2285 Folwell Ave:
She believes the task force is a good idea, but she would hope that you can start by having
discussion about the vision. What is it that you’re trying to achieve? Her vision is that five years
from now, people are no longer being told to not drive on Snelling and Larpenteur.
City Administrator Sack Thongvanh:
There have been many discussions around the budget, as the preliminary budget will soon be
adopted. None of the Council Members have ever discussed that the budget is dependent on
the fines. We hear your concerns and we will take a look at them.
Kristine Chitambra- 1941 Summer St:
She supports Montgomery’s amendment. She has never personally had a bad experiences with
the police, as she imagines many of the Falcon Heights residents have had similar experiences.
She’s concerned that if we have a task force made up of just Falcon Heights residents, we will
lose so much representation of the larger community. A bad group is almost worse than no
group at all. How will the group be selected?
Page 64 of 138
9 | Page
City Administrator Sack Thongvanh:
He is working on an application process for both groups. It will be open to apply for two weeks.
He will compile the applications and send them to each Council Member. The Council Members
will rank their selections. Then, he will look at the top nine candidates with a few alternates.
From there the Council will start doing short interviews with those individuals. The final
decisions will be made based on those interviews.
Kristine Chitambra- 1941 Summer St:
John Thompson suggested that the public vote on the applicants for the task force, and many
people were in support of this idea.
Council Member Harris:
After much discussion about the interview format, one of the main discussions was what
information the application should require.
City Administrator Sack Thongvanh:
He would recommend to the applicants that they would provide all the information that they
believe would be important to the City Council for review. A lot of the questions he formulated
for the application will be more open ended.
Dave Wark- 1588 Northrop St:
Interviewing is very important, and you usually get the answer you want within 90 seconds.
Tom Brace- 1433 Idaho Ave:
When looking at the budget, can you look at the idea of what it would cost to have our own
police force? How many people would that take and what are the opportunities for mutual aid?
Maybe then a police force that has a salary from the city would be more attentive to the
community’s needs.
Paula Mielke- 1868 Arona St:
She supports Montgomery’s amendment. Youth have also expressed interest in participating,
and to compensate their time maybe they could offer a stipend. Also, can Sack reach out to the
Maplewood Police Chief to review their application, they are just wrapping up their process.
City Administrator Sack Thongvanh:
He spoke with the Maplewood Police Chief about the application process and is using the
application as a template. Once the task force members are appointed, they will also all have
Falcon Heights emails. Maplewood commended the city for having nine people on the task
force since it difficult to coordinate larger groups. Having a smaller group, allows for quicker
action. If there is something that needs to be done right away, those recommendation can be
made before six months as well.
Jan Nye- Minneapolis Resident:
She commends the City Council on their democratic process.
Page 65 of 138
10 | Page
Mayor Lindstrom:
He does hope youth are involved. There is a component that allows for non-residents if they
have a connection through a business.
City Administrator Sack Thongvanh:
To clarify, the involvement in the task force is not restricted to just residents and business
owners as they can still be involved and subcommittees have the potential to form.
Council Member Harris:
She believes it is important that we have diverse viewpoints taken into account by this task
force, and she believes that they will be. She has expressed her concern for the legalities of data
practice and open meeting laws. One of the reasons that they narrowed it down to Falcon
Heights residents is that the city will have liability if members of the task force don’t abide by
those laws. She believes that the task force will need to hear from different people groups in
order successfully do the job that is in front of them.
City Administrator Sack Thongvanh:
There will be a fillable pdf that can be submitted online, as well as a printable application.
Council Member Gustafson Moved, Approved 5-0
H. INFORMATION/ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Council Member Fischer:
The Community Engagement Commission met on Monday, and they are looking forward to the
Human Rights Day event in December. They also had a great presentation on women’s rights,
and with the packed agendas that is something that will be discussed more for the 2017 goals.
Council Member Harris:
She attended an informal meeting with Mayor Lindstrom at a house on California Ave. last
week. The conversation on this same topic was very interesting and a good way to get together
to have conversations in person.
Council Member Brown Thunder:
Northeast Youth and Family Services is having one of their fundraisers, “Taste of Northeast”,
on Thursday, October 6 from 5:30-8:30pm.
Council Member Gustafson:
The Parks and Recreation Commission met last Monday to review summer programming. On
Thursday, October 13 there will be a Fall Fete at Community Park from 5-7pm. This will be a
make-up event in place of the Ice Cream Social.
City Administrator Sack Thongvanh:
The Fall Fete will be a little different with hot cider, pumpkin painting, a campfire, and maybe
even a balloon artist. Lastly, they are working on preparing the budget , and the preliminary
levy will be set on September 28.
Page 66 of 138
11 | Page
Mayor Lindstrom:
No updates
I. COMMUNITY FORUM:
J. ADJOURNMENT: 9:51 pm
_____________________________ Peter Lindstrom, Mayor
Dated this 21st day of September, 2016
__________________________________ Sack Thongvanh, City Administrator
Page 67 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 68 of 138
1 | Page
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
Regular Meeting of the City Council
City Hall
2077 West Larpenteur Avenue
MINUTES
September 28, 2016 at 7:00 P.M.
A. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 pm
B. ROLL CALL: LINDSTROM _X__ HARRIS ____ BROWN THUNDER _X__
FISCHER _X__ GUSTAFSON_X__
STAFF PRESENT: THONGVANH_X__
C. PRESENTATIONS:
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
1. August 24, 2016 City Council Meeting Minutes Approved
2. September 7, 2016 City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes Approved
E. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
F. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. General Disbursements through: 9/20/16 $177,364.74
Payroll through: 9/15/16 $41,126.07
2. SCORE Grant
3. MN Historical Grant-Interpreted Sign at Curtiss Field for $2,500
4. Administration Coordinator (Katie Thrasher) 18 Month Employee Step Adjustment
5. Community Development Coordinator (Paul Moretto) 18 Month Employee Step
Adjustment
Council Member Fischer Moved, Approved 4-0
G: POLICY ITEMS:
1. Adopt 2017 Preliminary Levy
City Administrator Sack Thongvanh stated that each year the city must set a preliminary
levy by September 30.
• There are no levy limits imposed by the legislature for the 2017 budget
• The amount of local government aid that the city received this year increased by
$4,200. LGA increased from $540,617 to 544,817.
• Fiscal disparity distribution dollars for 2017 increased by $56,779.
• This year city staff looked at the long-term fiscal stability. The proposal for 2017
is to set aside $20,000 for capital replacement. Currently the city uses vehicle
certificates to bond for the vehicles and debt service for street projects. The
purpose is to set aside on a regular basis going forward so that there aren’t
Page 69 of 138
2 | Page
spikes in impacts to the residents in terms of improvements or large equipment
purchases.
• The dollar amount increase is similar from last year. Last year was a $40-$50
increase annually for a median-value home, and this year it will be $26 annually
for a median-value home. The total taxable market value has increased in the city
in part due to the introduction of The Good Acre.
• The preliminary 2017 tax levy is 1,278,231. Staff recommends a budget hearing
meeting for Wednesday, December 14 at 7pm.
Council Member Gustafson agreed that it makes sense to build up a reserve again.
Council Member Gustafson Moved, Approved 4-0
2. SolSmart Program
Mayor Lindstrom states that this is a national program through the Department of
Energy. If the city signs up for SolSmart, we will get free technical advice from a local
representative on how to become more of a solar-friendly community. The city would be
certified at bronze, silver, or gold level based on a set of criteria. SolSmart is hoping for a
dozen or more cities to be involved in this program. This is the first year.
Council Member Fischer Moved, Approved 4-0
3. Minnesota Local Government Project for Energy Planning (LoGoPEP) Application
This application is a recommendation coming out of the Environment Commission,
similar to the SolSmart Program. This is an initiative of the University of Minnesota and
the Energy Transition Lab, partnering with the Great Plains Institute, the Department of
Energy, and other experts. The purpose is to utilize the expertise of the University, Great
Plains Institute, and other energy experts. The Environment Commission and city will
be presented with case studies and best practices on energy reduction from similar-sized
cities. LoGoPEP will take a close look the city’s energy usage and create easily digestible
baseline data on energy and greenhouse gas emissions. LoGoPEP would do a wedge
analysis to help bridge the gap between our goals and the state’s goals.
Council Member Brown Thunder Moved, Approved 4-0
H. INFORMATION/ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Council Member Fischer:
Thank you to the Environment Commission for all the work they’ve been doing.
Council Member Brown Thunder:
Northeast Youth and Family Services is doing their “Taste of Northeast” fundraiser on
Thursday, October 6 at 5:30-8:30pm at the Vadnais Heights Commons. Tickets are $30 in
advance and $40 at the door. He also welcomes a new business to the City of Falcon Heights. Fit
Lab recently opened off Hamline and Iowa.
Council Member Gustafson:
Saturday, October 1 is the 3rd Annual Fire Department Open House and Chili Cook-Off. It costs
$5 for adults to eat chili and $3 for children under 12. Saturday, October 7 is National Coffee
Page 70 of 138
3 | Page
with a Cop day. The events on October 7 are taking place at the Rosedale Caribou from 10-11am
and at the North Oaks Brueggers Bagels from 9-10:30am.
City Administrator Sack Thongvanh:
The Falcon Heights Fall Fete is on Thursday, October 13 from 5-7pm. One thing to keep in mind
for the winter months is keeping the fire hydrants clear. Please adopt a fire hydrant, keep it
clear, and help out the Falcon Heights Fire Department for emergency situations.
The application process went live this morning for both the Tri-City Work Group and Falcon
Heights Task Force. For the e-form, download the application first, fill it out, and then click
submit for an email to be sent to the City Administrator. The application deadline will be
October 12, 2016. He and the Mayor will also be looking into the option of having facilitators for
the group.
Mayor Lindstrom:
No updates.
I. COMMUNITY FORUM:
Paula Mielke- 1868 Arona St:
She wants to know if the 2017 budget will show a lower dollar amount for court fines for
revenue. Something they have asked is to seriously reduce ticketing in Falcon Heights. She is
assuming the court fines budget line item includes police ticketing. It is currently at $73,000 and
she is hoping that it will be less.
Chuck Laszewski- 1713 St. Mary’s St:
He is thrilled that the city is doing the SolSmart program and LoGoPEP application. Has the
budget been released on the website yet?
City Administrator Sack Thongvanh:
The actual budget won’t be compiled until the truth in taxation hearing. What’s in front of us
today is an amount for the levy. The Council has the opportunity to lower the levy in between
now and December 14.
Chuck Laszewski- 1713 St. Mary’s St:
As a way to show our seriousness about the death of Philando Castile, the Council should
seriously consider making the traffic stop fees a zero for revenue. We do not want the police
collecting fees on our behalf. Is anyone on the Council thinking about doing that?
Mayor Lindstrom:
• Due to recent work on solidifying the roles of the task force, rolling out the application,
reading through the recommendations on the 21st Century Policing Report, along with
many other tasks, he has not solidified his views on that particular subject matter. The
topic is certainly on the table. He would be interested in knowing what the makeup of
those fees is.
Council Member Gustafson:
• He echoes the Mayors comments. He would like to see where these fees are specifically
coming from.
Page 71 of 138
4 | Page
City Administrator Sack Thongvanh:
• The city does not depend on the dollar amount given. Those fines are automatically
issued to the city from the state. We receive about 25% of all tickets, and when we
receive the money from the state they do not break it down into categories. In terms of
impact to the budget, for every $10,000 decline that equates to a 1% increase. This would
mean a 7-8% increase on top of the current levy or cutting services to offset the cost.
Council Member Fischer:
• Our policing strategy is not being driven by fines. He believes it is a result of our
policing strategy. He believes that what is in the budget reflects expectations, but that
could change in the next six to eight months.
Council Member Brown Thunder:
• He would like more information on what we are collecting on and how we would
replace that money. He is open to looking into that.
Melissa Harrel- Sullew- 1588 Vincent St:
She is hopeful that it would be possible through the task force to direct our police not to make
traffic stops for things that seem mostly exploratory. If there is no incentive for ticketing that
could reduce the amount of fines the city is taking in. Is there a way to request that the state
break down the type of fine when they are distributing to us? Speaking as a tax payer in an
above median-value home, she would be willing to pay more taxes.
J. ADJOURNMENT: 7:29 pm
_____________________________
Peter Lindstrom, Mayor Dated this 28th day of September, 2016
__________________________________
Sack Thongvanh, City Administrator
Page 72 of 138
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item General Disbursements and Payroll
Description
General Disbursements through: 10/05/16: $140,962.01
Payroll through: 9/30/16: $18,407.72
Budget Impact The general disbursements and payroll are consistent with the budget.
Attachment(s) • General Disbursements and Payroll
Action(s)
Requested
Staff recommends that the Falcon Heights City Council approve general
disbursements and payroll.
Meeting Date October 12, 2016
Agenda Item Consent F1
Attachment General Disbursements and Payroll
Submitted By Roland Olson, Finance Director
Page 73 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 74 of 138
Page 75 of 138
Page 76 of 138
Page 77 of 138
Page 78 of 138
Page 79 of 138
Page 80 of 138
Page 81 of 138
Page 82 of 138
Page 83 of 138
Page 84 of 138
Page 85 of 138
Page 86 of 138
Page 87 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 88 of 138
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item Approval of City Licenses
Description
The following individuals have applied for a Municipal Business License. Staff
has received the necessary documents for licensure.
1. The F.I.T. Lab
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) N/A
Action(s)
Requested
Staff recommends that the Falcon Heights City Council approve the 2016 City
License Application.
Meeting Date October 12, 2016
Agenda Item Consent F2
Attachment N/A
Submitted By Tim Sandvik, Deputy Clerk
Page 89 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 90 of 138
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item City Administrator (Sack Thongvanh) 18 Month Employee Step Adjustment
Description
Sack Thongvanh, City Administrator was hired March 9th, 2015. It is the practice of
the City to reward after the 18-month review period with a 5% step increase in their
base salary.
Administrator Thongvanh is requesting that the current employment agreement be
amended to include compensation for all premiums for health and dental for
Family Coverage and Vacation Compensation accrue 20 days (160 hours) per year.
Budget Impact There are available funds for this step adjustment and health and dental has been
included in the 2017 budget.
Attachment(s) • Addendum #1 to March 25, 2015 Employment Agreement
• March 25, 2015 Employment Agreement for Sack Thongvanh
Action(s)
Requested
I recommend that the Falcon Heights City Council approve a 5% step adjustment
for Sack Thongvanh effective October 27, 2016 and approval of addendum #1.
Meeting Date October 12, 2016
Agenda Item Consent F3
Attachment N/A
Submitted By Peter Lindstrom, Mayor
Page 91 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 92 of 138
ADDENDUM #1 TO THE MARCH 25TH EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
This contract is between Sack Thongvanh and the City of Falcon Heights, Minnesota. This addendum
shall become effective as of October 27, 2016.
Addition 19. Benefits. Employer shall pay all premiums for health and dental coverage for Family
Coverage.
Amend 6. Vacation. Employee will accrue twenty days (160 hours) of vacation per year.
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
BY: _______________________________
Peter Lindstrom, Mayor
Employee
BY: _______________________________
Sack Thongvanh
Page 93 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 94 of 138
Page 95 of 138
Page 96 of 138
Page 97 of 138
Page 98 of 138
Page 99 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 100 of 138
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item Vacation of Easement at 1728 Lindig Street
Description
On February 23rd of 1965, the Village of Falcon Heights acquired from Joseph D. and
Dorothy M. Bianchi a 5 foot easement #1643377 in the rear yard of their parcel
located on a line as legal described: That portion of the North 94.63 feet of the South
624.88 feet of the East 492.20 Feet of the SW ¼ of Section 16 Township 29 North,
Range 23 West, subject to the rights of the public in Lindig St. and Fairview Ave.
which lies 5 feet on either side of the following described line: beginning at a point
on the north line of said parcel 290.70 feet West of the Center line of Fairview
Avenue (said point and said line also being 247.70 feet West of the North East
corner of said parcel) thence South parallel to the East line of said parcel 94.63 feet
to the South line of said parcel and there terminating.
This easement was acquired with the intended purpose of establishing utilities,
water drainage, and other public purposes. The adjoining parcels to the North and
South of this easement do not have connecting easements. This, essentially, makes
the easement unusable.
Being that there is no recognized public use or public good for this easement it is
recommended that it be in the benefit of the City of Falcon Heights to vacate this
easement.
The City of Falcon Heights Planning Commission held a hearing on August 23,
2016. The applicant testified that there are no utilities on the easement and it is a
burden. No one testified against the resolution. The Planning Commission
unanimously voted to recommend APPROVAL of the resolution to Council.
Budget Impact The City received application fee.
Attachment(s) • Vacation of Easement Application
• Resolution 16-32 Authorizing the Vacate of Easement for 1728 Lindig Street
• Site Map
Meeting Date October 12, 2016
Agenda Item Consent F4
Attachment Supporting Documents
Submitted By Paul Moretto, Community Development
Coordinator
Page 101 of 138
Action(s)
Requested
Staff request approval of attached resolution to vacate an easement at 1728 Lindig
Street.
Page 102 of 138
Page 103 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 104 of 138
Page 105 of 138
Page 106 of 138
Page 107 of 138
Page 108 of 138
Page 109 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 110 of 138
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
October 12, 2016
No. 16-32
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
A RESOLUTION VACATING EASEMENT
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 412.851, after two (2) weeks’ published and posted notice of the hearing and after mailing written notice of the hearing at
least ten (10) days before the hearing to each property owner affected by the proposed
vacation, the Falcon Heights City Council has conducted a hearing to consider the vacation
of the easement #1643377 for drainage and utility purposes located as legally described:
That portion of the North 94.63 feet of the South 624.88 feet of the East 492.20 Feet of the
SW ¼ of Section 16 Township 29 North, Range 23 West, subject to the rights of the public
in Lindig St. and Fairview Ave. which lies 5 feet on either side of the following described
line: beginning at a point on the north line of said parcel 290.70 feet West of the Center line
of Fairview Avenue (said point and said line also being 247.70 feet West of the North East corner of said parcel) thence South parallel to the East line of said parcel 94.63 feet to the
South line of said parcel and there terminating.
WHEREAS, it appears that it is in the public interest to vacate the West 5 feet of the
easement as described above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Falcon Heights, Minnesota:
1. The easement located at that portion of the North 94.63 feet of the South 624.88 feet of the East 492.20 Feet of the SW ¼ of Section 16 Township 29
North, Range 23 West, subject to the rights of the public in Lindig St. and
Fairview Ave. which lies 5 feet on either side of the following described
line: beginning at a point on the north line of said parcel 290.70 feet West of
the Center line of Fairview Avenue (said point and said line also being 247.70 feet West of the North East corner of said parcel) thence South
parallel to the East line of said parcel 94.63 feet to the South line of said
parcel and there terminating, that the West 5 feet is hereby vacated.
2. The City Clerk is directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the County Auditor and County Recorder/Registrar of Titles.
FURTHER, that said vacation shall not affect the authority of any person,
corporation, or municipality owning or controlling the electric or telephone poles and lines, gas lines, sanitary and storm sewer lines, water pipes, mains, hydrants, and
Page 111 of 138
natural drainage areas there on or there under, to continue maintaining the same or to
enter upon such way or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replace, remove,
or otherwise attend thereof.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Moved by: Approved by: ________________________
Peter Lindstrom
Mayor
LINDSTROM ____ In Favor Attested by: ________________________
GUSTAFSON Sack Thongvanh
HARRIS ____ Against City Administrator
BROWN THUNDER
FISCHER
Page 112 of 138
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item Vacation of Easement for 1725 Fairview Avenue
Description
On February 23rd of 1965, the Village of Falcon Heights acquired from Joseph D. and
Dorothy M. Bianchi a 5 foot easement #1643377 in the rear yard of their parcel
located on a line as legal described: That portion of the North 94.63 feet of the South
624.88 feet of the East 492.20 Feet of the SW ¼ of Section 16 Township 29 North,
Range 23 West, subject to the rights of the public in Lindig St. and Fairview Ave.
which lies 5 feet on either side of the following described line: beginning at a point
on the north line of said parcel 290.70 feet West of the Center line of Fairview
Avenue (said point and said line also being 247.70 feet West of the North East
corner of said parcel) thence South parallel to the East line of said parcel 94.63 feet
to the South line of said parcel and there terminating.
This easement was acquired with the intended purpose of establishing utilities,
water drainage, and other public purposes. The adjoining parcels to the North and
South of this easement do not have connecting easements. This, essentially, makes
the easement unusable.
Being that there is no recognized public use or public good for this easement it is
recommended that it be in the benefit of the City of Falcon Heights to vacate this
easement.
The City of Falcon Heights Planning Commission held a hearing on August 23,
2016. The applicant testified that there are no utilities on the easement and it is a
burden. No one testified against the resolution. The Planning Commission
unanimously voted to recommend APPROVAL of the resolution to Council.
Budget Impact No Changes
Attachment(s) • 1725 Fairview Application for Easement Vacation
• Site Map
• Resolution 16-33 Authorizing the Vacate of Easement for 1725 Fairview Ave
Meeting Date October 12, 2016
Agenda Item Consent F5
Attachment Supporting Documents
Submitted By Paul Moretto, Community Development
Coordinator
Page 113 of 138
Action(s)
Requested
Staff recommends approval of attached resolution for the vacation of easement for
1725 Fairview Ave.
Page 114 of 138
Page 115 of 138
Page 116 of 138
Page 117 of 138
Page 118 of 138
Page 119 of 138
BLANK PAGE
Page 120 of 138
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
October 12, 2016
No. 16-33
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
A RESOLUTION VACATING EASEMENT
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 412.851, after two (2) weeks’ published and posted notice of the hearing and after mailing written notice of the hearing at
least ten (10) days before the hearing to each property owner affected by the proposed
vacation, the Falcon Heights City Council has conducted a hearing to consider the vacation
of the easement #1643377 for drainage and utility purposes located as legally described:
That portion of the North 94.63 feet of the South 624.88 feet of the East 492.20 Feet of the
SW ¼ of Section 16 Township 29 North, Range 23 West, subject to the rights of the public
in Lindig St. and Fairview Ave. which lies 5 feet on either side of the following described
line: beginning at a point on the north line of said parcel 290.70 feet West of the Center line
of Fairview Avenue (said point and said line also being 247.70 feet West of the North East corner of said parcel) thence South parallel to the East line of said parcel 94.63 feet to the
South line of said parcel and there terminating.
WHEREAS, it appears that it is in the public interest to vacate the East 5 feet
easement as described above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Falcon Heights, Minnesota:
1. The easement located at that portion of the North 94.63 feet of the South 624.88 feet of the East 492.20 Feet of the SW ¼ of Section 16 Township 29
North, Range 23 West, subject to the rights of the public in Lindig St. and
Fairview Ave. which lies 5 feet on either side of the following described
line: beginning at a point on the north line of said parcel 290.70 feet West of
the Center line of Fairview Avenue (said point and said line also being 247.70 feet West of the North East corner of said parcel) thence South
parallel to the East line of said parcel 94.63 feet to the South line of said
parcel and there terminating, that the East 5 feet is hereby vacated.
2. The City Clerk is directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the County Auditor and County Recorder/Registrar of Titles.
FURTHER, that said vacation shall not affect the authority of any person,
corporation, or municipality owning or controlling the electric or telephone poles and lines, gas lines, sanitary and storm sewer lines, water pipes, mains, hydrants, and
Page 121 of 138
natural drainage areas there on or there under, to continue maintaining the same or to
enter upon such way or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replace, remove,
or otherwise attend thereof.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Moved by: Approved by: ________________________
Peter Lindstrom
Mayor
LINDSTROM ____ In Favor Attested by: ________________________
GUSTAFSON Sack Thongvanh
HARRIS ____ Against City Administrator
BROWN THUNDER
FISCHER
Page 122 of 138
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Families, Fields and Fair __________________________
The City That Soars!
Item Receive Feasibility Report and Order Public Hearing for the 2017 Pavement
Management Program – University Grove
Description
On May 11, 2016 the City Council ordered the preparation of a feasibility report for
the 2017 Pavement Management Project (PMP). The following streets have been
identified to be considered for improvements in 2017:
• Folwell Ave, from Fulham St to Hoyt Ave
• Vincent St, from Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave
• Northrup Ave, from Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave
• Burton St, from Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave
• Coffman St, From Hoyt Ave to Larpenteur Ave
The pathway along Roselawn from Fairview Ave to Cleveland Ave will be included
as well.
In accordance with City Council direction, a feasibility report has been prepared
that details the proposed design, neighborhood impact, and estimated cost of the
proposed 2017 Pavement Management Program. Copies of the completed
feasibility report are attached. The next step in the process is for the Council to
accept the feasibility report and to schedule a public hearing.
A resolution receiving the feasibility report and calling the public hearing for
December 14, 2016, is attached. A portion of the 2017 PMP is proposed to be
assessed. The approval of the attached resolution is required for the Minnesota
Chapter 429 Assessment Process.
Budget Impact This project has the following financial implications for the city and property
owners along the streets being considered for improvements:
• Assessments levied in accordance with the City’s assessment policy.
• Use of Municipal State Aid (MSA) and street infrastructure funds to pay the
City’s portion of the project.
• Expenditure of utility fund dollars to pay for repairs needed to the existing
utility system.
Meeting Date October 12, 2016
Agenda Item Policy G1
Attachment Feasibility Report, Resolution
Submitted By Jesse Freihammer, City Engineer
Page 123 of 138
Attachment(s) • Feasibility Report
• Resolution 16-34 Receiving the 2017 Pavement Management Project
Feasibility Report and Calling Public Hearing for Improvement
Action(s)
Requested
Receive Feasibility Report and Calling Public Hearing set for December 14, 2016 for
the 2017 Pavement Management Program.
Page 124 of 138
Feasibility Report
2017 Pavement Management Program
Project FH-17-07
Folwell Ave, from Fulham St to Hoyt Ave
Vincent St, from Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave
Northrup Ave, from Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave
Burton St, from Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave
Coffman St, From Hoyt Ave to Larpenteur Ave
Prepared by: Jesse Freihammer
City Engineer
City of Falcon Heights
I hereby certify that this feasibility report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of
the State of Minnesota.
, P.E.
Registration No. 47272
Page 125 of 138
INTRODUCTION
This preliminary feasibility report outlines the proposed 2017 Pavement Management Project.
This report consists of a detailed investigation of the streets proposed for improvements, listed below. A
map showing the street locations can be found in Appendix A:
University Grove Neighborhood
Folwell Ave, from Fulham St to Hoyt Ave
Vincent St, from Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave
Northrup Ave, from Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave
Burton St, from Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave
Coffman St, From Hoyt Ave to Larpenteur Ave
The proposed project involves street reclamation, spot curb replacement, utility improvements, and
watermain replacement in certain areas. As has been discussed during development of the CIP, the City
Council has expressed the desire to complete maintenance on City streets that, if neglected for too long,
would need to be reconstructed. The proposed 2017 PMP achieves this, while also maintaining a
neighborhood approach. The neighborhood approach minimizes the inconveniences residents experience
due to construction.
The proposed project also includes improvements to the pathway on Roselawn Avenue using the
reclamation process.
Utility improvements for the project include the repair of selected storm sewer manholes and catch basins.
The watermain system is owned and operated by St. Paul Regional Water Services and they have identified a
number of the watermains in the project area that they will be replacing as part of this project.
The total project cost is estimated to be $ 831,000, which includes contingencies and overhead costs.
Funding for the project will be provided through assessments from the benefitting properties, Stormwater
utility funds, street infrastructure funds, and Municipal State Aid (MSA) funds.
It is expected that if these improvements are approved, the work will be completed during the 2017
construction season. The project was initiated by council/staff as part of the City’s Pavement Management
Program.
Page 126 of 138
2017 Pavement Management Project Feasibility Report
2
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
An informational meeting was held on April 20, 2016, for residents who live within the proposed 2017 PMP
project. Meeting notices were sent out about two weeks in advance to the adjacent property owners.
Approximately 30 people attended. The meeting was an open house format, where staff was available to
discuss the City’s Pavement Management Program, the roadways being proposed for improvement, and the
City’s Assessment Policy. Most of the questions City staff received pertained to the scope of the project, the
proposed project schedule, the City’s assessment policy, and about pedestrian facilities.
Page 127 of 138
2017 Pavement Management Project Feasibility Report
3
EXISTING CONDITIONS
General Comments
Falcon Heights’ pavement management system utilizes a pavement condition index (PCI) rating of 0 to 100.
This rating is based on surficial pavement observations. Street condition ratings are divided into three
categories: “adequate” (66 to100), “marginal” (36 to 65) and “problem” (0 to 35). Generally, the indices
correspond to a level of most cost effective improvement as follows: problem = Reclaim Pavement; marginal
= Mill and Overlay. This rating system assists in prioritizing roadway improvements and projecting costs for
use in the City’s pavement management and capital improvements plan.
Street
Est. 2017
Rating
2017
Category
Burton Street, Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave 43 Marginal
Coffman Street, Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave 42 Marginal
Coffman Street, Folwell Ave to Larpenteur Ave 14 Problem
Folwell Ave, Fulham St to Vincent Ave 13 Problem
Folwell Ave, Vincent Ave to Northrup Ave 12 Problem
Folwell Ave, Northrup Ave to Burton St 32 Problem
Folwell Ave, Burton St to Coffman St 38 Marginal/
Problem
Folwell Ave, Coffman St to Ford St 6 Problem
Folwell Ave, Ford St to Hoyt Ave 6 Problem
Northrup Ave, Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave 22 Problem
Vincent Ave, Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave 23 Problem
Actual levels of street improvements are determined by obtaining soil borings and a comprehensive
geotechnical evaluation report.
The project areas include single family, town homes, commercial and tax-exempt properties. The
neighborhoods are fully developed. All of the streets are delineated with concrete curb and gutter.
Special Considerations
A. Street Design
The streets within the proposed project vary from 28 feet to 34 feet in width. The right of way width
for the streets vary with the University Grove Neighborhood typically 50 feet.
B. Pathway
1. Roselawn Avenue
There is an existing 8-foot wide bituminous trail located on the south side of Roselawn. The
pavement surface shows signs of severe oxidation, as can be seen by the exposed pavement
Page 128 of 138
2017 Pavement Management Project Feasibility Report
4
aggregates. Cracking is visible along the entire path, with vegetation growing in the more
severe cracks. The pavement has served its useful life and is recommended for
rehabilitation.
C. Utility Conditions
City utilities located within the project limits include storm sewer, water, and sanitary sewer. A
summary of the City’s utilities are listed below. Private utilities include gas, electric, cable television,
and telephone.
1. Water System
St. Paul Water Utility maintains the water system in Falcon Heights. They have identified the
watermain in the University Grove neighborhood for replacement.
2. Sanitary Sewer System
All of the sanitary sewers that are within the project areas have been lined via the CIPP
rehabilitation process. There is no work anticipated on the sanitary sewer system as part of
this project.
3. Storm Sewer System/ Drainage
Various storm sewer repairs will be made to existing catch basins and storm sewer
manholes as part of this project. There may be some catch basins added to help alleviate
poor drainage as part of this project as well. This will be determined during the
preliminary design stage of the project.
Page 129 of 138
2017 Pavement Management Project Feasibility Report
5
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
General Comments
Due to the pavement condition in the University Grove neighborhood reclamation of the pavement is
proposed as the method of pavement construction. This process involves the removal of all the
bituminous pavement along with the gravel layer. These materials are mixed together and placed back in
place. Some of the material is removed, while the rest is re-compacted and used as aggregate base. Then
new layers of bituminous will placed down to bring the road back to the current grad. Spot curb repair
and various storm sewer improvements will be done as well.
The watermain system is owned and operated by St. Paul Regional Water Services and they have identified a
number of the watermains in the University Grove Neighborhood that they will be replacing as part of this
project. This all costs associated with the watermain replacement will be paid by St. Paul Regional Water
Services.
ESTIMATED COSTS AND PROPOSED FUNDING
Proposed project costs for the 2017 PMP Improvement Project (including bituminous streets, storm sewer,
and restoration) are summarized below. The cost estimate is based on recent construction projects of similar
character and assumes that the proposed improvements would begin in 2017. Actual costs will be
determined through competitive bids following final design for the project. Therefore the actual costs will be
dependent upon the market conditions that exist at the time of the bidding.
Estimated
Cost* MSA
Street
Infrastructure
Funds
Assessments
Sanitary
Sewer
Fund
Storm Sewer
Fund
Street
Improvements $750,000 $200,000 $294,984 $197,516 $0 $57,500
Pathway
Improvements $81,000 $0 $81,000 $0 $0 $0
Total $ 831,000 $200,000 $375,984 $197,516 $0 $57,500
*Includes Engineering
The proposed project is eligible for assessments according to the City of Falcon Heights Assessment Policy.
Per City Policy, a portion of the street improvements will be assessed to the benefitting properties. Along
with assessments, street costs will be financed through the Street Infrastructure Fund and Municipal State
Aid. Typically, only roads that have been added to the City’s Municipal State Aid system (MSA) are eligible for
funding through the City’s portion of state gas tax revenues. However, the City of Falcon Heights has a
Certified Municipal State Aid Street system. As a result, the City can use MSA funds to pay for the City’s
portion of the project costs.
Page 130 of 138
2017 Pavement Management Project Feasibility Report
6
Pathway improvements can be assessed per the Assessment Policy. However, given that the Roselawn
pathway is an existing facility, staff recommends not assessing property owners. This would be consistent
with past practice; the City did not assess for pathway replacement along Roselawn Ave in 2015.
Utility improvements will be funded from the appropriate infrastructure fund, and are not assessable.
Assessments will be levied to the benefitting properties as outlined in Minnesota State Statute Chapter 429
and the City’s Assessment Policy, which is summarized below. The assessed amount is levied on a front
footage basis.
Assuming this project is completed by fall 2017, the final assessment amount would be determined following
an assessment hearing in the fall of 2017 and a thorough review of the proposed assessments by the Council.
The following City of Falcon Heights assessment policies are being followed:
Corner lots assessed 100% long, 0% short side
If the property being assessed is a non-single family residential parcel, both sides will be
assessed.
Mill & Overlay and Reclaim Assessment Rates:
o Residential - 40% of project cost
o Commercial and Multi-Unit Residential - 60% of project cost
o Tax-exempt- 100% of project cost
The tables below list the breakdown of costs for the reclaim streets along with the frontage and per foot
rates based on percentage.
Preliminary Assessment Summary- University Grove
100% of project cost/ foot $70.00
60% of project cost/ foot $42.00
40% of project cost/ foot $28.00
The following factors regarding the City of Falcon Heights assessment policies should be considered:
The University of Minnesota owned properties in the University Grove Neighborhood that are
tax-exempt parcels, and have been included in the preliminary assessment roll as such. The
University, however, has provided the City with statutory information that indicates University
property is not subject to assessments. The City will be meeting with the University Real Estate
division to discuss if they are willing to consider a payment in lieu of assessment. Staff expects
that if a payment is offered, it may not be the full amount that a typical tax-exempt parcel would
pay in assessments. This may result in a higher City cost, which could be offset by using
additional State Aid funds. Staff will update the City Council as information becomes available.
Page 131 of 138
2017 Pavement Management Project Feasibility Report
7
PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE
Neighborhood Meeting April 20, 2016
Prepare Feasibility Report Spring 2016
Preliminary Design Fall 2016
Neighborhood Meeting Fall 2016
Public Hearing/Authorize Plans and Spec December 14, 2016
Construction Summer 2017
Final Assessment Hearing October 2017
Page 132 of 138
2017 Pavement Management Project Feasibility Report
8
PRELIMINARY ASSEMENT ROLL
Page 133 of 138
Parcel ID Site Address SiteCityStateZIP
Front
Footage
Assessable
Footage
Assessment
rate %
Per foot
assessment
Preliminary
Assessment Notes
202923110029 2165 Hoyt Ave WF a l c o n Heights MN 55108 130.00 130.00 40%28.00$ 3,640.00$
202923110256 2161 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923110255 2173 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923110038 2099 Hoyt Ave WF a l c o n Heights MN 55108 95.00 0.00 40%28.00$ ‐$
202923110257 2159 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923110014 2111 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 74.00 74.00 40%28.00$ 2,072.00$
202923120066 2222 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
202923120056 1569 Northrop St Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 60.00 40%28.00$ 1,680.00$
202923120055 1575 Northrop St Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 60.00 40%28.00$ 1,680.00$
202923120030 2292 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 60.00 40%28.00$ 1,680.00$
202923120031 2286 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 60.00 40%28.00$ 1,680.00$
202923120033 1595 Vincent St Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
202923120002 2303 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 60.00 40%28.00$ 1,680.00$
202923120003 2297 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 60.00 40%28.00$ 1,680.00$
202923120004 2291 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 60.00 40%28.00$ 1,680.00$
202923120005 2285 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 60.00 40%28.00$ 1,680.00$
202923120006 2279 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 60.00 40%28.00$ 1,680.00$
202923120007 2273 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 60.00 40%28.00$ 1,680.00$
202923120008 2267 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 60.00 40%28.00$ 1,680.00$
202923120061 1572 Northrop St Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923120072 1571 Burton St Falcon Heights MN 55108 90.00 90.00 40%28.00$ 2,520.00$
202923120071 1579 Burton St Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923120070 1587 Burton St Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923120077 1586 Burton St Falcon Heights MN 55108 216.00 108.00 40%28.00$ 3,024.00$
202923120078 1578 Burton St Falcon Heights MN 55108 216.00 108.00 40%28.00$ 3,024.00$
202923120063 1580 Northrop St Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923120034 1589 Vincent St Falcon Heights MN 55108 65.00 65.00 40%28.00$ 1,820.00$
202923120048 1588 Vincent St Falcon Heights MN 55108 63.40 63.40 40%28.00$ 1,775.20$
202923120067 2216 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
202923120068 2208 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
202923120035 1583 Vincent St Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 60.00 40%28.00$ 1,680.00$
202923120036 1577 Vincent St Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
202923120037 1571 Vincent St Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.30 60.30 40%28.00$ 1,688.40$
202923120044 1564 Vincent St Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.00 0.00 40%28.00$ ‐$
202923120045 1570 Vincent St Falcon Heights MN 55108 60.30 60.30 40%28.00$ 1,688.40$
202923120046 1576 Vincent St Falcon Heights MN 55108 61.20 61.20 40%28.00$ 1,713.60$
202923120047 1582 Vincent St Falcon Heights MN 55108 63.40 63.40 40%28.00$ 1,775.20$
202923120057 2243 Hoyt Ave WF a l c o n Heights MN 55108 60.00 0.00 40%28.00$ ‐$
202923120076 2190 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 355.00 129.00 40%28.00$ 3,612.00$ long side/north side
202923110004 2179 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 210.00 135.00 40%28.00$ 3,780.00$ long side/west side
202923120069 2202 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 213.00 143.00 40%28.00$ 4,004.00$ long side
202923120083 1603 Northrop Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 98.40 98.40 40%28.00$ 2,755.20$
202923120079 1564 Burton St Falcon Heights MN 55108 216.00 108.00 40%28.00$ 3,024.00$
202923120065 1596 Northrop St Falcon Heights MN 55108 219.00 165.00 40%28.00$ 4,620.00$
long side, 54' short
side/north side
202923120073 2203 Hoyt Ave WF a l c o n Heights MN 55108 60.00 0.00 40%28.00$ ‐$
202923120064 1588 Northrop St Falcon Heights MN 55108 85.00 85.00 40%28.00$ 2,380.00$
202923120084 1595 Northrop St Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923120029 2298 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 121.00 121.00 40%28.00$ 3,388.00$
202923120032 2280 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 116.00 86.00 40%28.00$ 2,408.00$
long side, 30' short
side/north side
202923120038 2271 Hoyt Ave WF a l c o n Heights MN 55108 60.00 0.00 40%28.00$ ‐$
202923120081 1596 Vincent St Falcon Heights MN 55108 163.00 163.00 40%28.00$ 4,564.00$
202923120053 1589 Northrop St Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923120054 1583 Northrop St Falcon Heights MN 55108 65.00 65.00 40%28.00$ 1,820.00$
202923120060 2225 Hoyt Ave WF a l c o n Heights MN 55108 75.00 0.00 40%28.00$ ‐$
202923120082 2252 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 126.60 126.60 40%28.00$ 3,544.80$
202923110015 2105 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 74.00 74.00 40%28.00$ 2,072.00$
202923110013 2115 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 74.00 74.00 40%28.00$ 2,072.00$
202923110258 2151 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923120010 2261 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
202923120011 2255 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
202923120012 2249 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
202923120014 2231 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
202923120016 2217 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
202923120018 2203 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923120015 2225 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
202923110009 2143 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 80.00 80.00 40%28.00$ 2,240.00$
202923120013 2243 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
Page 134 of 138
Parcel ID Site Address SiteCityStateZIP
Front
Footage
Assessable
Footage
Assessment
rate %
Per foot
assessment
Preliminary
Assessment Notes
202923120017 2211 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
202923120019 2197 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 80.14 80.14 40%28.00$ 2,243.92$
202923120020 2189 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 197.71 137.57 40%28.00$ 3,851.96$ Long side/east side
202923110010 2137 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 80.00 80.00 40%28.00$ 2,240.00$
202923110011 2129 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 74.00 74.00 40%28.00$ 2,072.00$
202923110012 2121 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 74.00 74.00 40%28.00$ 2,072.00$
202923110144 2097 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 106.97 106.97 40%28.00$ 2,995.16$
202923110262 2148 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 77.00 77.00 40%28.00$ 2,156.00$
202923110033 2124 Folwell St Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923110017 2180 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 224.64 133.61 40%28.00$ 3,741.08$
202923110259 2170 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 77.00 77.00 40%28.00$ 2,156.00$
202923110260 2160 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 77.00 77.00 40%28.00$ 2,156.00$
202923110261 2154 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 77.00 77.00 40%28.00$ 2,156.00$
202923110034 2118 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 75.00 75.00 40%28.00$ 2,100.00$
202923110035 2112 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 80.00 80.00 40%28.00$ 2,240.00$
202923110036 2108 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 80.00 80.00 40%28.00$ 2,240.00$
202923110037 2098 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 185.14 98.41 40%28.00$ 2,755.48$ Long side only
202923110022 2140 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 79.00 79.00 40%28.00$ 2,212.00$
202923110032 2132 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 70.00 70.00 40%28.00$ 1,960.00$
Falcon Heights MN 55108 0.00
336.92 Total footage
for condo building
202923110145 1666 Coffman St Unit 101 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110146 1666 Coffman St Unit 102 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110147 1666 Coffman St Unit 103 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110148 1666 Coffman St Unit 104 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110149 1666 Coffman St Unit 105 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110150 1666 Coffman St Unit 106 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110151 1666 Coffman St Unit 107 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110152 1666 Coffman St Unit 108 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110153 1666 Coffman St Unit 111 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110154 1666 Coffman St Unit 112 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110155 1666 Coffman St Unit 113 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110156 1666 Coffman St Unit 114 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110157 1666 Coffman St Unit 116 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110158 1666 Coffman St Unit 117 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110159 1666 Coffman St Unit 118 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110160 1666 Coffman St Unit 119 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110161 1666 Coffman St Unit 120 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110162 1666 Coffman St Unit 121 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110163 1666 Coffman St Unit 122 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110164 1666 Coffman St Unit 123 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110165 1666 Coffman St Unit 124 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110166 1666 Coffman St Unit 125 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110167 1666 Coffman St Unit 126 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110168 1666 Coffman St Unit 127 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110169 1666 Coffman St Unit 128 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110170 1666 Coffman St Unit 129 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110171 1666 Coffman St Unit 130 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110172 1666 Coffman St Unit 131 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110173 1666 Coffman St Unit 132 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110174 1666 Coffman St Unit 133 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110175 1666 Coffman St Unit 134 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110176 1666 Coffman St Unit 201 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110177 1666 Coffman St Unit 202 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110254 1666 Coffman St Unit 203 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110180 1666 Coffman St Unit 204 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110181 1666 Coffman St Unit 205 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110182 1666 Coffman St Unit 206 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110183 1666 Coffman St Unit 207 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110184 1666 Coffman St Unit 208 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110185 1666 Coffman St Unit 209 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110186 1666 Coffman St Unit 211 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110187 1666 Coffman St Unit 212 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110188 1666 Coffman St Unit 213 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110189 1666 Coffman St Unit 214 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110190 1666 Coffman St Unit 215 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110191 1666 Coffman St Unit 216 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110192 1666 Coffman St Unit 217 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110193 1666 Coffman St Unit 218 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110194 1666 Coffman St Unit 219 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
Page 135 of 138
Parcel ID Site Address SiteCityStateZIP
Front
Footage
Assessable
Footage
Assessment
rate %
Per foot
assessment
Preliminary
Assessment Notes
202923110195 1666 Coffman St Unit 220 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110196 1666 Coffman St Unit 221 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110197 1666 Coffman St Unit 222 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110198 1666 Coffman St Unit 223 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110199 1666 Coffman St Unit 225 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110200 1666 Coffman St Unit 226 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110201 1666 Coffman St Unit 227 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110202 1666 Coffman St Unit 228 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110203 1666 Coffman St Unit 229 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110204 1666 Coffman St Unit 230 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110205 1666 Coffman St Unit 231 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110206 1666 Coffman St Unit 232 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110207 1666 Coffman St Unit 233 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110208 1666 Coffman St #234 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110209 1666 Coffman St Unit 301 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110210 1666 Coffman St Unit 302 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110211 1666 Coffman St Unit 304 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110212 1666 Coffman St Unit 305 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110213 1666 Coffman St Unit 306 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110214 1666 Coffman St #307 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110215 1666 Coffman St Unit 308 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110216 1666 Coffman St Unit 311 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110217 1666 Coffman St #312 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110219 1666 Coffman St Unit 314 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110221 1666 Coffman St Unit 316 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110222 1666 Coffman St Unit 317 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110223 1666 Coffman St Unit 318 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110224 1666 Coffman St Unit 319 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110225 1666 Coffman St Unit 320 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110226 1666 Coffman St #321 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110227 1666 Coffman St Unit 322 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110228 1666 Coffman St Unit 324 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110229 1666 Coffman St Unit 325 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110230 1666 Coffman St Unit 326 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110231 1666 Coffman St Unit 327 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110232 1666 Coffman St Unit 328 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110233 1666 Coffman St Unit 329 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110234 1666 Coffman St Unit 330 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110235 1666 Coffman St Unit 331 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110236 1666 Coffman St Unit 332 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110237 1666 Coffman St Unit 333 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110238 1666 Coffman St Unit 334 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110270 1666 Coffman St Unit 313 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110271 1666 Coffman St Unit 315 Falcon Heights MN 55108 3.66 3.66 60%42.00$ 153.81$
202923110266 0 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 10.28 10.28*100%70.00$ 719.60$ U of M
202923110030 0 Coffman St Falcon Heights MN 55108 143.35 143.35*100%70.00$ 10,034.50$ U of M
202923120009 0 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 30.00 30*100%70.00$ 2,100.00$ U of M
202923110031 0 Folwell Ave Falcon Heights MN 55108 30.00 30*100%70.00$ 2,100.00$ U of M
202923110239 2100 Larpenteur Ave WF a l c o n Heights MN 55108 1400.70 1400.7* 100%70.00$ 98,049.00$
U of M
*Final total
assesssment amount
to the U of M of
$113,003.10 will
need to be
negotiated
9925.11 8498.21 197,516.85$
Page 136 of 138
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
October 12, 2016
No. 16-34
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE 2017 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROJECT
FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ORDERING PUBLIC HEARING FOR IMPROVEMENT
WHEREAS, pursuant to resolutions of the Council adopted May 11, 2016 a report has been
prepared by the City Engineer with reference to the improvement of the following streets:
• Folwell Ave, from Fulham St to Hoyt Ave
• Vincent St, from Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave
• Northrup Ave, from Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave
• Burton St, from Hoyt Ave to Folwell Ave
• Coffman St, From Hoyt Ave to Larpenteur Ave
The pathway along Roselawn from Fairview Ave to Cleveland Ave will be included
as well.
and this report was received by the Council on October 12, 2016, and
WHEREAS, on August 10, 2016, the Council removed Garden Avenue, from Snelling Avenue to Hamline Avenue, from the 2017 Pavement Management Project for a project to be completed
at later date.
WHEREAS, the report provides information regarding whether the proposed project is necessary, cost effective, and feasible; whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement; the estimated cost of the improvement as
recommended; and a description of the methodology used to calculate individual assessments for
affected parcels.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Falcon Heights,
Minnesota:
1. The council will consider the improvement of such streets in accordance with the report and
the assessment of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of $831,000.
Page 137 of 138
2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 14th day of December,
2016 in the council chambers of the city hall at 7:00 p.m. and the City Administrator shall give
mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law.
ADOPTED by the Falcon Heights City Council this 12th day of October, 2016.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Moved by: Approved by: ________________________
Peter Lindstrom
Mayor
LINDSTROM ____ In Favor Attested by: ________________________
BROWN THUNDER Sack Thongvanh
HARRIS ____ Against City Administrator
FISCHER
GUSTAFSON
Page 138 of 138