Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-09-1987 Council AgendaAGENDA CITY OF LITTLE CANADA REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 1987 A. 1. Call to Order - 7 :30 p.m. Tape No.4Y__ 2. Roll Call Mayor Mr. Michael Fahey Councilwoman L.rs. Beverly Scalze Councilman Mr. William T3lesener Councilman [Tr. Rick Collova Councilman I-Tr. Jim L,aVal.le Recording Secretary Mrs. Kathy Glanzer Clerk /Treasurer Mr. Joseph Chlebeck ______ Attorney Mr. Thomas Sweeney Engineer Mr. Donald Carley _ Planner Mr, David Licht Mr. Steve Grittman Guest 3. Approval of Minutes - 8-26-87 4. Announcements: **!;This agenda is subject to change by additions and deletions. B. PUBLIC BEARINGS None C. PRESENTATIONS 5. Little Canada /Vadnais Chamber of Commerce Gambling Permit See Correspondence: Page 1 Motion to Approve: D. OLD BUSINESS G. David Wright - Noel Drive Extended See Correspondence Pages 2 -3 Engineer's Report Call for bearing on September 23, 1987 Tape No._....___to_____ Tape No.__ to______ 7. Assessment Policy Tape No.._,__._ See Correspondence: Pages 4 -5 - Assessment Policy 1967 Page 6 - Copy of Original Plat - Roy Wilson Add. Pages 7 -10 - Resolution Denying Property Division Lot 1, Blk 2 Wilson Add. (332 Brooks) Pages 11 -12 - Resolution Deleting Deferred Assort. Assessment to be Reviewed - Conor Lots: 333 Brooks - Kohn 07- 29 -22 -14 -0012 -- 220 ft. $7,884,00 332 Brooks - Linzrneir 07- 29 -22 -14 -0013 - 220 ft. $7,884.00 Conor Lots That Use Morrison: 2443 Morrison - Gallagher 07- 29- 22 -14- 0024 220 ft. $7,884.00 2515 Morrison - Zilge 07- 29- 22 -14- 0001 220 ft. $7,884.00 332 Sextant - Nekton Homes 07- 29 -22 -14 -0014 250 ft. $8,975.41 (They have a large driveway access onto Morrison) Other Assessment to be Considered: 318 Savage - Stenger 07- 29 -22 -11 -0010 - 251 ft, $8,995.84 (This includes a ponding area for E. Rose Place) Motions on Policy and Assessments: 8. DuPre - Fence and Weeds - $500.00 Motions: 9. Tax Increment Financing Districts See Correspondence: Pages 14 -18 Tape No,____ Tape No .______to__ E. NEW BUSINESS Engineer Tape No. to 10. Assessment Reapportionments See Correspondence: Page 19 - Div. No. DA060929 (AUD /DP - 5216) Page 20 - Div. No. DA060955 (AUD /DP - 1579 & AUD 0425 D/P 0032) Page 21 - Div. No. DA060970 (AUD /DP 1066 & AUD 0425 D/P 0032) Attorney Tape 11. Reports if any F. COUNCIL REPORTS 12. Public Safety: Mr. Fahey Tape No,__ to_:_____ a. Extension of Animal Control Contract to Sept. 30, 1987 He is asking for $474.00 for September. Normally it is $374.00 b, False Alarms See Correspondence: Pages 23 -25 Note: If reports from the police indicate that alarms is caused by a storm, then no statement is sent. The report from the police concerning Fuel Economy did not indicate a storm as the cause, c. Trovare - Intoxicating Beer License See Correspondence: Page 26 Motion: 13. Utilities: Hr. Blesener Tape No. a. Claim from Mr. Owens Cul -De -Sac Removal (Ontario) See Correspondence: Pages 27 -29 14, zoning and Building: Mr, Collova Tape No._,w._,_,_to 15, Parks & Recreation: Mrs. Scalze Tape a. Doug Andrews indicated to me that he will have the Appraisor report on the Centerville Road properties by our meeting this Wednesday. 16. Administration: Mr, LaVaile Tape No.,.,,._,_ 17. Adjourn CORRESPONDENCE TO AGENDA CITY OP LITTLE CANADA REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEI'I3ER 9, 1987 PAGES CONTENTS 1 Gambling Permit - Little Canada /Vadnais Chamber of Commerce 2 -3 Noel Drive Extended - David Wright 4 -5 Assessment Policy 6 -12 Wilson Addition 13 None 14 -10 Tax Increment Financing Districts 19 -21 Assessment Reapportionments 22 -25 Fuel Economy False Alarms 26 Trovare Intoxicating Beer License 27 -29 Rick Owens - Reimbursement for Cul -De -Sac Removal Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board Room N475 Griggs- Midway Building 1821 University Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 -3383 (612) 642 -0555 LAWFUL GAMBLING EXEMPTION FOR BOARD USE ONLY INSTRUCTIONS: 1. Submit request for exemption at least 30 days prior to the occasion. 2. When completing form, do not complete shaded areas. 3. Give the gold copy to the City or County. Send the remaining copies to the Board. The copies will be returned with an exemption number added to the form. When your activity is concluded; complete the financial information, sign and date the form, and return to the Board within 30 days. ?LEASE TYPE Organization Name Suburban Area Liitle Canada ad .i _•hts Ch -mb- o C.mmerc- Div.Chamb- .f Cate- license it currently or pre wustylicenuel - Address 2489 Rice Street City, County, Roseville. State, Zip Code Ramsey MN 55113 Manager's Name Tim Block Phone Number 483 -L313 Chief Executive Officer's Name Eugene R. Strommen Phone Number 483 -1313 Type of Organization If Other Nonprofit Organization ICheck One) O IRS Designation El Incorporated with Secretary of State 0 Affiliate of Parent Nonprofit Organization ❑ Fraternal • Veterans ❑ Religion Other Nonprofit Organization Name of Premises Where Activity Will Occur The Venetian Inn Premises Address 2814 Rice Street, Little Canada, MN 55113 Datelsl of Activity Sunday. October 18, 1987 Profit Games Yes No Gross Receipts Value of Prizes Expenses Bingo X Raffles X Paddlewheels Tipboards X Pull -Tabs Use of Profit X X Distributor From Whom Gambling Equipment Acquired Distributor's License No I affirm all information submitted to the Board is true, accu rate, and complete. Chief Exe(ykive Officer Signature ¢=5771110^�) 9 -1 -87 I affirm all financial information submitted to the Board is true, accurate, and complete. Date Chief Executive Officer Signature Date ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF NOTICE BY LOCAL GOVERNING BODY I hereby acknowledge receipt of a copy of this application. By acknowledging receipt, I admit having been served with notice that this application will be reviewed by the Charitable Gambling Control Board and will become effective 30 days from the date of receipt (noted below) by the City or County, unless a resolution of the local governing body is passed which specifi- cally disallows such activity and a copy of that resolution is received by the Charitable Gambling Control Board within 30 days of the below noted date. CITY OR COUNTY TOWNSHIP Name of Local Governing Body (City or County) City of Little Canada Township Name (Must be notified when County is the approving body) Sgnnaa- t�u�re�of Person Receiving App anon ✓Tile 7/ Clerk — Treasurer Joseph G. Chlebecf' Date Received 9 -1 -87 Signature of Person Receiving Application Title Date C3- 00020.01 14/861 White — Board Canary — Board returns to Organization to keep Pink — Organization Gold — City or County Page 1 NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF LITTLE,CANADA Notice is hereby given that the City. Council of the City of Little Canada will meet at the City Center, 515 Little Canada Road at 7:30 P.M. on Wednesday, September 23, 1987 to consider the making of the following improvement. Improvement 87 -13 Allan Ave. from Desoto to Noel Drive extended by.w.atermain. Noel Drive from Allan Drive 300 feet South — BY: Right -of -way acquisition, grading, sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, gravel base, concrete curb & gutter and bituminous surfacing. The total estimated cost is $ 110.,140..00. The general nature and location of the improvement is amplified in the preliminary engi.neeri:ng report on file With. th.e City Clerk. The area proposed to he assessed for these improvements is all lots and tracts of land atlutti;ng said street to b.e improved. All pursuant to Minnesota Statutes: 429.011 to 429.11 (Laws: 1953 Chapter 39.8 as amended)... Such persons as desire to Le heard with. reference to the proposed improvements will he heard at this meeting. s /s./ Joseph - Chlebeck, Clerk PUBLISHED: North. Suburban Press - September 8 and September 15, 1987. Page 2 .-. /5-41 ‘ a) g . 0- C 30.07 (11 !>,,,. ' )3 2 " 467 14 vd.. -,o t3 (ts? 01 N. • /a2-' 4 /23) „„ , 1475 m ,. .,±5.1. 4 t) J Y , s* 5 O - 135 4,04037. 134.0/ ...e...--- . / ° 1 551 Q • ■:.‘„5 1$ .,.. ; LI_ f., -------- -;14---) AV E I Doc 1. 12 20490 •saa ..2 2- 211-1.=,t‘'als2L.,J 4/ - 1 -,4 I,' ,,, cCte ;1410 Ornagg 9 ,-_ i• Ii 5 0° 4.4-114,54664tClr ...284e. t.)4271r 1 ' • li 0 (52) a49"eir , • 27 =.5C (1,71,2n 2.984 /1(f 5 , )( /-....24 3 34 .. !.,0 .,:tAil" 1391.97 ia4 - 78 it 11...- z,.. Evs , ac actec5 0 citi? 2'50. SS 3;1' 2 (291 _ 2 (25) (- 1754 An 7- • `!, „ 0%) 9 w v ( 09 5) ?9'71t1}24 9. as:177 aci7a 3 ' (-11'54-40 os •• 32, c302,3>,, 64 at. act bs 31 (9) ...) .? 2959 0 ,,,, 0 g (-1954 41) 15-/ 4 ,3,' , - ‘2a960 4 , . 84-�c 2959 Ole, Te-s, , 41-10 '44 C (--.., 5 t .2 2 acises 5 • 0 (-2054 41) I ‘‘C (3L- 0 1 •-••• c'< 0 0 14.1 I 0 (4') z& "a .,,-. G /33) 9. g ci1-48 G i 9 (-220441) ,- , act 31:1 , .0 (33) I )1 g v°) 0 I zcaa - aci"° 7 2 c ' ' actiii ',.". I '4.3 - 4) o o aci3t 0 0 ../19) . 1 02 est 1 =?`-`, 3 8 2 2 a°‘3?_ 84 9 '-1 Y .84ac , 4) O a.9 ict 0 1 0 c - 0 g ac‘a.o 5 0 , { 5,) 4 , et S4 ; a) cs i-17 op 0 '17e.11,37) act I 1. o 2 ZS 4,11:./ „... 1' ..).„---1- 10 S 0 a9le 10 ("'. ri (-2551441) tfl 8 4 eac - a €1..:=■ t 0 n 2 a°102. 11 8 (-2'054A1) 64 ac. 28c1c1 • o 28c152, 124 t . s 8 to O 12 ;35.) et i 2_2$c:It.i )2, "4' s (,,27$4 41 , ,_ • .. .. N ' 846: , ase,7 • ,b6 — (tI) 13 343 Z 0 1 assm 13 114 8 c-z:35440 \;•5 el , ,---i 2885,, 0 9 292.a 0 a i370 34 2 • " 286s (-205441 ) . 110 fic...;:?!ic:1,:....:..p111111111111111111, fl 6t 6111111 • ..- .•-••. ... • • •. . „ ....,. • ••:: •••••••••••-• 8 Page 3 fr BE IT }SOLVED, the Villege of Little Canada does hereby adopt a . eee :general policy for assessing property within the Village for benefit in connection with the installation of public improvements. This resolution constitutes a statement of the general policy'and.is hereby promulgated'as such a:, a matter'o > public information. 1. GENERAL POLICY -e It is the policy of the Village to assess every; lot, piece or parcel of land benefited by an improvement whether abutting thereon or not, based upon benefits received. without regard to cash valuation. The rate of any assessment is generally computed by dividing the total assessable coat of the improvement by the total number of assessment unit:;. The assessment units being either per unit of parcel area, the adjusted front footage of the parcel, an equal cost per parcel, or combinations of any of the above, as determined by the Council. All measurement for the assessment computation will be deteztned from the Ramsey County Assessor's map. 2. IN COMPUTING BENEFITS WHEN ASSL'SSM1!NT IS ',0 BE DETE&INED AND» COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF FRONT FOOTAGE, THe FOLLOWING PROCEDURES SHALL BE USED IN DETERMINING THE NUMBER OF FRONT FEET OF EkCH ASS1":3G -3LE PARCEL. A standard lot shall be 75 fee's wide and shall have an area of 10,000 square feet. In addition to this basic lot area, a benefit shall be nasigned;to:`; the tract or ownership, when assessed by front feet, to n depth of 150 feet. ,That' portion of the lot beyond 150 feet back from the front lot or property line shall' be deemed to be not benefited and the tract or ownership therefor not assessed unless it is assessed as a full lot under paragraph (a) or Paragraph (g) hereinafte . set forth. In applying front footage assessment rates to other than standard lots the following procedures for determination shall,be adhered to (a) Odd Shaped Lots - For odd shaped lots, such as exist on cul- de -saoi triangular intersection, curved streets, etc., the adjusted front footage is com tei by dividing the area of the lot by 10,000 to determine the equivalent number of 75i emnt footage units in the parcel. The number of units multiplied by 75 feet will; :,give the adjusted front footage. - (b) Approximately Rectangular Lots - for a lot which is apuroximetely rectangular, the adjusted front footage is computed- by averaging the.froit andrear sides of the lot. If the lot is deeper than 150 feet, the width at the 150 foot is used for the reel. line dimension. This method is used on:y where the, divergence between the front and rear lot lines is five (5) 'feel or lees. ;!here divergence is greater than five (5) feet, use "odd shaped lot" fori:ule. (c) ?tectangular Lot - For rectangular lots whosc frontage is greater than its depth, whether a corner or interior lot, the narrow width ehell be consider,i the assessable side. Where extreme variations exist, the "odd shaped lot" may- be uee Every effort will be made to give the property owner the benefit of an;- doubt. (d) Interior Lot - 'Interior loto fronting on improvement shell be assessed at 100j of the front footage. (e) Corner Lot - For street improvements, corner lcte having street on both sides shall be assessed :at 10Ca'of the front footage if the Page 4 pare .L is in the front and at 20;> of the 'side footage if the improvement is for therii* . of the property: For watennain and sanitary sewer improvements, coiner lets shall; be assessed for the shortest frontage whether the improvement abuts thereon:-Or`rio" If the improvement is available on both sides, the lot shall_be assessed for.the`t frontage of the shorter side plus 10 feet for the longer side. (r' Lots Fronting on a Cul. -de -sac Assessments for street`lmprovemptit to lots .fronting on a cul -de -sac' shall be assessed equal to. the 'frontage ,of, the A +,( _maximum number of lots' or the average' frontage.of,..the lots on..the',street'apprga5 the'.`cd- de -aao,' Whichever is'tne least, ,exoept: for curb and ixtter: ;assessment' "' able `footage, for concrete curb, and gutter will be determined by actual. footagrp cn.rb and gutter: as 'measured oetween property lines projected to radius point. g , for properties havens; combined frontage on street and.oul -de =sac shall be_determ1.ned , by projecting the`proPerty line>an" the Cul-de-sac :to the radius point and the:pxop4tkt line on the street projected to curb line. :assessable footage for sanitary'sewe,,4a»d',? watermain improvements shall be the width of the parcel measured at the building setback line or as stated in paragraph (a) - "odd shaped lots ",whichever is„the ;, (g) Lots Fronting on Trunk Highway 'Right -of -way'' "lath a village improveMer.0 en the side, ::hall :be computed at 100'tt of '.the side lot footage. .i: z;k:avlct; 2OT": tTIOHS - Service connection for utilities, from.''the utiiit ;r r:sin'to the street .right -of -bray line, shall be assessed :to the parcel; fox whach it •:a installed. Ayes 5 Resolution adopted on this the 8th day of March, Pr, MONT 6j J,. • WI Q' I IN 10G.2G' 6 Ie5.45 7 E.. 100• 5 00' BROOKS PVC. . 100• 4 100' UTILITY B 9 loo' 100' 3 00 10 100' 100' EASEMENT It 100' 1 to '1 O it ';.SM XTANT AN/M., 104)7 X100'- - NN dl M' At• Gt Accepted and approved this ___ day of /1//a A. U, 19 .5 "/• i`� ,� mm ea Doer Plat Commlonio o 'or Page 6 1 COUNTY ROAa" B-72-- 243 NOTE. E,114 CO R• 5EC, 7-29' 22 BUILDING SET•F3PCK TO BE 30 FEET FROM ALL PROPERTY LINE.5, Regular Meeting City Council I August 9, 1978 (Cont'd.) • Howard Lee Mr. Howard Lee requested a special use permit for a pole barn garage. Special Use Permit Mr. DeBace introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 78 -8 -248 - APPROVING THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A POLE BARN GARAGE AS SPECIFIED BY THE PLANNER The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Jespersen. Ayes (5) Messrs. DeBace, Jespersen, Valento, Nadeau and Hanson. Nayes (0). Chair declared resolution adopted. This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 4, Page 216. Hammel Mr. Hank Widmer appeared before the Council to register a complaint Barn about a barn which is located on the Hammel property on Twin Lake Road. The barn was moved onto the property. Mr. Widmer claims that the barn is an eyesore and is not located in the spot that Mr. Hammel had assured neighbors the barn would be located. Mr. Hammel also has two goats which are creating a nuisance. Mr. Hammel then appeared before the Council stating that the barn is not an eyesore and that neighbors were told the location that the barn would be placed. Mr. Hammel also stated that his goats and horses were well cared for. Other neighbors in the Twin Lake Road area expressed the same concerns that Mr. Widmer previously did. Council suggested that the neighbors get together and work out this problem for themselves,-and that there were empty meeting rooms in the City Center where they could get together and solve their problems. Anna Anna LaJurgen appeared before the Council requesting a property LaJurgen division of Lot 1, Block 3, Roy Wilson Addition. The Council informed Property LaJurgen that they had previously set a precedent in the Roy Wilson Division Addition that lots would remain single lots by deleting the assessments on the lots in said Addition. Mr. Valento introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 78 -8 -249 - DENYING THE REQUEST FOR A PROPERTY DIVISION OF THE LOT LOCATED ON MORRISON AND BROOKS, ROY WILSON ADDITION, LOT 1, BLOCK 2 The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Jespersen. Ayes (5) Messrs. Valento, Jespersen, Hanson, Nadeau and DeBace. Nayes (0). Resolution declared adopted. This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 4, Page 216. Page 7 Page -5- RoY bV1L,S91°! AD©1TIcW (Lock /d LOT 1, leen Yaced LITTLE enlviD4- • &Poo1<:,. J06 1 Page 8 ROY WILSON A000r1 0P1 3LoCK a L.OT f, k &.."•t a L /0©' L >Pf SR.°0,q..p; Page 9 ReaY W O A i-rior:i &LocK r) LC)T .L 0 74 trb 0 Z. 0 L!TTL"; CtRNi1D�i i1,0ai; 100 Page 10 Min. Reg.. Meeting City Council Sept. -8 -1976 Cont. Delete Deferred Assessments Wilson Addition Mr. Hanson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption. WHEREAS: WHEREAS: AND WHEREAS: WHEREAS: AND WHEREAS: RESOLUTION NO. 76 -9 -216 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE ASSESSMENT FOR SANITARY SEWER NO. -1- AUD.0425 -D /P 0032 BY DELETING THE DEFERRED ASSESSMENTS AGAINST PARCEL — NUMBERS: %3 -8250- 010 -01 - -- 53- 8250 - 120 -01 53 -8250- 010 -02 - -- 53- 8250 - 120 -02 53 -8250- 010 -03 On September 25 1967, the special assessments for the construction of Sanitary sewer no. -1- were levied against the following parcels numbers: 53 -8250- 010- 01 - -53- 8250 - 120- 01 - -53- 8250 - 010 -02 -- 53 -8250- 120 -02 and 53- 8250- 010 -03. And, On May -1- 1968 the Council passed a resolution deferring portions of the assessments aginst the following parcels: Parcel No. 53 -8250- 010 -01 53- 8250 - 120 -01 53 -8250- 010 -02 53- 8250 - 120 -02 53 -8250- 010 -03 Footage deferred Amount 85 ft. 85 ft. 85 ft. 85 ft. 85 ft. $ 722.50 $ 722.50 $ 722.50 $ 722.50 $ 722.50 Pursuant to resolution no. 76 -8 -176, adopted on August 4, 1976, the Council fixed a date for reviewing the deferred assessments. And, On Sept. 8 -1976 the Council reviewed the deferred assessments against the mentioned parcels and Mr. Kausner explained the sales of these lots It appears that the above mentioned parcels can not be divided because the divided portion of the lot would not meet the depth requirement and it appears that the deferred portion of the assessments against the above mentioned parcels do no benefit the parcels. Page 11 Min. Reg. Meeting City Council Sept. -8 -1976 Cont. Deleted Assessments Cont. Deferred Assessment Parcel no. 53- 6720- 010 -01 Amended Deferred Until Split • NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LITTLE CANADA. That the deferred assessment against the following parcels is hereby deleted. PARCEL NO. 53- 8250 - 010 -01 53 -8250- 120 -01 53 -8250- 010 -02 53 -8250- 120 -02 53- 8250 - 010 -03 FOOTAGE AMOUNT DELETED. 85 ft $ 722.50 85 ft - $ 722.50 85 ft $ 722.50 85 ft $ 722.50 85 ft $ 722.50 $3,612.50 The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Jespersen. The following voted infavor thereof. Messrs: Hanson,Jespersen,Veilleux,De Bace and Valento. Against the same, none,_resolution adopted. ( This resolution appears in resolution book no. 2 -page 235 8,236) Mr. Hanson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. 76 -9 -217 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 76 -9 -214 BY RESCINDING THE THREE YEAR REVIEW REQUIREMENT AND CONTINUING THE DEFERRED ASSESSMENT UNTIL THE PARCEL IS DIVIDED. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LITTLE CANADA. That resolution no. 76 -9 -214 is hereby amended by rescinding the three year review re- quirement on the deferred assessment and the deferred portion of the assessment is to be continued until the property is divided. The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Jespersen. The following voted infavor thereof. Messrs: Hanson,Jespersen,Veilleux, De Bace and Valento. Against the same,none,resolution adopted. (This resolution appears in resolution book no. 2 page236) Page 12 r MEMORANDUM T0: FROM: DATE: northwest Essociated consultEnts, inc. Little Canada City Council Dan Wilson 14 July 1987 RE: Thunder Bay TIF Project Alternative Project Structure FILE NO: 758.09 - 87.45 JUL 15 1987 CITY OF LITTLE CANADA I met with Mr. Robert Voto and Mr. Chlebeck on Monday, July 13, 1987, per their request. Mr. Voto questioned the current structuring of the Thunder Bay TIF project. He was concerned that this was a very small project to expend the City's time and money on. The second, and perhaps most important item he recognized was the large amount of tax increments that potentially could be generated by this project. Mr. Voto questioned if there wasn't some way surplus funds could be used to assist other economic development projects throughout the City. The short answer to his question is that there is a way to make these potential funds available for other eligible tax increment projects. The Thunder Bay TIF project as currently structured is a very simple single purpose project. The City is only seeking to capture sufficient tax increments in order to repay the approximate $40,000 the City would advance to the project. Even though we anticipate it only necessary to capture the tax increment for two years, the plan does provide for the City to receive the increments for the maximum eight years. The City has five years during which to amend its boundaries, which would allow using surplus Thunder Bay tax increments elsewhere. The current plan structure meets the intent of the tax increment statutes even by tax increment financing critics. Mr. Voto raises a very important question. I believe his intent is to provide the City with the greatest amount of flexibility in dealing with the community's development activities by maximizing your opportunities without your making any firm commitments at this time. 4601 excelsior blvd., ste. 410, minneapolis, mn 55416 (61 2) 925 -9420 Page 14 Little Canada City Council 4>-7� 14 July 1987 Page Two The Thunder Bay TIF District has the potential of generating between $400,000 and $500,000 over the life of the district. A case can be made that those funds could be better used by the City to encourage other development, rather than returning them to the County, School District and City for distribution under the normal tax policy. In order to accomplish this goal of using the surplus funds whenever the oppor- tunity presents itself, we would have to make a major change in the Development District boundaries. Presently, there exists seven different municipal development districts. Thunder Bay would be the eighth. Tax increment funds can be utilized anywhere within its development district. The procedure to accomplish our goal would be to: 1. Abolish all seven previous development districts. This is not a problem because no TIF districts were ever established in any of these districts. 2. Create one large district that includes all the property formerly included in the eight separate districts. 3. Establish Thunder Bay as TIF District #1. .We would have to create a new development district plan and hold a public hearing. The TIF District #1 is acceptable as is, but would require the new public hearing as well due to it being in a new development district. Ms. Ippel approved this format change and use of surplus TIF funds. The City need not capture all of the increment. You could elect to return a portion to the County, School District and City. This could help answer potential critics who point out the rising cost of police, fire, schools, etc. The TIF statutes have partially addressed this problem by requiring the frozen base to increase annually by a five year average annual adjustment factor. In this project, the County has established the adjustment factor to be 1.3 %. The City would be able to accumulate the funds for four years before they must be utilized for some eligible project. If there were none, the City would simply return the funds. The proposed structuring change is a very aggressive use of TIF. It does depart from the philosophy of utilizing funds for projects which create them or for similar or like projects. Some critics of TIF would object to using TIF funds generated by a single family residential subdivision on an industrial project across town. I believe Mr. Voto will be present at your meeting of July 22nd to encourage your support for restructuring the project. I too will be in attendance. I would have no objections to such a change. • Page 15 tittle Canada City Council 14 July 1987 Page Three • If you choose to restructure the project, we still must deal with Mr. and Mrs. Wright and Mr. Frattalone. I believe Mr. Frattalone will be ready to sign the development contract. If he is ready, then the City could authorize the purchase agreement with Mr. and Mrs. Wright. They refused to sign the purchase agreement without the City first signing the agreement. The purchase agreement with the Wrights is in its second revision. They are now requesting or demand that the City pay the outstanding water special assessment of approximately $780.00, as well as paying abstracting cost, state deed tax and mortgage registration tax. I informed them that I could not make a commitment to them, but I would prepare the purchase agreement to reflect this change. Please call be with any questions at 448 -4630. cc: Robert Voto Joe Chlebeck David Licht Thomas Sweeney Page 16 MEMORANDUM TO: Joe Chlebeck FROM: Dan Wilson DATE: 28 July 1987 RE: Development District Boundary Changes FILE NO: 758.15 northwest associated consultants, inc. WITS-9420 4AXXXXAgITIMAKX4NOIMXIMW minneapolis, mn 55416 4601 Excelsior Blvd. #410, After the Council meeting last Wednesday, Mr. Voto questioned our methodology to establish the Thunder Bay District. My understanding of the Council action was to approve and certify the Thunder Bay TIF District #1 as previously prepared. The City now has the authority to complete the acquisition of the Wright property. The Council also opted to give themselves the option to utilize surplus Thunder Bay funds in the future. In order to accommodate this, the Development District Boundaries must be enlarged. The specific boundaries were not determined. We are to return to the next Council meeting with our recommendation. The Council wanted the revised Development District Boundaries to include more than just the existing seven development districts. Once the boundary decision is made we will prepare the amended Development District Plan. That will require another Public Hearing. It will not require notifying the County or School District. That requirement only applies to TIF Districts. The manner in which we proceeded is consistent with the TIF statutes. The City has four years in which to modify the boundaries. Our approach is also acceptable to Ms. Mary Ippel, with Briggs & Morgan, the City's Bond Counsel. I spoke with her again today. She is aware of what is going on and approves our approach. If we would have abolished the Thunder Bay project and started all over, we would have possibly run into problems. Without approving the District, it is questionable if we would have the authority to acquire the Wright property with the expectation of later collecting tax increments. The City now has the best of both worlds. The Wright property can be acquired and steps have been initiated to utilize future surpluses. CC: Bob Voto David Licht DW /jj Page 17 WHITE - ORIGINAL YELLOW - FILE COPY PINK - C FILE 3r (7)' a ,;7i D 1987 TO: Joseph Chlebeck FROM: Dan Wilson DATE: 5 August 1987 RE.: Thunder Bay TIF MEMORANDUM FILE NO: 758.09 - 87.45 • northwest associated consultants, inc. (612) 925 -9420 )4axbcmlmmmmx mXDGV1xxcex21$ ®. minneapohs, mn 55416 4601 Excelsior Blvd. #410, There seems to be growing confusion around the establishment of Little Canada's first tax increment district. Your project was initially set up and still remains a very straight forward and simple tax increment project. Because of your ability to borrow funds from the general fund, this project does not require a bond sale. The fact that there is no bond sale is the reason bond counsel has not been involved in this project. Bond counsel provides an opinion on the bonds pro- posed to be sold. No bonds means no need for an opinion on the bonds. This does not mean you cannot ask them to review the TIF plan, if you would feel more comfortable with their input. To that end, I have had two telephone calls with Ms. Mary Ippel at Briggs and Morgan about the project and the proposed plan amendment. If you desire additional input from bond counsel, your local attorney or anyone else just let me know. I am available to meet and explain the project to anyone you desire. DW /jj Page 18 WHITE - ORIGINAL YELLOW - FILE COPY PINK - C FILE AUG 6 198' CITY OF LITTLE C:Ai4AD ?. Oq CITY OF LITTLE CANADA NAME OF ASSESSMENT: S -W -S 81 -8 DIVISION # DA060929 DP t 5216 Aud. # 5216 ORIGINAL: 07- 29_22_42 - 0112 -9 None 07- 29- 22 -42- 0013 -2 8,992.16 REAPPORTIONMENT: 07- 29- 22 -42- 0114 -4 None 07- 39- 22 -42- 0115 -7 8,992.16 07- 92- 22 -42- 0116 -0 None BORG PROPERTY Page 19 CITY OF LITTLE CANADA NAME OF ASSESSMENT: WTR 76 -5 MMI • can =Mu Mar I• -170 1017 nlitt13 Mtn wain gla NCO I DIVISION I 060955 DP 01579 Aud ® 1579 ORIGINAL: 07- 29- 22 -21- 0041 -2 1,982.67 REAPPORTIONMENT: 07- 29- 22 -21- 0131 -4 07- 29 -22 -21 =0132 -7 None 1,982.67 CITY OF LITTLE CANADA NAME OF ASSESSMENT: SAN SWR DIVISION if 060955 DP S 0032 Aud. B 0425 ORIGINAL: 07- 29- 22 -21- 0041 -2 1,195.00 REAPPORTIONMENT: 07- 29- 22 -21- 0131 -4 07- 29- 22 -31- 0132 -7 None 1,195.00 LA CASSE PROPERTY Page 20 N O 9 6 8 Y (d 15, '6 (pi) ,L DD ]( 41 ' 13Q(33) 140') R 15 ( ) 5 G (0) 04 1A-L-L A N 3 10 a9 ve) 'A") Ai e2 CITY OF LITTLE CANADA NAME OF ASSESSMENT: IMP 78 -18 DIVISION # DA 060970 DP 8 0032 Aud A 0426 ORIGINAL: 05- 29- 22- 14- 0001 - -2 3,915.40 REAPPORTIONMENT: 05- 29 -22 -1 4- 0073 -7 05- 29- 22 -14- 0074 -0 CITY OF LITTLE CANADA 2,887.44 1,527.96 NAME OF ASSESSMENT: SAN SAW DIVISION 6 DA 060970 DP 4 0032 Aud. Y 0425 ORIGIANL: 05- 29- 22 -14- 0001 -2 2,342.50 Page 21 REAPPORTIONMENT: 05- 29- 22- 14- 0073 -7 1,526.50 05- 29- 22- 14- 0074 -0 SENTY PROPERT Citereconomy Home Office • St. Paul, MN • Since 1919 August 27, 1987 City of Little Canada 515 Little Canada Road Little Canada, Minnesota 55117 Attention Mr. Joseph G. Chlebeck Subject: Your letter of August 14, 1987 Re: Ordinance No. 281 Gentlemen: P. O. BOX 43336 ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55164 (612) 484-8404 We have reviewed our records and the weather records for the time in question and find that that alarm was associated with a rather severe thunderstorm in the area that had dropped over three inches of rain locally. We believe under Section 816.020.0 last sentence which states: "A false alarm does not include an alarm caused by climatic conditions such as tornadoes, thunderstorms, utility line mishaps, violent conditions of nature, or any other conditions which are clearly beyond the control of the alarm manufacturer, installer or user". This being the case, we do not believe that Fuel Economy Contracting Company should be recorded as having a false alarm in this instance. The same would apply to the alarm that occurred on July 25, which as you remember was the day after the very severe thunderstorm of the 23rd and 24th during which considerable damage was done to electrical equipment throughout the area. We appreciate your consideration in this matter. Very truly yours, sistance Vice President JMR /bjt RITETV AUG 31 1981 CITY OF LITTLE CANADA SHIPPING ADDRESS: 95 WEST WOODLYNN AVENUE ST. PAUL MINNESOTA 55117 Page 22 281 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 816 TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF LITTLE CANADA REGULATING THE USE OF ALARM SYSTEMS, ESTABLISHING USER FEES, AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR FALSE ALARMS THE CITY COUNCIL OF LITTLE CANADA HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 816 is hereby added to the Municipal Code of the City of Little Canada to read as follows: 816. ALARM SYSTEMS 816.010. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to ensure the availability of the City's public safety services for appropriate public safety needs to encourage alarm users to adequately maintain and utilize alarm systems. 816.020. Definitions. (A) Alarm System. An alarm installation designed to be used for the prevention or detection of burglary, robbery, or fire and located in or on a building, structure or facility. (B) Alarm User. The legal entity in control of any building, structure or facility wherein or whereon an alarm system is located. (C) False Alarm. An alarm signal eliciting a response by personnel of the City's law enforcement agency or fire department when a situation requiring a response does not, in fact, exist, and which is caused by the activitation of an alarm system through mechanical failure, movement, alarm malfunction, improper installation or the inadvertence of the alarm user or its employees, family or agents. A false alarm does not include an alarm caused by climatic conditions such as tornados, thunderstorms, utility line mishaps, violent conditions of nature, or any other conditions which are clearly beyond the control of the alarm manufacturer, installer or user. (D) Law Enforcement Agency. An agency or a person designated by the City Clerk. Page 23 -1- 816.030. False Alarm Reports. ,The City Cierk shall cause the law enforcement agency to report all false alarms occurring within the City. The report shall include the identification of the alarm user and the date, time and location of the false alarm. 816.040. User Fees. An alarm user whose alarm system has resulted in the reporting of four (4) or more false alarms shall be charged the following user fees: (A) If four (4) through twelve (12) false alarms have been reported within 365 consecutive days, the user fee shall be $50.00 for each such false alarm. (B) If more than twelve (12) false alarms have been reported within 365 consecutive days, the user fee shall be $150.00 for each false alarm in excess of twelve (12) within 365 consecutive days. 816.050. Not'ce. Upon notice of the first false alarm report for a particular alarm system, the City Clerk shall, by certified mail, notify the alarm user that a false alarm has been reported. The notice shall include a copy of the City's false alarm regulations. Upon receipt of the second and subsequent false alarm reports for a particular alarm system, the City Clerk shall, by certified mail, notify the alarm user that, within ten (10) days of the date of the City's notice, the appropriate user fee must be paid to the City finance department or the alarm user must file a written notice of appeal with the City Clerk. 816.060 Appeal. User fees which have been appealed shall be reviewed by the City Council. The alarm user shall be invited to appear before the City Council. If the alarm user is not present when the council reviews the appeal, the City Clerk shall notify the alarm user, by certified mail, of the result of the council's review. User fees, as determined by the City Council, shall be paid within ten (10) days of the date of the City's notice of the council's determination. 816.070. Collection of Delinquent Fees. All delinquent charges for user fees shall be certified by the City Clerk to the Ramsey County Department of Property Taxation for collection with taxes due against the property on which the alarm system is located. This certification process shall occur annually on or before October 10 of each year. 816.080. Excessive Alarm Report. When the operation of an alarm system has resulted in twelve (12) or more false alarms within 365 days, the City Cierk shall request the alarm user to provide the City with a written report indicating the actions taken or to be taken by the alarm user to discover and eliminate the cause of the false alarms. Failure to submit the written report within the time limits provided by the City Cierk shall be considered a violation of this ordinance. Page 24 816.090. Confidentiality. All information, submitted in compliance with this ordinance shall be held in confidence and shall be deemed a confidential report exempt from discovery to the extent permitted by law. Subject to the requirements of confidentiality, the City Clerk shall develop and maintain statistics for the purpose of ongoing alarm system evaluation. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and publication. Fe PASSED by the City Council of Little Canada this 25 day of 1987. ATTEST: seplf G. Chlebeck, Clerk ael I. F hey, Mayor Ayes -- 5 Nays - -0 Page 25 tY av One East Little Canada Road • Little Canada, Minnesota 55117 • 483 -1805 • City Of Little Canada 515 E. Little Canada Road Little Canada, MN 5511? ATTN: Joe Clebeck Dear Joe, Trovare, Inc. is currently carrying 3.2% Beer under the. 198G Beer €Wine License.. Revised licensing as of August 198? states that we are allowed to carry strong beer under our current license. Due to this revision, we would like to be approved to carry strong beer. Our license number is '7513(214). Thank you for your help in this matter. TROUARE, INC. fnL.N AUG 31 1981 CITY OF Li? i_c CANADA. Page 26 Rick L. Owens 3078 Thunder Bay Road Little Canada, MN 55117 August 20, 1987 Mr. Joe Chleback City of Little Canada 515 Little Canada Road Little Canada, MN 55117 Dear Joe, Per your request on my visit Monday, August 17, 1987 I am putting my inquiry in letter form. I spoke with you in June of 1986 regarding the temporary blacktop turn - arounds on Thunder Bay Road. When I purchased the home in April of 1985 I was told that the city would be removing the blacktop, extending the driveway to the street and sodding the remaining area. This was to happen at the same time that the park was built under the power line. I was also told that no building would be done south of the power line at Thunder Bay Road. When the street was extended and construction of homes started I came down to check on the status of the turn - arounds. You advised me that it was the developers responsibility. In the past few weeks I discovered that the city has done the work at 3075 Thunder Bay Road and at 3095 and 3098 Ontario. It seems to me that what is good for three is good for all. Enclosed please find copies of bills paid to private contrac- tors to extend the driveway where the blacktop was and to sod where the blacktop was. I would appreciate reimbursement for money I spent for work which the city has obviously shown is their responsibility. Rick L. Owens Encl: Melek Concrete Groundskeeper, Inc. RLO:mjs Page 27 plid211VEQ AUG 24 1987 CITY OF LITTLE CANADA RICK L. OR DEBORAH S. OWENS - 3336 0-520-738-484.07.5c0-50,139,.778.34 3078 THUNDER' SAY'RD.".81248...t14/3 LITTLE CANADA, MN 55117 75-1679/960 PagolgAij $cd Thc.:- S3 SIGNAL BANK 100 Signal Hills West St. Paul, MN 55118 Memo I:0960 L6 V141: 011.14 WO 1 )`-e lc Palau- be Egon ?II' 3336 11'00000 20 79 7,1' Page 28 12) fq FROM Proposal No. Page No. Date PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO WORK TO BE PERFORMED AT Name ,0F,6SLg. Otn)t all S Street Street ;20 7 D 7� t) jio e r a q 1 City State City State Date of Plans Telephone Architect We hereby propose to furnish all the materials and perform al the labor necessary for the completion of ill / v r /E, K'/ fl r; tide. w1tL a —. c)L np rvurA-, _G. 12) Pouf nr re Fc ;L I l s /.n s `-%0 ci v / j3 /+g f'k t 'it h_en..4 CS L C' o ,t 11-----44:,-±-4 r o n , rr c. n / sr All material is guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance with the drawings and specifications submitted for above work and completed in a substantial workmanlike manner for the sum of with payments to be made as follows: f #L4r✓C Er- oA/ o plc /./ 0"7 Dollars ($ `fps— �' O Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs, will be executed only upon written orders, and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire, tornado and other necessary insurance upon above work. Workmen's Compensation and Public Liability Insurance on above work to be taken out by Respectfully submitted Per NOTE - This proposal may be withdrawn by us if not accepted within days ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above. Accepted )c( Signature Date Signature IA. Form M 29181 age