Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09/25/2007
LAUDERDALE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA SEPTEMBER 25, 2007 7:30 P.M. CITY HALL 1891 WALNUT STREET 1. ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 3. APPROVALS a. Minutes of the September 11, 2007, City Council Meeting.'-, b. Claims totaling $23,103.85 4. OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA 5. CONSENT a) Deputy Clerk Step Increase b) Install "No Parking" signs on Fulham Saturday, September 29, 2007 as traffic control for the U of M cross country race. 6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS/RECOGNITION/PROCLAMATIONS a) Resolution of Commendation for Council Member Karen Gill -Gerbig b) Resolution of Commendation for PCIC Member Michelle Krug 7. REPORTS a) TH280 Update b) Halloween Party 8. DISCUSSION/ ACTION 9. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 10. ADDITIONAL ITEMS 11. SET AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING a) Inflow and Infiltration discussion b) Halloween Party c) Rental Housing Licenses 12. COUNCIL /ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATIONS 13. WORK SESSION a) Comprehensive Plan b) Inflow and Infiltration discussion c) Personnel Annual Evaluations 1 MINUTES OF THE LAUDERDALE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2007 8:00 p.m. Lauderdale City Hall, 1891 Walnut Street Mayor Dains called the meeting to order at 8:04 p.m. and asked Administrator Heck to take the roll. Members present: Council members Denise Hawkinson, Karen Doherty, and Clay Christensen and Mayor Dains. Also present were staff members Jim Bownik, Assistant to the City Administrator, and Heather Butkowski, Deputy City Clerk. Mayor Dains asked if there were any additions or deletions to the agenda. Mayor Dains requested removing the resolution prepared for council member Karen Gill -Gerbig and requested adding a comment on September 11, 2001. There being no further requests, council member Christensen moved to approve the agenda. Motion seconded by council member Doherty and carried. Mayor Dains asked if there were any additions or corrections to the August 28, 2007, City Council minutes. There being no amendments to the minutes, council member Hawkinson moved approval. Council member Doherty seconded the motion and it carried. Mayor Dains asked if there were any questions on the claims. Council member Hawkinson asked about the size of the archery bails and if this will be the size from now on. Heck said he didn't know, but the information will be part of the Friday report. There being no further questions, council member Hawkinson moved to approve the claims in the amount of $78,327.12. Council member Christensen seconded the motion and it carried. Mayor Dains asked if anyone present wished to address the Council on issues not on the agenda. No residents were present to address the Council. Mayor Dains asked if the Council wished to add or remove items from the consent agenda. Council member Hawkinson requested removing item b) PCIC member appointment. There being no other items to remove, Council member Hawkinson moved approval of the consent agenda consisting of the following: a) accepting the low quote for installation of flooring in the social room, and b) approving the agreement with Bonestroo for sanitary sewer mapping. Council member Doherty seconded the motion and it carried. Mayor Dains requested a moment of silence to commemorate those who died in the World Trade Center attack six (6) years ago. Heck provided the Council with a brief update on the status of the TH280 project. Mayor Dains suggested Senator Marty and Representative Griling be invited to a council meeting before the legislative session begins to discuss the Larpenteur / Hennepin Avenue Bridge replacement. - 1 - Mayor Dains opened the discussion on filling the vacant Council seat. He stated there were four candidates for the two open seats. He indicated the Council has a few options available including not filling the seat. Following the discussion, Council member Doherty moved to delay the appointment until after the general election in November and to appoint the candidate with the highest number of votes to fill out the remainder of the term. Council member Christensen seconded the motion and it carried on a roll call with Members Hawkinson, Doherty, Christensen and Dains all voting yes. Heck told the council the Minnesota Electrical Association requested the use of the social room to conduct training as a part of their apprentice program. Heck went on to say they would like to have a reduced rate and committed to 27 weeks. Council Member Hawkinson moved and council member Doherty seconded a motion allowing the Minnesota Electrical Association to reserve the social room at the resident rate for weeknights. On weekend they will pay the full non-resident rate. Motion carried with all members voting yes. Heck outlined the 2008 proposed tax levy and additional options. He said that in the two levy options, one allowed for additional funds for transfer to the Debt Service funds and the other is the original levy proposal. Council member Christensen moved Resolution 091107-A Levying Taxes for 2007 Payable in 2008 in the amount of $551,634. Council member Hawkinson seconded the motion and it carried on a roll call vote with members Hawkinson, Doherty, Christensen, and Dains all voting yes. Council member Hawkinson asked that park committee appointments be removed for discussion. Bownik stated that Ms. Barbara Meier withdrew her application for appointment. Council member Hawkinson felt the Certificate of Recognition should be considered separately and not on the consent. Council member Doherty agreed with Hawkinson and extended her thanks to Ms. Michelle Krug for her involvement, work and support of the PCIC. Council member Hawkinson moved to appoint Bob Milligan and Gretel Keene to the PCIC. Council member Doherty seconded the motion and it carried. The Council set the agenda for the next meeting: 1) Comprehensive Plan Update 2) Step Increase for Heather Butkowski 3) Halloween Party The Council moved to the work session to discuss the request from 1953 Carl for a retaining wall in the front yard and to meet with Stacie Kvilvnag. The Council discussed with Ms. Kvilvnag options and possible costs for the redevelopment of the Larpenteur Avenue corridor. Ms. Kvilvnag separated the area into three "project" areas and -2- provided the Council with information as to what type of development would work the best in these areas based on the market and her discussions with developers. She indicated that most of the areas are too small for retail type development and that housing or some type of housing / office mix might work on the southwest area. The main concern for retail development is access. The Council also discussed the possible impact the new Bridge will have on the area. After additional discussion, Heck was asked to organize a meeting together with owners/representatives along the corridor. The Council discussed the request made by Mr. and Ms. Schultz of 1953 Carl for a retaining wall. Heck provided some information on their property before and after grading. The Council asked Heck to work with the engineer to get better information. They also requested that when this issue comes up again, to have the right staff at the table. There being no further items for consideration, council member Christensen moved to adjourn. Council member Doherty provided the second and the meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Brian W. Heck City Administrator -3- CITY OF LAUDERDALE Claims for Approval September 25, 2007 City Council Meeting Payroll 9/21/07 Payroll: Direct Deposit # 500409-500417 #7984-7988 $7,937.44 9/21/07 Payroll: Payroll Liabilities, e -payments 188E -191E $6,673.33 Vendor Claims 9/25/07 Claims: Check #s 18844-18863 $8,493.08 Subtotal of Claims From Above $23,103.85 Total Claims for Approval $23,103.85 CITY OF LAUDERDALE 09/20/07 11:03 AM Page 1 Payments Current Period: SEPTEMBER 2007 Batch Name 092107paytax Payment Computer Dollar Amt $6,673.33 Posted Refer 458 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST- 457 Ck# 000188E 9/21/2007 Cash Payment G 101-21705 ICMA RETIREMENT 9/21/07 payroll $1,956.47 Invoice Trnnsartinn Date 900/2007 Due 0 NORTH STAR CHEC 10100 Total $1.956.47 Refer 459 MN DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Ck# 000189E 9/21/2007 Cash Payment G 101-21702 STATE WITHHOLDING 9/07 state withholding Invoice Transaction Date 9/20/2007 Due 0 NORTH STAR CHEC 10100 Refer 460 NORTH STAR BANK, CHECKING S Ck# 000190E 9/21/2007 Cash Payment G 101-21703 FICA WITHHOLDING. 9/21/07 payroll taxes Invoice Cash Payment G 101-21701 FEDERAL TAXES 9/21/07 payroll taxes Invoice Transaction Date 9/20/2007 Due 0 NORTH STAR CHEC 10100 Refer 461 PERA Cash Payment G 101-21704 PERA Invoice Transaction Date 9/20/2007 _ Ck# 000191E 9/21/2007 9/21/07 payroll Due 0 NORTH STAR CHEC 10100 Fund Summary BATCH Total 10100 NORTH STAR CHECKING 101 $6,673.33 $6,673.33 Pre -Written Checks $6,673.33 Checks to be Generated by the Compute $0.00 Total $6,673.33 $724.42 Total $724.42 $1,879.94 $780.87 Total $2,660.81 $1,331.63 Total $1,331.63 $6,673.33 CITY OF LAUDERDALE *Check Detail Register© SEPTEMBER 2007 Check Amt Invoice Comment 10100 NORTH STAR CHECKING Paid Chk# 018844 9/25/2007 1922 MALVERN STREET- M. KRUG E 201-45600-377 DAY IN THE PARK $75.25 Day in the Park prizes reimbur Total 1922 MALVERN STREET- M. KRUG $75.25 Paid Chk# 018845 9/25/2007 AFSCME G 101-21709 UNION DUES $89.74 9/07 union dues Total AFSCME $89.74 Paid Chk# 018846 9/25/2007 AT & T E101-41200-391 TELEPHONE/PAGERS $1.00 8/07 fax long-distance Total AT & T $1.00 Paid Chk# 018847 9/25/2007 AVENET, LLC E 202-49500-307 COMPUTER SERVICES $105.00 4g07 web hosting Total AVENET, LLC $105.00 Paid Chk# 018848 9/25/2007 CINTAS E 601-49000-425 CLOTHING $27.05 pw clothing Total CINTAS $27.05 Paid Chk# 018849 9/25/2007 ESCHELON TELECOM, INC E 101-41200-391 TELEPHONE/PAGERS $50.52 8/07 fax line Total ESCHELON TELECOM, INC $50.52 Paid Chk# 018850 9/25/2007 EUREKA RECYCLING E 203-50000-389 RECYCLING CONTRACTOR $1,443.38 8/07 recycling service Total EUREKA RECYCLING $1,443.38 Paid Chk# 018851 9/25/2007 GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL E 101-43400-386 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL $100.90 8/07 locate calls Total GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL $100.90 Paid Chk# 018852 9/25/2007 HIGHLAND PRODUCTS GROUP LLC E 101-45200-202 PERMENANT SUPPLIES $53.00 plastic liner for recycling co Total HIGHLAND PRODUCTS GROUP LLC $53.00 Paid Chk# 018853 9/25/2007 LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWS E 101-41600-309 DELIVERY $733.60 8/07 Roseville Review delivery Total LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWS $733.60 Paid Chk# 018854 9/25/2007 LMC _ E 101-41100-438 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS $2,022.00 '07-08 annual dues Total LMC $2,022.00 Paid Chk# 018855 9/25/2007 NAPA AUTO PARTS E101-43100-402 CITY TRUCK REPAIR/MAINTEN $1.43 stop signal lamp for truck Total NAPA AUTO PARTS $1.43 CITY OF LAUDERDALE *Check Detail Register© SEPTEMBER 2007 Check Amt Invoice Comment Paid Chk# 018856 9/25/2007 NELSON CHEESE AND DELI E 101-41500-201 GENERAL SUPPLIES $72.71 lunch/dinner for primary judge Total NELSON CHEESE AND DELI $72.71 Paid Chk# 018857 9/25/2007 OFFICE MAX E 101-41200-201 GENERAL SUPPLIES $159.41 easel, envelopes, misc supplie Total OFFICE MAX $159.41 Paid Chk# 018858 9/25/2007 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES INS PROGRAM G 101-21706 HEALTH INSURANCE $1,875.48 10/07 insurance benefits Total PUBLIC EMPLOYEES INS PROGRAM $1,875.48 Paid Chk# 018859 9/25/2007 RAMSEY COUNTY, PROP REC & REV G 101-21706 HEALTH INSURANCE $251.29 10/07 insurance benefits E 101-41300-355 MISC PRINTING/PROCESS SER $25.00 10/07 insurance benefits proce Total RAMSEY COUNTY, PROP REC & REV $276.29 Paid Chk# 018860 9/25/2007 SAM'S CLUB E 201-45600-377 DAY IN THE PARK $212.08 Day in the Park food Total SAM'S CLUB $212.08 Paid Chk# 018861 9/25/2007 SPRINT PCS E 601-49000-391 TELEPHONE/PAGERS $67.79 4/07 & 8/07 pw cell phones E 101-43100-391 TELEPHONE/PAGERS $67.79 4/07 & 8/07 pw cell phones Total SPRINT PCS $135.58 Paid Chk# 018862 9/25/2007 W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. E 101-41400-355 MISC PRINTING/PROCESS SER $985.00 park survey Total W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. $985.00 Paid Chk# 018863 9/25/2007 XCEL ENERGY, PARK & GARAGE E 101-43100-383 GAS UTILITIES E 101-45200-383 GAS UTILITIES E 101-43100-381 ELECTRIC E 101-45200-381 ELECTRIC Total XCEL ENERGY, PARK & GARAGE $11.88 8/07 pw/park gas and electrici $11.88 8/07 pw/park gas and electrici $24.95 8/07 pw/park gas and electrici $24.95 8/07 pw/park gas and electrici $73.66 10100 NORTH STAR CHECKING $8,493.08 CITY OF LAUDERDALE *Check Detail Register© SEPTEMBER 2007 Check Amt Invoice Comment Fund Summary 10100 NORTH STAR CHECKING 101 GENERAL $6,562.53 201 COMMUNITY EVENTS $287.33 202 COMMUNICATIONS $105.00 203 RECYCLING $1,443.38 601 SEWER UTILITIES $94.84 $8,493.08 LAUDERDALE COUNCIL ACTION FORM ACTION REQUESTED Consent X Public Hearing Discussion Action Resolution Work session Date: 25, 2007 ITEM NUMBER 5A-DQIU Clerk Step Increase STAFF INITIAL f APPROVED BY DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE AND PAST COUNCIL ACTION: Heather began working for the City on September 19, 2005. According to the union agreement, she is to be granted step increases on her anniversary dates until she reaches the final step. This is her final step of the 5 step plan. Her salary will increase from $20.82 to $21.86. OPTIONS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve step increase COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. 092507A CITY OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR KAREN GILL-GERBIG WHEREAS, Karen Gill -Gerbig has served as a member of the City Council since April 1995; and WHEREAS, Karen Gill -Gerbig has been and will continue to be the City's representative to the Mississippi Watershed Management Organization; and WHEREAS, Karen Gill -Gerbig had served as Council Liaison to the Park & Community Involvement Committee, Tree Commission, Comp Plan Committee, and School District; and WHEREAS, Karen Gill -Gerbig had served as a member of the Park & Community Involvement Committee; and WHEREAS, Karen Gill -Gerbig provided competent and valued public service to the City of Lauderdale in these appointed and elected positions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Lauderdale, that Council Member Karen Gill -Gerbig be commended and thanked for her dedication and years of public service to the City of Lauderdale; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council wishes Council Member Karen Gill -Gerbig success in her new endeavors. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Lauderdale, Minnesota this 25th day of September, 2007. (ATTEST) Jeffrey E. Dains, Mayor (SEAL) Brian Heck, City Administrator RESOLUTION NO. 092507B CITY OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR MICHELLE KRUG WHEREAS, Michelle Krug has served as a member of the Park & Community Involvement Committee since July 2003; and WHEREAS, Michelle Krug has been a key contributor to the planning, organizing, and managing of city events including Day in the Park, Halloween, Snow*Commotion, and the City -Wide Garage Sale; and WHEREAS, Michelle Krug has provided input and recommendations to the City regarding improvements to Lauderdale Community Park; and WHEREAS, Michelle Krug has provided leadership and promoted community spirit through these community building activities; and WHEREAS, Michelle Krug provided competent and valued public service to the City of Lauderdale in this appointed position. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Lauderdale, that Park & Community Involvement Committee Member Michelle Krug be commended and thanked for her dedication and years of public service to the City of Lauderdale; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council wishes Park & Community Involvement Committee Member Michelle Krug success in her new endeavors. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Lauderdale, Minnesota this 25th day of September, 2007. (ATTEST) Jeffrey E. Dains, Mayor (SEAL) Brian Heck, City Administrator To: City Council From: Brian W. Heck, City Administrator Date: September 21, 2007 Re: Administrator Update BUDGET UPDATE Revenue is running 2% ahead of projections and expenditures are on target at 67%. Based on current trends, we expect revenue to exceed expenditures by approximately $170,000. Fund balances remain healthy and are anticipated to continue to grow. One major factor is the interest received on our investments. Attached is the monthly budget report. The proposed 2008 levy is set and Lauderdale is not required to have a Truth -in -Taxation hearing. Should the Council choose to hold a hearing, which is recommended, the dates specified are Monday, December 3 and Monday, December 10. Further discussion on the proposed 2008 budget is scheduled for October 23. TRAFFIC STUDY We are using the Falcon Heights speed cart to track and record data. The first location was on Malvern Street north of Ione. We placed the cart at Pleasant north of Larpenteur over the weekend and will set it up on Walnut tracking vehicles heading south. Attached is a letter I sent to Mr. and Ms. Schultz, 1953 Carl Street, regarding their request made at the Council meeting on August 28. 1 will be working with Tom Kellogg on the issue. I am not sure when Tom will have an opportunity to evaluate the situation; Tom and his staff are currently working on several projects related to the Comprehensive Plan and I and I. A few residents commented on the stop signs installed at Roselawn and Walnut. I placed calls to Mark Guess regarding the signs and have yet to hear from him. I am going to request the signs be removed. TH280 MnDot removed the barricades at Industrial Blvd and Broadway. I have not spoken to Hamline Auto Body since the barricades were removed and I am hoping this action lessens the impact on that business. Excel Energy needs to relocate their transmission poles and is doing soil borings on the east and west sides of 280 near the Children's Home Society, New Mech., etc. Fund Balances General Fund 567,644 2007 2007 201 Community Events Fund Percent Percent 5,237 2006 ADOPTED YEAR TO 2007 Year to Projected 43,499 ACTUAL BUDGET DATE PROJECTED Date to Budget EXPENDITURES 360,462 391,644 304 2003 Imp Debt Fund 473,824 434,569 464,234 201 Community Events Fund 3,371 2,535 4,685 5,000 184.82% 197.24% 202 Cable T.V. Fund 23,484 26,140 17,330 26,100 66.30% 99.85% 203 Recycling Fund 29,829 38,640 17,631 27,434 45.63% 71.00% 301 TIF Debt Service Fund - - - - - - 302 2000 Imp Debt Fund 121,793 122,520 122,186 121,971 99.73% 99.55% 303 2002 Imp Debt Fund 153,294 149,690 149,356 149,356 99.78% 99.78% 304 2003 Imp Debt Fund 127,606 120,980 120,646 120,646 99.72% 99.72% 401 Street Improvement Fund 40,764 12,500 - 1,500 0.00% 12.00% 402 General Capital Impr. Fund 37,509 12,500 - 18,000 0.00% 144.00% 403 Storm Water Impr. Fund 39,891 44,465 24,384 38,239 54.84% 86.00% 404 Park Improvement Fund 101,009 180,000 98,805 93,708 54.89% 52.06% 405 TIF Project Fund 664 156,000 154,713 154,713 99.17% 99.18% 407 Sewer Improvement Fund - - - - 409 Water Utility Fund - 112,954 114,750 112,954 601 Sewer Utility Fund 213,300 220,111 132,458 '192,883 60.18% 87.63% Total before operating transfers 892,516 1,199,035 956,944 1,062,505 79.81% 88.61% Less Operating Transfers - 266,954 268,750 268,750 100.67% 100.67% TOTAL EXPENDITURES 892,516 932,081 688,194 793,755 73.83% 85.16% OVER/UNDER BUDGET (31,307) 207,715 (705) (119,560) -0.34% -57.56% TOTAL BUDGET REVENUE 1,863,047 1,756,447 1,226,484 1,937,245 69.83% 110.29% 2006 Audit Adjustment (111,578) ADJUSTED NET REVENUES 1,751,469 TOTAL BUDGET EXPENDITURES 1,735,940 1,964,162 1,324,146 1,766,682 67.42% 89.95% 2006 Audit Adjustment (300,429) ADJUSTED NET EXPENDITURES 1,435,511 NET OVER/(UNDER) (315,957) 207,715 97,661 (170,563) 47.02% -82.11% Fund Balances General Fund 567,644 443,522. 591,951 201 Community Events Fund 5,537 3,190 5,237 202 Cable T.V. Fund 40,645 34,407 34,789 203 Recycling Fund 37,754 43,499 38,756 302 2000 Imp Debt Fund 235,065 182,058 219,284 303 2002 Imp Debt Fund 438,776 360,462 391,644 304 2003 Imp Debt Fund 473,824 434,569 464,234 401 Street Improvement Fund 355,890 388,229 353,390 402 General Capital Impr. Fund 170,308 175,096 162,058 403 Storm Water Impr. Fund 184,251 185,763 192,286 404 Park Improvement Fund 44,059 61,751 98,500 405 TIF Project Fund 448,582 381,569 449,582 407 Sewer Improvement Fund 87,183 89,669 325,378 409 Water Utility Fund 112,549 - - 601 Sewer Utility Fund 341,837 326,177 148,303 TOTAL 3,543,904 3,109,961 3,475,392 2007 MONTHLY BUDGET ANALYSIS August- should be at 67% of year GENERAL FUND SUMMARY 21,341 24,655 15,574 23,668 63.17% 96.00% Administration 183,173 2007 2007 193,811 Percent Percent Elections 2006 ADOPTED YEAR TO 2007 Year to Projected Public Safety ACTUAL BUDGET DATE PROJECTED Date to Budget REVENUES 255,288 525,600 349,900 525,500 66.57% 99.98% Property Taxes 445,983 550,900 273,994 534,373 49.74% 97.00% State Aide 396,907 409,341 204,671 409,341 50.00% 100.00% Permits and Licenses 24,735 17,830 12,350 18,187 69.27% 102.00% Fines and Fees 34,130 33,500 22,349 32,495 66.71% 97.00%' Other Revenue 37,468 20,510 24,221 29,534 118.10% 144.00% TOTAL REVENUE 939,223 1,032,081 537,586 1,023,930 52.09% 99.21% EXPENDITURES Legislative 21,341 24,655 15,574 23,668 63.17% 96.00% Administration 183,173 201,886 126,622 193,811 62.72% 96.00% Elections 15,371 18,320 9,176 15,572 50.09% 85.00% Public Safety 288,458 580,600 383,720 577,000 66.09% 99.38% Police 255,288 525,600 349,900 525,500 66.57% 99.98% Fire 21,246 42,000 24,837 38,640 59.14% 92.00% Prosecution 11,925 13,000 8,983 13,235 69.10% 101.81% Public Works 69,600 80,017 42,055 68,014 52.56% 85.00% Planning and Inspections 34,153 35,783 18,621 30,416 52.04% 85.00% Parks and Recreation 55,072 75,820 40,184 64,447 53.00% 85.00% Transfers 176,256 15,000 - - 0.00% 0.00% TOTAL EXPENDITURES 843,424 1,032,081 635,951 972,928 61.62% 94.27% OVER/(UNDER) BUDGET (95,799) - 98,366 (51,002) 82.88% 108.00% OTHER FUNDS REVENUE 201 Community Events Fund 4,120 2,235 2,302 2,011 102.98% 89.98% 202 Cable T.V. Fund 20,789 20,284 10,892 20,284 53.70% 100.00% 203 Recycling Fund 40,824 39,638 23,388 39,638 59.01% 100.00% 301 TIF Debt Service Fund 76,950 - - - 302 2000 Imp Debt Fund 87,274 56,739 71,281 75,345 125.63% 132.79% 303 2002 Imp Debt Fund 88,542 52,558 72,564 76,132 138.06% 144.85% 304 2003 Imp Debt Fund 146,008 61,390 82,588 85,654 134.53% 139.52% 401 Street Improvement Fund 30,626 10,000 37,874 40,065 378.74% 400.65% 402 General Capital Impr. Fund 17,101 4,250 4,788 5,738 112.67% 135.00% 403 Storm Water Impr. Fund 62,446 52,500 34,772 54,075 66.23% 103.00% 404 Park Improvement Fund 18,541 3,000 116,498 120,000 3883.25% 4000.00% 405 TIF Project Fund 83,422 157,000 87,700 150,720 55.86% 96.00% 407 Sewer Improvement Fund 3,780 3,000 2,486 3,240 82.88% 108.00% 409 Water Utility Fund 12,502 - 2,201 2,201 601 Sewer Utility Fund 230,898 261,772 139,564 238,213 53.32% 91.00% TOTAL REVENUE 923,823 724,366 688,899 913,315 95.10% 126.08% September 20, 2007 Mr. Jack Schultz 1953 Carl Street Lauderdale, MN 55113 Dear Mr. Schultz, 1891 Walnut Street Lauderdale, MN 55113 Main 651-792-7650 Heather 651-792-7657 Jim 651-792-7656 Brian 651-792-7655 PW/Inspections 651-792-7661 This letter is a follow-up to the City Council meeting you attended on August 28, 2007, and the Council meeting of September 11, 2007. At the August 28, 2007, Council meeting you and your wife presented a letter to the Council asking for their consideration in helping you to resolve the slope in your front yard. In your discussion with the Council, you stated the front yard has become more difficult to mow and that growing grass is also difficult. You suggested the maintenance problem was exacerbated by the street and utility improvements the City completed in 2002. Your specific request was to have the City install a retaining wall of some sort to improve the condition and ease the maintenance. The Council took your request under advisement and indicated they would discuss the issue further at the next council meeting. The Council discussed your issue at the September 11, 2007, Council meeting. Council directed staff to work with the engineer and gather additional information so the Council can have a more complete discussion with as much information as possible to allow for them to make an informed decision. I will contact you when the Council considers placing this item on the agenda for discussion so that you may be present. At this time, I do not know when the Council will place this item on the agenda. It is my guess the Council will not have this item on the agenda until the spring of 2008. Again, thank you for bringing your concern and issue to the Council for consideration. Sincerely,_ Cc: Mayor and Council Tom Kellogg, City Engineer The City of Lauderdale is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer LAUDERDALE COUNCIL ACTION FORM Action Requested Consent Public Hearing Report Discussion/Action Resolution Work Session X Meeting Date September 25, 2007 ITEM NUMBER �13A—Comprehensive Plan STAFF INITIAL HAB APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATOR DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE AND PAST COUNCIL ACTION: The Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee has two more meetings planned for 2007 (October and November). We expect to present a rough draft of the Plan to the Coun- cil in December before sending it to out neighboring jurisdictions to review. Our neighbors get 6 months to review the plans but many have said they plan to present comment in much less time. We will likely pick the meetings back up in February to finalize the plan. The Committee spent the last four months working on land use planning, which is the heart of the Comprehensive Plan. While most of the City will not see land use changes, the Committee talked in great length about Larpenteur Avenue and the Chinese Christian Church. They see these areas as likely to be redeveloped or see a use changes by 2030. The Committee sees opportunity to implement their vision for a city with a small but attractive mixed use corridor with businesses that provide for some basic needs of residents. This first section of the Comp Plan reflects that to the best I was able to put together since our meeting on Tuesday. I have received Dave and Jessica's (Ehlers) insight into how these plans have played out in other cities. They said flexibility in land use policies and zoning is key to de- veloping the area while not creating a negative impact on existing owners. They suggested a mixed use corridor. Another goal would be to adopt principles for sustainability and livabil- ity. Chair Bob Milligan will also be at the meeting tonight to share the Committee's view with the Council. The goal is to finalize the land use districts so that the city engineers can completed their work for the Plan (generating maps, sewer tables, etc.). OPTIONS: Provide feedback to the Committee and staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: COUNCIL ACTION: TABLE OF CONTENTS Section1: Introduction................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose of the Lauderdale Comprehensive Plan........................................................................ 2 Vision of the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee............................................................ 2 A Brief History of Lauderdale.................................................................................................... 2 PlanningProcess History............................................................................................................ 3 Changes since the 1997 Comprehensive Plan............................................................................. 4 Section 2: Foundation of the Comprehensive Plan ....................................................... ............. 5 Planning Area Designation & Available Services...................................................................... 5 Policiesand Objectives............................................................................................................... 5 Population and Household Forecasts.......................................................................................... 6 Employment................................................................................................................................ 9 Section3: Land Use..................................................................................................................... 10 LandUse Planning since 1998.................................................................................................. 10 1998 Staging Plan................................................................................................................. 13 Land Use Planning — 2008-2020............................................................................................... 15 General Development Policies.............................................................................................. 15 Land Uses and Land Use Policies by Type.......................................................................... 15 2008-2030 Staging Plan........................................................................................................ 19 SurfaceWater............................................................................................................................ 20 Housing..................................................................................................................................... 22 Lauderdale's Current Housing Stock.................................................................................... 22 HousingCost & Sales........................................................................................................... 24 Regional Affordable Housing Needs.................................................................................... 24 LauderdaleHousing Goals.................................................................................................... 26 Historic and Cultural Preservation............................................................................................ 27 SolarAccess.............................................................................................................................. 28 Aggregate Resource Protection.............................................................................................:... 29 CriticalArea Plan...................................................................................................................... 29 1 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Lauderdale Comprehensive Plan The Metropolitan Council coordinates planning of waste water handling and treatment, transportation, airports, and parks. As part of the seven -county metropolitan area, the City of Lauderdale and its residents use these metro -wide systems. In order to assist the Metropolitan Council in the efficient and orderly development of these metropolitan systems, the City updated is planning tools to coordinate as best possible with those of the Metropolitan Council through the year 2030. This Comprehensive Plan states Lauderdale's intentions for the future. The Plan is a policy statement aimed at the unified and coordinated development of the community. The plan includes analysis of and recommendations for the use of land, improvement of the transportation system, and provisions for community facilities, economy, housing, parks, and the natural environment. The long-range policies within the plan are especially important to those affected by the Plan, namely: • Current and future Lauderdale residents who are directly impacted by the development of community services; • Lauderdale City Council, city committees, and staff who use the plan for consistent and far-sighted decision-making; • Adjacent public agencies as they are often directly impacted by Lauderdale decisions and policies; • The three watershed districts within the City and other environmental organization charge with the protection of our water and natural resources; and, • The Metropolitan Council as the agency is charged with maintaining orderly development and growth in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Vision of the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee While drafting the Comprehensive Plan, the steering committee created a vision statement they felt encapsulated their desires for Lauderdale. "Creating a livable, loveable Lauderdale....together." The committee wanted Lauderdale to be livable. By this they meant a city that both provided for the physical health of residents and promoted community spirit. Many of the policies recommended by the steering committee focused on adopting policies seen in other livable cities with the City Hall and city staff used to create opportunities for residents to get involved with local affairs. The underlying belief is that healthy community would be generated through the participation of residents in city projects and events. The committee believed Lauderdale could be more than a bedroom community if everyone worked....together. A Brief History of Lauderdale The first European descendants to settle in the area that is now Lauderdale were the Walsh family in 1855. Shortly thereafter in 1858, Minnesota became a state. In 1859, Rose Township was organized as a voting precinct, elected town officers, and levied taxes. Rose Township was composed of an area which today includes parts of the cities of Roseville, Falcon Heights, Lauderdale, Minneapolis, St. Paul, and St. Anthony. By 1895, Rose Township had a population of 1,028. The first telephone lines into the area were installed along Eustis Street in about 1899. The Village of Lauderdale was officially incorporated on January 21, 1949. Lauderdale, at that time, had a population of 1,500 people and an area of 270 acres. Also during that time, the land use distribution was considered to be more industrial than residential. The first village boundaries were Roselawn Avenue on the north, Fulham Street on the east, Hoyt Avenue on the south, and Emerald (33rd Avenue West) on the west. The water and sewer systems were installed shortly thereafter in the 1950s. Lauderdale annexed the portion of land between Roselawn Avenue and Ryan Avenue on February 15, 1954. In this same year, the plans for Highway 280 were first approved. On March 20, 1956, Lauderdale adopted a "weak mayor -council" form of government. In April, 1961, a $75,000 bond issue was approved for a new village hall. In 1973, the Village of Lauderdale became the City of Lauderdale. Lauderdale's only public school, "Lauderdale School," closed in 1974. Currently, Lauderdale children attend Roseville Area Schools, Independent School District #623. Planning Process History Lauderdale began formal planning in 1973 and adopted a city wide zoning ordinance in 1974.. The second planning program began in 1977 with the issuance of a Metropolitan Systems Statement by the Metropolitan Council that outlined local obligations to metro -wide systems. The Comprehensive Plan developed by the Planning Commission and adopted by the city in 1981 relied extensively on the 1973 plan. It was reviewed by residents and the city council who suggested a program of activity that would be followed for the next five years. The Capital Improvement Program outlined within the implementation section was conservatively drawn because of existing obligations. The purpose of the plan was to accommodate the development of limited vacant land areas available at that time. The plan outlined a broad overview of development policy. Specific details were to be addressed based on the experience of the first Capital Improvement Program. The Capital Improvement Plan was ultimately partially implemented. The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) was to serve Lauderdale until 1985. After 1985, the city essentially continued without a Capital Improvement Plan until late 1997 when the previous Comprehensive and Capital Improvement Plans were adopted. The previous Comprehensive Planning process began in March 1994 with the creation of the Planning and Zoning Task Force. This Task Force met monthly during the creation of the draft Comprehensive Plan. The Task Force completed a citizen survey and held Town Meetings. Both the Town Meetings and the survey were used to look at Lauderdale's development situations and to chart out a course for the next decade. Two major concerns were raised during these discussions: one was the maintenance and improvement of Lauderdale's property tax base and the other was to prepare a Capital Improvement Plan to accommodate the redevelopment of the city's infrastructure. The Comprehensive Plan was adopted by the city council in October of 1997 and expired, along with the Capital Improvement Plan, at the end of 2007. The Metropolitan Council issued System Statements on September 12, 2005 to launch the current Comprehensive Plan revision period. In early 2006, the city council invited applications from residents interested in being on the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee. At the April 25, 2006 city council meeting, 12 residents were appointed to the steering committee. Starting in May 2006 and ending in early 2008, the resident advisory body met monthly to formulate policy revisions for the Comprehensive Plan. During this time, the Steering Committee held four open houses and asked residents to complete a survey which solicited input on how to retain Lauderdale's small- town charm with healthy engaged residents. The results of that survey are on Appendix page 1. Changes since the 1997 Comprehensive Plan The following list highlights projects completed and policies adopted by the Lauderdale City Council since the adoption of the 1997 Comprehensive Plan. • Laid new sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water lines, curb and gutter, and road surfaces on all City street and alleys between 2000 and 2004. • Redeveloped Highway 280/Broadway intersection with Hamline AutoBody and Boyer Motor Company. • Seal coated the eastern half of Lauderdale to extend the life of the City streets. • Redeveloped the tennis and basketball courts in Lauderdale Community Park. • Acquired two additional parcels on the western side of Walsh Lake. • Mn/DOT redeveloped the Goodwill Industries site into a storm water holding pond. • Adopted a rental housing licensure program. SECTION 2: FOUNDATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Planning Area Designation & Available Services Surrounded by Minneapolis, St. Paul, Roseville, and Falcon Heights, Lauderdale is a "fully developed" community within the metropolitan area. The Metropolitan Council defines a fully developed community as having more than 85% of the land within its borders developed as of the year 2000. As a first -ring suburb, Lauderdale residents access services provided by the Metropolitan Council including transit and wastewater services. Water service is provided by St. Paul Regional Water Service. Policies and Objectives Lauderdale's history is of a small independent -minded community, but Lauderdale always works with the Metropolitan Council on policies and directives that better the community. This update of the City's Comprehensive Plan is no different. As a fully developed city with sewer services completely extended throughout the city to each business and residence, Lauderdale no longer needs to adopt the policies and programs of growing communities. Instead, the policies of Lauderdale focus on improving or redeveloping an aging infrastructure and developing amenities that draw new residents to the area. Among the policies and objectives highlighted in this version of the Comprehensive Plan include: ■ Housing policies that allow for a variety of housing options. The goal is to continue to be a community that welcomes all. ■ Storm water management policies that respect the environment. ■ Plans to eliminate, to the extent possible, inflow and infiltration into the sanitary sewer system. ■ Replacement of road and sewer segments as needed. ■ Zoning ordinances that allow for redevelopment of the city's Commercial corridor along Larpenteur Avenue. ■ Creation of a pedestrian and bicycle friendly community that believes in providing residents maximum opportunity to access transit systems. ■ Continued monitoring and restoration of areas in need of environmental clean up. 5 Population and Household Forecasts In 2000, US Census officials counted 2,364 Lauderdale residents living in 1,150 households with an average household size of 2.06 persons. The Metropolitan Council adopted the 2000 Census figures in its revised January, 2007 population; household, and employment estimates found in Table 1. The Metropolitan Council, recognizing Lauderdale's fully developed status, anticipates only a modest increase in population, household, and employment figures between now and 2030. Table 1: Forecast of population, households employment Population: 1980 1990 2000 1990 2000 2010 2020 203 Population 2,700 2,364 2,400 2,600 2,60 Household 1,166 1,150 1,160 1,250 1,25 Employment 500 700 730 750 80 Source: Metropolitan Council 12.1% 267 11.3% -18% Lauderdale's population increased during the 1980s when Brandychase Condominiums (104 Units), Rosehill Town Homes (42 units), City Gables Apartments (84 units), and Luther Northwestern Seminary (142 units) were built. However, there have been no new housing developments since the previous Comprehensive Plan was written in 1997. In spite of the new high-density housing built in the 1980s and early 1990s, Lauderdale's overall population decreased between 1990 and 2000. Table 2 shows the overall population decline of 12% broken down by age groups. The population decline is tied to the decrease in household size, which shrank from 2.32 persons in 1990 to 2.06 persons in 2000. This decrease of 12.5% in household size mirrors the 12% decrease in Lauderdale's overall population. Table 2 Population Population: 1980 1990 2000 Change 1980 1980% 1990 1990% 2000 2000% 1990 to 2000 Under 5 vears 129 6.5% 227 8.4% 132 5.6% -42% 6 to 17 years 284 14.3% 326 12.1% 267 11.3% -18% 18 to 24 years 418 21.1% 410 15.2% 385 16.3% -6% 25 to 34 years 438 22.1% 768 28.4% 548 23.2% -29% 35 to 54 years 386 19.4% 612 22.7% 656 27.7% 7% 55 to 64 years 170 8.5% 149 5.5% 171 7.2% 15% 65 years and over 160 8.1% 208 7.7% 205 8.7% -1°/ Total Population 1,985 100% 2700 100% 2,364 100% -120/(o Source: 1990 &2000 Census Table 2 also reflects the double digit decreases in school age children and adults in their "family rearing" years from 25-34 years. Without additional information, one may speculate scenarios that rationalize these pollution changes. Maybe families with children moved away from Lauderdale between 1990 and 2000. A decrease in the number of families with children would decrease the average household size as well as account for the population decline of children and adults between the ages of 25-24. On the other hand, maybe families remained in Lauderdale and the decrease in household size was a natural byproduct of children growing up and moving away from home. This would correlate to the growth in residents between the ages of 35 to 54 and 55 to 64. These two age brackets account for the only population growth between 1990 and 2000. on 25 to 28% 18 to 15°r 1990 Age Distribution o54 55 to 64 6% and Over 8% i 6to17 8% 12% 2000 Age Distribution 25 to 34 23% 18t 16% 35 to 54 28% 55 to 64 7% 65 and Over 9% Under 5 6 to 17 6% 11% Which of these two scenarios is more plausible? The above pie charts show the age distribution of Lauderdale in 1990 versus 2000. These graphs focus on the age composition of Lauderdale without the implications of the overall population decrease. The charts show the age distribution up of the city remained quite stable. Only the 25-34 and 35-54 age brackets showed more than a two percent (2%) population shift. These age brackets flip-flopped which furthers the conclusion that those belonging to the 25-34 year old group in 1990 remained in Lauderdale and represented the 35-54 year age bracket in the 2000 census. As is the case in communities throughout the United States, Lauderdale is slowly becoming more diverse. The authors of Lauderdale's last Comprehensive Plan predicted that "by the year 2000, Lauderdale's population could be made up of 30% "non-white" races." Since this prediction was made, that has not been the Table 3 Population by Race: 1980 1990 2000 1980 % of 1990 % of 2000 % o Total Total Total White 1,865 94% 2,260 84% 1,857 78.7% American Indian 1 0% 27 1% 11 0.5% Asian & Others 90 5% 303 11% 314 13.3% African American 9 1% 59 2% 116 4.9% Hispanic 20 1% 51 2% 61 2.6% 1 985 100% 2 700 100% 2 359 100% case. As seen in Table 3, there has only been a slight increase I Source: 1980, 1990, 2000 Census in "non-white" residents. The only population that saw a significant increase was African Americans, whose population almost doubled between 1990 and 2000, rising from 59 to 166 residents. While changes in the minority populations were small, the decrease in the overall population of Lauderdale discussed above was seen among white residents. According to the Census Bureau, the overall population decreased by 341 people from 1990 to 2000 and 403 were white. This resulted in approximately a net gain of 60 new minority residents in Lauderdale in from 1990 to 2000. As Lauderdale is a fully developed community, the projected population growth will remain quite small without major changes to the existing housing or land use. In the mid 1990s, the Metropolitan Council projected that Lauderdale's population would increase from 2,700 persons in 1990 to 2,950 by the year 2020. As evident in Tables 2 and 3, Lauderdale's population shrank between 1990 and 2000; therefore, population projections were revised by the Metropolitan Council. Currently, the Council projects 36 new residents before 2010 bringing the total from 2,364 to 2,400. Thereafter, the council anticipates 2,600 residents by 2020 and for that number to remain the same through 2030. 7 Seemingly, Lauderdale's population growth will be determined by whether the average household size increases. Lauderdale has what many consider "starter homes" and as a result Lauderdale has a large number of single person households. According to the 2000 Census, of the 1,150 households in Lauderdale, 208 (18%) households were comprised of men living alone and 247 (21.5%) households had females living alone. In total, 39.6% of Lauderdale is comprised of one person households and 35.0% are two person households. Quite simply, that means that three-fourths of Lauderdale's households have two persons or less. This number is heavily influenced by Lauderdale's rental housing as more than half of Lauderdale's housing units are comprised of one and two bedroom apartments or dormitories. With growing commute times and employment options in the downtowns of Minneapolis and St. Paul, Lauderdale remains an attractive place to live. With changes in how we work and where we work, it is yet to be seen how employment and market changes will impact an older community like Lauderdale and other first ring suburbs. N. Employment While Lauderdale is largely a residential community, local businesses employ a sizable number of people. Among those businesses are Twin Cities Die Casting, New Mech Companies, Children's Home Society, and Bolger Publications, which each employ over 100 people. Other Lauderdale employers are a mix of retail, non-profit, and service centered businesses. According to the Metropolitan Council, Lauderdale businesses employed about 700 employees in 2000. When the last Comprehensive Plan was written in 1997, the Metropolitan Council predicted that the number of employees within the City would increase to 970 by the year 2000 and to 1,700 by the year 2020. Since then, the projections were revised in light of the lack of developable land in Lauderdale. Currently, the Metropolitan Council projects total employment of 730 people by 2010, 750 people by 2020, and 800 people by 2030. A phone survey conducted in May 2007 showed that 756 people worked in Lauderdale. Bolger Publications, New Mech, and the Children's Home Society added sizable numbers of employees which made up for the loss of 125 jobs to the Goodwill closing. Table 4 shows Lauderdale's current businesses and their employees as of May 2007, including the new additions of Lauderdale Wellness Center, the Mississippi Watershed Management Organization, Boyer Motor, and Hamline AutoBody. Table 4 Employment in Lauderdale in 1997 & 2007 Employer 1997 2007 Twin City Die Castings 187 108 Bolger Publications 110 173 NewMech 100 200 Midwest Editions 47 37 Children's Home Society 30 120 JAL Amoco 18 1 Super America / Super USA 12 5 International Operating 12 10 Engineers Union Seraphim Communications 8 6 Lauderdale Hollows 7 3 Twin City Chinese Christian Church 6 6 City of Lauderdale 5 5 Nada Chair 4 3 Rapit Print 4 5 Western Remodelers Inc. 4 4 City Gable Apartments 3 2 Rosehill Investments 2 1 Cross Roads Apartments 1 2 New Employers since 1997 Boyer Motor Company 30 Hamline Auto Body 22 Jordan Products Company Lauderdale Wellness Center 7 Mac & PC Station Mississippi Watershed Management 6 Organization Paul Frank — DBA Perfection Type Recycool SignMinds Veit Disposal Systems Employers Closed since 1997 Goodwill/Easter Seal 125* Rosehill Service Station 3 Total Employment 688 756 Source: 1997 Lauderdale Survey & 2007 Phone Survey *Moved to Roseville and site is now a storm water holding pond. These employment figures currently exceed Metropolitan Council projections but the loss of one large employer would greatly impact the City's employment and tax base. The Land Use section of the Comprehensive Plan addresses the City's intentions for the Larpenteur Avenue commercial corridor. Ultimately, the future viability of Lauderdale's commercial area while be contingent on the redevelopment of commercial and residential land as opposed to new growth. SECTION 3: LAND USE Land Use Planning since 1998 Since the 1981 Comprehensive Plan, there have been several land use developments within Lauderdale. The largest of them, mentioned several times already, developed Lauderdale's remaining open parcels. These three planned unit developments (PUDs) were Brandychase Condominiums (built in 1979-80), Rosehill Townhomes (built in 1987-91) including City Gables Apartments, and the Luther Seminary Dormitories (built in 1981). Brandychase Condominiums and Luther Seminary Dormitories were developed privately and Rosehill Townhomes and City Gables Apartments were developed as a part of a City -sponsored Tax Increment Finance (TIF) district. The creation of this district also included creating a small City park and drainage pond on the property south of the development. The Park is now known as the Lauderdale Nature Area. Since the adoption of the 1998 Comprehensive Plan, the City has seen a number of developments and changes. Goodwill Industries moved its Lauderdale operation to Roseville. The land was acquired by Minnesota Department of Transportation for future improvements to Highway 280 and is currently a storm water holding area. In 2001 Children's Home Society consolidated their operations in Lauderdale and opened a new building at the intersection of Eustis, Street and Como Avenue. Also in 2001, Boyer Motor Company and Hamlin AutoBody opened their doors for business at the intersection of Highway 280 and Broadway. Previously, the University of Minnesota's Computer Center and the Lightning Transient Research Institute was located at the intersection. Over $600,000 in funding was provided by the Metropolitan Council in the form of a Livable Communities Grant to clean up hazardous waste and asbestos on the site to prepare the land for redevelopment. The priority of the 1998 Comprehensive Plan was the redevelopment of the commercial / industrial area at the intersection of TH280 and Broadway. The change from tax- exempt University of Minnesota use to privately owned businesses achieved the goal of improving the City's property tax base. The 1998 Comprehensive Plan resulted in the City's current zoning and land use maps (pages 11- 12). 10 The City of Lauderdale Existing Land Use 12 1998 Staging Plan Aside from the redevelopment of TH280 and Broadway, the 1998 Comprehensive Plan Staging Map and Plan focused on expanding businesses along Larpenteur Avenue through zoning changes and the redevelopment of open parcels. The staging plan mapped changes through 2020. The staging plan and progress are described below with the staging plan map on page 14. By the year 2005: 1. Rezone the property at 1631 Eustis Street from I-1 (Industrial) to B-1 (Community Business). 2. Redevelop the former Rosehill Dairy Store at 2436 Larpenteur Avenue as a commercial property. 3. Rezone these properties north of Larpenteur Avenue from a commercial zoning district that includes light industrial to a commercial zoning district that does not include light industrial. 4. Redevelop this former University of Minnesota property and Brownfield site to a light industrial use. Progress: 1. 1631 Eustis is still zoned I-1 for light industrial. 2. The former site of Rosehill Dairy has not been redeveloped but has new owners. 3. Light industrial is not an allowed use or conditional use for business and residential properties north of Larpenteur Avenue. 4. The former University of Minnesota property has been redeveloped. By the year 2010: 5. Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) will reconstruct Trunk Highway 280. This reconstruction will include the taking of a portion of the Goodwill/ Easter Seal site at 2543 Como Avenue as well as the possible taking of land on the north end of Walnut Street. Any land left at the north end of Walnut Street after the highway reconstruction would be developed as a park/open space. Progress: 5. Plans to reconstruct the bridge are progressing. The former Goodwill/Easter Seals site is a storm water holding pond owned by Mn/DOT. By the year 2015• 6. Rezone these properties north of Larpenteur Avenue from a residential zoning district to a commercial zoning district that does not include light industrial. 7. Rezone these properties south of Larpenteur Avenue from a residential zoning district to a commercial zoning district that does not include light industrial. 8. Redevelop the properties at 1769 and 1771 Walnut Street from vacant land to a park/open space use. Progress: 6 & 7. The property on the north side of Larpenteur Avenue from Eustis to Pleasant Street has not yet been rezoned for a commercial use. The property on the north side of Larpenteur Avenue from Malvern to Eustis Street is zoned for business use and the B -I zone does not allow industrial uses. 8. 1769 and 1771 Walnut Street were developed as single-family homes. 13 By the year 2020: 9. Redevelop the properties south of 1738 Ione Street from vacant land to a park/open space use. 10. Redevelop the properties west of Walsh Lake from vacant land to a park/open space use. Progress: 9&10. See section X regarding parks and open space plans. Map 4 August 1401 The City of Lauderdale � � W 4N F, Comprehensive plan --Staging Map 14 Land Use Planning - 2008-2020 This section encompasses both general land use policies and more specific land use policies for each land use type. General Development Policies . 1. The Comprehensive Plan will guide future development in such a way as to strengthen, enhance, and protect the City's character and natural environment. 2. The City Council will review each development proposal to ensure it is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 3. Population, household, and employment estimates will be reflected in the extent and timing of new development. 4. Projects will not begin until a proposal and design for the project has been submitted, met requirements laid out by the city planning officials, expenses guaranteed, and plans approved by city council. 5. Lauderdale will continue to seek diversity of living environments. Growth will be influenced by community input, development trends, accessibility, and need for services. 6. The City will continue to make optimal use of public land. 7. Lauderdale will coordinate planning efforts and development decisions with neighboring communities, watershed districts, and the Metropolitan Council. 8. Future development will retain the small-town character of the community. Development along the Larpenteur Avenue corridor will be done through zoning, architectural review, parking, landscaping, siting of structures, and other tools at the City's disposal. 9. To the extent possible, active living principles will be used in planning for land use changes. 10. Lauderdale will encourage development that expands the City's current revenue base. 11. The City will ensure that adequate buffers are created between the commercial and residential districts. Land Uses and Land Use Policies by Type R-1 Suburban Residential zoning allows for parks, public schools, and single-family dwellings. The R-1 district comprises most of the City's land. All lots have sewer and water service. Disbursed among the detached single family homes are duplexes and small apartments (2 to 7 units) in the R-1 district. The three completed planned unit developments (PUDs) for town homes, condominiums, and dormitories were zoned R-1. Additionally, two churches are located within the R-1 district. R-1 Land Use Policies: Allow for housing within range of economic affordability. • Review City ordinances defining allowable home occupations and revise as appropriate to address current economic, energy, and transportation issues. • There are a few legal non -conforming uses at this time, but there are no plans to change the zoning code to accommodate these uses. • Require standards for site improvements that ensure compatibility with adjacent residential areas. 15 • Require utilities to be placed underground wherever possible, both for aesthetic enhancement and improved safety. • Emphasize resident and pedestrian safety by creating a walkable city. Require planning of walkway systems in the early design stages of any new development so that residents are provided safe access to City parks and open space. Correct inconsistencies between the land use plan and the current zoning code. • Minimize storm water run-off problems by addressing issues such as setback requirements and limits on amount of impervious surface. • Address other ordinance issues, such as off- and on- street parking. R-2 Urban Residential allows for public parks, public schools and two family dwellings. R-3 Multiple Residential zoning allows for churches, multiple family dwellings, public and parochial schools, public parks, and townhouses. Currently, there are zoning inconsistencies between the 1997 Zoning Map and the zoning ordinance. The 1997 Zoning Map defines R-2 Urban Residential as the land on the southeast corner of Eustis Street and Larpenteur Avenue extending to Idaho Avenue on the south and Pleasant extended on the east. The map has no land defined as R-3 Multiple Residential as the area south of Larpenteur Avenue between trunk Highway 280 and Eustis Street were rezoned to B-1 and I-1 in the 1990's. The City applies the R-3 zoning standards to the area currently labeled R-2 on the zoning map. The City's large multi -family buildings (17 to 48 units per building) are located here. Once the correction is made, no parcels within Lauderdale will be zoned R-2. R-3 Land Use Policies The 2008 Zoning Map corrects the inconsistency between the 1997 zoning map and the current zoning code. • Promote attractive, well-maintained dwellings on functional, clearly marked roads, with adequate facilities and open space. • Emphasize resident and pedestrian safety. • Require planning of walkway systems in the early design stages of any new development so that residents are provided safe access to City parks and open space. • Allow for a variety of housing types within range of economic affordability. • Encourage a controlled mix of densities, housing types, age groups, economic levels, lot sizes, and living styles that are of appropriate scale and consistent with appropriate land use, market demands, and development standards. B-1 Community Business zoning currently allows for commercial schools, eating and drinking places, motor fuel stations, offices and banks, parking lots, personal and professional services, public buildings and retail businesses. The B-1 zoning district follows the first row of businesses and homes along Larpenteur Avenue on the north and south from TH280 to Eustis Street plus the Union Building (2417 Larpenteur Avenue) on the northeast corner of Larpenteur and Eustis. New Mech's 1633 Eustis property was zoned B-1 in the mid-1990s. The 1997 zoning map also shows that the area owned by the Children's Home Society to the southern City border is zoned B-1. 16 The City's long-term vision is to create a vibrant commercial corridor along Larpenteur Avenue that includes an appropriate mix of housing. Another City objective is to develop land use planning policies that appeal to developers and investors yet do not negatively impact current property owners. During the Comprehensive Plan visioning process, a number of methods to achieve these goals were discussed. For example, the City could revise and expand its existing B-1 zoning along Larpenteur Avenue to encourage new development. The drawback is that the B-1 zoning only allows for multi -family housing as a conditional use. It does not allow housing over commercial, townhomes, condos, or other houses uses; thereby, limiting infill options and potentially preventing the creation of a "downtown" area. Another Steering Committee discussion focused on maintaining the current mix of B-1 and R-1 zoning along Larpenteur Avenue and allow for expanded conditional uses in those districts. Some felt that this was land use planning "through the back door" as opposed to a more direct re- zoning process. This method would also require a revision of the conditional use provisions for each district. The unintended result might be the creation of new, undesirable conditional uses for the residential district north of Larpenteur Avenue. The option that appeared to give the City the most flexibility is a mixed use zoning district along Larpenteur Avenue. In the future, this zone could be expanded to include the New Mech property on down through the southern Lauderdale border if it gave the City the flexibility to create commercial or housing opportunities on the land currently owned by New Mech. Further into the future, the City may want to expand the zone to the R-3 district on the southeast corner of Larpenteur and Eustis if it allows for the development of a new or revamped community use for the apartment buildings. Another option is to create a planned unit development district for Larpenteur Avenue. This is an option the City may consider in the future if it allows for the City to exercise greater flexibility in achieving City goals and meeting the needs and desires of residents with a developer or the property owners. The following establishes some of the desirable guidelines for a mixed use development. The emphasis is on creating a vibrant, livable, walkable corridor that applies unique solutions to compensate for the small land size, heavy traffic, and difficult parking. Mixed Use Land Use Guidelines • Perform market research on the types of uses viable along Larpenteur Avenue and Eustis Street. Give priority to business that provide convenient, attractive shopping and professional services to meet the needs of local residents. • Allow a mix of residential and commercial uses to co -exist. This may occur on adjacent parcels as well as a mix of uses within the same structure. • Zoning/ordinance changes should be coordinated to prevent haphazard redevelopment. Consider planned unit developments. Use building standards that enhance and maintain a small town look. This may include: brick facades, traditional street lighting, sidewalks, etc. • Create standards for lot size and layout of buildings (freestanding, rowed). Consider options for a uniform look or theme for the area. 17 Consider alternatives for meeting parking requirements. This may include parking in the rear of buildings or shared parking. • Make the area pedestrian and bike friendly to further reduce the need for parking. Allow for adequate bike parking. Consider limiting access to city streets north of Larpenteur Avenue to curb traffic and create room for more mixed use purposes. Plan for lighting and other public improvements. Decide whether these will be the responsibility of the city or the developer/property owner. Involve residents, businesses, community groups, and other stakeholders in the planning of this district. Consider height restriction of new buildings as residents abut Larpenteur Avenue on the northern and southern side of the street. • Plan for a buffer between the commercial area and residential neighborhood. • Calculate storm and sanitary sewer capacity of the area and ensure that new development does not exceed that capacity. I-1 Industrial zoning currently allows for antennas; auto reduction and junk yards; auto sales, service, and repair; commercial recreation; manufacturing; public utility buildings; supply yards; truck terminals; wholesale business; and telecommunications towers. Industrial uses are located on the west side of Trunk Highway 280 from the northern to the southern Lauderdale border. Additionally, 1631 Eustis Street (New Mech's southern parcel) is zoned I-1. I-1 Land Use Policies • Maintain the industrial land use designation for city land on the west side of Trunk Highway 280 from the northern to the southern city border. Change the I-1 zoning at 1631 Eustis Street to business / mixed use should New Mech relocate its business from Lauderdale. Calculate storm and sanitary sewer capacity of the area and ensure that any new or expanded use does not exceed that capacity. C-1 Conservation, as found on the 1997 Zoning Map and defined by Chapter 10 of City Ordinance, includes what is commonly referred to as Lauderdale Community Park and the Lauderdale Nature Area. Since 1997, the City has purchased two lots at the intersection of Walnut and Ione Streets and four lots on the north-west corner of Walsh Lake. These last two sections of publicly owned land are not currently defined in the zoning ordinance. C-1 Land Use Policies • Create a master plan and make decisions based upon the master plan for Lauderdale Community Park and other open space. • Create connectivity through paths, trails, and walkways within Lauderdale to make the parks and open space accessible to all residents. • Invest in features for the parks and open spaces that are safe, long lasting, and visually attractive and well-maintained. Create maintenance plans for all capital improvement projects. • Delineate property lines before making improvements to the peripheries of public land. Develop strategic relationships with local entities (Mississippi Watershed Management Organization, University of Minnesota, Gibbs Farm, Falcon Heights, City of Minneapolis, City of St..Paul, community groups etc.) to create improvements to the Lauderdale Nature Area. Follow the policies and guidelines adopted through the 2008 Surface Water Management Plan. 2008-2030 Staging Plan By the year 2010: 1. Work with Mn/DOT on the Larpenteur Avenue bridge project to minimize the negative impact on Lauderdale residents and businesses. 2. Fix the incorrect zoning map designation for the R-3 multi -family housing south of Larpenteur Avenue. The zoning map should conform to the language in the zoning ordinance. 3. Establish a mixed use zoning corridor for Larpenteur Avenue from TH 280 to Carl Street on the north and from TH280 to Eustis Street on the south. 4. Establish design standards with the assistance of a design firm for Larpenteur Avenue from TH 280 to Carl Street on the north and from TH280 to Eustis Street on the south before the Mn/DOT bridge project. Preparation will allow the City to negotiate with Mn/DOT for bridge plans that coincide with the City vision and plans for Larpenteur Avenue. 5. Ensure the City's goals for pedestrian access are adopted in the Comprehensive Plan. Preparation will allow the City to negotiate with Mn/DOT for pedestrian and bike access for the new Larpenteur/East Hennepin Bridge. By the year 2015: 1. Expand the mixed use zoning corridor for Larpenteur Avenue from Carl to Pleasant Street on the north side. 2. Expand or modify the master design plan with resident and business input for expansion of the mixed use zoning area. 3. Discuss creation of a design plan for the expanded area with neighboring jurisdictions (Roseville, Falcon Heights, and St. Anthony Park). 4. Consider the relocation of City Hall to Larpenteur Avenue. Create a planned unit development for the redevelopment of City Hall and the Public Works building. By the year 2020: 1. Expand the mixed use zoning designation from Eustis Street to Carl Street along the south side of Larpenteur Avenue. 2. Expand or modify the master design plan with resident and business input for expansion of the mixed use zoning area. By the year 2025: 19 1. Expand the mixed use zoning designation for 1605, 1631,' and 1633 Eustis Street and improved vacant property. 2. Expand or modify the master design plan with resident and business input for expansion of the mixed use zoning area By the year 2030: 3. Expand the mixed use zoning designation for the remaining R-3 properties between Eustis Street and Carl Street south of Larpenteur Avenue. 4. Expand or modify the master design plan with resident and business input for expansion of the mixed use zoning area Being Created 2008 Zoning Map (after adoption) - Bonestroo Future Land Use Map and Definitions - Bonestroo Existing and Planned Land Use Tables with density calculations (2010, 2020, 2030) - Bonestroo Sewer Plan - Bonestroo Surface Water Adoption of Local Surface Water Management Plan The protection of surface water is of vital interest to the City. City engineers performed the necessary research to update the City's Local Surface Water Management Plan which replaces the 1997 surface water management plan. The Plan was completed and adopted by the Lauderdale City Council on This Plan is adopted by reference for purpose of this Comprehensive Plan. Surface Water Map and policies -Bonestroo Examples Bonestroo May Include: 1. Control flooding to minimize property loss and damage. 2. Work with the watershed districts to ensure that the city's waterways and wetlands are being adequately protected. 3. Include National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) ponds and other storm water management techniques in the city's engineering standards. 4. Prohibit direct connection of storm water systems to the City's sanitary sewer system. 5. Require restrictions on the amount of allowable hardcover to ensure adequate maintenance and control of stormwater. 6. Protected wetlands and waterways from stormwater runoff. 7. Maintain control over surface water management by continuing the City's designation as the Local Governmental Unit (LGU) for wetlands. 8. Reduce Phosphorus run-off. 9. Minimize Soil Erosion. 10. Prevent contamination of ground water and promote groundwater recharge. 11. Adequately plan a Storm Water Infrastructure Systems to minimize capital expenditures. Housing Lauderdale's Current Housing Stock As a first -ring suburb, Lauderdale's housing concerns are centered on housing condition, maintenance, size of units, property values, and rental property. Housing conditions were addressed in each of the previous Comprehensive Plans as the City saw the aggregate age of the housing stock increase without unimproved land to develop. According to Table X, 79.2% of Lauderdale's housing is 35 years or older. New homes can only be built to replace existing homes. Since 2000, two new homes were built. Older homes need ongoing upkeep and repair. There is the sense that Lauderdale residents have made noticeable improvements to their properties since the street projects began in 2000. Using building permits as an indicator of improvements, Table X reflects dollars spent by Lauderdale residents and business owners to improve existing structures.' The reinvestment in property and homes has been relatively stable over the last five years. Whether current investment levels will maintain property values and the overall appeal of the City is an ongoing question the City Council will consider in years to come. The Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee discussed research presented in Governing Magazine that evaluated the extent to which housing size factored into the overall health of a community. The article suggested that middle-aged suburbs with homes built in the mid -1950 through 1960s stagnated because the average home size was 1,100 square feet. Prior to this time, homes were larger in size, and then again starting in the 1970's, home sizes grew. In Lauderdale, the average home size is 1,163 square feet3 and homes are approximately the same age (Table X above) as those mentioned in the article. Overall, the strong correlation between size and stagnation do not appear to hold true in Lauderdale. Factors such as proximity to the University of Minnesota and other area colleges and access to the economic centers of downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul were discussed as reasons why the same stagnation did not occur Table X Lauderdale Age of HousingUnits in 2000 Year Built Lauderdale 1939 or earlier 19.9% 1940 to 1959 23.6% 1960 to 1979 35.7% 1980 to 1994 20.8% 1995 to 2000 0.00% Total 100% Source: 2000 Census 2002 95 Table X Lauderdale Value of BuildingImprovements Housing units by type: 1980 to 2000 Year # Permits Investment* 1996 62 $606,793 1997 82 $479,721 1998 86 $1,067,381 1999 96 $805,932 2000 88 $1,007,800 2001 64 $668,685 2002 95 $1,036,060 2003* 81 $889,867 2004 78 $863,322 2005 68 $890,277 2006 59 $699,530 Total 1996 - 2006 $9,015,368 Source: Annual Building Surcharge Report - Not adjusted for inflation. * 2 new homes in 2003 with a combined value of $220,000. Table X Housing units by type: 1980 to 2000 1980 1990 2000 One -Unit Detached 466 498 497 One -Unit Attached 5 52 58 2 Units 29 35 14 3 to 4 Units 11 21 55 5 or more Units 314 614 545 Total 825 1,220 1,169 S 1980, 1990, and 2000 Census ource: 1 Boyer Motor and Hamline Auto Body not included. Prices not adjusted for inflation. 2 Ehrenhalt, Alan. "The Bungalow Bind." Governing. June 2006. http://www. governing. c om/archive/2006/j un/as ses s. txt 3 Median is 1,060 square feet. One standard deviation is 429 square feet. From Ramsey County GIS database. 22 here. Attached housing continues to be the predominant type of housing unit in Lauderdale. This includes the four plus unit apartments, dormitories, town homes, and condominiums, which account for 682 of the City's total housing units (57.8% of the total housing). Detached one -unit homes account for 42.2% of Lauderdale's housing. This balance will remain until land is redeveloped into housing at a different density or commercial/industrial land is rezoned for residential use. With its proximity to the University of Minnesota and Luther Seminary, Lauderdale has more rental housing than the metro area norm. According to the Metropolitan Council "Regional Housing Snapshot,"4 over 70% of housing in the seven -county metro area is owner -occupied. As shown in Table 14 Lauderdale has 50 3 Table X Housing Inventory: 1980, 1990, and 2000 Total Housing Units 828 100% 1,222 100% 1,169 100% Owner -Occupied 437 Renter -Occupied 372 54% 564 46% 602 48.4% 51.6% 579 571 50.3% 49.7% Total Occupied Units 809 100% 1,166 100% 1,150 100% Source: 1980, 1990, and 2000 Census owner -occupied and 49.7% renter -occupied housing units. Previously, the City relied on Census data for rental property statistics and information. A computation of the licensed rental properties for 2007 showed only a minute difference in rental housing from that of the 2000 Census with 50.7 % Owner -Occupied and 49.3% Renter -Occupied housing units.5 A goal of the previous Comprehensive Plan was to adopt a rental housing ordinance to ensure that rental properties were safe for tenants and did not detract from neighborhoods. In July 2006, the City Council adopted a rental housing license program. To this regard, the City will continue to have bi-annual inspections of rental property within the City to ensure that rented property is safe and meets a minimum maintenance standard. 3 4 Regional Housing Data Snapshot: http://www.metrocouncil.orp-/metroarea/HousingSnapshot.pdf. 5 This number does not reflect rental units in Brandychase Condominiums as they were exempt from licensure. Data also does not count single family homeowners that use portions of their property as rental units. 23 Housing Cost & Sales The Metropolitan Council considers housing "affordable" if it costs 30 percent or less of the total income of a low or moderate income family. Table X Table X Average Rents 12+ unit apartments) Bedroom Size Price Range Efficiency $355-$530 1 -bedroom $510-$900 2 -bedroom $700-$1200 Source: Rental Property Managers reflects rent ranges for apartments within the City as of May 2007. Three of the four Table X ✓Ionthly gross rent including tenant- iaid utilities, affordable at 50% of irea median income. Bedroom Size Affordable Efficiency $687 1 -bedroom $736 2 -bedroom $883 Source: 2007 Metropolitan Council apartment complexes in the City have rents that are affordable at 50% of median area income as defined by the Metropolitan Council in Table X. The affordable rents and local student population continue to be attracted to Lauderdale's rental housing and the owners are generally at full occupancy. Similarly, Lauderdale is attractive to home buyers seeking a moderately priced home. Lauderdale is no different that other metro cities in regard to the rapid rise in home prices during Household Income Level Affordable Home Price 80% of area median income ($62,800) $206,800 160% of area median income ($47,100) $152,000 the last five years, but homes are generally still affordable by Metropolitan Council. Table X shows the 2007 Council affordability standards and table X shows a comparison of median home values for the Lauderdale, Falcon Heights, and St. Anthony Park. The full MLS comparison can be found on page X in the Appendix. Table X Median Home Prices: Lauderdale, Falcon Heights, St. AnthonyPark 1997 -June 2007 Lauderdale Falcon Heights St. AnthonyPark 1997 $72,250 $133,950 $158,400 1999 $112,000 $160,000 $177,950 2001 $151,000 $219,900 $242,450 2003 $170,250 $255,321 $328,750 2005 $209,900 $272,800 $369,900 June 2007 $167,900 $304,000 $387,500 Source: Multiple Listing Service$ Regional Affordable Housing Needs During the 1980s, Lauderdale encouraged the development of low- to moderate -income housing. This included 104 units at Brandychase condominiums, 42 units at Rosehill Town Homes, 84 units at City Gables Apartments, and 142 Luther Seminary Dorms units for a total of 394 new units. 6 LCA housing ownership and rent affordability limits for 2007 http://www.metrocouncil.org/services/livcon m/LCAHousingAffordabilityLimits.htm LCA housing ownership and rent affordability limits for 2007 http://www.metrocouncil.org/services/livcomm/LCAHousingAffordabilityLimits.htm 8 For the complete info — see the Appendix. 24 The Metropolitan Council has identified 35 units of new affordable housing as Lauderdale's share for 2011-2020.9 This calculation factors the projected net growth of 90 new sewered households against "Housing Adjustment Factors" such as job proximity, housing stock, and transit service. This new model of assessing housing needs attempts to create affordable housing near existing and planned transit and employment opportunity centers. Previously, the City used tax increment financing to encourage the creation of affordable housing. It is the City's intent to continue considering using tools such as TIF, tax abatement, bonding, and the zoning ordinance to meet the City's affordable housing goal. As a fully developed city, it is not within the City's control to guide available land for affordable housing. All land within the City is held by private parties and the use and reuse of land will be at the owners' discretion, so long as plans meeting City ordinances and zoning laws. The City will work with landowners redeveloping or modifying their properties in the interest of affordable housing when possible. (Need to expand on this once we finish the land use planning.) Livable Communities Program Beginning in 1995, the Lauderdale City Council elected to participate in the Livable Communities Program, which makes Lauderdale eligible for the Tax Base Revitalization, the Livable Communities Demonstration, and the Local Housing Incentive Accounts. Lauderdale has received funds from these pools to clean up the site that is now Hamline AutoBody and Boyer Motor Company and assess redevelopment options along Larpenteur Avenue. The City Council has continually renewed participation in the Livable Communities Program as the City easily meets the Council's benchmarks. Table X shows the benchmarks in effect through 2011. The City exceeds both affordability and density indexes. In fact, the City exceeds all goals except for owner mix goals. An ongoing concern is the extent to which Lauderdale exceeds the minimum density standards and the negative impact that high density may have on overall property values. (Table X not fully updated). Table X CITY INDEX BENCHMARK GOAL AFFORDABILITY Ownership 95% 68/77% The City will remain within or above the stated benchmark ranges for ownership Rental 65% 45/48% The City will remain within or above the stated benchmark ranges for rental LIFE -CYCLE Type (non -single 59% 36/41% The City will remain within or family detached) above the stated benchmark ranges for non -single family detached 9 Information in this section taken from "Summary Report: Determining Affordable Housing Need in the Twin Cities 2011-2020. Metropolitan Council. January 2006. 25 Owner/renter mix 48/52% (64-74)/(26-36)% The City will remain within or above the stated benchmark ranges for the renter component of the stated figure. DENSITY Single-family 4.0/acre 1.8-2.9/acre The City will remain within or detached above the stated benchmark ranges for single- family detached Multi -family 24.0/acre 12-15/acre The City will remain within or above the stated benchmark ranges for multi -family Lauderdale Housing Goals The overall goal of Lauderdale's housing program is to improve the quality of the housing stock and neighborhood appeal without unfairly burdening residents. The Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee addressed the City's role in improving housing in terms of "carrots" and "sticks." The Committee felt the City should provide incentives for residents to maintain their homes, and if they did not, the sticks would be more justified. Goal 1: Perform Needs Assessment Conduct housing condition survey to determine the nature and scope of home improvements needed to be an attractive home -buyers market. Use survey results to determine City's roll in maintaining or improving housing. Goal 2: Set Standards Setting property maintenance standards and adhering to a comprehensive nuisance ordinance are two tools used by cities to maintain housing standards and overall neighborhood appeal and character. The following tools are also recommended to improve the over-all quality of Lauderdale housing during the next decade. Create a housing maintenance code for single-family (non -rental) housing or expand the International Property Maintenance Code to all housing (current standard for rental property). To the extend possible, property standards should be quantifiable (length of grass, allowable percentage of peeling paint, etc.) and should include such items as removal of dilapidated buildings; no storage of junk in yards; reasonable yard maintenance; and fence maintenance and repair. Evaluate feasibility of City offering loans to low to moderate income residents to repair and maintain their homes. Similarly, offer micro -grants to off -set the costs for residents who would like to make modest improvements, like repainting, but don't have the resources. • Use the nuisance ordinances to aggressively deter the abandonment of homes. • Add sunsets to building permits. Recommended standard is for the permits to be valid for one year from date .of issuance for exterior work and two years from date of issuance for interior work. 26 • Assess impact of changing ordinances to allow for bigger homes. • Assess whether cutting permit fees as an incentive to home improvement reaps aesthetic and tax benefits that exceed the original loss in permit revenue. • Redevelop the Eustis Street /Larpenteur Avenue intersection and arrange for its maintenance and upkeep. • Implementing the Capital Improvement Plan for City improvement as dictated by financial capabilities. Goal 3: Cooperation and Community Building Well-maintained neighborhoods do not happen by accident. The City can foster both community spirit and housing maintenance through partnerships and cooperation. • Create an affordable housing mix by continued participation in the Metropolitan Council's Livable Communities Program. • Partner with Falcon Heights and St. Anthony Park for an annual clean up day. • Investigate other opportunities for cooperation with local cities and neighborhoods. • Initiate community improvement group to coordinate "Home of the Month" programs and aesthetic improvements to city property. Goal 4: Education Education is integral to building community support for campaigns designed to improve the communities housing stock. City publications (included but not limited to: newsletters, public notices, flyers, e- mails, website, and press releases) are integral to the dissemination of information related to home improvements projects and opportunities such as: o The purpose and benefit of pulling permits (building, plumbing, and mechanical) o Property information available to the public o Permit requirements o Variance requirements o Homeowners insurance o Tax assessments and levies o Disclosure laws for buyers and sellers o Home improvement grant opportunities o Home buyer assistance Historic and Cultural Preservation As Lauderdale ages as a community, it is only natural to look back on its history and assess how Lauderdale's history could and should be preserved. History may be preserved through the protection of buildings, artifacts, land, and documents and the recording of personal experiences. At present, no properties within the city are listed on the National Register of Historic Places, but there are properties that have historic significance to area residents. 27 This Comprehensive Plan addresses issues important to an aging community and among these issues are a sense of place and identity. To this end, the Plan calls for the City to assess places and items of historical significance, work to protect them, and determine how these places and items can be used to enhance the community. Historical and Cultural Preservation Objectives 1. To conserve historical resources in the community. 2. To protect architecturally significant structures of all ages within the City. 3. To showcase Lauderdale through its historic context. Historical and Cultural Preservation Policies 1. Encourage the protection of properties designated as historically and architecturally significant by the State Historical Society. 2. Determine whether the City should develop a local history organization such as a historical society or a heritage preservation commission (HPC) through the State Historic Preservation Office of the Minnesota Historical Society to guide the City in the preservation of Lauderdale's history. 3. Identify properties that possess historical or architectural significance within Lauderdale but which may not be candidates for state or federal designation. 4. Support and encourage community efforts to protect properties and artifacts that have historic or architectural significance. 5. Support and encourage area -wide efforts to protect properties and artifacts that have historic or architectural significance in the broader "Rosehill" community. Examples of ways for the City to gather and promote Lauderdale's history: Create a heritage trail similar to Roseville's or work with them to create a Lauderdale or Rosehill expansion. • Create an annual event to celebrate the City's day of incorporation. • Ask residents to bring historic artifacts or photos to the City for duplication or preservation. Gather copies of the three Lauderdale History books for review by the public. Solar Access State legislation enacted in 1978 requires local comprehensive plans to address solar access protection. The law requires that communities make efforts to ensure that direct sunlight access to solar panels is,not subjected to shading from nearby trees, buildings or other structures. The City acknowledges the importance of maintaining solar access for residents who want to make use of this energy source. The City will assist homeowners in finding information pertaining to design criteria for solar access and consistent with State Statutes, the city will consider variances in circumstances where hardships are imposed because of the inability of structures to obtain :, direct sunlight for solar energy systems because of existing zoning and subdivision ordinance provisions. Aggregate Resource Protection No aggregate resources have been identified within the City of Lauderdale. Critical Area Plan Lauderdale is not located within the Mississippi River Critical Area. 29 LAUDERDALE COUNCIL ACTION FORM TYPE OF REQUEST Consent ❑ Action Cl Resolution ❑ Information ❑ Work session X MEETING DATE Tuesday, September 25, 2007 AGENDA NUMBER 13B DESCRIPTI I BACKGROUND OR PAST COUNCIL ACTION The MCES monitors metro area cities flow from sanitary sewers to assess the impact on the system. During major storm events inflow from storm water puts a strain on the sanitary sewer system. To remedy this issue, MCES began a surcharge program assessing communities for excessive flow. The attached memorandum and report provide additional information for the discussion MOTION BY STAFF ACTION OPTIONS STAFF RECOMMENDATION SECOND Work Session Memo To: City Council From: Brian W. Heck, City Administratoll CC: Staff Date: September 20, 2007 Re: Inflow and Infiltration Discussion We are working diligently to keep up to date with the requirements for the Inflow and Infiltration (I & 1) program. Last year the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) assessed Lauderdale a surcharge for exceeding our daily flow during a couple storm events. The MCES is assessing a surcharge to those cities that have excessive flow in the sanitary sewer system to address capacity issues and to encourage cities to develop and implement ways to reduce excess flow. We sent a letter to MCES outlining Lauderdale's proposal for reducing our I & I and MCES accepted our proposal. In short, our proposal called for evaluating our existing system for possible leaks and seepage and then, if discovered, to take the necessary steps to seal, line, or replace the faulty structure. We stated that this phase is for completion in 2007. The second phase of the plan states Lauderdale will improve our existing ordinance on I & I and we will conduct inspections of all housing to identify and remediate any illegal connections to the sanitary sewer. Attached is Lauderdale's report to MCES for 2007 activities along with costs so far and our estimate for costs in 2008. The discussion tonight will focus on the broad parameters for an updated ordinance. Issues to consider: 1) possible incentive plan for remediation of illegal connections, 2) due process and appeals, 3) potential penalties for non-compliance, 4) in-house or contract inspectors. Appendix B: Ill Project and Cost Eligibility Form Application for 2008 Credit Q Application for 2009 Rebate This form should be completed by communities requesting a credit for work to be done in 2008 checking the box "Application for Credit". Communities requesting a rebate of eligible expenses should check the box, "Application for Rebate". When approved credits exceed the surcharge amount, the surcharge bill from MCES will be eliminated. Send completed form(s) to: Mail: Assistant Manager, Engineering Planning Fax: Attn: Assistant Manager, Engineering 390 N.. Robert Street Planning St. Paul, MN 55101 (651) 602-1030 Community: Lky SSC ZDkL 2008111 Work (planned or for rebate the actual expenditures): $ a) Public Facility Work: Attach detailed description of the 2008 Ill reduction work. Itemize the type of work to be completed in 2008 (or for a rebate the work actually completed in 2008) on the public sanitary sewer system, and the estimated or actual costs.. MCES may request additional documents to verify actual or planned expenditures. Include the percent of each project that is related to Ill mitigation. Summary of Costs: b) Private Property Work: For Credit, attach a detailed description of the Community's Inspection program for broken service laterals and illegal connections of sump pumps or passive drain tile(s). Or for a rebate of prior -year expenditures, attach a detailed list itemizing the location and repairs made on private properties within the community. Sump pump disconnections: $150 per dwelling = $ Foundation drain disconnections: $3,000 per building = $ Rain leader disconnections: $100 per single family dwelling = $ Rain leader disconnections: $3,000 per commercial dwelling= $ Service lateral repairs: $5,000 per repair Describe Other Work: 624�5f--- Rs'1 Total estimated for 2008 (or for rebate actual computed for 2008)': $ City or Township Official/Title: Date Signed: Phone #: Form: 11 Project_2008 17 Last update: 7!5107 Memorandum 4 eonestroo 2335 Highway 36 W To: Brian Heck Project: MCES 1/1 Date: 9/11/07 St Paul, MN 55113 From: Chuck Janski Client: City Of Lauderdale Tel 651.636.4600 Fax 651-636.1311 Re: Report for MCES 20081/1 Surcharge File No: 532-07000 wwwbonestroo.com Remarks: Attached is a spreadsheet listing a brief description of the effort and cost of the 1/1 identification work completed in 2007 and the work anticipated for 2008. In 2007, all of the 1/1 identification effort was completed by the City Staff or the City Engineer under direction from the City Staff: • The City engineer reviewed the MCES flow data to develop art understanding of the flow patterns and the type of rainfall response within the sanitary sewer system. • The City Staff completed inspection of the manholes on the sanitary sewer system and identified a number of manholes that are potential sources of 1/1 through leaking in the adjustment ring area or leaking in the lower barrel area • During a rental property inspection, a sump pump connection was identified and removed from the system. In 2008 it is anticipated that the investigation process will focus more directly on potential private property sources with a review of the City Ordinance and the initiation of a sump pump inspection process. The attached spreadsheet identifies several specific tasks with projected costs that may be anticipated. There are several assumptions in this listing that will be further defined as the process evolves. City of Lauderdale MCES Ill Surcharge Report of Eligible Costs September 11,2007 Proposed MCES Surcharge $21,700 per year for 5 years Date Location/ Work Completed Unit Costs Total Costs Eligible Costs Summer 2007 Inspections of Sanitary Sewer Manholes 27,914.54 27,914.54 by City Staff (640 hours total) Wages & Benefits - Employee 1 13,413.64 Wages & Benefits - Employee 2 14,500.90 Sump Pump Disconnection - One Unit 150.00 Engineering Assistance 1,382.00 1,382.00 Total 2007 Expenses $ 29,446.54 Planned 2008 Program Rehabilitation of Identified MH Problems (est. 10 MH) 10,000..00 10,000.00 Investigate Private Property Sources Review City Ordinance Initiate building inspections (594 units total) Staff effort - estimated at $201 unit for contacts Contractor effort - estimated at $50 per unit to complete inspection and document findings Disconnection of sump pumps Estimated 20 units at $500 41,580.00 41,580.00 11,880.00 29,700.00 10,000.00 31000.00 10,000.00 Engineering Assistance 1,500.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 Total Projected 2008 Expenses 63,080.00 $ 56,080.00 LAUDERDALE COUNCIL ACTION FORM TYPE OF REQUEST Consent ❑ Action ❑ Resolution ❑ Information ❑ Work session X MEETING DATE Tuesday, September 25, 2007 AGENDA NUMBER 13 C DESCRIPTION Discuss process and timing for staff evaluations BACKGROUND OWYAST COUNCIVACTION I In the past, the City Administrator conducted and completed staff evaluations and compensation recommendations were made based on these evaluations. The contract changed last year granting a regular increase for union employees based on the CPI. Non -Union staff — Assistant to the City Administrator and City Administrator — is evaluated and compensation based on performance. I would like to have discussion as to how the Council would like to approach staff evaluations for all staff — including the Administrator and potential increases for non-union staff. The Administrator evaluation and increase occurred during a council meeting and involved all council members with discussion on increase as well. OPTIONS 1. Keep system the same. Whole Council evaluates Administrator and Administrator evaluates and recommends increase for staff 2. Administrator evaluates and recommends increase for staff; committee of council evaluates Administrator and recommends to full council. 3. Council committee and administrator evaluate and recommend to full council 4. Other options STAFF RECOMMENDATION The administrator recommends the council consider option three. Form a Personnel Committee to work with the Administrator in conducting staff and Administrator evaluations and work with the Administrator in possible increases for non-union staff. MOTION BY STAFF ACTION SECOND