Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packets - 1999/06/07
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW WORK SESSION AGENDA June 7199 b• •00p.m. Items Discussed Per Consensus 1. Presentation by David Piggott, Executive Director of Metro East Development Partnership, regarding MEDP's 1999 strategic plan 2. Council Talk Session A. Reports B. Agenda format C. Additional retreat with Carl Neu 3. Police Chief interview schedule 4. Review of Minnegasco Franchise and City Rights of Way Ordinance 5. Billboard Variance Options 6. Review of Request for Proposals for City Engineering 7. Further Discussion of Tax Increment Financing 8. Review of Streets Policies Recommendations and Options (Bring copy of previously distributed Streets Committee Report.) 9. Discussion regarding Development Review request for a four-plex on vacant land, 7623-7629 Woodlawn Drive 10. Preliminary Internet Survey Results 11. Discussion regarding proposed Ordinance 628, an Ordinance amending Chapter 1001 of the Mounds View Building Code pertaining to Contractor's licenses 12. Park and Recreation Commission Appointments 13. Lakeside Park- Spring Lake Park - Lions Planning Committee C:\JOANMAGENDAS\CC\6-07-99.WS June 3, 1999 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator Re: June 7, 1999 City Council Work Session I hope everyone had a good Memorial Weekend. For those who didn't know, long time resident Bill Frits passed away last week. Bill is remembered for attending many council meetings and commenting on council issues. His wife Alice has been a long time election judge for the city. We sent condolences on behalf of the city. Here's what we have for Monday's work session: Item 1: Metro East Development Partnership, David Piggott: We will have a brief presentation from Mr. Piggott. Mounds View is a member of this organization which attempts to promote development in the east metro area. We have not been very active, which may have led to this presentation. Item 2: Council Session Talk: This is a follow up to the Council's discussion at your May 3 work session. Mayor Coughlin and Council member Quick have both talked to me about considering additional retreat or goal sessions as a follow up to the two held this spring. In anticipation of this, staff contacting Carl Neu again, and Dennis Cheesebrow, a consultant the Mayor has had contact with. If there is interest in pursuing additional sessions, staff can certainly follow up on that again. Item 3: Council Agenda Format: This item refers to some discussion about whether an additional agenda item should be placed at the start of each agenda where the council approves the agenda. In essence, this would also provide the opportunity to add or delete items anyone would have. I have seen this before and it can be helpful. If the council approves, we will add it. Item 4: Franchise Agreement and Right of Way Ordinance: This is a follow up to the Minnegasco request for utility approval in the city. Bob Long will be present to review the particulars of the agreement, and we should spend some time talking about the significance of this issues and its impact on city right of ways. I have received considerable interest from NSP on this, which opposes the granting of franchise rights to Minnegasco. They intend on being at the meeting and will ask the Mayor for permission to speak. I anticipate receiving a letter from them on their position which may have gotten into your packet. Item 5: Billboard Variance Options: Rick has put together a memo reviewing the billboard situation and the Planning Commission's action of last week. Any additional council direction would be welcome. Item 6: RFPs for City Engineering: Mike has put together options for council consideration on this item and will review them with the council on Monday. Council interest in sitting in on interviews will be ask for. Item 7: TIF Discussion: As a follow up to the last tif discussion, I ask Rick to put together options which essentially run the gamut of all of planning options. Perhaps that will help in coalescing council opinions on the future use of tif. Council members may want to bring the spreadsheet information given out at the last discussion. We have inclosed some of the tax bill just passed for related impacts on tif as well. Item 8: Streets Policies Recommendations and Options: The council has not discussed the specifics of the recommended changes to existing streets policies. The resolution accepting the report calls for the council to hold a couple of public hearings on the options. The council may also want to direct staff to draft up the specific changes to existing policies, resolutions and ordinances that would need to be done to make the recommended changes. I have actually asked Mike to begin this anyway in preparation for future action. I inadvertently forgot to have the council set the public hearings at the May 24 meeting, meaning that in order to have two hearings, the second hearing would have to come at the July 12 meeting, thereby exceeding the time limits of the resolution. I can make this known at the June 14 meeting for residents anticipating these hearings, and will ask the council to grant this exception from the resolution. The council may want to bring its reports to the meeting to discuss the merits of the recommendations as well. Item 9: 7623-7629 Woodlawn Drive Development Review: See staff memo regarding this item. Item 10: Preliminary Internet Survey Results: Staff did a little work attempting to determine the community's use of the internet. Jim Ericson's memo reviews the results. This is not the same surveying question considered by the council earlier, which is still being worked on. Item 11: Discussion re: Ordinance 628 Amendments: Council is aware of this issue and staff can brief Monday night. Item 12: Parks and Recreation Commission Appointments: Cari has enclosed information about the status of Park and Recreation Commission terms for the council. We have had one application to date. Attendance from commissioners has not been real good of late. One note, Frank Silvis is back and doing fine after his heart attack. He stopped in City Hall yesterday like nothing had happened. He looked great. Anyway, the reason for putting this on the agenda is to simply give it some air time to help encourage applicants, let the existing commission members know that efforts are being taken to fill the board up, and to let existing applicants know that it is moving. Item 13: Lakeside Park Improvements Committee: Last year the City Council agreed to allowing the name"Lions"to be incorporated into the park's name. The interest in this came much from the Spring Lake Park City Council who in the past relied heavily on their Lions club for funding park improvements. That stopped at some point, only to restart with Mounds View's okaying of this change. The Spring Lake Park City Council is now being approached by the Lions for approval of several park improvements funded by the Lions, and since we share the park responsibilities with Spring Lake Park, they have asked us to participate in a committee to review those improvements. Specifically, Spring Lake Park is suggesting a committee of two SLP council members, two Mounds View council members and a Lions rep, along with our department head. We can discuss the council's interest in this Monday. The council members attending the League conference can also meet directly with their council, as we did last year, and review this an other common interests. In other news,with summer here we are working around vacation times that have been saved up. Bruce has been gone and therefore I did not put the YMCA contract on the agenda. It will be on the June 21 agenda. Roger Stigney did call with questions and I think Bruce will be able to answer them better than me. Still waiting to hear from other council members. Still no problems,not one, with the theater opening. Council coming to city hall will already see that parking is easier if done at the MVCC. The realignment project is going fine. The new phones are here and we are all learning how they work. Call Cari if you have any questions about use. I put in your boxes correspondence with Donna Meyer regarding a petition for stop sign at Sherwood and Fairchild. I recognize the concern,but just can justify doing this one. The council may feel differently and want to overrule. I intend to talk with her prior to the meeting on Monday. In an odd note, we found out that Charlie Hall's attorney involved in the Mermaid project drowned recently after falling out of a boat. You may remember Chris Berndt attending one of our meetings last winter. That's it for now, have a good weekend and see you on Monday. Item No. 0 Type of Business: WS WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council From: Cari Schmidt Item Title/Subject: Council Talk Session -Carl Neu Date of Report: June 3, 1999 At the request of the Mayor I contacted Carl Neu about potentially coming back to do a Budget workshop with the Council. His schedule is such that he cannot get back to Minnesota until June 25-26th. He could do a weekday afternoon and evening session. In July, he will be coming back on the 22nd-24th for meetings with Eagan, Delano and Mahtomedi. He could piggyback the trip if the Council could do a weekday afternoon and evening. His schedule is filling up rapidly, and requested to be informed as soon as possible if you want him to come out. I I ,1 I • Vi Item No. Type of Business: WS WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council From: Cari Schmidt Item Title/Subject: Police Chief Interviews Date of Report: June 3, 1999 The Police Civil Service Commission will submit their 3 final candidates to the City Council for interviews. With the League conference and vacation schedules to contend with, finding a t' common time now would make planning this event much easier. To save money we should interview on a Monday &/or Tuesday so that the candidates can fly in on the weekend (cheaper fares). The 2 sets of days that would work the best are the 14th and 15th and the 21st and 22nd. After speaking with most of you, your availability is as follows: • PM Monday 14 AM Tuesday 15 PM Monday 21 AM Tuesday 22 Dan.Coughlin ok ok ok ok Lynne ok ok no no Thomason Gary Quick Rob Marty ok ok ok ok Roger Stigney ok ok ok ok If everyone is available on Monday the 14th, the ideal interview times would be 3:30, 4:30 and 5:30. Please let me know if Monday the 14th works for you or if another day would be better. '.. 06-03-99 08:19 From-KENNEDY i GRAVEN +6123378310 T-282 P.02/07 F-116 ORDINANCE NO C1TY OF MOUNDS VIEW,RAMSEY COUNTY An ordinance griming Reliant energy Minnegasco, a.nanwai gas utility, a division of Reliant Resources Ccxp naion, Delaware corporation, its successors and assigns, a nonexclusive franchise to construct,operate,repair and maintain facllides and equipment for rhe transTortarion, distribution,manufacture and sale of gas errry for public and private use and to use the Public Ways and Public Ground of the City of Mounds View, Minnesota for such purposes; and prescribing certain terms and conditions thereof. THE CITY COUNCIL OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this Ordinance,the following terms'hail mean: 1.1. City,City City Cleric. These terms mean respectively,the City of Mounds View,the Council of the Qty of Mounts View,and the Clea'of the City of Mounds s View. 12. City Utility System. Facilities used for providing public utility service owned or operated by the City or agency thereof,including sewer,storm sewer and water service,street lighting and traffic signal systems but excluding Facilities for providing hearing or other forms of energy. 1.3. Commission. A lvftnnesotia Public Utilities Comlmi%ioxn, or any successor, agency ar agencies,including an agency of the federal govemtretu that preempts all or part of the authority to regulate gas retail rates now vested in the Commission. 1.4. Company. Reliant Energy Minnegasco,a division of Reliant Energy Resources Ccuporano n,its successors and assigns, including success= of those portions of the Company that contraire any part or parts or the Gas Facilities subject to this franchise. 1.5. Effective loan. 'Dr date on which the ordinance becomes effective under Section 2? 1.6. Gas. Natural gas,manufactured gas,mixture of natural gas and manufacuued gas or oder forms of gas energy. 1.7. Gas Facilities or Facilities. Gas transmission and distribution pipes,mains,lades,dims,fixaues, and necessary facilities,equipment and appurtimmom owned,operated or otherwise used byte Company for the purpose of providing gas energy for public use. 1.8. Non-Betterment Costs. Costs incurred by the Company fivm relocation,removal or rearrangement of Gas Facilities that oro nes result in an improvement to the Facilities. 1.9. Notice. A writing served by die party or parties on another party or pares. Notice to Company must be mailed or personally delivered to: Reliant Energy Minnegasco V.P.Marketing&Customer Services 800 LaSalle Avenue Minneapolis,MN 55402 IMS-162951 MU210.14 06-03-98 09:19 From-KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 T-282 P.03/07 F-116 Notice to the City must be mailed to: City of Mounds View City Cleric 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View,MN 55112-1499 1.10. Public Way. A street,alley,or other public right-of-way within the City. 1.11. Pubhc Ground Land owned or otherwise colied by the City for park,open space or similar Pubes PoPose. SECTION 2. FRANCHISE. 2.1. Grant of Franchise. The City hereby grants to the Company,until(concurrent with expiration date of NSP gas franchise),the right to upon,manufacture,ttanspot,distribute and sell gas for public and private use in the City. This right includes the provision of Gas that is 0)manufacaued by the Company or its affiliates and delivered by the Company, (ii)purchased and delivered by die Company or (iii) purchased from another sots by the retail customer and delivered by the Company. For these purposes,the Company may 0311SMICL operate,repair and maintain Gas Facilities in,on,over,under and across the Public Way and Public Ground of the City,subject to further er provisions of this sed nance,zoning ordinances,or other applicable ordinance.,,including Permit pis,as they may be enacted or amended from time to time. 2.2 at_Nie Date_Written Aso •r . This franchise shall be in throe and effect from and after its passage and publication as requited by law,and its acceptance by the Company in writing filed with the City Clerk within 60 days after publication. 2.3. Nonexclusive Franchise. This is not an exclusive franchise. 2.4. paradnn; Publication Expense. The expense of _ publication of this ordinance gha11 be paid by rhe Company. 2.5. Default. lithe Company is in default in the performance of any material pats of this franchise for rote than 60 days,unless weather conditions or remedial efforts warrant a longer time,after receiving Notice from the City of such default, dr City Council may, by ordinance, terminate all rights granted hereunder to the Company.The Notice of r ef1nlr shall be in writing and shall specify the provisions of this franchise under which the default is claimed and state the basis therefor Such Notice shall be served on the Company by Personally delivering the Notice to an officer trieteot at its p incipal place of business in Minnesota, 2.6. Notice and Cure, It the Company is in default as to any par;of this franchise,the City may,atter Notice to the Company and the failure of the Company to cure the default within a reasonable time,take such action as may be necessary to abate thie condition unused by the default, Company agrees to reimburse the City for all its reasonable costs incurred in connection with the default. 2.7. Contest of Default. If the City or Company asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the ceanplainuhg party must notify the other party in writing of the default acid the desired remedy. Representatives of the potties must promptly mess and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within thirty(30)days after service of the nonce, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The part's will share the fees and expenses JMS•162951 MU210-14 06-03-99 09:20 From-KENNEDY 8 GRAVEN +6123379310 T-282 P.04/07 F-116 of the mediator equally. If a mediator is not used or if the partes are unable to resolve the dispute within thirty(30) days after first meeting with the n diaior,either party may commence an action in District Cowl to interpret and enforce this franchise or for such other relief as may be permitted by law. 2.8. Continuation of Franchise. if this City and the Company are unable to agree on the terms of a new franchise by the time this franchise expires,this frarx a will remain in effect until a new franchise is agreed upon,or until 90 days after the City or the Company serves written Notice to the other party of their intention to allow the firanchi,e to expire; provided,however,that if the City is imposing franchise fees at the time of such noun,such fees will continue on the same terms and conditions until the new franchise is agreed upon. SECTION 3. CONDITIONS OF USE. 3.1. Use of Public Ways and Public Ground. Gas Facilities roust be located,constructed,installed, operated and maintained so as not to interfere with a City Utility System or with the safety and convenience of tri denary travel along and over Public Ways or with the health and safety of the inhabitants of the City. Gas Facilities must be located on Public Ways and Public Grounds as determined by the City. The Companys correction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance and location of Gas Facilities is subject to enter ordinances and regulations of the City consistent with autlxxity granted the City to manage its Public Ways and Public Grounds under state and federal law. 32 Field Location_ Upon request by the City,the Company must provide field locations for any of rb Gas Facilities within the period of time required by Minnesota State Statute 216D. 33. Permit Required. The Company may not open or disturb the space of any Public Way or Public Ground without first having otxained a permit from the City,for which the City may impose a reasonable fee. The permit conditions imposed on the Company may not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work The Company may,however,open and disturb the surface of any Public Way or Public Ground without a prima of(i)an emergency exists requiting the immediate repair of Gas Facilities and(u)the Company gives notice to the City before,if possible,commencement of the emergency repair.Within two business days after commencing the repair,fie Company must apply for any requited permits and pay the requited fees. 3.4. Company Protection of Gas Facilities. The Company must rake reasonable mr.. sues to prevent the Gas Facilities from causing damage to persons or property. The Company must take reasonable measures to protect the Gas Facilities from damage that could be inflicted on the Facilities by Fleming,property or tine elements. The Company and the City will comply with all applicable laws and codes when performing work near the Gas Facilities. lit City does not waive any of its defenses of immunity or limitation,on liability under Minnesota Statutes,Chi 466. JMs-162951 MU31O.14 06-03-99 09:21 From-KENNEDY i GRAVEN +6123379310 T-282 P.05/07 F-116 3.5. Relocation of Facilities in Public Ways. The Company shall promptly and at its own expense, with due regard for seasonal waiting conditions, permanently remove and relocate its Facilities in the Public Ways when it is nec sary to prevent interference,and not merely for the convenience of the City,in connection wit:(1)a present or fire=local government use of the Public Way fora public project,including a City Utility System;(2)the public health or safety;or(3)the safety and convenience of travel over the Public Ways. If such relocation is done without an;ge:anenr first being made as to who shall pay the relocation cost,the Company's relocation of the Facilities shall not be considered a waiver of any right to be reimbursed for the relocation cost If the Company claims that it should be reimbursed for a relocation cost,it shall not,the City within thirty(30)days of receipt of such order. 3.6. Relocation of Facilities in Public Gr>orad. The Ciry may require the Company to relocate Facilities within or remove Faciliries from Public Ground upon a finding by the City that the Facilities have become or will become a substantial impairment of the public use or enjoyment of current or planned.use of the Public Ground, The relocation or removal will be at the Companys expense when the City properly exercises its police power. The Company does nor waive its rights undo(as existing easement or prescriptive right in the Public Ground. The City will nor require the removal of abandoned t -gas raw Facilities in Public Ground, ;mires those Facilites have be x*ne or will become a substantial impairment of the public use or enjoyment of the Public Ground. 3.7. Sneer Improvenrnty,Paving or Res rrfacing. The City shall give the Company reasonable rotten Notice of plans for(timet improvements where paving or resurfacing()fa permanent nature is involved. The Notice shall contain the nature and character of the improvements,the streets upon which the improvemenrs are to be made,the went of the improvements and the time when the City will start the work,and,if more than ane sneer is involved,the ostler in which this work is to proceed. The Notice shall be given to the Company a sufficient length oftime,considering seasonal working condirions,in advance oldie act commencrment of the work to permit the Company to make any addition,,alterations or repairs to us Facilities the Company deems may. Sf171'IC)N 4.FRANCHISF FFF 4.1. Form During the term of the franchise hereby granted, and in addition to permit fees being imposed or that the City has a right to impose,the Cry may charge the Company a franchise fee. The fee may be (i)a percentage of gross revenues received by the Company for its operations within the City,or(ii)a flat fee per customer based on metered service m serail cuscarrrers within the City or on some other similar bates,or(in)a tee based on units of enemy delivered to any rlacs of retail customxls within the corporate limits of the City. hie formula for a franchise fee based on units of energy delivered may incorporate both comnrdity and demand units. The method of imposing the franchise fee,the percentage of revenue rare,or the flat rare on the per unit rate may differ for each customer class or combine the methods described in(i)—(iii)above in assessing tie fee. The City shall sok to use a formula that provides a sable and predictable amount of fees,without placing the Company at a ourpe;irive disadvarrage. if the Company claims that the City-required fee formula is disairninarory or otherwise places the Company at a corrtpeti ve disadvantage, the Company shall provide a formula that will produce a substantially similar fee amount to the City and reimburse the City's reasonable fees and costs in reviewing the formula. The City will attempt to accommodate the Company but is udder no franchise obligation to adopt the Company-proposed franchise fee formula. 42 Separate Ordinance. 'Ire franchise fee shall be imposed by xparac ordinance duly adopred by tie City Council,which ordinance shall not be adopted until at least 60 days after written notice enclosing such proposed ordnance has been served upar the Company by coed mail.The fee shall not become effective until IMS-1629i1 Mu21u-14 06-03-99 09:21 From-KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 T-262 P.06/07 F-116 at least 60 days after written notice enclosing such adopted ordinance has been served upon the Company by coed mail. 43 Condition of Fee. The separate ordinance imposing the fee shall not be effective against the Comp<rny unless it lawfully imposes a fee or tax of the same or substantially similar amount on the sale of gas mem, within the City by any other gas energy supplier, provided that, as to such supplier, the City has the a>thahry to require a franchise fee or impose a rix. 44 Collection of Fee. The lianchise tee shall be payable not less than quanedy during complete billing months of the penal for which payment is to be made.The franchise fee formula may be changed from time to time;however,the change shall meet the same notice requirements and the fee may not be changed rim often than annually. Such fee shall not exceed any amount which the Company may legally chi to as customers prior to payment to the City. Such fee is subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncolleaibles and customer refunds inctuzecl by the Company. The Company agrees to make available for inspection by the City at reasonable times all records necessary to audit the Cempanys determination of the franchise fee payments. SECTION 5, INDEMN ICATION. 5.1 Tenn,, The Company shall defend,indemnify and hold harmless the City from all liability or claims of liability for bodily injury Of death to persons,or for property damage,in which the claim: 5.1.1. Alleges a negligent or otherwise wrongful act or omission of the Company or its employee, agent or independent contactor in installing,maintaining,operating or repairing the Company's Facilities; and alleges that the City is liable,withour alleging any independent negligent or otherwise wrongful,act or omission on the pan of the City;or 5.1.2. Is based on the City's negligent or otherwise wrongful act or omission in issuing a permit or in failing to properly or adequately inspect or enforce compliance with a term,condition,or purpose of the permit granted to rhe Company. 5.2 Litigation. If a suit is brought against the City under circumstances where the agteent in this Section S to indemnify applies,the Company at its sole cost and expense will defend the City in such suit if Notice thereof is even to the Company within a reasonable period. Notice by the City of a claim or action promptly given to ti>e Company within a period wherein the Company is not prejudiced by the lack of notice,constitutes a reasonable period The City shall not be entitled to reimbursement for its costs incurred prior to notification of the Company of the claims or actions. The Company will thereafter have control of the litigation,but the Company may not settle such litigation without the consent of the City,which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not as to third parties a waiver of any defense or unity otherwise available to the City;or to dna Company. In defending any action on behalf of the City,the Company shall have available to it every defense or immunity that the City could assert in its own behalf SECTION 6. LIMITATIONS ON APPLICABILITY. This Ordinance constitutes a franchise agreement between the City and the Company. No provision of this ftanchise intoes to the benefit of any third person,including the public at large,so as to cxsisdture any such person as a third-party benefrciaty of the agreement or of any one or mote of the terms hereof,or otherwise give rise to any cause of action for any person nota party hereto. IMS-142951 MU210•14 06-03-99 09:22 From-KENNEDY i GRAVEN +6123379310 T-262 P.07/07 F-116 SECTION 7 ASSIGNMENT. The Crwmpany,upon nonce to the City shall have the right and authority to assign all rights conferred upon it by this franchise to any person. The assignee of such rights,by accepting such assignment,shall become subject to the terms and provisions of this franchise. SECTION 8. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Any change in the form of government of the City shall nor affect the validity of this franchise. Any governmental unit sic eedilg the City shall,without the consent of the Company,automatically%lazed to all or the rights and obligations of the City provided in this franchise. SECTION 9. SEVERABILITY. If any portion of this franchise is found to he invalid for any reason what ver,the validity of the rest of this franchise shall not be affected. SECTION 10. PREVIOUS FRANCHISE SUPERSEDED. This franchise supersedes and replaces previous franchises granted to the Company or its predecessois. SECTION 11 AMENDMENTS. This otdinance may he arnendo3 at any time by the City. An amendatory ordinance becomes effective upon the filing of the Company's written consent thereto. Paced and approved , 19 Mayor of the City of Mounds view,Minnesota ATTEST: City Cleric of Mq 1g.Viewv Minnrccia _ •--Q . This redlined draft generated byCom areRite(TM)-The Inst Redlincr shows the Th , F ( ) � , differences between - original document : L:IDMSUMS10162951.03 and revised document: C:IWINDOWSITEMP10162951.04 CompareRite found 24 change(s) in the text Deletions appear as Overstrike text Additiotis appear as BoId+Dbl Underline text JMS-162951 Mum-I4 JUN-03-99 THU 09:44 AM NSP FAX NO. 7793139 P. 02 1#1 Northern States Power Company RSP Gas Utility 1700 E County Road E White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110-4658 June 3, 1999 Dear Mayor and City Council Members, On behalf of Northern States Power Company, this letter is to clearly state our position on the request for franchise from Reliant Energy Minnegasco. NSP has been and will continue to be a strong corporate partner in the Mounds View area and we ask to continue as your service provider of choice for reliable electricity and natural gas. First and foremost, adding a second distribution and pipeline system offers no real financial advantage for residential customers in Mounds View. With no large areas of undeveloped land remaining in Mounds View, adding a natural gas pipeline system that parallels NSP's existing pipeline makes no sense. With only a few acres of undeveloped . land left in your city, the effort and indirect costs of adding a second gas utility is impractical. Secondly, a decision to allow a second natural gas distributor in Mounds View results in the unnecessary and complex installation of a second pipeline system. Not only does this activity involve roadway/traffic disruption in our community, more importantly it creates the potential for confusion and miscommunication among area agencies whose responsibility it is to streamline emergency response procedures in the event of a utility incident. For decades, NSP has been your community's energy expert by delivering reliable, cost- efficient natural gas and electric service to Mounds View area residents and businesses. As a local business headquartered in the Twin Cities, NSP has invested largely in this area to provide the level of service we expect. NSP is your primary energy resource, offering additional skills, flexibility and energy-related products and services. NSP is well positioned to serve Mounds View in all of its future economic development needs. In addition, NSP donates hours of training to area schools and fire departments regarding utility safety. We recommend denial of the request for a second franchise in the incorporated City of Mounds View at this time. We feel strongly that NSP should remain your area's energy provider of choice and continue with its quality customer service, reliability and community stewardship. Sincerely, ` val vti ctietal ohn Theis, Community Relations Manager Michael Mayerchak, Key Accounts Representative 06-03-99 14:23 From-KENNEDY A GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.02/20 F-153 ORDINANCE NO. CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING A FRANCHISE FEE ON RELIANT ENERGY MINNEGASCO NATURAL GAS OPERATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City of Mounds View Municipal Code Appendix D is hereby amended to include reference to the following Special Ordinance No. Subdivision 1. Purpose. The Mounds View City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide natural gas and electric services within the City of Mounds View. a. Pursuant to City Ordinance No. 517 and Ordinance No. 518, which are the Franchise Agreements ("Franchise Agreements")between the City of Mounds View (the "City") and Northern States Power Company(the "Company"), a franchise fee of not more than four(4)percent of the Northern States Power Company's ("NSP") gross operating revenues may be imposed by the City at any time during the 20 year term of the Franchise. The franchise fee is paid as full compensation for the rights to transmit and furnish electric energy for light,heat, power and import, transport, sell and distribute natural gas for heating, illuminating and other purposes as outlined in Section 2 of Ordinance Nos. 517 and 518. b. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 605 effective December 13, 1997,the City imposed a franchise fee under the electric and natural gas Franchise Agreements in the amount of two and one-half(2.5)percent of NSF s gross revenues, as defined in Section 4.2 of the Franchise Agreements, subject to a sunset on December 31, 1998. c. Pursuant to City Ordinance No. 625, a Franchise Agreement between the City and Reliant Energy Minnegasco ("Minnegasco"), the City has the right to impose a franchise fee on Minnegasco in amount and fee designs as set forth in Section 4.1 of the Franchise, The City currently imposes franchise fees of two and one-half(2.5)percent on NSP gas and electric as described in Subdivision l.b. above. The Minnegasco Franchise allows such a similar fee to be imposed by the City on Minnegasco. Subd. 2. Statement. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Minnegasco under its natural gas Franchise in the amount of two and one-half(2.5)percent of the Minnegasco's gross revenues, as defined in Section 4.1 of the Franchise commencing with the Minnegasco's , 1999 billing month. SIR•163'i21 1 Mu210-14 06-03-99 14:23 From-KENNEDY i GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.03/20 F-153 Subd. 3. Payment. The said franchise fee shall be payable to the City in accordance with the terms set forth in Section 4.4 of the Franchise. Subd. 4. Surcharge. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission requires each said utility company to add to its effect rates for the utility service on which the public utility gross earnings fee is imposed,a surcharge to reimburse such utility company for the cost of the fee. Subd. 5. Proof of Company Gross Revenues. Notwithstanding the effective date of this ordinance and notwithstanding any contrary provisions in Section 4 of the Franchise,the effective date of the fee collected under Subdivision 2 of this ordinance is the later of ten (10) days after the publication and after the sending of written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted ordinance upon Minnegasco by certified mail. Subd. 6. Sunset Clause. This ordinance shall automatically sunset on SECTION 2. This ordinance takes effect 30 days after its publication. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this—day of , 1999. Read and passed by the City Council of the city of Mounds View this day of 1999. Dan Coughlin,Mayor Charles S. Whiting, City Clerk/Administrator APPROVED AS TO FORM: Robert C. Long, City Attorney S!F-163921 MU210-14 06-03-99 14:23 From-KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.04/20 F-153 ORDINANCE NO, CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE TO ENACT A NEW CHAPTER OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CODE OF ORDINANCES TO ADMINISTER AND REGULATE THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE ISSUANCE AND REGULATION OF RIGHT•OF-WAY PERMITS THE COUNCIL OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Tide 900 of the Mounds View Municipal Code shall be amended by the addition of an entirely new Chapter 910,to read as follows: Chapter 910 Right-of-Way Management SECTION 910.01. Findings, Purpose and Intent 910.02. Election to Manage the Public Rights-of-Way 910.03. Definitions 910.04. Administration 910.05. Registration and Right-of-Way Occupancy 910.06. Registration Information 910,07. Reporting Obligations 910.08. Permit Requirement 910.09. Permit Applications 910.10. Issuance of Permit; conditions 910.11. Permit Fees 910.12. Right-of-Way Patching and Restoration 910.13. Joint Applications 910.14. Supplementary Applications 910.15. Other Obligations 910.16. Denial of Permit 910.17. Installation Requirements 910.18. Inspection 910.19. Work Done Without a Permit 910.20. Supplementary Notification 910.21. Revocation of Permits 910.22. Mapping Data 910.23. Location of Facilities 910.24. Relocation of Facilities 910.25. Pre-Excavation Facilities Location 910.26. Damage to Other Facilities 910.27. Right-of-Way Vacation SJR-163902 Mt1210-14 2 06-03-99 14:24 From-KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 T-285 P.05/20 F-153 910.28 Indemnification and Liability 910.29. Abandoned and Unusable Facilities 910.30. Appeal 910.31 Reservation of Regulatory and Police Powers 910.32. Severability Sample Application for Right-of-Way Permits 910.01: FINDINGS,PURPOSE,AND INTENT: The City hereby enacts this new Chapter of this Code relating to right-of-way permits and administration and to provide for the health, safety and welfare of its citizens, and to ensure the integrity of its streets and the appropriate use of the rights-of-way. This Chapter imposes reasonable regulation on the placement and maintenance of facilities and equipment currently within its rights-of-way or to be placed therein. It is intended to complement the regulatory roles of state and federal agencies. This chapter,hail be interpreted consistently with 1997 Session Laws, Chapter 123, substantially codified in Minnesota Statutes,Sections 237.16, 237.162,237.163, 237.79, 237.81, and 238.086 (the "Act") and the other laws governing applicable rights of the city and users of the right-of-way. This chapter shall also be interpreted consistently with Minnesota Rules Part 7819.0050.- 7819.9950 where possible. To the extent any provision of this chapter cannot be interpreted consistently with the Minnesota Rules,that interpretation most consistent with the Act and other applicable statutory and case law is intended. 910.02: ELECTION TO MANAGE THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: In accordance with the authority granted to the city under state and federal statutory, administrative and common law, the city hereby elects pursuant to this chapter to manage rights-of-ways within the jurisdiction. 910.03: DEFINITIONS: The following definitions apply in this Chapter of this Code. References hereafter to "sections" are unless otherwise specified references to sections in this Chapter. Defined terms remain defined terms whether or not capitalized. "Abandoned facility"means a facility no longer in service or physically disconnected from a portion of the operating facility,or from any other facility,that is in use or still carries service. A facility is not abandoned unless declared so by the right-of-way user. "Applicant"means any Person requesting permission to Excavate or obstruct a Right-of- Way. "City"means the City of Mounds View, Minnesota. For purposes of section , City means its elected officials, officers,employees and agents. "Commission"means the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. "Congested right-of-way" means a crowed condition in the subsurface of the public right-of- way that occurs when the maximum lateral spacing between existing underground facilities does not allow for construction of new underground facilities without using hand digging to expose the existing lateral facilities without using hand digging to expose the existing lateral SJR-163902 MU210-14 2 06-03-99 14:24 From-KENNEDY A GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.06/20 F-153 facilities in conformance with Minnesota Statutes, section 216D.04. subdivision 3, over a continuous length in excess of 500 feet. "Construction Performance Bond"means any of the following forms of security provided at permittee's option: A. Individual project bond; B. Cash deposit; C. Security of a form listed or approved under Minn. Stat. Sec. 15.73, sub. 3; D. Letter of Credit, in a form acceptable to the LOU E. Self-insurance, in a form acceptable to the LGU F. A blanket bond for projects within the city, or other form of construction bond, for a time specified and in a form acceptable to the city. "Degradation" means a decrease in the useful life of the Right-of-Way caused by excavation in or disturbance of the Right-of-Way, resulting in the need to reconstruct such Right-of- Way earlier than would be required if the excavation or disturbance did not occur. "Degradation Cost" subject to Minnesota Rules 7819.1100 means the cost to achieve a Ievel of restoration as determined by the City at the time the permit is issued, not to exceed the maximum Restoration shown in plates 1 to 13, set forth in Minnesota Rules parts 7819.9900 to 7819.9950. "Degradation Fee"means the estimated fee established at the time of permitting by the city to recover costs associated with the decrease in the useful life of the right-of-way caused by the excavation, and which equals the degradation costs. "Department"means the deparunent of public works of the city. "Department inspector"means any person authorized by the director to carry out inspections related to the provisions of this chapter. "Director"!Weans the director of the department of public works of the city, or her or his designee. "Delay Penalty"is the penalty imposed as a result of unreasonable delays in right-of-way excavation, obstruction,patching,or restoration a.,requested by permit. "Emergency"means a condition that(1)poses a danger to life or health, or of a significant loss of property; or(2)requires immediate repair or replacement of facilities in order to restore service to a customer. "Equipment"means any tangible asset used to install,repair,or maintain facilities in any right-of-way. -`Excavate"means to dig into or in any way remove or physically disturb or penetrate any part of a right-of-way. SIR.163902 MU2ia-14 3 06-03-99 14:25 From-KENNEDY i GRAVEN +6123379310 7-295 P.07/20 F-153 "Excavation Permit" means the permit which, pursuant to this chapter, must be obtained before a person may excavate in a right-of-way. An excavation permit allows the holder to excavate that part of the right-of-way described in such permit. "Excavation Permit Fee" means money paid to the city by an applicant to cover the costs as provided in Section "Facility or Facilities" means any tangible asset in the right-of-way required to provide utility service. "Five-year project plan" shows projects adopted by the local government unit for construction within the next five years. "High density corridor" means a designated portion of the public right-of-way within which telecommunications right-of-way users having multiple and competing facilities may be required to build and install facilities in a common conduit system or other common SttUMture "Hole"means an excavation in the pavement, with the excavation having a length less than the width of the pavement. "Local Representative"means a local person or persons,or designee of such person or persons, authorized by a registrant to accept service and to make decisions for that registrant regarding all matters within the scope of this chapter. "Management Costs" means the actual costs the City incurs in managing its rights-of-way, including such costs, if incurred, as those associated with registering Applicants; issuing, processing, and verifying right-of-way permit applications; inspecting job sites and restoration projects; maintaining, supporting,protecting, or moving user facilities during right-of-way work; determining the adequacy of right-of-way restoration; restoring work inadequately performed after providing notice and the opportunity to correct the work; and revoking right-of-way permits. Management costs do not include payment by a telecommunications right-of-way user for the use of the nght-of-way, the fees and cost of litigation relating to the interpretation of Minnesota Session Laws 1997, Chapter 123; Minnesota Statutes, Sections 237.162 or 237.163 or any ordinance enacted under those sections,or the city fees and costs related to appeals taken pursuant to Section of this chapter. "Obstruct"means to place any tangible object in a right-of-way so as to hinder free and open passage over that or any part of the right-of-way. "Obstruction Permit" means the permit which,pursuant to this chapter, must be obtained before a person may obstruct a right-of-way, allowing the holder to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of that right-of-way, for the duration specified therein. "Obstruction Permit Fee" means money paid to the city by a permittee to cover the costs as provided in Section . SJR-i63902 MUM-14 4 06-03-99 14:25 From-KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 7-295 P.08/20 F-153 "Patch or Patching"means a method of pavement replacement that is temporary in nature. A patch consists of(1)the compaction of the subbase and aggregate base, and (2)the replacement, in kind, of the existing pavement for a minimum of two feet beyond the edges of the excavation in all directions. A patch is considered full restoration only when the pavement is included in the city's five-year project plan. -Pavement"means any type of improved surface that is within the public right-of-way and that is paved or otherwise constructed with bituminous, concrete, aggregate, or gravel. "Permit"has the meaning given "right-of-way permit"in Minnesota Statutes, Section 237.162. "Permittee" means any person to whom a permit to excavate or obstruct a right-of-way has been granted by the city under this chapter. "Person"means an individual or entity subject to the laws and rules of this state,however organized, whether public or private, whether domestic or foreign, whether for profit or nonprofit, and whether natural,corporate, or political. Probation"means the status of a person that has not complied with the conditions of this Chapter. "Probationary Period"means one year from the date that a person has been notified in writing that they have been put on probation "Registrant"means any person who(1) has or seeks to have its equipment or facilities located in any right-of-way, or(2) in any way occupies or uses, or seeks to occupy or use, the right-of-way or place its facilities or equipment in the right-of-way "Restore or Restoration"means the process by which an excavated right-of-way and surrounding area, including pavement and foundation,is returned to the same condition and life expectancy that existed before excavation. "Restoration Cost"means the amount of money paid to the city by a permittee to achieve the level of restoration according to plates 1 to 13 of PUC rules_ "Public Right-of-Way"means the area on,below, or above a public roadway, highway, street,cartway,bicycle lane and public sidewalk in which the city has an interest, including other dedicated rights-of-way for travel purposes and utility easements of the city. A right- of-way does not include the airwaves above a right-of-way with regard to cellular or other non-wire telecommunications or broadcast service. ((Note: this definition does not include other public grounds,which may be the subject of other city requirements.)] "Right-of-Way Permit"means either the excavation permit or the obstruction permit,or both, depending on the context,required by this chapter. "Right-of-way user" means (1) a telecommunications right-of-way user as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 237.162, subdivision 4; or(2) a person owning or controlling a SIR•163902 MU21O-14 5 06-03-99 14:26 From-KENNEDY Z GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.09/20 F-153 facility in the right-of-way that is used or intended to be used for providing utility service, and who has a right under law, franchise, or ordinance to use the public right-of-way. "Service or Utility Service"includes (1) those services provided by a public utility a defined in Minn. Stat. § 216B.02, subds. 4 and 6; (2) services of a telecommunications right- of-way user,including transporting of voice or data information;(3) services of a cable communications systems as defined in Minn. Statutes, Chapter 238; (4)natural gas or electric energy or telecommunications services provided by the city; (5) services provided by a cooperative electric association organized under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 308A; and (6) water, sewer, steam,cooling or heating services. "Supplementary Application"means an application made to excavate or obstruct more of the right-of-way than allowed in, or to extend,a permit that had already been issued. "Temporary surface" means the compaction of subbase and aggregate base and replacement, in kind,of the existing pavement only to the edges of the excavation. It is temporary in nature except when the replacement is of pavement included in the local government unit's two-year plan, in which case it is considered full restoration. 'Trench"means an excavation in the pavement,with the excavation having a length equal to or greater than the width of the pavement. "Telecommunication Rights-of-Way User" means a person owning or controlling a facility in the right-of-way,or seeking to own or control a facility in the right-of-way,that is used or is intended to be used for transporting telecommunication or other voice or data information. For purposes of this chapter, a cable communication system defined and regulated under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 238, and telecommunication activities related to providing natural gas or electric energy services whether provided by a public utility as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 216B.02, a municipality, a municipal gas or power agency organized under Minnesota Statutes,Chapters 453 and 453A, or a cooperative electric association organized under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 308A, are not telecommunications right-of-way users for purposes of this Chapter.. "Two year project plan"shows projects adopted by the local government unit for construction within the next two yews. 910.04: ADMINISTRATION: The Director is the principal City official responsible for the administration of the Rights-of-Way,Right-of-Way Permits,and the ordinances related thereto. The Director may delegate any or all of the duties hereunder. 910.05: REGISTRATION AND RIGHT-OF-WAY OCCUPANCY: Subd. 1. Registration: Each Person who occupies, uses, or seeks to occupy or use, the Right-of- Way or place any Equipment or Facilities in or on the Right-of-Way,including Persons with installation and maintenance responsibilities by lease, sublease or assignment, must register with the Director_ Registration will consist of providing application information and paying a registration fee. SIR-163902 Mu21u-1i 6 06-03-99 14:26 From-KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.10/20 F-153 Subd. 2. Registration Prior to Work: No Person may construct, install,repair, remove, relocate, or perform any other work on,or use any Facilities or any part thereof in any Right-of-Way without first being registered with the Director. Subd. 3. Exceptions: Nothing herein shall be construed to repeal or amend the provisions of a City ordinance permitting Persons to plant or maintain boulevard plantings or gardens in the area of the Right-of-Way between their property and the street curb. Persons planting or maintaining boulevard plantings or gardens shall not be deemed to use or occupy the Right- ot;Way, and shall not be required to obtain any permits or satisfy any other requirements for planting or maintaining such boulevard plantings or gardens under this Chapter. However, nothing herein relieves a Person from complying with the provisions of the Minn. Stat. Chap. 216D, One call Law. 910.06: REGISTRATION INFORMATION: Subd. 1. Information Required: The information provided to the Director at the time of registration shall include,but not be limited to: (a)Each Registrant's name, Gopher One-Call registration certificate number, address and e- mail address if applicable, and telephone and facsimile numbers. (b)The name, address and e-mail address,if applicable, and telephone and facsimile numbers of a Local Representative. The Local Representative or designee shall be available at all times. Current information regarding how to contact the Local Representative in an Emergency shall be provided at the time of registration. (c) A certificate of insurance or self-insurance: (I)Verifying that an insurance policy has been issued to the Registrant by an insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Minnesota, or a form of self insurance acceptable to the Director; (2)Verifying that the Registrant is insured against claims for Personal injury, including death, as well as claims for property damage arising out of the(1) use and occupancy of the Right-of-Way by the Registrant,its officers, agents,employees and Permittees, and(ii)placement and use of Facilities and Equipment in the Right-of- Way by the Registrant, its officers, agents,employees and Permittees, including,but not limited to,protection against liability arising from completed operations, damage of underground Facilities and collapse of property; (3)Naming the City as an additional insured as to whom the coverages required herein are in force and applicable and for whom defense will be provided as to all such coverages; (4) Requiring that the Director be notified thirty (30) days in advance of cancellation of the policy or material modification of a coverage term; (5)Indicating comprehensive liability coverage, automobile liability coverage, workers compensation and umbrella coverage established by the Director in amounts SJR-163902 MU210-14 7 06-03-99 14:27 From-KENNEDY 8 GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.11/20 F-153 sufficient to protect the City and the public and to carry out the purposes and policies of this Chapter. (d)The City may require a copy of the actual insurance policies. (e)if the Person is a corporation, a copy of the certificate required to be filed under Minn. Stat. 300.06 as recorded and certified to by the Secretary of State. (I)A copy of the Person's order granting a certificate of authority from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission or other applicable state or federal agency, where the Person is lawfully required to have such certificate from said Commission or other state or federal agency. Subd. 2. Notice of Changes: The Registrant shall keep all of the information listed above current at all times by providing to the Director information as to changes within fifteen (15) days following the date on which the Registrant has knowledge of any change. 910.07: REPORTING OBLIGATIONS: Subd. 1. Operations: Each Registrant shall, at the time of registration and by December 1 of each year, file a construction and major maintenance plan for underground Facilities with the Director. Such plan shall be submitted using a format designated by the Director and shall contain the information determined by the Director to be necessary to facilitate the coordination and reduction in the frequency of excavations and Obstructions of Rights-of- Way. The plan shall include,but not be limited to,the following information: (a)The locations and the estimated beginning and ending dates of all Projects to be commenced during the next calendar year(in this section, a"Next-year Project"); and (h)To the extent known, the tentative locations and estimated beginning and ending dates for all Projects contemplated for the five years following the next calendar year(in this section, a "Five-year Project"). The term"project" in this section shall include both Next-year Projects and Five-year Projects. By January 1 of each year the Director will have available for inspection in the Director's office a composite list of all Projects of which the Director has been informed of the annual plans. All Registrants are responsible for keeping themselves informed of the current status of this list. Thereafter,by February 1,each Registrant may change any Project in its list of Next-year Projects, and must notify the Director and all other Registrants of all such changes in said list. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Registrant may at any time join in a Next-year Project of another Registrant listed by the other Registrant. Subd. 2. Additional Next-year Projects: Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Director will not deny an application for a Right-of-Way Permit for future to include a project in a plan submitted to the City if the Registrant has used commercially reasonable efforts to anticipate and plan for the project. Slit-163902 MU210-14 8 06-03-99 14:27 From-KENNEDY i GRAVEN +6123379310 1-295 P.12/20 F-153 910.08: PERMIT REQUIREMENT: Subd. 1. Permit Required: Except as otherwise provided in this Code,no Person may Obstruct or Excavate any Right-of-Way without first having obtained the appropriate Right-of-Way Permit from the Director to do so. (a)Excavation Permit: An Excavation Permit is required by a Registrant to Excavate that part of the Right-of-Way described in such permit and to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of the Right-of-Way by placing Facilities described therein, to the extent and for the duration specified therein. (b) Obstruction Permit: An Obstruction Permit is required by a Registrant to hinder free and open passage over the specified portion of Right-of-Way by placing Equipment described therein on the Right-of-Way, to the extent and for the duration specified therein. An Obstruction Permit is not required if a Person already possesses a valid Excavation Permit for the same project. Subd. 2. Permit Extensions; No Person may Excavate or Obstruct the Right-of-Way beyond the d4tc or dates specified in the permit unless such Person (i)makes a Supplementary Application for another Right-of-Way Permit before the expiration of the initial permit, and(ii) a new permit or permit extension is granted. Subd. 3. Delay Penalty: In accordance with Minnesota Rule 7819.1000 subp. 3 and notwithstanding subd. 2 of this section,the City shall establish and impose a Delay Penalty for unreasonable delays in Right-of-Way excavation, Obstruction, Parching,or Restoration. The Delay Penalty shall be established from time to time by City Council resolution. Subd.4. Permit Display: Permits issued under this Chapter shall be conspicuously displayed or otherwise available at all times at the indicated work site and shall be available for inspection by the Director. 910.09. PERMIT APPLICATIONS: Application for a permit is made to the Director. Right-of- Way Permit applications shall contain, and will be considered complete only upon compliance with the requirements of the following provisions: (a) Registration with the Director pursuant to this Chapter; (b) Submission of a completed permit application form, including all required attachments, and scaled drawings showing the location and area of the proposed project and the location of all known existing and proposed Facilities. (c)Payment of money due the City for (1)permit fees, estimated Restoration Costs and other Management Costs, (2)prior Obstructions or Excavations; (3)any undisputed loss,damage, or expense suffered by the City because of Applicant's prior excavations or Obstructions of the rights-of-way or any Emergency actions taken by the City; »K-163902 MU210-14 9 06-03-99 14:28 From-KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.13/20 F-153 (4) franchise fees or other charges, if applicable. (d) Payment of disputed amounts due the City by posting security or depositing in an escrow account an amount equal to at least 110% of the amount owing. (e)Posting an additional or larger construction performance bond for additional facilities when applicant requests an excavation permit to install additional facilities and the director deems the existing construction performance bond inadequate under applicable standards. 910.10: ISSUANCE OF PERMIT; CONDITIONS: Subd. 1. Permit Issuance: If the Applicant has satisfied the requirements of this Chapter,the Director shall issue a permit. Subd. 2. Conditions: The Director may impose reasonable conditions upon the issuance of the permit and the performance of the Applicant thereunder to protect the health, safety and welfare or when necessary to protect the Right-of-Way and its current use. 910.11: PERMIT FEES: Subd. 1. Fee Schedule and Fee Allocation:The city's permit fee schedule shall be available to the public and established in advance. The permit fees shall be designed to recover the City's actual costs incurred in managing the right-of-way and shall be based on an allocation among all users of the right-of-way,including the city. Subd. 2. Excavation Permit Fee: The city shall establish an Excavation Permit Fee in an amount sufficient to recover the following costs: (a) the City Management Costs; (b) Degradation Costs,if applicable. Subd. 3. Obstruction Permit Fee: The city shall establish the Obstruction Permit Fee and shall be in an amount sufficient to recover the City Management Costs. Subd.4. Payment of Permit Fees: No Excavation Permit or Obstruction Permit shall be issued without payment of Excavation or Obstruction Permit Fees. The City may allow Applicant to pay such fees within thirty (30)days of billing. Subd. S. Non refundable: Permit fees that were paid for a permit that the Director has revoked for a breach as stated in Section 1.21 are not refundable. Subd. 6. Application to franchises: Unless otherwise agreed to in a franchise, management costs may be charged separately from and in addition to the franchise fees imposed on a right-of-way user in the franchise. 910.12: RIGHT-OF-WAY PATCHING AND RESTORATION: Sig-163902 MU2IU-14 10 06-03-99 14:28 From-KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.14/20 F-153 Subd. 1. Timing: The work to be done under the Excavation Permit, and the Patching and Restoration of the Right-of-Way as required herein, must be completed within the dates specified in the permit, increased by as many days as work could not be done because of circumstances beyond the control of the Permittee or when work was prohibited as unseasonal or unreasonable under Section 1.15. Subd. 2. Patch and Restoration: Permittee shall Patch its own work. The City may choose either to have the City restore the Right-of-Way or to Restore the Right-of-Way itself. (a)City Restoration: If the City restores the Right-of-Way, Permittee shall pay the costs thereof within thirty(30) days of billing. If, following such Restoration,the pavement settles due to Permittee's improper backfilling, the Permittee shall pay to the City, within thirty(30) days of billing, all costs associated with having to correct the defective work. (b)Permittee Restoration: If the Permittee Restores the Right-of-Way itself, it shall at the time of application for an Excavation Permit post a Construction Performance Bond in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rules 7819.3000. (c)Degradation Fee in Lieu of Restoration: In Iieu of right-of-way restoration, a right-of-way user may elect to pay a degradation fee. However, the right-of-way user shall remain responsible for patching and the degradation fee shall not include the cost to accomplish these responsibilities. Subd. 3. Standards:The Permittee shall perform Patching and Restoration according to the standards and with the materials specified by the Director and shall comply with Minnesota Rule 7819.1100. The Director shall have the authority to prescribe the manner and extent of the Restoration, and may do so in written procedures of general application or on a case-by-case basis. Subd.4. Duty to Correct Defects: The Permittee shall correct defects in patching,or restoration performed by permittee or its agents. Permittee upon notification from the Director,correct all restoration work to the extent necessary, using the method required by the Director. Said work shall be completed within five(5)calendar days of the receipt of the notice from me Director,not including days during which work cannot be done because of circumstances constituting force majeure or days when work is prohibited as unseasonal or unreasonable under Section 1.15. Subd. 5. Failure to Restore: If the Permittee fails to Restore the Right-of-Way in the manner and to the condition required by the Director,or fails to satisfactorily and timely complete all Restoration required by the Director,the Director at its option may do such work. In that event the Permittee shall pay to the City, within thirty(30) days of billing,the cost of Restoring the Right-of-Way. If Permittee fails to pay as required, the City may exercise its rights under the Construction Performance Bond. Subd. 6. Degradation Fee in Lieu of Restoration: In lieu of Right-of-Way Restoration, a Right-of-Way user may elect to pay a Degradation Fee. However,the Right-of-Way User shall remain responsible for Patching and the Degradation Fee shall not include the cost to accomplish these responsibilities. 910.13: JOINT APPLICATIONS: Subd. 1. Joint Application: Registrants may jointly apply for permits to Excavate or Obstruct the Right- of-Way at the same place and time. Slit-163402 Mu310-44 11 06-03-99 14:29 From-KENNEDY i GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.15/20 F-153 Subd. 2. Shared Fees: Registrants who apply for permits for the same Obstruction or excavation, which the Director does not perform, may share in the payment of the Obstruction or Excavation Permit Fee In order to obtain a Joint permit,registrants must agree among themselves as to the portion each will pay and indicate the same on their applications Subd. 3. With City Projects: Registrants who join in a scheduled Obstruction or excavation performed by the Director, whether or not it is a joint application by two or more Registrants or a single application, are not required to pay the Excavation or Obstruction and Degradation portions of the permit fee,but a permit would still be received. 910.14: SUPPLEMENTARY APPLICATIONS: Subd. 1. Limitation on Area: A Right-of-Way Permit is valid only for the area of the Right-of-Way specified in the permit. No permittee may do any work outside the area specified in the permit, except as provided herein. Any Permittee which determines that an area greater than that specified in the permit must be Obstructed or Excavated must before working in that greater area(i)make application for a permit extension and pay any additional fees required thereby, and(ii) be granted a new permit or permit extension. Subd. 2. Limitation on dates: A Right-of-Way Permit is valid only for the dates specified in the permit. No Permittee may begin its work before the permit start date or, except as provided herein, continue working after the end date. If a Peiznittee does not finish the work by the permit end date,it must apply for a new permit for the additional time it needs, and receive the new permit or an extension of the old permit before working after the end date of the previous permit. This Supplementary Application must be submitted before the permit end date. 910.15: OTHER OBLIGATIONS: Subd. 1. Compliance With Other Laws: Obtaining a Right-of-Way Permit does not relieve Permittee of its duty to obtain all other necessary permits, licenses, and authority and to pay all fees required by the City or other applicable rule,law or regulation. A Permittee shall comply with all requirements of local, state and federal laws, including Minn. Stat. • • 216D.01-.09 (One Call Excavation Notice System). A Permittee shall perform all work in conformance with all applicable codes and established rules and regulations, and is responsible for all work done in the Right-of-Way pursuant to its permit,regardless of who does the work. Subd. 2. Prohibited Work: Except in an Emergency,and with the approval of the Director,no Right-of- Way Obstruction or excavation may be done when seasonally prohibited or when conditions are unreasonable for such work. Subd. 3. Interference with Right-of-Way: A Permittee shall not so Obstruct a Right-of-Way that the natural free and clear passage of water through the gutters or other waterways shall be interfered with. Private vehicles of those doing work in the Right-of-Way may not be parked within or next to a permit area,unless parked in conformance with City parking regulations. The loading or unloading of trucks must be done solely within the defined permit area unless specifically authorized by the permit. SIR-163902 MU210-14 12 06-03-99 14:29 From-KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.16/20 F-153 910.16: DENIAL OF PERMIT: The Director may deny a permit for failure to meet the requirements and conditions of this Chapter or if the Director determines that the denial is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare or when necessary to protect the Right-of-Way and its current use. 910.17: INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS: The excavation, backfilling, Patching and Restoration, and all other work performed in the Right-of-Way shall be done in conformance with Minnesota Rules 7819.1100 and other applicable local requirements, in so far as they are not inconsistent with the Minnesota Statutes, Sections. 237.162 and 237.163. 910.18: INSPECTION: Subd. 1. Notice of Completion: When the work under any permit hereunder is completed, the Permittee shall furnish a Completion Certificate in accordance Minnesota Rules 7819.1300. Subd. 2. Site Inspection: Permittee shall make the work-site available to the Director and to all others as authorized by law for inspection at all reasonable times during the execution of and upon completion of the work. Subd 3. Authority of Director: (a)AT the time of inspection the Director may order the immediate cessation of any work which poses a serious threat to the life,health, safety or well-being of the public. (b)The Director may issue an order to the Permittee for any work which does not conform to the terms of the permit or other applicable standards,conditions,or codes. The order shall state that failure to correct the violation will be cause for revocation of the permit, Within ten (10)days after issuance of the order,the Permittee shall present proof to the Director that the violation has been corrected. If such proof has not been presented within the required time, the Director may revoke the permit pursuant to Section . 910.19: WORK DONE WITHOUT A PERMIT: Subd. 1. Emergency Situations: Each Registrant shall immediately notify the Director of any event regarding its Facilities,which it considers to be an Emergency. The Registrant may proceed to take whatever actions are necessary to respond to the Emergency. Within two business days after the occurrence of the Emergency the Registrant shall apply for the necessary permits,pay the fees associated therewith and fulfill the rest of the requirements necessary to bring itself into compliance with this Chapter for the actions it took in response to the Emergency. If the Director becomes aware of an Emergency regarding a Registrant's Facilities, the Director will attempt to contact the Local Representative of each Registrant affected, or potentially affected, by the Emergency. In any event, the Director may take whatever action it deems necessary to respond to the Emergency,the cost of which shall be borne by the Registrant whose Facilities occasioned the Emergency. Subd. 2. Non-Emergency Situations: Except in an Emergency, any Person who, without first having obtained the necessary permit, Obstructs or Excavates a Right-of-Way must subsequently obtain a permit, and as a penalty pay double the normal fee for said permit,pay double all the other fees SJR-163')02 MU210.14 13 06-03-99 14:30 From-KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.17/20 F-153 required by the Legislative Code, deposit with the Director the fees necessary to correct any damage to the Right-of-Way and comply with all of the requirements of this Chapter. 910.20: SUPPLEMENTARY NOTIFICATION: If the Obstruction or Excavation of the Right- of-Way begins later or ends sooner than the date given on the permit,Permittee shall notify the Director of the accurate information as soon as this information is known. 910.21: REVOCATION OF PERMITS: Subd. 1. Substantial Breach:The City reserves its right, as provided herein,to revoke any Right-of-Way Permit, without a fee refund, if there is a substantial breach of the terms and conditions of any stature, ordinance,rule or regulation, or any material condition of the permit. A substantial breach by Permittee shall include,but shall not be limited to, the following: (a) The violation of any material provision of the Right-of-Way Permit; (b) An evasion or attempt to evade any material provision of the Right-of-Way Permit,or the perpetration or attempt to perpetrate any fraud or deceit upon the City or its citizens; (c) Any material misrepresentation of fact in the application for a Right-of-Way Permit; (d)The failure to complete the work in a timely manner; unless a permit extension is obtained or unless the failure to complete work is due to reasons beyond the Permittee's control;or (e)The failure to correct, in a timely manner, work that does not conform to a condition indicated on an Order issued pursuant to Section Subd. 2. Written Notice of Breach: If the Director determines that the Permittee has committed a substantial breach of a term or condition of any statute,ordinance,rule,regulation or any condition of the permit the Director shall make a written demand upon the Permittee to remedy such violation. The demand shall state that continued violations may be cause for revocation of the permit. A substantial breach, as stated above, will allow the Director,at his or her discretion,to place additional or revised conditions on the permit to mitigate and remedy the breach. Subd. 3. Response to Notice of Breach: Within twenty-four(24)hours of receiving notification of the breach, Permittee shall provide the Director with a plan, acceptable to the Director, that will cure the breach. Permittee's failure to so contact the Director,or the Permittee's failure to submit an acceptable plan, or Permittee's failure to reasonably implement the approved plan, shall be cause for immediate revocation of the permit. Further,Permittee's failure to so contact the Director, or the Permittee's failure to submit an acceptable plan,or Permittee's failure to reasonably implement the approved plan, shall automatically place the Perminee on Probation for one (I)year. Subd. 4. Cause for Probation: From time to time, the Director may establish a list of conditions of the permit, which if breached will automatically place the Permittee on Probation for one full year, such as,but not limited to, working out of the allotted time period or working on Right-of-Way grossly outside of the permit authorization. SJR-163902 MU210-14 14 06-03-99 14:30 From-KENNEDY I GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.18/20 F-153 Subd. 5. Automatic Revocation: If a Permittee, while on Probation,commits a breach as outlined above, Permlttee's permit will automatically be revoked and Permittee will not be allowed further permits for one year,except for Emergency repairs. Subd. 6. Reimbursement of City Costs: if a permit is revoked, the permittee shall also reimburse the City for City's reasonable costs, including restoration costs and the costs of collection and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in connection with such revocation. 910.22: MAPPING DATA: Subd. 1. Information Required: Each Registrant and Permittee shall provide Mapping information required by the Director in accordance with Minnesota Rules 7819.4000 and 7819.4100. 910.23: LOCATION AND RELOCATION OF FACILITIES: Subd. 1. Location,placement and relocation of facilities must comply with the Act,with other applicable law, and with Minnesota Rules 7819.3100,7819.5000 and 7819.5 MO,to the extent the rules do not limit authority otherwise available to cities. Subd. 2. Corridors: The Director may assign specific corridors within the Right-of-Way, or any particular segment thereof as may be necessary, for each type of Facilities that is or, pursuant to current technology, the Director expects will someday be located within the Right-of-Way. All excavation, obstruction,or other permits issued by the Director involving the installation or replacement of Facilities shall designate the proper corridor for the Facilities at issue. Any Registrant who has Facilities in the Right-of-Way in a position at variance with the corridors established by the Director shall,no later than at the time of the next reconstruction or excavation of the area where the Facilities are located, move the Facilities to the assigned position within the Right-of-Way,unless this requirement is waived by the Director for good cause shown, upon consideration of such factors as the remaining economic life of the Facilities, public safety, customer Service needs and hardship to the Registrant. Subd. 3. Nuisance: One year after the passage of this Chapter, any Facilities found in a Right-of-Way :that have not been Registered shall be deemed to be a nuisance. The City may exercise any remedies or rights it has at law or in equity, including,but not limited to, abating the nuisance or taking possession of the Facilities and restoring the Right-of-Way to a useable condition. Subd.4. Limitation of Space: To protect health, safety, and welfare or when necessary to protect the Right-of-Way and its current use,the Director shall have the power to prohibit or limit the placement of new or additional Facilities within the Right-of-Way. In making such decisions, the Director shall strive to the extent possible to accommodate all existing and potential users of the Right-of-Way,but shall be guided primarily by considerations of the public interest,the public's needs for the particular Utility Service, the condition of the Right-of-Way,the time of year with respect to essential utilities,the protection of existing Facilities in the Right-of-Way, and future City plans for public improvements and development projects which have been determined to be in the public interest. 910.24: PRE-EXCAVATION FACILITY AND FACILITIES LOCATION:In addition to complying with the requirements of Minn. Stat. 216D.01-.09 ("One Call Excavation Notice System") SJR-143902 MU210-44 15 06-03-99 14:31 From-KENNEDY & GRAVEN +6123379310 T-295 P.19/20 F-153 before the start date of any Right-of-Way excavation,each Registrant who has Facilities or Equipment in the area to be excavated shall mark the horizontal and approximate vertical placement of all said Facilities. Any Registrant whose Facilities is less than twenty(20)inches below a concrete or asphalt surface shall notify and work closely with the excavation contractor to establish the exact location of its Facilities and the best procedure for excavation. 910.25: DAMAGE TO OTHER FACILITIES: When the Director does work in the Right-of- Way and finds it necessary to maintain,support,or move a Registrant's Facilities to protect it,the Director shall notify the Local Representative as early as is reasonably possible and placed as required. The costs associated therewith will be billed to that Registrant and must be paid within thirty(30)days from the date of billing. Each Registrant shall be responsible for the cost of repairing any Facilities in the Right-of-Way, which it or its Facilities damages. Each Registrant shall be responsible for the cost of repairing any damage to the Facilities of another Registrant caused during the City's response to an Emergency occasioned by that Registrant's Facilities. 910.26: RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION: If the City vacates a Right-of-Way, which contains the Facilities of a Registrant,the registrant's rights in the vacated right-of-way are governed by Minnesota Rule 7819.3200. 910.27: INDEMNIFICATION AND LIABILITY: By registering with the Director, or by accepting a permit under this Chapter, a Registrant or Permittee agrees to defend and indemnify the city in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rule 7819.1250. 910.28: ABANDONED AND UNUSABLE FACILITIES: Subd. 1. Discontinued Operations: A Registrant who has determined to discontinue all or a portion of its operations in the City must either: (a) Provide information satisfactory to the Director that the Registrant's obligations for its Facilities in the Right-of-Way under this Chapter have been lawfully assumed by another Registrant; or Subd. 2. Removal: Any Registrant who has abandoned Facilities in any Right-of-Way shall remove it from that Right-of-Way if required in conjunction with other right-of-way repair, excavation, or construction,unless this requirement is waived by the Director. 910.29: APPEAL: A Right-of-Way user that: (1)has been denied registration; (2) has been denied a permit; (3) has had permit revoked; or(4)believes that the fees imposed are invalid, may have the denial,revocation,or fee imposition reviewed, upon written request, by the City Council. The City Council shall act on a timely written request at its next regularly scheduled meeting. A decision by the City Council affirming the denial,revocation, or fee imposition will be writing and supported by written findings establishing the reasonableness of the decision. 910.30: RESERVATION OF REGULATORY AND POLICE POWERS: A Permittee's or Registrant's rights are subject to the regulatory and police powers of the City to adopt and enforce general ordinances necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public. 910.31: SEVERABILITY: If any portion of this chapter is for any reason held invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate,distinct, and independent provision SIR-163903 MI7310.14 16 06-03-99 14:32 From-KENNEDY i GRAVEN +6123378310 T-285 P.20/20 F-153 and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Nothing in this Chapter precludes the City from requiring a franchise agreement with the Applicant, as allowed by law, in addition to requirements set forth herein. SECTION 2. This ordinance takes effect 30 days after its publication. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this_day of , l 999. Read and passed by the City Council of the city of Mounds View this day of , 1999. Dan Coughlin, Mayor Charles S. Whiting, City Cleric/Administrator APPROVED AS TO FORM: Robert C. Long, City Attorney SIR-163902 MU21u 1g 17 Item No. __cr Staff Report No. Meeting Date: 6/7/99 Type of Business: WK WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;EDAB:EDA Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council Members From: Rick Jopke, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Billboard Variance Options Date of Report: June 3, 1999 Background: The City Council has asked that the Planning Commission to look into and make recommendations whether billboards should be allowed and what process should be used if it is determined that the City wants to allow billboards at the golf course or nearby public property. Originally it was thought that this could be handled by issuing variances. I have serious misgivings about granting variances to allow billboards because I am not sure how you demonstrate an hardship. In my mind,this would also constitute a use variance which is prohibited by state statutes. An alternate method of addressing this, if the City wishes to permit billboards, would be to do a code amendment. If the City wishes to proceed to approve billboards, the code could be amended to allow billboards by conditional use permit and specific standards for billboards could be specified in the code. The types of standards could include the following: 1. Maximum sign area 2. Maximum sign height 3. Minimum distance between billboards 4. Pole type 5. Sign face configuration 6. Minimum distance and/or screening requirements from residential property 7. Total number of billboards allowed 8. Permitted locations 9. Maximum length of permit 10. Minimum setback requirements A second issue that would have to be overcome if billboards are to be constructed is that the billboard company will have to also obtain a permit from MnDOT. In talking to a representative from a billboard company, I learned that MnDOT requires that billboards be located in commercial or industrial zoning districts. He thought that they might treat a golf course as the same as a commercial use if it was in a zoning district which permitted only public type uses. A number of the potential billboard sites are in the CRP zoning district. An alternative would be to rezone the golf course to PF.Golf courses are permitted uses in the PF District. However,the City of Mounds View Staff Report June 3, 1999 Page 2 current sign code technically does not permit any signage in the CRP or PF zone. Under the above scenario the code could be amended to allow billboards in PF and/or CRP districts if a conditional use permit is obtained. It was unclear whether MnDOT would approve permits in the CRP or PF districts. The Planning Commission at that point directed staff to talk to MnDOT about their requirements because it doesn't make sense for the City to go through a lot of effort to amend its ordinances or rezone property if the state will not issue permits. Subsequently I talked to Gary Ericksen and Mike Constant from MnDOT. They both indicated to me that MnDOT would not issue permits for billboards which were not in commercial or industrial zoning districts. They were not aware of any permits that have been approved on public golf courses. They indicated that the state does not have any control over how cities zone property but they indicated that they have denied billboard permits where it appeared that properties were rezoned solely to allow billboards. They also indicated that courts have upheld denials the last three times they were challenged. During the staff review and research that has ocurred two areas have been identified which should be addressed even if the billboard issue is not. These are as follows: 1. Is the Golf Course properly zoned?The City should consider rezoning the golf course property from CRP to PF. Golf Courses are not specifically permitted in the CRP district. Major recreational use facilities are permitted but not defined. The definition of a recreation field or building does include golf courses. Golf Courses are specifically permitted in PF districts. 2. Should the sign code be amended to allow signs in CRP and PF districts?Technically Mounds View's sign code does not permit any signage in CRP and PF districts. Therefore existing signs at the golf course, City Hall and at parks are in violation of the sign code. Requested Action: Prior to staff spending additional time on this issue, staff would like additional direction from the City Council about what issues if any staff should continue to pursue. RickpY Jo ke Comunit Development evelo ment Director p � C:\OFFICE\WP WIN\WPDOCS\6799BB.RPT Item No. 6 Staff Report No. Meeting Date: June 7, 1999 Type of Business: W. K. WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business Ci of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works Item Title/Subject: Review of Request for Proposals for City Engineering Date of Report: June 2, 1999 The subject of seeking a new consulting engineer has received some discussion in past meetings. Current projects that SEH is involved with are the Realignment of Edgewood Drive, Upgrade of the Booster Station, and Woodcrest Wetland Mitigation. Upon completion of these projects, staff sees very few future projects of any significance in which extensive engineering services will be required. It appears likely that new construction standards and methods will be adopted by the City Council for future street construction projects. If the residents wish to simply have their streets overlaid or milled and overlaid, these are projects of which will require very little outside engineering. Current staff, with the addition of a seasonal employee or intern and minimal survey equipment, can perform • the necessary tasks to complete these projects successfully. A registered and designated civil engineer will be required to sign the City's report to MnDOT to receive MSA funding,both maintenance and construction funds. In light of these predictions, staff is suggesting the City advertise for engineering proposals for general services and select three (3)to five (5) firms to perform any major projects that may occur. SEH could be retained to provide information and services on minor issue of which they have past knowledge or experience of City systems. This could prove to be less costly in terms of staff time which would be required to research files and historical events to provide to a firm which does not have any prior experience in the City. Since most expenses occur during the early stages of projects, less engineering time, fewer meetings, and reduced staff and consultant time could lessen the City's overall contractual engineering services. Major street projects, City land platting, wetland delineations and plan review could be performed by any of the firms selected. These projects could be rotated through the list. It is likely that staff will find a possible preference as to a firms abilities, expenses and turn around time through this process. The City has utilized several consulting engineers and architects in past projects with various results. The earlier City Hall addition, Community Center, City Hall HVAC, Environmental surveys,Risk Management Program, Pedestrian Bridge and general land surveys are a few of the latest projects in which alternative consulting services have been utilized. Staff feels this approach could prove to be the most cost effective and efficient for the City, staff, and projects. Staff is seeking Council's direction in this matter. /A' .7 �i ael Ulrich, Director of Public Works Item No. 7 Staff Report No. Meeting Date: 6/7/99 Type of Business: WK WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;EDAB:EDA Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council Members From: Rick Jopke, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Discussion of Tax Increment Financing in Mounds View Date of Report: June 2, 1999 Background: An item is scheduled on the June 7, 1999 work session agenda to continue the discussion of tax increment financing in Mounds View. At previous work sessions staff has provided a general overview of the tax increment districts in Mounds View. At the June 7th work session staff would like to review options with the City Council to determine how the City should proceed with tax increment financing in the future. Discussion: To facilitate the discussion staff has identified three general options for City Council consideration. These include the following: 1. Continue the current practice. The City Council each year during the budget process would allocate all available tax increment funds (TIF)to general project areas. Currently funds are allocated to debt service,pay-as-you-go TIF obligations, administration costs, and discretionary projects. Discretionary projects have included housing programs such as the housing replacement program, the business loan program, Highway 10 redevelopment, and the Community Center project. Through this budget process a current year budget and a long term financial plan are adopted. The City Council/EDA review specific projects as they are presented and must approve resolutions and development assistance agreements as necessary separate from the budget process. The City Council/EDA/EDC may want to review and amend the City's current TIF policy, if necessary,to ensure that tax increment financing is used to meet current City goals. 2. Use current practice but set ceiling on the amount of funds which go into the TIF pool for use on discretionary projects. Any tax increments received above the ceiling amount would be returned to the County. Current projections indicate that there will be varying amounts of discretionary funds available through the year 2015 when the districts expire. The amounts vary from $235,000 to $920,000. The City Council/EDA could annually, during the budget process, determine what projects should be funded from the TIF pool in the upcoming year and allocate the necessary City of Mounds View Staff Report June 2, 1999 Page 2 amount of funds. Any amount of TIF funds actually received over and above the allocated amount of funds would then be returned to Ramsey County for distribution to the county, school district and the city instead of going into the TIF pool. Based on the above projections, if the City Council/EDA allocated$235,000 to discretionary projects, the range of funds returned to the County would be $0 to$685,000 depending on what year it was. The City Council/EDA could also approve pay-as-you-go TIF assistance to assist specific projects within existing TIF districts. 3. Return all tax increments not necessary for debt service,pay-as-you-go obligations and administrative costs to the County. Under this scenario, the City Council/EDA determines that tax increment financing is no longer appropriate for funding new projects in Mounds View. Existing obligations and associated administrative costs would be paid off and existing tax increment districts would be decertified when financially feasible. Existing discretionary projects such as the housing replacement program, business loan program, and Highway 10 improvements would be eliminated or funded from other funding sources. Any amount of TIF funds actually received over and above that which is necessary to meet existing obligations and associated administrative costs would be returned to Ramsey County for distribution to the county, school district, and the city.No new pay-as-you-go assistance would be approved. Attached for your information is a summary of the changes which the legislature made to the tax increment financing law and to the tax class rates. The reduction in tax class rates will reduce taxes collected and tax increments received. Requested Action: Discuss general options regarding how tax increment financing should be used in Mounds View in the future. 11? I Rick Jopke, Com unity Development Director N:\DATA\USERS\RICKJO\SHARE\6199TIF.RPT H.F. 2420 May 17. 1999 Version: Conference Committee Report Page 38 Section Article 10: Tax Increment Financing • Overview • This article makes a number of changes in the tax increment financing law: • Reduces the required local contribution for housing districts from 10 percent to 5 percent; • Prohibits the use of increments for social and recreational facilities; • Pooling is permitted to make up deficits that resulted from property tax rate compression enacted in 1997, 1998, and 1999. In addition, $4 million is appropriated to the TIP grant program for deficits. • Provides a new enforcement mechanism that will authorize the attorney general to petition the tax court to suspend the TIF authority of a municipality or development authority for violations referred by the state auditor. • Pooling by pre-1982 districts is ratified, if it was done before receiving a non- compliance notice from the State Auditor or the end of 1999. These districts are allowed to pay off pre-existing bonds and contractual obligations. The article provides special law authority for several cities: • Onamia • St. Cloud • Dawson ► Brooklyn Center • St. Paul ► Jackson ► Minneota ► Fridley 1 Local contributions, housing districts. Reduces the required local contribution for housing districts from 10 percent to 5 percent. If the municipality elects to make a local contribution out of its unrestricted moneys (such as its general fund), the district is exempt from the state aid offset. The contribution is a percentage of the district's increments. Under present law, housing, renewal and renovation, and economic development districts are subject to a 10 percent contribution rate. Redevelopment, soils districts, and hazardous substance subdistricts contribute at the 5 percent rate. Qualified housing districts (those that provide low income rental housing) are exempt. Effective for districts for which the request for certification is made after June 30, 1999. Article 10: Tax Increment Financing H.F.2420 May 17. 1999 Version: Conference Committee Report Page 39 Section 2 TIF for social and recreational facilities. Prohibits spending tax increments to construct or renovate facilities for social, recreational, or conference facilities or a public park used as a commons area. This will prohibit use of TIF to build ice rinks, community centers, and other facilities that cities have typically financed with TIF. The prohibition does not apply to privately owned conference facilities. This section also prohibits the use of tax increments outside of the TIF district on improvements, equipment, and other items whose primary purpose is decorative or aesthetic or if the materials used or design cost twice that of more commonly used equipment and improvements. This prohibition does not apply to improvements related to rehabilitating historic structures on national register or in a historic district listed on the national register. The prohibitions under this section would be effective for expenditures made or binding contracts entered after January I, 2000. 3 TIF pooling authority. Authorizes municipalities with a deficit in a tax increment financing (TIF) district that was caused by the1997 and 1998 reductions in property tax class rates to transfer available increments from other TIF districts to eliminate the deficit. This authority is subject to a number of limitations and conditions. 0. Scope. The authority applies only to TIF districts for which the request for certification was made before enactment of the 1997 tax bill (i.e., the first round of class rate reductions). Qualifying deficits. Deficits are defined as the lesser of(1) increments from the district and any available increments,from other districts permitted by existing pooling restrictions less the district's obligations to pay pre-June 2, 1997 bonds or bonds issued to refund contracts entered before June 2, 1997 or (2) the reduction in the district's • increments that result from the 1997, 1998, and 1999 property tax class rate changes. • Transfers from_districts created by separate development authorities. The municipality may transfer increments between districts even if they were created by different types of development authorities (e.g., an economic development authority and a port authority). This authority is limited to development authorities • under the control of the municipality (defined by reference to appointment powers). Thus, a city could not transfer increments from a county HRA project, even if the TIF district was located in the city. Increments could not be transferred by the city of Duluth from the Seaway Port Authority. • ► Other pooling authority. The pooling authority under the bill applies notwithstanding the pooling limits under other laws--i.e., the percentage restrictions and the lack of authority for pre-1982 districts. Pooled increments under the bill's authority are to be deducted before calculating the percentage pooling limits for post-1990 districts. Thus, pooling will proportionately reduce both increments available for in-district - spending and pooling. Article 10: Tax Increment Financing ELF. 2420 May 17, 1999 Version: Conference Committee Report Page 40 Section 4 Pre-1982 TIF District Pooling Rules. Sets out "pooling rules" (i.e., the authority to spend increments from a district on activities outside of the geographic area of the district) for districts established after July 31, 1979 and before July 1, 1982. Applies only to TIF districts where the request for certification was made after July 31, 1979 and before July 1, 1982. Background information. The 1979 TIF Act explicitly required increment to be spent in accordance with a TIF plan for the improvement and development of the district. This limited spending to development or redevelopment of the district. Pooling or spending of increments for development or redevelopment of other areas (i.e., outside the district) was not explicitly authorized. The 1982 legislature allowed unlimited pooling of increments, but these changes were effective only for districts for which the request for certification was made after June 30, 1982. Thus, these pre-1982 districts have no specific statutory authority to spend increments on developments outside of the district. In 1990, the legislature imposed percentage limits on the amount of increments that could be spent outside of the district. These limits apply to newly certified districts and areas of existing districts. Exemptions. Increments are not subject to this section, if they were used for debt service pooling by municipal development districts. (This was a limited pooling authority available between 1984 and 1990.) Also, the section does not ratify past pooling violations, if the city voluntarily repaid the increments and decertified the district before legislation was enacted. Notification by state auditor. The bill requires the State Auditor to notify each development authority (e.g., a economic development authority or housing and redevelopment authority) of the provisions of this law. Ratification of past spending. The bill provides that expenditures on activities outside of the TIF district are legal if they meet either of two requirements: ► The expenditures were made before the city or authority was notified by the State Auditor that spending for the district was not in compliance with the law or December 31, 1999, whichever occurs first. This notification by the Auditor does not refer to notice required by this section, but rather would have been part of a compliance audit by the Auditor or similar circumstances that resulted from a review of the district's activities. ► The expenditures were made to pay"pre-existing outside district obligations." These are obligations that are secured by increments from the district. To qualify • bonds must have been issued before the earlier of(1) final notice of noncompliance from the Auditor or (2) April 1, 1999. To qualify contracts must have been entered before the earlier of(1) the notice from the Auditor or (2) May 1, 1999. Article 10: Tax Increment Financing H.F.2420 May 17, 1999 Version: Conference Committee Report Page 41 Section Early decertification required. If the authority spent increments on activities outside of the district, after December 31, 1999 it may only spend increments to pay pre-existing obligations. These are bonds issued or contracts entered before the dates listed in the previous paragraph, except for contracts for activities in the district may be entered into up to June 30, 1999 (rather than the May 1, 1999 date). When these obligations are paid, the district must be decertified. 5 Enforcement notices. Requires a county attorney who receives a TIF violation notice to . _ notify the State Auditor, if the county attorney decides not bring an action or if 12 months pass and no action has been brought. The State Auditor is then required to notify the attorney general. 6 Suspension of TIP authority. Requires the attorney general to review materials on violations submitted by the State Auditor, the municipality, and the development authority. If the attorney general finds the violation was substantial, the attorney general is to petition the tax court to suspend the municipality and development authority's power to use TIF for up to five years. Before petitioning the tax court, the attorney generalis to attempt to resolve the matter using alternative dispute resolution. If the tax court finds a substantial violation, it may suspend the authority to use tax increment financing for up to 5 years. In determining the length of the suspension, the court may consider a variety of enumerated factors, such as the dollar amount involved, the sophistication of the local unit, the extent which it was a clear violation of law, or whether there was a pattern of violations. A suspension would prohibit requesting certification of new districts, adding area to existing districts, issuing bonds, or amending a TIF plan to authorize new activities or expenditures. This suspension procedure and authority is limited to violations that are identified by the State Auditor beginning in the year 2000. 7 Conforming changes. Repeals the special pooling authority to eliminate deficits enacted in 1998 as part of the special taxing district authority. Section 3 provides general pooling rules for this purpose. 8 Permitted purposes for abatements. Allows abatements to be used to defer paying taxes without interest or penalties. This section also clarifies that property tax abatements may be used to pay for public infrastructure. 9 Definition. Defines abatement to include deferral of taxes with abatement of interest and penalties. This is intended to permit use of abatements to defer the payment of taxes without interest. Article 10: Tax Increment Financing H.P. 2420 May 17, 1999 Version: Conference Committee Report Page 42 Section 10 Amount of abatement. Authorizes political subdivisions to abate fiscal disparities tax. Each of the three units (city/town, school district, and county) would be permitted to abate an amount of the total taxes equal to its tax rate multiplied by the tax capacity of the parcel. Thus, the total amount of the abatement would effectively include tax equal to the fiscal disparity tax on a commercial or industrial parcel. The abatement would be fully funded by the approving local unit of government. It would not reduce the contributions to the fiscal disparities pool or increase distributions from the pool. This section authorizes abating interest and penalties on property taxes. This section clarifies that use of an abatement for public infrastructure is not limited to improvements located on the parcel whose taxes are abated. It also allows the town board of supervisors to grant an abatement. Under present law, this required action at the town meeting. 11 Deferred payment schedule. Requires establishing a repayment schedule, when abatement is used to defer payment of taxes. The deferred taxes will be levied as with a regular • abatement. 12 Amount of school district abatements. Allows school districts to abate the full amount of their tax. Under present law, school districts may not abate one-half of the tax attributable to the general education tax rate. 13 Annual approval of abatements of school taxes. Eliminates the requirement that schools annually re-approve abatements. This requirement prevents issuing bonds financed with the amount of the school tax abatements. 14 Consent of property owner. Clarifies that a property owner need not consent to an abatement. 15 Public infrastructure. Clarifies that abatements may be retained to reimburse the political subdivision for infrastructure costs for which bonds were not issued. 16 TIF grants. Provides that the TIF grant programs may pay for deficits caused by the 1998 property tax class rate compression, as well as any enacted in 1999. Present law limited the availability of grants to the 1997 compression. 17 TIF grants, extension. Extends the duration of the TIF grant program by one additional year through 2002. 18 Onamia TIF. Allows the city of Onamia to increase the 5 year rule to 10 years. The 5 year rule requires increment to be spent or binding contracts to be entered within five years after the district is certified. These increments may only be spent on three parcels fronting on U.S. highway 169. • Article 10: Tax Increment Financing H.F. 2420 May 17, 1999 Version: Conference Committee Report Page 43 Section 19 St. Cloud TIF, pooling permitted. Authorizes the St. Cloud housing and redevelopment authority (HRA) to spend increments from a pre-1982 TIF district outside of the district to redevelop properties destroyed by a natural gas explosion on December 11, 1998. Effective upon local approval. 20 St. Paul,TIF. Extends the duration of the Williams Hill TIF district in St. Paul by ignoring the first $2,000 of increment for purposes of the duration limit. The maximum permitted duration extension is 2 years. The duration limits for TIF districts generally begin upon • receipt of the first increment. Effective upon local approval by the city, county, and school district. The state aid offset will apply during the extension period. 21 City of Jackson, TIP. Allows the city of Jackson to extend the duration of a pre-1979 TIP district to collect increments through 2002. The maximum amount of increments allowed to be collected is$170,000. Under general law, these districts may not spend increment after April 1, 2001, except to pay obligations issued before April 1, 1990. Thus, the bill will allow the city to collect increments in 2001 and 2002. Effective upon local approval by the city, county, and school district. The state aid offset applies during the extension period. 22 City of Minneota, TIF. Ratifies expenditures of increment made by the city of Minneota for its tax increment financing district. This ratifies approximately $28,000 that the city spent in excess of the total estimated expenditures in the TIF plan. The provision is effective upon local approval by the city. 23 Fridley TIF. Allows the city of Fridley to extend the duration of TIF district No. 6 to 2025. This district is a redevelopment district; absent the legislation it would be required to be decertified in 2012. Thus, this section provides for up to a 13 year extension. The extension is subject to the state aid offset during the extension period under special rules. The amount of the aid offset is limited to the least of(1) $200,000, plus one-half of the excess; (2) 2.5 percent of the city's net tax capacity; or(3) 5 percent of the district's increment for the previous year. Pooling of increments from the districts is permitted only for sewer and highway costs directly related to the development in the district. Tax capacity attributable to 200,000 square feet of building value (other than parking ramps) must be decertified in the year district would have been decertified under general law. The extension is effective upon approval by the city, county, and school district. 24 Brooklyn Center. Authorizes Brooklyn Center to change the fiscal disparities election for TIF district No. 4 to permit the fiscal disparities contribution to be paid by the city, rather than the district. 25 Dawson. Extends the duration of an economic development district in the city of Dawson to 18 years after receipt of the first increment. This would extend the decertification date . from January, 2010 to July, 2019. Article 10: Tax Increment Financing KF.2420 May 17, 1999 Version: Conference Committee Report Page 45 Section_ (HACA) payments to counties, an amount representing the net cost to the state for assumption of district court costs. The HACA subtraction is $3 million less in the first year than the cost of the state takeover to help provide counties with half of the funding for the 6- month transition problem(calendar/fiscal year). 4 Fines and forfeited bail. Provides that in counties where the state has full responsibility for court administration costs, fines and forfeited bail collected by the state patrol that would otherwise go to the county will be deposited in the general fund. 5 Screener-collector. Provides that in counties where the state has full responsibility for court administration costs, screener-collector fees shall be deposited in the general fund. 6 Family preservation aid. Reduces the increase in family preservation aid from$30 million to $20 million in calendar year 2000, as a result of the $10 million HACA transfer cancellation in section 2. 7 Court fees. Strikes reference to certain court administration and forfeited bail fees being deposited in the general fund. 8 Property tax levy. Prohibits the counties in the fifth, seventh, and ninth judicial districts from levying property taxes for the court functions that have been transferred to the state, except for the amount necessary to pay for one-half of the costs of the first six months of calendar year 2000. (Levy limits are adjusted for one year. See Article 6.) 9 County court; forfeitures. In law dealing with county courts, provides for sums forfeited to be paid to the general fund. 10 County court; fines and penalties. Provides that in counties where the state has full responsibility for court administration costs, fines and fees that currently go to counties, will instead go to the state and be credited to the general fund. 11 Bonds; fines and forfeitures. Provides that in counties where the state has full responsibility for court administration costs, bond fines and fees that currently go to counties, will instead go to the state and be credited to the general fund. 12 Appropriation. Appropriates $18,731,000 to the district courts for the state assumption of funding district courts under this article. (This includes both the HACA offset and the fees and fines.) 13 Effective dates. (a) Provides that sections 2 and 6 are effective for aid payable in 2000. . Other provisions are effective January 1,2000 with respect to counties in the 8th judicial district, and July 1, 2000 with respect to counties in the 5th, 7th, and 9th judicial districts. (b) Provides that this article does not take effect unless the state assumes the district court costs under S.F. 2221. • Article 11: State Funding of District Courts rrClass Rate Schedule Property Payable Payable Payable Payable Type 1997 1998 1999 2000 Page 29 Residential Homestead: 476,000' 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% 1.00% >$76,000 2.00 1.85 1.70 1.65 Residential Non-homestead: • Single unit: 476,0001 2.30 1.90 1.25 1.20 >$76,000 2.30 2.10 1.70 1.65 2-3 unit and undeveloped land 2.30 2.10 1.70 1.65 . Market-rate Apartments: Regular 3.40 2.90 2.50 2.40 Small city 2.30 2.30 2.15 2.15 Low-income Apartments: Title 11 2.30 2.00 - - Farmer's Home Administration 2.00 L90 - - New Class 4d. - .- 1.00 1.00 • Commercial/Industrial/Public Utility: <5150,0002 3.00 2.70 2.45 2.40 >5150,000 4.60 4.00 3.50 3.40 Seasonal Recreational Commercial: - Homestead resorts(1c) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Seasonal resorts(4c) 2.30 2.10 1.80 1.65 Seasonal Recreational Residential: <$76,000' 1.75 1.40 1.25 I.20 >$76,000 2.50 2.50 2.20 1.65 Disabled Homestead(432,000) 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 Agricultural Land &Buildings: Homestead: 4115,000 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.35 $115,000-$600,000: <320 acres 1.00 0.90 0.80 0.80 >320 acres 1.50 1.40 1.25 0.80 >$600,000: <320 acres 1.G0 0.90 0.80 1.20 >320 acres 1.50 1.40 1.25 1.20 Non-homestead 1.50 1.40 1.25 1.20 Education Homestead Credit: Rate -. 32% 66.2% 83% Maximum - $225 $320 $390 Education Agricultural Credit: . Homestead - - - 54% • Nonhomestead - - - 50% 'First tier limit was 572,000 for payable 1997,$75,000 for payable 1998 and 1999. 2First tier limit was$100,000 for payable 1997. Art:Am S.D....--....r-..-. Item No. Staff Report No. Meeting Date: June 7, 1999 Type of Business: W. K. WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB:Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works Item Title/Subject: Review of Streets Policies Recommendations and Options Date of Report: June 2, 1999 At an earlier City Council meeting the final Street Committee Policies Recommendations were presented to the Council. These recommendations are scheduled to be heard again at two public hearings, one on June 28, the second on July 12, 1999. If these recommendations are adopted in their entirety or partially, some amendments to the ordinance or resolutions will have to be made. The assessment rate of 50% is part of the ordinance. The street width was adopted by resolution. Based on Council direction and public input, staff will prepare the required documents. Another issue within the assessment policy might be the rate on utility replacements. This rate is also 50% for residential mains, 100% for trunk mains and residential services. Perhaps a wastewater surcharge of some amount, paid quarterly would lessen the impact of any rehabilitation of the sewer mains. After the meter change out program is paid for,the current charge could remain in-place and subsidize any future water main replacement. Staff will be conducting additional research into various trenchless technologies for rehab of these utilities and the projected costs. Please give these ideas some additional thought. Staff will be happy to discuss any options that . might be presented. It is staffs intent to provide the Council and community with as many options as possible to maintain and improve the City's infrastructure in the manner in which directed. Please bring your final copy of the Streets Committee's report and recommendations with you to the meeting. If you have any questions or comments that staff can address or research prior to the meeting, please feel free to call me. Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works RESOLUTION NO. 5330 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW • COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A REPORT FROM THE MOUNDS VIEW STREETS POLICIES COMMITTEE ON RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO EXISTING STREETS POLICIES AND SETTING PUBLIC NOTICE AND HEARING DATES FOR FURTHER COMMUNITY REVIEW AND INPUT FOR FINAL POLICIES CONSIDERATION WHEREAS,the Mounds View City Council established a Streets Policies Committee in Resolution 5267 on September 14, 1998; and WHEREAS,this committee was charged to review the street reconstruction and assessment policies, and the city's financing abilities pertaining to those policies; and WHEREAS,the Streets Policies Committee has met during the period since and has now completed its report pertaining to its charge; and WHEREAS,the recommendations in the report are as follows: Recommendation#1: The standard from which to start considering a street improvement should be based on the current design of the street. Recommendation#2: [That] streets should be designed to provide a safe driving surface,but no wider than necessary to minimize the amount of impervious surface. The City will consider all drainage options. Recommendation#3: [The city should] determine the concerns of the residents who are involved in the project through a City-sponsored questionnaire and follow up with additional informational meeting with those residents before Council approves action. The feasibility study is to incorporate the residents' issues and concerns. Recommendation#4: [That] the City integrates a flexible 18-to 36-month time schedule for street reconstruction projects. Recommendation#5: [The City should] integrate certifying our MSA road system as complete into the city's overall project improvement plan. Recommendation#6: [That] the City considers bonding and/or creating interest-bearing-only funds to contribute toward the City's share of reconstruction costs. Recommendation#7: [That the City should] reduce the property owners' assessment from 50% to 20-25%of the reconstruction project. AND WHEREAS, residents can read the full report during working hours at Mounds View City Hall and authorizes staff to publicize the report in the local media and city newsletter; and V THEREFORE BE IT NOW RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council hereby accepts the report from the Streets Policies Committee for the City Council's further consideration during regularly scheduled work sessions and council meetings and sets a minimum of two public hearings for the community to comment and discuss the recommendations and City Council considerations for formal City Council action no later than June 28, 1999. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council hereby extends its gratitude to the members of the Streets Policies Committee for their hard work and fine effort in compiling this report. The City Council recognizes these individuals who served on the committee: Chair-Mary Malrick Dan Coughlin Jim Schmidt Rob Marty Ordeen Braathen Jim Norton Debbie Rielley Barbara Haake Brian Kaden Pat Michna Adopted this 12th day of April, 1999. Dan Coughlin,Mayor Attest: Charles S. Whiting, Clerk Administrator 9 CITY COUNCIL MEMO To: Mounds View City Council From: James Ericson, Planning Associate c Subject: Discussion Regarding Proposed Development Review of Fourplex at 7623-29 Woodlawn Drive Date: Meeting of June 7, 1999 Background: The Planning Commission, at their meeting on June 2, 1999, reviewed the request of PMJ Group, Inc., represented by Mike and Phil Juaire, to develop vacant land located at 7623-29 Woodlawn Drive. They are proposing a four-unit multi-family dwelling on the site. The Planning Commission, after much discussion, voted to recommend approval of the development review, conditioned upon certain things being done prior to and after Council review. The Commission's resolution is attached for your reference. Discussion: The proposed two-level structure is situated on the irregularly-shaped lot to take full advantage of available space, yet creates some difficulties in terms of parking and access as well as drainage. Attached to this report is a copy of the revised front elevation. I am not enclosing a copy of the overall site plan as it is undergaing a further revision in response to the Planning Commission action. This revised site plan may be available for your meeting on June 7, 1999. The items that the Planning Commission felt needed improvement and/or further work included the drainage plan, the landscape plan, and the parking layout. The Planning Commission also recommended that the required drainage and utility easements be drafted and executed prior to building permits be issued. Staff will be looking into the possibility of obtaining an easement for a storm sewer across another property fronting County Road I in an effort to address potential drainage issues. Direction: The sole intent of bringing this to you prior to the June 14th meeting is to call your attention to the project and to ask that if there are any comments and/or suggestions with regard to the building or site plan which can be addressed before the regular meeting. , , °° £ttSS ui i `K.uid uAPIooag o\ o o �utssoa� P�o�Ia.L 61Z6 Y N . e g dnoijW ` � ° a � U N cc D2 \ ' T f ❑❑❑. ❑❑❑s ❑❑❑s ❑❑❑■ ❑❑❑I . ❑❑❑'■ v_ D❑❑' ❑❑❑is - Z ( -, --❑s o ❑❑❑s ❑❑❑s 9 ODOR ❑Dais Dais ❑❑❑'s m iii U1111111II IIIIILI SSSS® \,_1 ICIOCIOCI,i SEER® o ` Innitl-Uu11i� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIJ > O EE®®E nn lull 11111111} 1 113 Illl 11111111 > ODO 1 1Z Z U Z ODOMZiL ❑❑as IL 1001 IL rY > Oq❑s X n ❑❑❑s L (1 Z K-; OEMs D DOOM o o OMR a❑❑s ❑D❑s ❑❑❑s i\ _ II 11. MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 580-99 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR A FOUR-UNIT MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING LOCATED AT 7623 - 7629 WOODLAWN DRIVE; PLANNING CASE NO. 555-99 WHEREAS, PMJ Group, represented by Mike Juaire, has requested City approval of a development review for a four-unit multiple family residential structure to be located at 7623 - 7629 Woodlawn Drive, legally described as follows: Lot 9,Block 1,Parkview Terrace Ramsey County,Minnesota WHEREAS, Chapter 1006 of the Mounds View Municipal Code requires that a development review be conducted for all commercial and industrial development and all residential development where more than two dwelling units are being erected within the City; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Site Plan(Certificate of Survey)date-stamped 5/28/99 4. Elevations,date-stamped 5/24/99 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that the site plan date-stamped May 28, 1999 conforms to the general zoning requirements of Chapter 1104 with regard to setbacks, parking requirements, building height, minimum floor space, open space, and floor area; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission is aware that City staff has reviewed proposed drainage plans and has determined that a suitable method for addressing drainage considerations can be accomplished, yet that plan has not yet been finalized; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that the building elevations and architectural design of the structure could be improved and has offered a list of requested changes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of a development review for a four unit multiple family residential structure to be located at 7623 - 7629 Woodlawn Drive, subject to the following stipulations: Resolution 580-99 Juaire Development Review June 2, 1999 Page 2 1. A landscaping plan approved by City staff and the City Forester shall be provided showing all areas to be sodded and those areas where additional plantings will be located with the species and quantities identified, prior to City Council review. 2. The building and site plans shall be revised prior to City Council review as follows: a. The entryways shall be located on the ground floor and the entryways for the two end units shall be relocated to the sides of the building rather than the front. b. An exterior light shall be located on the building adjacent to each entryway. c. Overhangs or some other type of architectural feature shall be added to the structure over each entryway. d. A second window shall be added to the front of the building for each unit. e. Detailed parking plan shall be submitted outlining areas for parking and no parking. 3. A final drainage plan shall be submitted and approved by the City before any building permits are issued. 4. Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated to the City prior to building permits being issued for those areas to be utilized for drainage purposes where none have been previously dedicated . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs Staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 2nd day of June, 1999 Jerry Peterson, Chairperson ATTEST: Rick Jopke, Community Development Director SEAL N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDE V\DE VCASES\555-99\5 80-99PC.RES /0 CITY COUNCIL MEMO To: Mounds View City Council From: James Ericson, Planning Associate Subject: Preliminary Internet Survey Results Date: Meeting of June 7, 1999 Background: With this last mailing of the utility bills to residents, staff included a short, half-page survey regarding Internet access. In all, a total of 2985 surveys were sent out. The surveys were included with utility bills to facilitate a high rate of response, given that practically no effort was needed to return the survey. The intent of the survey, a copy of which is attached, was to ascertain (1) how many of our residents had Internet access, (2) how many residents would visit the City's website, and (3) how many of our"connected" residents would want to be added to an e-mail list to be notified of City events, public meetings or other municipal information. With this knowledge, the City would be better able to assess its Internet presence and the effort that goes into maintaining the site as well as to improve communication between the City and its residents by providing an alternative means of conveying City information. Analysis: As of this writing, the City has received back 996 responses to the Internet survey. While more responses are expected, their numbers should be minimal, yet will push the total over the one- thousand mark. This translates (at this point) into a 34.5% rate of response--a percentage considered quite high for a mailout survey. I would expect the final percentage to be at least 35%. Of the 996 responses, 530 indicated that someone in their household had Internet access either at home or work. Thus, more than half(53%) of the respondents have access to the Internet. This figure was far higher than I had expected. Of those connected, the split between home and work was practically even--389 responses indicated access from home and 346 indicated access from work. Many responses (38%) indicated access at both home and work. Concerning the e-mail list, 272 respondents expressed a desire to be put on a list to be kept informed of City events and other information. In addition to those responses, we have received fifteen separate requests via e-mail asking to be added to the City's e-mail list. Again, this total is far higher than I expected, and am very happy at the response. The question which received far fewer positive responses than hoped was whether or not residents had visited the City's website. Of the 530 connected households, only 69 indicated that they had visited the website, or 13 %. This information, while disappointing, gives staff reason to believe that if more people knew about the website, more residents would utilize it. This leads to the only failing of the survey instrument. I had stated in the opening survey paragraph that I wanted to know how many residents would visit the website to obtain information, but then asked how many had visited the website. The results of the question, had it been asked in the former manner, could have been significantly different and consequently could have been more encouraging . There were a few comments written in on the survey sheets, some of which were from those who had visited the website. Comments on the surveys included a desire to have council agendas e- mailed regularly, while another felt that Council actions should be updated regularly on the website. A few responses included the comment that they were unaware the City even had a website! Last, more than one respondent pointed out that the content of the site was not up to date. This point is not lost on staff--myself, in particular. One of the biggest mistakes or failings an organization can make with a website is to not keep it current. Time sensitive material and information is just that--time sensitive. There is nothing more frustrating than visiting a website only to find the content out of date. Conclusions: We can conclude from the results of this survey a number of things. • First, if the survey instrument is kept short and simple, distributing them with the utility bills provides an inexpensive yet extremely successful method of garnering public opinion concerning a specific matter. A detailed, in depth survey, in my opinion, would be less successful. • Second, a large number of residents would like to receive information via e-mail concerning City events or other municipal information. With the desire to promote a higher level of communication between the City and its residents, utilizing e-mail is a logical and cost-effective way to raise residents' awareness regarding certain matters. • Third, more than half of the respondents have indicated they have Internet access. It would be reasonable then to expect, due to the high rate of return, that more than 50% of all of the households in Mounds View have access to the Internet. And since a properly designed and updated website can ultimately be a labor-saving agent of the City via its power of disseminating information, we should promote its availability to our residents with every presented opportunity. • Last, while the question was not explicitly asked, the results seem to indicate that more people with Internet access would visit the City's website if they knew it existed, if it were kept current, and if the residents knew it was the source for municipal information. Building on the last three points, it is my opinion that we need to strengthen and improve our web presence by committing more time to maintaining the site by keeping the content up to date and by providing additional information to the residents. The City's ability to communicate electronically with its residents via e-mail and the website is an under-utilized yet exciting and powerful tool, one which has the potential of accomplishing so much with very little investment. 2 SO THAT WE MAY SERVE YOU BETTER... The City of Mounds View would like to know how many of its residents have direct access to the Internet, either at home or work, and whether or not they would visit the City's website to obtain municipal information. Please take the time to fill out this short survey and return it to the City with your utility bill payment. We appreciate your response. Do you or someone in your household have Internet access? Yes No (Circle one) (If you responded"No,"there are no further questions.) If"Yes", where is your access? ' Hom-. ork.. Other(describe) If"Yes", have you visited the City ofMounds View Website? ' Yes No (Circle one) If you would like to be put on an e-mail list to be kept apprised of City events,public meetings or other municipal information,write your e-mail address below in the area provided or send an e-mail to moundsview@rcmnet.org with the subject header"Mounds View E-mail List". (Your address will not be used for any other purpose and will not be shared with any other organizations.) Your E-Mail address: The City's website is located at http://tcfreenet.org/ip/city/moundsview / 1 CITY COUNCIL MEMO To: Mounds View City Council From: James Ericson, Planning Associate .% Subject: Preliminary Discussion Regarding Proposed Ordinance 628, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 1001 of the Mounds View Municipal Code Pertaining to Contractors Licenses Date: Meeting of June 7, 1999 Background: The impetus for this revision to the Building Code results from consistantly negative feedback received from building contractors concerning the timing of annual contractor license fee. Analysis; The proposed changes are few--the licensing period shall run from January 1 to December 31 annually instead of July 1 through June 30. This change will allow contractors doing work in the City to get a contractors license that will cover the entire building season rather than requiring a contractor to get two licenses (the initial license and a renewal) for one building season. Staff would like to handle the transition between the two licensing periods administratively, such that all licenses that need to be renewed on July 1 will expire December 31, 1999 and will cost a prorated fee of$20 instead of the established $40. Staff has already sent notices to contractors to alert them to the proposed changes (see attached). The other changes considered with this ordinance is to remove references to "Fire Protection" and "Roofing" under Section 1001.03, Subd 2, Work Requiring License. These types of work are now licensed through the state and as such should not be listed with other work requiring a City license. If the contractor has a state license to do general residential or general commercial work, a city license is also not required. This point will be clarified as well. Direction: Please indicate to staff if any changes are needed to this proposed ordinance so corrections can be made prior to the first reading of the ordinance. Staff has timed the readings and hearing so that adoption will occur prior to the June 30th expiration of the current contractors licenses. CM OF I1 © ] Phone: (612) 717-4000 E��p Fax: (612)784-3462 A v�� °gess Partners\4' June 3, 1999 RE: CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE RENEWAL This letter is to remind you that your 1998-1999 contractor's license with the City of Mounds View will expire on June 30, 1999. As you know, the City's contractor license period runs from July 1 to June 30. However, the City has decided to change the license period to run from January 1 to December 31 to coincide with the construction season. This will hopefully eliminate some contractors having to obtain two licenses for one season. Because of the new licensing period, this next license period will run from July 1 to December 31 (a six- month period instead of the full 12 months). Since, your license will be valid for only six months, the charge for this license will be half the normal license fee, or $20. If you wish to renew your license by July 1, please complete the enclosed license application and send it along with $20 fee to my attention by Monday. June 21, 1999. If we do not already have a current Certificate of Insurance of file, please enclose one with your application or forward it to our office. Your license cannot be approved until the City has proof of acceptable insurance. Minimum coverage under Mounds View Code is as follows: Public liability per person $100,000 Public liability per occurrence $300,000 Property damage $50,000 If your insurance policy does not coincide with our license period, please make sure that you or your insurance company forwards a current certificate to us immediately upon renewal of your policy. Read the license application carefully (note that a signature is also required on the reverse side of the application). If you have any questions, please contact me at (612)717-4020. Sincerely, CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW Barb Benesch Administrative Assistant Community Development rePRINTED WITH 2401 Highway 10 • Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 "' ISOYINK TM recycled paper Equal Opportunity Employer ORDINANCE NO. 628 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 1001 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW MUNICIPAL CODE (BUILDING CODE)PERTAINING TO CONTRACTORS LICENSES; PLANNING CASE SP-070-99 THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1: Section 1001.02 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby amended with the proposed additions underlined and italicized and deletions respectively, to read as follows: 1001.02: LICENSING PROVISIONS 3: Subd. 1. License Required: Before any person shall engage in the business of doing or performing any of the work set forth in subdivision 2 hereof in the Municipality, said person shall first obtain a City license to do so as more fully provided for in this Chapter. A City license shall not be required if said person is licensed with the State and if said license is valid for the work being performed in Mounds View. A fee for checking the status of the State-issued license may be charged and will be set by resolution. (Ord. 500, 1-13-92) Subd. 2. Work Requiring City License: Asphalt Excavating and filling Fence installing • Gas line installer General construction; commercial contractors and those residential general contractors who do not require have a State license Heating, air conditioning, ventilation or refrigeration Masonry Plaster, stucco or lathing Roofing Sewer and witer (working in street only, State plumbing license covers any work to the property line) i Sheetrock Sign and billboard'2 Ordinance 628 Page 2 Siding (Ord. 521, 11-23-92) Tree trimming and removal (Ord. 558, 4-24-95) [Subdivisions 3 through 6 remain unaltered] Subd. 7. Expiration And Renewal: All licenses shall expire on July-1-December 31 following the date of issuance unless sooner revoked or forfeited. If a license granted hereunder is not renewed previous to its expiration, then all rights granted by such license shall cease, and any work performed after the expiration of the license shall be in violation of this Code. Persons renewing their licenses after the expiration date shall be charged a full annual license fee. No prorated license fees shall be allowed for renewals. [Subdivision 8 remains unaltered] SECTION 2. This Ordinance goes into effect thirty (30) days after its publication in the official City newspaper. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this 14th day of June, 1999. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this 28th day of June, 1999. Dan Coughlin, Mayor ATTEST: Charles S. Whiting, City Clerk/Administrator (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\SPECPROJ\628.ORD Item No. JO& Type of Business: WS WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report 1 1 To: Mayor and City Council From: Carl Schmidt Item Title/Subject: Park and Recreation Commission Appointments Date of Report: June 3, 1999 There are 2 openings on the Park and Recreation Commission. One vacancy is from the additional seat that was added by the City Council in January. The other opening is from the resignation of Scott Dentz. We have received one application from Theresa Lexcen. r. •b ; I ,• i 1Z 11111 11111 ....'. .'.'. 1 ., . . . . . ,. ... .... zw 1111/ ril ,,,,,-.; -,,•.a.-- -,...:-.PI•i-,0,4.,....,q4, ,,..- • , . tIJ '•••'-' ,m,k11..,-,.,---!,' ,_ . ik24.'PA'0,,,,•:‘,. ."--7,- ';'-'.,eailfi •-,,i.- .- • a., 6:-. 7,4,,,-,-,--:,,,,Ti ...-.,--.,„-4.--*..,,s ' ' ' ' },,,,,,-.,&--.1. 7",t11,ge;;;,..10; ; ` "' ' 11111 'e-rr'‘`;':';;!';'-;'-A'''il‘;:1;;;4;';44' -I- .1 ; ' ' ' Z tr) a, :."2:44-ir.:1-'ilti,' i3-,',14' '1, :",, , 0 11111 .t' 0 , , . .. „. ... . . . . . . .. . . . .. . .. ..._ o ilAo ri ., . . . . . . _. . .., 1,,-,,,,,,,,,-.4, .-,4,0,,,,,,,,s..,,,,z,w, - •-, - . Ei 2 1. . ..„. (..) 11111 At,-:„0:.1e,`tifi-•::- :,-1,... ,,, ,:., ,, :.„„ ,.. ,-,,,, ,,,,,,-., .,,, . CI :-,:'--4`'-:";11.'-';',6-`"D'''''',:-':•: '..i.',1 ;': ';';'2 - ';••:::: -,,,,.• ..F.is .,- 0 ICI m 3 PI 11111 = le) - o = - A 0 z 5 - - . a ;-• . . 0 .„, g . (n- vs f:., ty5rrir.o-„,c•:im,,,,S4=bm4,,i-,-,-PTt,,,,*,,.,...,.,,,,1,.T4l,k4,v.-:,.',.--,4-i--,.,-;-Z.,,1„f.‘:,Rx:,,1,‘...t.,r..,*tt,4-.-1,:t.i<v,i...?0t.=iilK4/..„7f:`',i,:121i,1_,1,71•..,11,a',;*'41-''.1'.74V.2:7,;%4.:,1:•:F0•t..-;%i19.i:•.5.:'.4,1:,R.i::..-:._':;.2.,.'..,.:.:!.--i.:..-.f.,..'l:--..':..-iz,:.l:',,..,.lr'-1,I'iI'4:i,.fs:;-;4•',;ZI••:•,.-,'F,':i:l",:..:-:.,.:-;i4A.::,;z'...;,i*,7i.tt1t,1-,'..,.V;i,-i,i*frq;A.:-C.,i1,.i,4,1;t3i°tk,‘1-E-•gi%-:jV*2P-'i:,:.'',,i*4;.:,•4:'p.'V.,:,it,5.:.2:'1i::•41.:4.-;-;11'-. =.... 11111 ..r.it'iit?-tzl.'ss, '.3g4A[..f,•:-•=,1-',':%[11..17:1:4.-4',,ii.11.$1.4—A.:Ii„, 2,•,,a- r----'-•.'.... ..'",:=.1=•:::-T.•:;.:•;.*:-7,-,..f,',,,:w9 . 111,:iilm -ii‘,5N,,,..1.i.,-,,,!,,,,,if,,,.:t,....!,'4,:••,i,i'474Srk-.3,..v l.‘,:::/.1114g;I:,,17,1z,-..:401.•!:::'$..%1::::t.f;•,tf.,!,.:4%.:z.:14:1.4.4-", , ',":7;7,417.:::%•454:":11.':::•••41:7,•%V6:k.,,,--q0..T.,104....•:,,;e;f2.4-44 1.. -4t,••"''-e-li.24,:.•:•:;.:;.1.s.,,::,:--;:;:;,;.',:•...1::ig•113•„1,1m41- c:1 -; . • ii.1;:' ,.7,1'..,-t.o,fli‘ft,•-•,-,;•,‘•‘:: ,,,.;.1..,;:,!,,,,,,k.Wz•••;,,z;.;ti.ZI• © . . - .',. ••',.-4,}'1.';''''•:;::6.?;1':,•1,';•'`',;:;,:it.:a..441.1`4iiii•l*..1$1 IC ITA ., . :,,Nitti:V:!;.'..7,,:•11-Alfj'i:5117:::;',1:-.•Ig',:a.W:°4:11 -'1-° .• - - 11111 V)-0 - • ••'..t.'4•`-.`-f`-•:F''''''.4:z•-'-'71/s0,. ..•-•• .7114,s.-",.7.i.e.,:-Tfit.k.•,t; ...= I z - '<4.-..:&..F.•:4.,,,,e.:1„,i•.,:.5:w..,. :::.;.•,.,,N-A.....74:A.,,,,,:..-,- o - • -",—, z?,:...-.,0,,,i,„4,2 4,,,,,,••4.1••..-14-1,..tift4:::=.4-. w .1i*-Isolivitl,-swl'is:•-.:7L,VIt.l•r•*:V.'44.*•:.kzel- 0,-,-c4 - rt2.?;..;f'rt-,:iFA iVi•:?;t1:-.5. -14)•-, - 11111 ,-.-1•-•it - kr) 4 c, 4?-1 a sz • t--- ON a' CI CA 0 aN 4 ca. CI ON G &N 4 8 ccl 0T\ M C:' r. ,... CI = 0 cc: 0 )n el CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 2401 HIGHWAY 10 MOUNDS VIEW, MN 55112 612-7174000 APPLICATION FOR ADVISORY GROUPS Group Applied For: Farb<�- �. . Cori �S. Second Choice(if any): Full Name(print or type): ,71-7 Home Phone: Work or Other: 1Z - 7r6 —S'c��• Address: 521 a' -FL-re P Years at this address: Years you have lived in Mounds View: QUALIFICATIONS YOU WANT TO HAVE Ii € COUNCIL CONSIDER Skills and Interests: ca /1,04)4, c7- / l t i S-��yI l//l4 %7'a,vtc/ o--r,4i4 S '1''0 ),Le_, 1,e Ivo�' Alt4Cc7 -Palky-/fr; Employment, Occupation, or Other Experience: bcz y Cee .dt of i'v► I a GI e h 'f � Ce �1 i:�1jf Memberships, Accomplishments, or Other Qualifications &t n�2 S I J-2. �1.2 - ` 0 y 1 q �. " 1 9 ' C o..ad-C/) 13 a 5'e d(ill et r J C0/7141 u n i C Cite, •`tri c 4-z '-.t v t4 C-e, Please state your reason for wanting to serve on this committee: 62�I�L�-t_ �ti�, �' iM _� L � CL ( ,1-0/2.1; 644 CLO sfa ' - - e 1 Your response to any of the above inquires may be continued on the back and you may attach an ' other material which you want the City Council to consider. y Signature: I ,,, -e ,. 4011.64," Date: jl / yr The City of Mounds View is committed to the policy that all persons shall have access to its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, creed, color, sex, age, national orgin, or handicap.