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 - 1998/06/08
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNCIL AGENDA MONDAY,JUNE 8, 1998 7:00 PM 5:00 PM - 1999 Council Budget Special Work Session 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL: McCarty, Stigney, Koopmeiners, Quick, Gunn 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. May 26, 1998 City Council Meeting Minutes 4. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: None. 5. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve Just and Correct Claims. B. Approval of Park and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes - May 28, 1998. C. Set a Public Hearing for 7:05 PM on Monday, June 22, 1998 to consider Resolution No. 5242, a Resolution approving a conditional use permit for an oversized accessory building at 2085 Oakwood Drive. D. Set a Public Hearing for 7:10 PM on Monday, June 22, 1998 to consider Resolution No. 5243, a Resolution approving a PUD amendment tot he Silverview Estates PUD and development review for a senior cooperative housing development. 6. RESIDENTS REQUESTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR A. Citizens: Before speaking must give their full name and address for the minutes. 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. 7:05 PM Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution No. 5241, a Resolution Approving a Conditional Use Permit and a License for a Residential Dog Kennel at 2359 Pinewood Circle. Page 2 City Council Agenda June 8, 1998 B. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 617, An Ordinance Amending Title 1100, Chapters 1114 and 1115 of the Municipal Zoning Code relating to the permitted uses within the B-3 Highway Business, and B-4, Regional Business zoning districts. 1. Second Reading 2. Consider Motion Adopting Roll Call: Quick, Stigney,Koopmeiners, Gunn, McCarty C. Consideration of Resolution No. 5244, Changing Election Polling Location to Edgewood Middle School. D. Consideration of Community Center HVAC Change Order. (Information will be provided at meeting). E. Work Session Format Approval. CLOSED SESSION F. Collective Bargaining Agreements. 8. REPORTS 9. Next Council Work Session: July 6, 1998 -6:00 PM Next Council Meeting: June 22, 1998 - 7:00 PM 10. ADJOURNMENT Item No. Staff Report No. Meeting Date: June 1, 1998 Type of Business: WK WK:Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Chuck Whiting From: Carl Schmidt Item Title/Subject: 1998 Public Works Labor Agreement Date of Report: May 22, 1998 The following articles have been modified from the previous contract during the Public Works negotiations: Article 15 - Safety- Safety glasses increase reimbursement amount from a$70 maximum to $75 in per year, not to exceed$150 in two years. Article 17- Insurance-Insurance increases from$330 to $340 (same for all employees). Article 19 - Clothing- Safety shoes increase from$50 per year to $65. Work jacket increases from$40 every two years to $60. Article 24-Wages-Wage increase of 3%(same for all employees). LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW AND STEVEN D. DAZENSKI LAWRENCE DECHEINE WILLIAM G. HANGGI WILLIAM G. HANSON GARY G. KARDELL WALLACE RMORTENSON JEFFREY WIENKE TIMOTHY FREDBERG BRUCE MEEHAN MICHAEL SCHNUR JANUARY 1, 1998 -DECEMBER 31, 1998 1 ARTICLE 1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT. 4 ARTICLE 2. CITY AUTHORITY 4 ARTICLE 3. APPLICABILITY OF CITY PERSONNEL CODE 4 ARTICLE 4. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 5 ARTICLE 5. DEFINITIONS 5 ARTICLE 6. SAVINGS CLAUSE 5 ARTICLE 7. WORK SCHEDULE 5 ARTICLE 8. OVERTIME PAY 6 ARTICLE 9. CALL BACK 6 ARTICLE 10. LEGAL DEFENSE 6 ARTICLE 11. RIGHT OF SUBCONTRACT 7 ARTICLE 12. DISCIPLINE 7 ARTICLE 13. SENIORITY. 7 ARTICLE 14. PROBATIONARY PERIODS 7 ARTICLE 15. SAFETY 7 ARTICLE 16. JOB POSTING. 8 ARTICLE 17. INSURANCE 8 ARTICLE 18. INJURY ON DUTY. 9 ARTICLE 19. CLOTHING 9 ARTICLE 20. STANDBY DUTY. 9 ARTICLE 21. PERFORMANCE REVIEWS 9 ARTICLE 22. JOB CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM 10 2 ARTICLE 23. SEVERANCE 12 ARTICLE 24. WAGES 12 ARTICLE 25. INTERMITTENT LEAD WORKER 13 ARTICLE 26. DEPARTMENT LEAD DESIGNATION 13 ARTICLE 27. DURATION. 13 3 ARTICLE 1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT is entered into by and between the City of Mounds View, hereinafter called the CITY, and the named members of the City's Public Works and Parks Department, hereinafter called the EMPLOYEES. The intent and purpose of this AGREEMENT is to: 1.1 Establish the conditions which will govern the employment relationship between the CITY and the EMPLOYEES in the Public Works Department including Garage, Parks Maintenance, Street Maintenance, Sanitary Sewer Operations, Water Operations and other maintenance areas the CITY may add; 1.2 Establish hours, wages and other conditions of employment; 1.3 Establish procedures for the resolution of disputes concerning this AGREEMENT's interpretation and/or application; 1.4 Specify the full and complete understanding of the parties; and 1.5 Place in written form the parties' agreement upon terms and conditions of employment for the duration of this AGREEMENT. The CITY and the EMPLOYEES, through this AGREEMENT, continue their dedication to the highest quality of public service. Both parties recognize this AGREEMENT as a pledge of this dedication. ARTICLE 2. CITY AUTHORITY. 2.1 The CITY retains the full and unrestricted right to operate and manage all manpower, facilities, and equipment; to establish functions and programs;to set and amend budgets; to determine the utilization of technology; to establish and modify the organizational structure;to select, direct and determine the number of personnel;to establish work schedules; and to perform any inherent managerial function not specifically addressed or limited by the AGREEMENT. 2.2 Any term and condition of employment not specifically established or modified by this AGREEMENT shall be governed by Chapter 300 of the Municipal Code, entitled Personnel, and shall remain solely within the discretion of the CITY to modify, establish, or eliminate. ARTICLE 3. APPLICABILITY OF CITY PERSONNEL CODE 3.1 Except where specifically superseded by this agreement, the Personnel Code, Chapter 300 of the Municipal Code, of the CITY shall regulate all conditions of employment. 4 ARTICLE 4. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 4.1 The grievance procedure for the EMPLOYEES shall be as prescribed by Section 308 of the Personnel Code. 4.2 Grievances relating to performance reviews shall be limited to Steps 1 and 2 of the established procedures. ARTICLE 5. DEFINITIONS 5.1 "EMPLOYEE" means an individual who has successfully completed the required probationary period and who employed on a schedule of at least 40 hours per week and 80 hours per pay period and who is subject to the terms of this agreement. 5.2 "BASE PAY RATE" means an employee's hourly pay rate exclusive of any other special allowances. 5.3 "SENIORITY" means length of continuous service with the CITY for purposes of promotion, transfer, layoff and recall. 5.4 "CALL BACK" means return of an employee to a specified work site to perform assigned duties at the express authorization of the CITY at a time other than an assigned shift. An extension of or an early report to an assigned shift is not a call back. ARTICLE 6. SAVINGS CLAUSE This AGREEMENT is subject to the laws of the United States, the State of Minnesota, and the CITY. In the event any provision of this AGREEMENT shall be held to be contrary to law by a court of competent jurisdiction from whose final judgement or decree no appeal has been taken within the time provided, such provision shall be voided. All other provisions of this AGREEMENT shall continue in full force and effect. The voided provision may be renegotiated at the request of either party. ARTICLE 7. WORK SCHEDULE 7.1 The sole authority for work schedules is the CITY. The normal work day for an EMPLOYEE shall be eight(8) hours. The normal work week shall be forty(40)hours Monday through Friday. Hours per day and days of the week may be varied if mutually agreed between the CITY and the EMPLOYEE. 7.2 Service to the public may require the establishment of regular shifts for some EMPLOYEES on a daily, weekly, seasonal or annual basis other than the normal 7:00 a.m. - 3:30 p.m. day. The CITY will give seven(7) days advance notice to the EMPLOYEES affected by the establishment of work days different from the EMPLOYEES normal eight hour work day. 5 7.3 In the event that work is required because of unusual circumstances such as(but not limited to)fire, flood, snow, sleet, or breakdown of municipal equipment or facilities, no advance notice need be given. It is not required that an EMPLOYEE working other than the normal work day be scheduled to work more than eight(8) hours, however, each EMPLOYEE has an obligation to work overtime or call backs if requested unless unusual circumstances prevent the EMPLOYEE from so working. 7.4 Service to the public may require the establishment of regular work weeks that schedule work on Saturdays and/or Sundays. ARTICLE 8. OVERTIME PAY 8.1 Hours worked in excess of either eight (8) hours within a twenty-four(24) hour period (except for shift changes) or more than eighty(80)hours within a fourteen(14) day pay period will be compensated for at one and one-half times the EMPLOYEES regular base pay. Overtime worked on a holiday will be compensated at the EMPLOYEE's holiday pay plus two (2)times the regular pay rate. 8.2 Overtime will be distributed as equally as practicable based upon a list maintained by the CITY and in consideration of any special skill requirements. Work in progress will not be stopped merely to equalize overtime, but will continue with the crew assigned. 8.3 Overtime refused by EMPLOYEES will for record purposes under ARTICLE 8.2 be considered as unpaid overtime worked. 8.4 For the purpose of computing overtime compensation, overtime hours worked shall not be pyramided, compounded, or paid twice for the same hours worked. ARTICLE 9. CALL BACK An employee called in for work at a time other than the employee's normal scheduled shift will be compensated for a minimum of two (2)hour's pay at one and one-half(1 'h)the employee's base pay rate. ARTICLE 10. LEGAL DEFENSE 10.1 EMPLOYEES involved in litigation because of negligence, ignorance of the laws, non- observance of laws, or as a result of EMPLOYEE judgmental decision may not receive legal defense by the City. 10.2 An EMPLOYEE who is charged with a traffic violation, ordinance violation or criminal offense arising from acts performed within the scope of the EMPLOYEE's employment, when such act is performed in good faith and under direct order of the CITY shall be reimbursed for reasonable attorney's fees and court costs actually incurred by such EMPLOYEE in defending against such charge. 6 10.3 An EMPLOYEE classified as Level D in the Water area will be covered by the CITY's professional liability coverage and if, necessary, named separately in the policy. ARTICLE 11. RIGHT OF SUBCONTRACT Nothing in this AGREEMENT shall prohibit or restrict the right of the CITY from subcontracting work performed by EMPLOYEES covered by this AGREEMENT. ARTICLE 12. DISCIPLINE The EMPLOYER will discipline employees only for just cause. Suspension, demotion and dismissal actions shall be regulated by the Personnel Code. ARTICLE 13. SENIORITY. 13.1 Seniority will be the determining criterion for transfers, promotions and layoffs only when all job-relevant qualification factors are equal. 13.2 Seniority will be the determining criteria for recall when all job-relevant qualification factors are equal. Recall rights under this provision will continue for twenty-four(24) months after lay off. Recalled employees shall have ten(10)working days after notification of recall by registered mail at the employee's last known address to report to work or forfeit all recall rights. ARTICLE 14. PROBATIONARY PERIODS 14.1 All newly hired or rehired EMPLOYEES will serve a twelve(12)month probationary period. 14.2 Reclassified positions that have exhausted the twelve(12) month probationary period will serve a six(6)month probationary period. All EMPLOYEES will serve a six month(6) month probationary period in any job level in which the EMPLOYEE has not served a probationary period. 14.3 At any time during the probationary period a newly hired or rehired EMPLOYEE may be terminated at the sole discretion of the CITY. 14.4 At any time during the probationary period a promoted or reassigned EMPLOYEE may be demoted or reassigned to the EMPLOYEE's previous position at the sole discretion of the CITY. ARTICLE 15. SAFETY 15.1 The CITY AND THE EMPLOYEES agree to jointly promote safe and healthful working conditions, to cooperate in safety manners and to work in a safe manner. 7 15.2 The City will reimburse up to 50% of the cost of a City approved purchase of prescription safety glasses to be used during working hours, the reimbursement amount not to exceed $75 $ O per year, not to exceed $150 in a two (2)year period. ARTICLE 16. JOB POSTING. 16.1 The CITY agrees that permanent job vacancies within the department shall be filled based on the concept of promotion from within provided that applicants: 16.1.1 have the necessary qualifications to meet the standards of the job vacancy; and 16.1.2 have the ability to perform the duties and responsibilities of the job vacancy. 16.2 Employees filling a higher job level based on the provisions of this ARTICLE shall be subject to the conditions of ARTICLE 14 (PROBATIONARY PERIOD). 16.3 The EMPLOYER has the right of final decision in the selection of employees to fill posted jobs based on qualifications, abilities and experience. 16.4 Job vacancies within the designated bargaining unit will be posted for five(5)working days so that members of the bargaining unit can be considered for such vacancies. ARTICLE 17. INSURANCE 17.1 The CITY will contribute up to a maximum of three hundred forty dollars($340)-per month per employee for group health and life insurance for dependent coverage for calendar 1998. 17.2 By mutual agreement EMPLOYEES may use twenty-five dollars($25.00) of the per month per employee of health insurance dollars for dental insurance. 17.3 EMPLOYEES not choosing dependent coverage cannot be covered at CITY expense for any additional insurance than the individual group health and group life insurance. Additional life insurance can be purchased by EMPLOYEES at the EMPLOYEE's expense to the extent allowed under the CITY's group policy. ARTICLE 18. INJURY ON DUTY. The Injury on duty benefit will be sixty(60) days with the first three(3) days to come out of sick leave and then sixty(60) days injury on duty. Any days beyond the sixty(60) days will then be taken from the EMPLOYEE's banked sick leave. EMPLOYEES receiving benefits under this ARTICLE shall not receive payments from the CITY which causes the EMPLOYEE to earn more than the EMPLOYEE's after tax take home pay earned while working. 8 ARTICLE 19. CLOTHING. 19.1 The CITY will contribute $60 every two (2)years for the purchase of one(1)winter jacket The winter jacket is to be cleaned and kept in repair by the employee. 19.2 The City will reimburse an employee up to $65 /year or up to a maximum of$195 in three (3)years toward the purchase of one pair of safety shoes of a type approved by the City (above the ankle boot with a steel/composite reinforced toe). Any remaining funds from the purchase of the boots can be"banked" for the three year period. ARTICLE 20. STANDBY DUTY. 20.1 EMPLOYEES assigned standby duty for a seven(7) day period shall be compensated at the rate of 7 hours of overtime. When a holiday falls within the seven(7) day period, an additional two hours at overtime rate shall be paid. Such standby pay shall be in addition to other compensation the EMPLOYEE is entitled to under this AGREEMENT including call back pay should the EMPLOYEE be required to return to the City to perform emergency work. 20.2 Standby duty will be made available to employees on a voluntary basis. Employees wishing to be assigned standby duty shall indicate their interest on a list maintained by the CITY. Employees wishing not to be assigned to standby duty shall not be included in the equalization of overtime under Article 8.2 and will be placed last on the callback list. 20.3 The EMPLOYEE on standby duty shall first be offered overtime for which he is qualified. If it is refused, it shall be offered to other employees in accordance with Article 8.2 of this AGREEMENT. 20.4 In further consideration of standby duty, the CITY shall furnish a vehicle for the EMPLOYEE to take home at his choosing during the period of standby duty. 20.5 A schedule of employees and their assigned standby duty assignment dates shall be maintained by the Public Works Supervisor. EMPLOYEES may, with the permission of the Public Works Supervisor, trade standby duty on a day-to-day basis with other public works/parks maintenance employees. ARTICLE 21. PERFORMANCE REVIEWS. 21.1 The CITY will design a performance review form with the input of the EMPLOYEES. 21.2 The CITY will perform a performance review on an annual basis to help guide the employee in areas which need to be more fully developed and to determine the job level to which the employee will be assigned for the next fiscal year. 21.3 Performance reviews will be prepared by each employees' supervisor. Appeals must follow normal City personnel rules. 9 ARTICLE 22. JOB CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM. 22.1 A 4 (four)level job classification system designated as Levels A, B, C and D will be used to classify employees and establish wages. 22.1.1 Public Services Worker-LEVEL A Requirements • High School Diploma GED, or equivalent. • Valid Minnesota Class C Driver's License. • Successful completion of City's physical examination. • Demonstrated ability to meet the physical demands of the job; including, but not limited to, lifting, bending, climbing, reaching overhead, pushing, and pulling with out restriction. • Demonstrated ability to read, understand, and follow written and oral instructions including safety rules. • Demonstrated ability to perform job responsibilities in climatic extremes. • Demonstrated ability to perform routine repair and maintenance tasks in the following sections: Streets, Parks, Building Maintenance, Sewer, Water, &Vehicle Maintenance 22.1.2 Public Services Worker-LEVEL B Requirements • Meet or exceed all Level A requirements; and • Successful completion of one or more years of relevant experience. • Possession of valid Minnesota Commercial Driver's license plus endorsements required by the CITY. • For current Level A employees, the following areas must be satisfactory on the most recent performance review: (For new employees coming in at Level B these areas will be judged by their references in relevant work experiences) • Safe work practices and safe driving record. • Adherence to tardiness and sick leave policies. • Demonstrated ability to deal effectively and tactfully with the public. • Demonstrated ability to work with a minimum of on-site supervision. • Working knowledge of job fundamentals. • Adherence to all City policies and procedures. 22.1.3 Public Service Worker-LEVEL C Requirements • Meet or exceed all Level B requirements; and • Successful completion of 3 or more years of relevant experience. • For employees with primary responsibility in the indicated area, the following license/certificate will be required. • All areas- Successful completion of a certified heavy equipment training program or equivalent training and experience. • Water- Class D Water Supply System Operator's Certificate • Sewer- Class S D Waste Water Operator's Certificate 10 • Mechanic- Certification of successful completion of training in brakes, alignments, transmissions and driveline components, and vehicle electrical systems; and demonstrated proficiency in welding. • Streets- City certification in snow plowing, street patching, and demonstrated proficiency in both. • Parks -Basic proficiency in carpentry and plumbing demonstrated on the job to the satisfaction of the Parks and Recreation Director. • For current Level B employees,the following areas must be satisfactory on the most recent performance review: (For new employees coming in at Level C these areas will be judged by their references in relevant work experiences) • Working knowledge of all operations, preventive maintenance, and routine repairs of equipment operated or assigned to operate. • Working knowledge of methods and materials used in their areas of responsibility. • Demonstrated ability to work without direct on-site supervision and to make on- site decisions related to work assignments. 22.1.4 Public Service Worker-LEVEL D Requirements • Meet or exceed all requirements of Level C; and • Successful completion of 5 years of relevant work experience. • For employees with primary responsibility in the indicated area, or temporarily assigned to an area and in responsible charge, the following license/certificates will be required: • Water- Class B Water Supply System Operator's Certificate • Mechanic- Certification in computerized and electronic components, hydraulic systems, and completed training in propane fuel systems. • Parks-Minnesota Non-Commercial Herbicide/Pesticide Applicator License/Certificate and completion of liability training in parks operations (LMC Safety and Loss Control Workshop). Attendance at a workshop or seminar related to turf management and demonstration of a working knowledge of those principles. • Streets - Certification of completion of training in MMUTCD signing, attendance of work zone safety class, demonstrated ability to supervise contract labor and perform all designated tasks of accountability, ability to formulate preliminary division budget and maintain proper budgetary expenditures and completion of liability training for public works operations(LMC Safety and Loss Control Workshop) 11 • Sewer- Class S-C Waste Water Operator's Certificate. Demonstrated ability to effectively and efficiently operate jet truck for clearing sewers and cutting roots and inspection unit. Attendance of combined space and competent person seminar. Ability to formulate preliminary division budget and maintain budgetary expenditures. • Multiple Areas-Employees who meet the requirements for Level C classification in 3 or more areas; and must be normally assigned to these areas on a regular basis; irrespective of standby duty. Employees achieving Level D classification for skill in multiple areas must make substantial effort on an annual basis to receive the training and achieve required licensing for Level D in the area to which they are primarily assigned. • For Level C employees, the following areas must be satisfactory on the most recent performance review in order to be classified as Level D. • Demonstrated ability to lead a work crew. • Demonstrated ability to assist in scheduling other employees, materials, equipment and activities. • Demonstrated ability to assist in training of other employees. • Working knowledge of operations in all departments. • Demonstrated ability to assume supervisory duties in the absence of the Public Works Supervisor. • Demonstrated ability to respond to and resolve complaints effectively. ARTICLE 23. SEVERANCE • 23.1 Severance pay shall be granted in the amount of fifty percent(50%) of the maximum accrual of one hundred and twenty(120) days of unused sick leave to employees who have completed ten years of service. Upon death of the employee, the beneficiary of the employee shall be paid the benefit. 23.2 Employees who have completed ten years of service and retire may elect, in lieu of severance pay as provided in Section 23.1, to have the employer use sixty five percent (65%) of the employee's accumulated and banked sick leave for the retiree's group insurance premium for as long as the funds are available up to the retiree's 65th birthday. ARTICLE 24. WAGES. 24.1 The following wage schedule will be in effect from the first payroll period in 1998 through the last payroll period in 1998. 1998 (3%) LEVEL A $12.25 $-11.89 per hour LEVEL B $14.38 $ 13.96 per hour LEVEL C $16.65 $ 16.17 per hour LEVEL D $17.00 $-1.6750 per hour 12 24.2 An EMPLOYEE classified in Levels B through D will receive wages listed for that level regardless of the area to which they are assigned, but will receive no less than the level to which they are classified. 24.3 New employees starting salary will be a percentage of the determined four level job classification system. Adjustments will occur throughout the first year of employment resulting in 100% of the determined level upon completion of the employees probationary period. Starting salary resulting from job level reclassification will also be a percentage of the determined four level job classification system. Adjustments will occur throughout the probationary period. resulting in 100% of the determined level upon the end of the probationary period. Adjustments for new employees and job level reclassifications are not automatic. Adjustments are based upon performance and discretion of Public Works Director. ARTICLE 25. INTERMITTENT LEAD WORKER 25.1 Under certain circumstances, the Public Works Director as well as the Parks and Recreation Director may determine the need for an Intermittent Lead Worker to be in charge of a work crew. This determination will be made at the discretion of the Public Works Director as well as the Parks and Recreation Director and may be based on the complexity of a task, the number of workers involved, the experience level of the workers assigned, or a combination of these factors. The determination of the Public Works Director as well as the Parks and Recreation Director is final and not grievable. 25.2 The CITY will maintain a sign-up list for those EMPLOYEES who are to be considered for Intermittent Lead Worker assignments. Selections for Lead Workers will be made from this list in accordance with the Public Works Director's determinations of the best qualifications. There will be no attempt to equalize distribution of Intermittent Lead Worker selections. 25.3 To be eligible on the sign-up list an employee must be classified as a Public Services Worker-Level D. Selections will be only for those areas in which the individual is classified. 25.4 The Lead Worker will receive a pay differential of$0.50 per hour while assigned as the Lead Worker. ARTICLE 26. DEPARTMENT LEAD DESIGNATION An employee who has been designated by the City to be Department Lead shall receive$1.00 per hour additional compensation. ARTICLE 27. DURATION. This AGREEMENT shall be effective as of January 1, 1998 and shall remain in full force and effect until December 31, 1998. 13 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT on this th day of , 1998. CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW: Mayor City Administrator EMPLOYEES: Steve D. Dazenski Lawrence Decheine William G.Hanggi William G. Hanson Gary G. Kardell Wallace R. Mortenson Michael Schnur Jeffrey Wienke Timothy Fredberg Bruce Meehan MEMO June 5, 1998 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator Re: June 8, 1998 City Council Meeting We start at 5 p.m. on Monday with budget review for 1999. The emphasis as I understand it of this budget meeting is to talk about the budget from the perspective of what programs or wants does the Council have for this upcoming budget. Last Monday we touched a bit on the community center which should be looked at as a program or service. Other items that have been discussed from time to time over the past several months include policing manpower relative to traffic management,cable television manpower and equipment, internet service, youth oriented programming, receptionist personnel, comprehensive planning and manpower, and probably others that I have forgotten. I added a couple last week to think about in the year 2000 project and neighborhood liaison program. If some thought and discussion can take place on Monday on these and others ideas Council may have, staff can take a crack at how they may be implemented in a budget plan for next year. As for the regular meeting, it shouldn't take too long. Here's what we have: Item 5D - Public Hearing Scheduling for Silverview Estates PUD Amendment: This item is simply the scheduling of a public hearing, but the reason is that the project will include a different type of senior housing project. Item 7C-Polling Place: Cari's memo and resolution proposes moving this fall's election polling place from City Hall to Edgewood Middle School. After some staff discussion, we felt this would be the most pragmatic approach to the elections for this year. In the past, some concern has been expressed that even at the old Bel Rae people couldn't get in and quickly vote. While I have seen no evidence to that affect in the elections since coming to town,this switch now for this year only should be doable and hopefully reassuring to candidates and voters. Item 7E - Work Session Format Approval: Last Monday night the Council discussed its work session format, particularly whether to continue on with televising. While there were different opinions expressed,the consensus seemed to be to talk about it some more and decide this Monday. Typically resolutions are done up for Council decisions,but I think in this case with some discussion still to take place, it may be premature to draft up a resolution. What the Council may want to do if it finds a decision can be made Monday is to simply do it by motion with clarifiers added to the motion as desired. Item 7F: Collective Bargaining Agreements: Cari and I will go over the agreements with the Council with the intent of coming to a final agreement position on the ones that can be done. This will be a closed session. In other business, I may ask to add to the agenda an update on the golf course in closed session. I am waiting for word with Mr. Long on that. The prevailing wage language has been determined and distributed to contractors on the community center site. A wage determination was acquired from Ramsey County and it does not appear that any onerous paperwork will need to be done to verify wages during the construction period, so that is good news. It is not anticipated that any difficulties will arise from the wage addendum with the contractors. I also met with Jerry Linke and had him review the construction site. He pointed out a couple of things and seemed a bit more satisfied that concerns are being addressed. Mike and I have put our files together and will be sorting them out as we go. The history of the prevailing wage issue is sorting itself out slowly. I am still waiting for a couple of documented recollections of events that may have contributed to the problem. As for the operations planning for the community center,I haven't had much time to work on it since last Monday night and hope to get to it shortly. Also,the corner lot on Edgewood and Hwy 10 is still to be worked on here internally. Have a good weekend and see you at 5 p.m. on Monday. 34 Page 1 May 26, 1998 Mounds View City Council PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA Regular Meeting May 26, 1998 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: The Mounds View City Council was called to order by Mayor McCarty at 7:01 p.m. on May, 26, 1998. 2. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor McCarty, Council Members Gunn, Koopmeiners, Quick, and Stigney. ALSO PRESENT: Chuck Whiting, Clerk Administrator; Rick Jopke, Community Development Director; Bob Long, City Attorney; and Stacy Caton (for Dave Hix) Recording Secretary. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Regular Meeting of May 11, 1998: Mayor McCarty offered one correction to the May 11, 1998 minutes: On line No. 1, Page 11, the spelling of Groberg was corrected from the incorrectly spelled Broberg. Stigney offered one correction to the May 11, 1998 minutes: Page 7, line No. 1, insert the word "major" in front of the word "portion". MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Stigney to approve the May 11, 1998 City Council Meeting Minutes as corrected. VOTE: Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion Carried Page 2 May 26, 1998 Mounds View City Council 4. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: A. Resolution No. 5235, Resolution of Appreciation for Firefighter Eric R. Emerson. Mayor McCarty noted that Mr. Ericson could not be present to accept Resolution No. 5235, A Resolution of Appreciation. The Resolution was read into the record. Emerson retired from the Springlake Park/Blaine/Mounds View volunteer Fire Department after 20 years of service. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to approve Resolution No 5235, a Resolution of Appreciation for Firefighter Eric R. Emerson. VOTE: Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion Carried 5. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Gunn to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. VOTE: Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion Carried 6. RESIDENTS' REQUESTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR: There were no questions or comments from the public on items not on the agenda. 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS: Mayor McCarty requested that Item B, Report on Tree Damage be moved up to the first order of business. A. Report on Tree Damage Rick Wrisky gave his report as follows: The City's storm clean-up effort started May 21, 1998,the Thursday following the storm. At this point in time the clean-up has been accomplished in 3/4 of the City. The most grievous damage taking place in the Irondale Road, Bona Road, Edgewood Middle School area. The O'Connel Drive and Jeffery Drive areas were also hit hard. The clean-up crew will be moving to the Pleasant Veiw Drive, Knollwood Drive, and Spring Lake Road area this week. Once this area is serviced there will be some spot areas that will need Page 3 May 26, 1998 Mounds View City Council to be addressed. The clean-up process should be completed by May 30, 1998. The Council thanked Mr. Wrisky for his efforts in the clean-up process. Mayor McCarty closed the regular Council Meeting and opened the 7:05 Public Hearing. A. Public Hearing and Introduction of Ordinance No. 617, an Ordinance Amending Title 1100, Chapters 1114 and 1115 of the Municipal Zoning Code Relating to Permitted Uses within the B-3,Business Commercial, and B-4, Regional Business Zoning Districts. Director Jopke gave his report as follows: Ordinance No. 617 adds some permitted uses to the Zoning Ordinance under the Commercial B- 3 in the City. There are two areas that are being proposed as changes: First is the addition of bowling alleys as a permitted use. The Mermaid Entertainment Complex is proposing to expand their operation by adding more bowling lanes to the north side of their facility. Currently the facility is operating out of compliance with City regulations. Adoption of Ordinance No. 617 will bring the bowling operation in compliance with regulations. A second item is in regard to the new Mounds View Community Center. The facility, as currently configured in its design and uses, is not mentioned as a permitted use in the B-3 District. Staff is recommending the addition of community centers as a permitted use in the B-3 District. The Planning Commission had reviewed and recommended the City Council's approval of the Ordinance Amendment. Mayor McCarty asked for questions and/or comments from the public on the Ordinance Amendment being considered by the Council. No questions or comments were considered from the public. The Public Hearing was closed and the regular Council Meeting was reopened. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to introduce Ordinance No. 617 and waive the reading. ROLL CALL VOTE: Council Member Gunn Aye Council Member Quick Aye Council Member Stigney Aye Council Member Koopmeiners Aye Page 4 May 26, 1998 Mounds View City Council Mayor McCarty Aye Motion Carried(5-0) Mayor McCarty stated the second reading of Ordinance would be held June 8, 1998. C. Consideration of Resolution No. 5240,Determination of Sufficiency of Petition Concerning Anthony Properties Management Project. Administrator Whiting gave his report as follows: A petition had been submitted to the City regarding exiting on to County Road H2 and Long Lake Road next to the theater project. The petition was for a referendum per requirements of the Charter. Staff had reviewed two aspects of the petition. First,the number of signatures that were submitted on the petition. There were 733 valid signatures submitted; 859 are required by the Charter, being 15 percent of the electors in the 1996 presidential election. The second question was whether or not the wording of the petition was adequate. The City Attorney's opinion was requested in this regard. His finding was that the wording of the petition was insufficient. Staff's recommendation to the City Council is that the petition is insufficient at this time. The petitioners have been made aware of their right to challenge the validity of the petition's signatures. In reviewing the requirements of the Charter it appeared that the Councils action would be required to determine the sufficiency of the petition. The wording of the attached Resolution was done stating the insufficiency of the petition. City Attorney Long summarized the legal opinion for the Council as follows: The first part of the opinion, dated May 19, 1998, stated a Resolution that is administrative in nature, not a legislative act, is not the proper subject of an initiative. The petition was seeking to adopt by resolution, an administrative act of the City,to declare ingress and egress forbidden on or two streets within the City. That would not be the proper subject of an initiative, according to case law in Minnesota. The second part of the opinion stated that the exact text of the matter must be stated in the form of a resolution. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney to table Consideration of Resolution No. 5240, a Determination of Sufficiency of Petition Concerning the Anthony Properties Management Project,to give the petitioners a chance to resolve the matters of insufficiency. The motion failed due to lack of a second. Page 5 May 26, 1998 Mounds View City Council MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to approve Resolution No. 5240, a Determination of sufficiency of Petition Concerning the Anthony Properties Management Project. VOTE: Ayes - 4 Nays - 1(Stigney) Motion Carried MOTION/SECOND: Stigney that the City not grant any permits for the Anthony Properties Development until the issue of insufficiency is resolved with the petitioners. Mayor McCarty asked for The City Attorney's opinion on the motion. City Attorney Long told the Council if there was a sufficient petition before the City, there would then be a basis to consider delaying the permits; although, that would not be a clear cut answer. Lacking a sufficient petition, denying permits on a project that has received previous Council approval, could subject the City to litigation over the denial of the permits. Stigney asked for a clarification. He said he did not state to deny the permits but said to defer granting of building permits until the matter is resolved. City Attorney Long told the Council there would be no valid reason to defer the permits. Stigney restated his motion: "Defer granting of permits from the City to the developer for the properties indicated until the issue of the sufficiency of the resolution, or the sufficiency of the initiative is resolved, within a 30 day time period." Mayor McCarty stated for the Body: "Defer granting permits from the City to the developer(Anthony Properties) until the resolution,the initiative petition, determine the sufficiency of the petition is resolved, within 30 days." The motion failed due to a lack of a second. Barbara Haake stated her opinion in opposition to the Anthony Properties Development because of the ingress and egress to the development. She asked if there was a way to use the City's Attorney and the City's funds to force MnDOT to do what the City would like to see done; develop the property without the proposed cut-ins to H2 or Long Lake Road. Haake agreed that with the addition of the new community center a traffic light was needed at the intersection of Highway 10 and Edgewood. Mayor McCarty told Haake that it is MnDOT's opinion that the new community center, by itself, would not warrant a light at the intersection of Highway 10 and Edgewood. Greg Padgin, asked the Mayor how the City would respond to bumper to bumper traffic that is Page 6 May 26, 1998 Mounds View City Council created by the theater development. Mayor McCarty stated that the theater traffic could be tracked and if it is found that the traffic is using the neighborhood streets that were not intended for this use, and it causes a safety issue on the street, the City will respond with some type of traffic control be it signage, etc. Mr. Padgin asked if the citizens would notify the police department when traffic situations from the theater project occur. Mayor McCarty said the City would know of problems before the citizens started making reports. He also encouraged notifying the Council by writing letters or coming to Council meetings. Lynn Thomison, 5301 Edgewood Drive, asked for a point of clarification from the Council. She asked for clarification on Item 4 of the letter that she had submitted to the City Council May 26, 1998. Is it Mounds View's obligation to spell out exactly what is necessary in the construction and the text of a petition, if the residents decide to pursue the sufficiency matters, she asked. Ms. Thomison asked if the City would be willing to help construct these documents. Mayor McCarty stated whenever there is a petition for either a referendum or an initiative the sponsoring committee should take it upon themselves to get the proper expertise to help them write the appropriate documents. Inclusion of the City staff in this process would put an improper stamp of approval and the results would be skewed. The Mayor recommended contacting the Charter Commission. Geri Evans stated she would be happy to respond to any questions that the citizens might have in regards to legal matters concerning the petition process in question. D. Approval of New Drywall Bid for Community Center Administrator Whiting gave his report as follows: It was discovered that the City is required to have prevailing wages on the site of the new community center. Because of this fact a new contract is needed between the City and the drywall contractor for this project. Staff is recommending that the currently contracted drywall firm be paid for services to date and a new contractor be hired to complete the job with a union crew. The City Attorney is reviewing the contract. The City,the architect and the construction manager are researching how the omission of this requirement came about. To be in compliance with the terms of the grant the City must abide by the prevailing wage requirements. Page 7 May 26, 1998 Mounds View City Council City Attorney Long told the Council that the Community Center was being developed in two phases. The first phase was the development of the child care center. At the time contracts were signed for the first phase there was no grant involved so the prevailing wage requirements did not apply to this contract. Phase two of the project is the construction of the community center. Under this phase there is a grant that is being used to partially fund construction. Both the City staff and City Attorney overlooked the prevailing wage section of the second phase contracts thinking that they were the same as the first phase contracts. City Attorney Long told the Council they had two motions before them to consider in an effort to resolve the prevailing wage issue. The first motion being,to approve the cancellation agreement and release of claims, essentially terminating the contract with the non-prevailing wage contractor. If this first motion is approved there is a second motion to approve the recommended new contract, including specific language as prepared by the City Attorney's office. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn to approve the cancellation agreement and release of claims between the City of Mounds View and M. Reinhart Drywall Inc. VOTE: Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion Carried Jerry Linke, 2319 Knoll Drive, stated he had been to the City offices and had found a letter from the construction manager reiterating about a phone conversation where the City had made a comment that the City was willing to settle the contract out for$15-20,000. He asked if there was any thought given to require the contractor to go to prevailing wage; was the contractor asked if he would do that. Administrator Whiting stated that the contractor was asked to honor the prevailing wage and, in fact, was asked to supply union workers. Mr. Linke told the Council that the contractors on this job are not filing the proper AIA documents, forms G702 and G703, for their requests for payment. These forms are required by the general conditions of the contract documents, he said. He continued saying that there were no change orders in the job files. There has been a change order approved by the Council for HVAC work. There are letters referring to some possible changes, but no change-order request forms could be found in the job files for the HVAC work. MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Koopmeiner to approve the new standard contract with specific language as prepared by the City Attorney's office. VOTE: Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion Carried E. Consideration of Resolution No 5239. 1999 Budget Calendar Page 8 May 26, 1998 Mounds View City Council MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiner/Gunn to approve the calendar as presented in the Resolution No. 5239. VOTE: Ayes- 5 Nays - 0 Motion Carried F. Review of Council/Staff Retreat Administrator Whiting told the Council the Mayor, City Council, City Administrator, and Department heads held a Council/Staff retreat o May 18, 1998. The retreat was held at the Harriet Alexander Interpretive Nature Center located in Roseville, MN. Primary objectives of the retreat were: 1. Determine the credibility of the organization A. Where are the credibility issues a. citizenry b. Council Members c. staff and Council 2. How to keep informed of the communities needs 3. How to get City information to the community in the most efficient way 4. To create understanding from which appropriate action will follow The City Administrator identified three main issues facing Mounds View in the future. The first issue being cash flow and how to properly manage the City's budget. The second issue will be street improvements. The third issue, what does the future hold for development in Mounds View. What role does the Council want to take in the future development of Mounds View. Mayor McCarty told the Council the question had come up at the retreat, how would the Council respond when the residents bring forth conflicting information than what staff has presented. He said its unfair to expect the residents to know the technicalities of what the City is dealing with. The City needs to find a way to respond to citizens, in private, so that people can learn without being embarrassed. Administrator Whiting suggested analyzing what is the purpose of City government and how to apply the answers to the betterment of all of the community. Eric Emerson arrived to accept his Resolution of Appreciation, Resolution No. 5235. Page 9 May 26, 1998 Mounds View City Council The Council offered its thanks and appreciation to Mr. Emerson. CLOSED SESSION G. Status of Golf Course Law Suit Mayor McCarty suggested tabling the discussion until after the EDA meeting. 8. REPORTS Council Member Quick had no report. Council Member Koopmeiner had no report. Council Member Gunn had no report. Council Member Stigney had no report. Mayor McCarty had no report. City Administrator had no report. City Attorney had no report. 9. Next Council Work Session: June 1. 1998 - 6:00 p.m. Next Council Meeting: June 8. 1998 - 7:00 p.m. 10. ADJOURNMENT MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to adjourn the meeting at 8:20 p.m. VOTE: Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion Carried Respectfully submitted, i0C446/1)C044— Dave Hix Recording Secretary 1 Page 1 APPROVED May 11, 1998 Mounds View City Council PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA Regular Meeting May 11, 1998 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Hwy. 10,Mounds View,MN 55112 ********************************************************************************** 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: The Mounds View City Council was called to order by Mayor McCarty at 7:00 p.m.on May 11, 1998. 2. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor McCarty,Council members Koopmeiners,Gunn, Quick and Stigney ALSO PRESENT: Chuck Whiting,Clerk Administrator Jim Ericson,Planning Associate Rick Jopke,Community Development Director Cari Schmidt, Assistant to the City Administrator Michael Ulrich,Public Works Director Bob Long, City Attorney 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A. Regular Meeting of April 27, 1998: MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Koopmeiners to approve the Minutes of the April 27, 1998 City Council Meeting as presented in writing. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 4. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: A. Resolution No. 5235 of Appreciation for Firefighter Eric R.Emerson. APPROVED Page 2 May 11, 1998 Mounds View City Council Mayor McCarty noted that Mr.Emerson was unable to be present to accept this award and therefore this item would be delayed to another time. S. CONSENT AGENDA: MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Quick to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 6. RESIDENTS REQUESTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR: Mayor McCarty explained that this is the time for residents to address the council with concerns on items that are not on the Agenda. There were no questions or comments from the public. 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS: A. Second Reading and Consideration of Ordinance No.607,an Ordinance Amending Chapter 1008 of the Municipal Code entitled "Signs and Billboards". Mayor McCarty noted that the public hearing for this item was held on April 27, 1998. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to approve the second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 607,an Ordinance Amending Chapter 1008 of the Municipal Code entitled"Signs and Billboards"and to waive the reading. ROLL CALL VOTE: Council member Gunn: aye Council member Koopmeiners: aye Council member Stigney aye Council member Quick aye Mayor McCarty nay Mayor McCarty stated he maintains his position that this Ordinance is unnecessary. Motion Carries-(4- 1 ) Council member Stigney asked that Item 5 (D)of the Consent Agenda be read for public record. Mr. Whiting explained that Item 5(D)sets a Public Hearing for 7:05 p.m.,May 26, 1997 for the Introduction (First Reading)of Ordinance No.617,an Ordinance Amending Title 1100,Chapters 1114 and 1115 of the Municipal Zoning Code Relating to Permitted Uses within the B-3,Business Commercial,and B-4, Regional Business Zoning Districts. APPROVED Page 3 May 11, 1998 Mounds View City Council B. Second Reading and Consideration of Ordinance N.615,an Ordinance Vacating a Drainage and Utility Easement over and across Parts of Lots 2 and 3,Block 1,North Star Industrial Park Second Addition. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to approve the second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 615,an Ordinance Vacating a Drainage and Utility Easement over and across Parts of Lots 2 and 3,Block 1,North Star Industrial Park 2nd Addition, and to waive the reading. ROLL CALL VOTE: Council member Stigney aye Council member Koopmeiners aye Council member Gunn aye Council member Quick aye Mayor McCarty aye Motion Carries(5-0) C. Consideration of Resolution No.5236,a Resolution Approving a Development Review to allow for the Expansion of the Mermaid Entertainment Center. Mr.Ericson,Planning Associate,noted that a copy of the site plan was on display showing the proposed expansion of the Mermaid Entertainment Center. Mr.Daniel Hall,representing the Mermaid,has requested a development review to allow for the expansion of their facility by adding eight bowling lanes. The addition would consist of approximately 7,800 square feet. This was approved by the Planning Commission at the May 6, 1998 meeting. He noted that the parking issues which were discussed at the Planning Commission meeting have all been resolved. The site is currently zoned B-3 which at this point does not allow for Bowling Alleys. They are allowed B-4 zoning districts. This issue was looked at in the 1970's when Bowling Alleys were added,however a Code Amendment was never accomplished. Therefore,a Public Hearing has been scheduled for May 27th to accomplish this. The setbacks do not quite meet code requirements,but they are consistent with what is there now,therefore staff is not proposing that the Mermaid re-construct their entire lot at this time. The only portion of the parking lot that they plan to change will be the North parking lot. Resolution No. 5236 will approve the development review requested by the applicant with necessary stipulations. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn to Approve Resolution No.5236,a Resolution Approving a Development Review to allow for the Expansion of the Mermaid Entertainment Center. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried APPROVED Page 4 May 11, 1998 Mounds View City Council D. Public Hearing and Second Reading of Municipal Code Changes Allowing a Festival in the Park Beer Garden: Ms. Cari Schmidt explained that the Festival Committee has expressed an interest in having a beer garden as part of the Festival in the Park Celebration. In order to allow for this, changes will need to be made to the city code. Ms. Schmidt briefly discussed the two changes. Mayor McCarty opened the Public Hearing at 7:10 p.m. There were no questions or comments in regard to this item,and Mayor McCarty closed the Public Hearing at 7:11 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Gunn to approve the second reading and the adoption Municipal Code Section 503.03, Subd.4,and the changes to the Municipal Code Section 909.07, Subd. 11,and to waive the readings. ROLL CALL VOTE: Council member Koopmeiners aye Council member Gunn aye Council member Quick aye Council member Stigney aye Mayor McCarty aye Motion Carried(5 -0) E. Update on discussing MnDOT concerning access to the proposed Theater Site. Mayor McCarty explained that he was directed by the City Council at the last meeting to work with city staff in trying to clarify the city's position with MnDOT and what they will require in terms of access to the theater site. Applications previous to April 21st included no outlets onto County Road H-2 or Long Lake Road. A clarification from MnDOT informed the city that this was not what they intended to state. They would require an opening on secondary roads in the City of Mounds View. Mayor McCarty presented a schematic of the collection streets in the City of Mounds View. MnDOT informed him that former county roads are arterial collector roads from Highway 10. It is their rules that a local rule of government compliments their state system with a local system as well. They have indicated that,regardless of any other misunderstandings,the city will be required to give at least one cut on these roads. At a work session on May 5th, the Council decided that if this were the requirements,they would seek an equal distribution to both County Road H-2 and Long Lake Road. After much discussion however,it was felt that the connection to Long Lake Road should be discounted,as there were concerns about congestion at that intersection and the unknowns about crossing wetland properties. The offer to the City of Mounds View at this time to further and complete this project,is a full-movement intersection on Highway 10 with a median break,a break on County Road H-2 about mid-way between Long Lake Road and Highway 10 that would bring the driveway out facing two homes that are owned by the property owner at this time. There will be no loss of buildings under this plan, and there is the possibility in the future that we may be able to further enhance access to the property by opening right- APPROVED Page 5 May 11, 1998 Mounds View City Council turn-in/right-turn-out access down close to Donatelles. These changes are the requirements of MnDOT and are recommended by Mayor McCarty to the City Council for approval. Mayor McCarty took this opportunity to address numerous concerns which had been addressed by residents for council's consideration during the public hearing process on this project. Mr. Whiting noted that during the afternoon,he received a petition containing approximately 900 signatures requesting a referendum initiative in regard to this proposed development. Mayor McCarty explained that this meeting was not a Public Hearing on the project. At the last regular Council meeting,it was recommended that action be delayed on the Resolutions approving the project with the proposed property access configurations. The resolutions were approved by the Council,however, and the Public Hearings were not continued. The project has essentially be approved with transportation configurations that MnDOT has since denied. Council member Stigney stated he, as well as many of the residents,were under the understanding that this was to be a continuation of the Public Hearing. Mayor McCarty noted that this does not prevent any resident from providing input. Mr. Whiting explained that due to time requirements,the Public Hearing could not be continued. In regard to the impacts of the petition,he asked Mr.Long to provide information. Mr.Long explained that under the City Charter, Chapter 5, Section 5.03,there is a process that the City Clerk must go through to determine the sufficiency of the petition. This must be completed within 10 days with a written response. Additionally,the attorney must determine whether or not the form of the questions is sufficient to put into an initiative form under state law. Mr. Whiting explained that he will take necessary administrative action and that he will be able to respond on this issue at the next regular council meeting. A formal response,however,will be required within a 10 day period,which will occur prior to the May 26th Council meeting. Mr.Long, City Attorney,explained that if it is the wish of the Council members to accept the transportation configurations as approved by MnDOT,the Council would need to consider a motion to reconsider Resolution 5226,which was adopted at the last council meeting. If it prevails,the council could then amend the resolution to reflect the recommended changes. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to reconsider the action on Resolution No. 5226. Council member Stigney stated he would like to hear what the residents have to say in regard to this matter. Mayor McCarty explained that the Council would allow comments while the issue is being discussed. VOTE: 4 ayes 1 nay(Stigney) Motion Carried Mr.Long explained that the council could consider Resolution No.5226,could be adopted as it is written with one amendment as follows: Page 6 May 11, 1998 Mounds View City Council "NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council does hereby approve a PUD development stage plan dated 3/6/98 AND AS AMENDED 5/11/98,for the O'Neil property, 2430 Highway 10, and as described . . . . " MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to approve Resolution No. 5226,Approving a PUD Development Stage Plan,for Commercial Uses on the O'Neil Property,2430 Highway 10,AS AMENDED. Mr.Jopke,Community Development Director,presented a copy of the revision that has been approved by the MN Department of Transportation and outlined the changes which have occurred. The major change is the public street which runs through the middle of the property,between the theater and the parking area. This is a 50-foot right-of-way with a 30 foot street,widened at the intersection of Highway 10 to accommodate the turn lanes. This road will cut through the 30 foot wide buffer area onto County Road H-2. In order to accommodate the roadway,there have been some minor shifts in the office buildings to the East. Mr.Jopke provided information in regard to setbacks,parking spaces,etc. Mr.Jopke noted that he had asked the City Consultant who has previously performed traffic studies on the project to review the changes and to advise as to the impact on surrounding streets. Mr. Jopke provided a summary of their findings. Council member Stigney asked who will be responsible for handling any traffic problems which may result on County Road H-2. Mayor McCarty indicated that on-site issues will be handled by the developer. Wherever a traffic problem exists in a public right-of-way,the city is duty-bound to respond. Council member Stigney stated he would like to include a stipulation in the PUD that it will be the developer's responsibility for handling traffic control problems in and out of his site. MOTION by Stigney that a stipulation be added in the PUD that it will be the developer's responsibility to handle traffic control problems in and out of the development site. MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF SECOND. Council member Quick stated he would like to see a sidewalk added on the westerly side of the new Edgewood between the theater and County Road H-2 to accommodate pedestrian traffic. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to amend the main motion to add a sidewalk on the Westerly side of the new Edgewood between the theater and County Road H-2 to accommodate pedestrian traffic. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Council member Stigney stated the signalized intersection will be of considerable benefit to the theater project and city staff was directed to assist the developer in requesting the signalized intersection. It is his opinion that the city has gone well beyond their responsibilities. The fmal configurations indicate a significant change in the Municipal center's parking lot,green space,etc. Additionally,it was originally thought that MnDOT would be paying for the traffic signals;now MnDOT will not be paying for any APPROVED Page 7 May 11, 1998 Mounds View City Council major portion of the signals or the re-alignment of Edgewood. The city will be responsible for a portion of the costs. He is opposed to this. The residents have strongly argued against access from the site to County Road H-2 and to Long Lake Road. The residents make up Mounds View and he believes the Council should consider their concerns. Julie Olson,2663 Lake Court Circle,stated in a Resolution dated June 12, 1996,in regard to County Road 11-2 and a collector street given back to the city,the resolution states that the roadway segment has been determined to serve a local function only. She also wished to know who will be paying for the roadway through the development and what the approximate cost is. Mr. Smith of Anthony Properties stated the road from Highway 10 to County Road H-2 will be a project cost paid for by the developer. Mayor McCarty stated, in response to the June 12, 1996 resolution,he is not certain that it was the intent of the council to expect that. Mayor McCarty requested a brief recess of the meeting. The Council Meeting was re-convened at 8:10 p.m. Julie Olson noted that there are three phases to the development process and the city is in the second stage. She asked what happens differently in the final plan as far a alterations and changes. Mr. Jopke explained that the third stage is the final plan approval. These plans will be the ones submitted for city building permits,etc. Mayor McCarty explained that the resolution Ms.Olson referred to earlier,was relative to the turn back process from Ramsey County and only intended to convey that the road will become a local road as opposed to a county road. The designation and use of the road would remain as a collector road. It is not a residential street. Cliff Ash,2664 Lake Court Drive,stated he attended the Council work session and feels the project is a "done deal". He wondered where the funds would come from to fund the development. Mayor McCarty noted that the funds are from the captured increments of commercial and industrial development. These are the excess funds which are allowed to be used for certain purposes under state law. The funds will not come out of the general property tax fund;this is a separate fund. Daniel Rosen, 1200 MN World Trade Center, St.Paul,MN,stated he is an attorney,present on behalf of a sponsoring committee of a Petition for an Initiative. He noted that the 898 registered voters who signed the petition,make up close to 17%of the registered voters who voted in the last general election in the City of Mounds View. Those who signed the petition are asking the Council to defer to the true democratic process. In 120 days there will be the issue on the ballot and it will be voted on by the residents in the City of Mounds View. Residents were told up until four days ago that there would be no outlet onto their street. Now changes have been made and the council is being asked to vote on the change,which will affect many residents. He believes this is a 100%sufficient petition without any legal input from council. He asked that the council defer action on this until the people of Mounds View can speak on this issue. AppROVED Page 8 May 11, 1998 Mounds View City Council Ruth Berke,2683 Lake Court Circle,provided excerpts from the City Newsletters in regard to the commitments to residents on improving property values in the City of Mounds View. She wondered what the theater project will do to the property values around the site. The council has lost the trust and respect of the community and she asked that the Council reconsider their votes and end the battle. Mayor McCarty noted that property rights extend to all-whether residential,commercial or industrial. There have been many delays,but he noted that a great number of the delays have been at the request of the residents for more time to look at other alternatives or different ways of doing the project. Sooner or later that property will be developed and the right of that property owner to access County Road 11-2, Highway 10 or Long Lake Road is the same as a resident's right to access those roads. Mike Welch,on Irondale Road, stated he feels betrayed by the City Council. He is bothered that there is suddenly a"safety"issue which never was an issue before. He wondered if the safety of those coming from outside Mounds View is more important than those residents of Mounds View. When Highway 10 is congested,people will try to find the easiest route and he fears that someone will be fatally injured. Jerry Linke,2319 Knoll Drive,stated that County Road H-2 is a collector street-it was made that way. He stated he feels it would be beneficial to connect the proposed sidewalk to Long Lake Road. He noted that his concern is losing the soccer field in front of City Hall. He stated he believes in this development and thinks it is a benefit as a whole. Dave Nord,2522 Ridge Lane,stated assuming an additional 50 cars will be using County Road H-2 per hour during peak hours,it will defmitely have an impact on the traffic in the area. He asked that the Council please re-consider and not endanger the children in the area by encouraging this development. Cyndi Camarillo,5299 Greenfield Avenue,stated her husband is a firefighter in Mounds View and he must respond to calls within a short period of time. The increased traffic will defmitely impact them as well as the increased dust and exhaust. There are too many variables and the one-day traffic study do not accurately depict the impact this will have on the residents in the area. Pete Miller,2462 County Road H-2,stated he moved to Mounds View approximately 1-1/2 years ago. He was never approached by the developer,but he was aware of the proposed development. At that time he was not concerned as he was told that the access to the site would be off Highway 10. The increased traffic on County Road H-2 will force him to move. Linda Buckardt,2658 Lake Court Drive,stated she would have appreciated a notice of last week's meeting. Bill Kendall,5270 Edgewood Drive,stated residents have a reason to be angry with the Council. He asked if the council has really thought this through well. Al Zdon, 5064 Irondale Road,stated he is past resident of Hibbing,MN. He does not believe the Hibbing City Council would have made one commitment to the residents and then changed their mind or changed major portions of the plans only four days prior to the vote. APPROVED Page 9 May 11, 1998 Mounds View City Council Dan Johnson,7359 Park View Terrace,noted that within one block of the theater project,there are deaf and blind residents. With the steady increase in traffic on County Road H-2,he has concerns in the safety of these children and asked the Council to consider this when voting on this issue. Al Gregerson,7366 Park View Terrace,asked where the cars exiting onto H-2 will go. Also,there will also be an increase in pedestrian traffic. If the stop sign remains at County Road H-2 and Long Lake and there are 50 cars turning onto Highway 10,it will cause a backup. He believes there will be a greater traffic impact than what is predicted. Tracy Swig,5292 Edgewood Drive, stated she would like to invite the mayor to come to her home from 2:00 to 4:30 p.m. and see the number of students walking along Edgewood. She believes these are safety concerns that the Council needs to look at. Kelly Rosenthal,2425 Ridge Lane,stated prior to Thursday's meeting,the residents on her street were not informed of the meetings on this development. She stated she cannot understand how the traffic consultant estimated an additional 50 cars per hour on County Road H-2. Mr.Jopke explained that the traffic engineer predicted that the vast majority of the patrons will use the Highway 10 entrance. The peak hours are 8:30 to 9:30 p.m. Mayor McCarty noted that residents within a designated distance of the proposed development are notified in writing of the Public Hearings in regard to the project. Additionally,the Public Hearings are published in the local newspapers. Council member Stigney stated that he has taken the entire community into consideration in his stand on this issue. Additionally,he plans to listen to the residents,as he promised. The cost of the re-alignment of Edgewood should be covered by the developer. He would like the Council to consider a 50/50 split on the costs between the city and the developer. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Gunn to Amend the motion to state that 50%of the cost of the re-alignment of Edgewood and the signalized intersection and associated costs be paid for by the developer. VOTE: 2 ayes 3 nays(McCarty/Koopmeiners/Quick) Motion Fails MOTION by Stigney to table any action on Resolution No. 5226 until after the pending petition is resolved. MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF A SECOND. VOTE ON AMENDED RESOLUTION NO. 5226: 4 ayes 1 nay(Stigney) Motion Carried Mayor McCarty recessed the meeting. The meeting was reconvened at 9:25 p.m. AFTROVED Page 10 May 11, 1998 Mounds View City Council F. Consideration of Resolution NO.5237,Denying a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low Density and High Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial for Properties Located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road. Mayor McCarty noted that this resolution will clarify and strengthen the resolution which he presented at the last Council meeting. MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Koopmeiners to approve Resolution NO. 5237,Denying a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low Density and High Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial for Properties Located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road. VOTE: 4 ayes 1 nay(Quick) Motion Carried G. Consideration of Resolution No.5238,Denying Ordinance No.614,An Ordinance Approving the Re-zoning of Properties Located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road from R-3, Medium Density Residential and R-1,Single Family Residential,to B-2,Limited Business District. Mayor McCarty noted that this Resolution will clarify the action of the last council meeting in regard to the Wallgreen's proposal. MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Gunn to approve Resolution No. 5238,Denying Ordinance No.614, An Ordinance Approving the Re-zoning of Properties Located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road from R-3,Medium Density Residential and R-1, Single Family Residential,to B-2, Limited Business District. VOTE: 4 ayes 1 nay(Quick) Motion Carried H. Consideration of Community Center HVAC Change Order. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to approve the HVAC Change Order as presented for the Community Center. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 8. REPORTS: Council member Gunn: no report. Council member Quick: no report. Council member Stigney: no report. Council member Koopmeiners: no report. Mayor McCarty: Mayor McCarty informed the community that Dick Meyers,former City Attorney, passed away; he extended prayers and thoughts to his wife and family. Mayor McCarty extended the community's best wishes,condolences and prayers to the family of Melissa Peterson, 18 years old,who AFTROVED Page 11 May 11, 1998 Mounds View City Council died suddenly on Friday. Thoughts and prayers are extended to the family of Gil Groberg who passed away last week. Gil was a long-time resident of Mounds View and an active Lion's Club member. City Administrator: No report. City Attorney: No report. 9. NEXT COUNCIL WORK SESSION:June 1.1998-6:00 p.m. NEXT COUNCIL MEETING: May 26.1998- 7:00 p.m. 11. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Stigney to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 p.m. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Respectfully submitted, Jaolvd, 40,pee Pac Tamara D. Saeflce Recording Secretary 5r6 MOUNDS VIEW PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, May 28, 1998 City Hall, 6:30 p.m. The Parks and Recreation Commissioners met at Woodcrest Park at 6:30 p.m. to observe the conditions of the building and to discuss options for replacing the park building. Afterwards the Commissioners stopped by Silver View Park to discuss the improvements and new layout of the proposed Disc Golf Course. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Silvis called the meeting to order. ROLL CALL: Commissioners present included Chair Silvis, Stevenson, Starr, Benz, Dentz and Long. Commissioner absent was McDonald. APPROVAL OR MINUTES: Commissioner Long made a motion seconded by Commissioner Benz to approve the minutes of April 23, 1998. Motion passed unanimously. UPDATE OF ATHLETIC FACILITIES MTGS: Director Saarion informed the Commission that there seems to be opportunities to add soccer fields at Highview Middle School, add Fast Pitch field and Baseball field at Mounds View High School, add little league fields at University Property area in Shoreview and provide grass infields to various fields in the district for upper age baseball users. Group continues to look at possibilities and planners are formulating information to present to Mayors and Manager on June 10. GROUNDS MAINT. PROP: Director Saarion informed Commissioners that the School District sent a letter thanking cities for offering proposals but that they would continue as usual this year and perhaps consider proposals for future years. COMM CNTR EQUIP NEEDS: Director Saarion informed the Commission that there may be a need to purchase basketball goals, bleachers and volleyball sleeves during the construction of the Community Center so that these elements can be installed at the time of construction. It seems that these equipment needs, although identified in the construction of the Community Center, have been identified as"supplied by owner". This means that the City must pay for the addition of these items. Director Saarion asked the Commission if they would approve the use of Park Dedication Funds if there was no other funding identified for the purchase and installation of these items. While the Commissioners were very disappointed that these items were not part of the project funding and construction, they understood the importance of these equipment items in the construction of the community center. Therefore, Commissioners gave direction to Saarion that if there were no other funding alternatives, that Park Dedication could be used, although it was their opinions that there were lots of other uses for park dedication funds than the community center gymnasium equipment. - Commissioners asked why capital ca ital items were not included and asked what other equipment or items were not included. Because staff was unable to answer these questions, Commissioners requested that the Community Task Force be called to meet and asked that staff put together a list of itemized equipment and materials included and those that are not included in the cost of the community center. Director Saarion said that she would discuss the concerns with Administrator Whiting and Public Works Director Ulrich. WOODCREST BUILDING DISCUSSION: Commissioners directed Saarion to provide information at the next meeting including the costs and opportunity of a new or used portable building. Commissioner Long stated that it is important to keep the neighborhood parks viable. Commissioners agreed. SUMMER UPDATE: Director Saarion informed the Commissioners that there were three special events the weekend of June 6 & 7. A Bicycle Safety program is being held at City Hall and a tennis activity promotion to be held at Groveland Park on Saturday afternoon, June 6. June 7 is the first Entertainment in the Park program at Lakeside Park. DISC GOLF COURSE: Commissioners reviewed the plan to improve the disc golf course at Silver View Park. Commissioner Long made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Stevenson to purchase 4 additional baskets and give the "go-ahead"to the volunteer disc golf group to improve the course as planned Motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS: At the Commissioners request, Councilmember Gunn provided an update to the Theater project and Hwy 10 streetlight issue. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Benz made a motion seconded by Commissioner Dentz to adjourn the meeting. Motion passed unanimously. Item No. 7 R Staff Report No. Meeting Date: June 8, 1998 Type of Business: CB 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: Jim Ericson, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution No. 5241, a Resolution Approving a Conditional Use Permit for a Residential Dog Kennel at 2359 Pinewood Circle;Planning Case No. 528-98. Date of Report: June 4, 1998 Background: The applicants, Scott and Marcia Dumonceaux of 2359 Pinewood Circle, are applying for a conditional use permit for a residential dog kennel, a Code requirement for property owners with three or four dogs. One of the licensing requirements is that the property owner shall obtain signatures of approval from more than 50 percent of the residents within 500 feet of the property proposing the kennel. The applicants were sent a map showing those properties within 500 feet along with a corresponding list of property owners/taxpayers. This has been accomplished. The Planning Commission, at its meeting on May 20, 1998, voted unanimously to approve a resolution recommending approval of this CUP request to the City Council. Planning Commission Resolution No. 550-98 is attached for Council review. Discussion: Petition: On the map the staff sent to the applicants, 56 properties were highlighted, which means that 29 of the property owners would need to sign the petition, which was also provided by staff. The applicants collected 30 signatures approving of the kennel request. All of the properties adjacent to 2359 Pinewood Circle, of which there are five, have indicated their approval of the application. Background Check: Staff requested the Police Department to check its records with regard to animal complaints at this location. Only two incidences are on record for this address, one occurring in March of 1997 and the other more recently in May of 1998. The 1997 incidence, which the applicants take full responsibility for, resulted from them leaving for the weekend with the dogs in the care of a"babysitter". The babysitter was not at the house when the applicants left and did not spend the entire day at the home, leaving one dog outside unattended. The applicants regret the inconvenience this cause their neighbors and have not had any complaints since then about barking dogs. The 1998 complaint simply was for owning four dogs without a kennel license/CUP, not for barking dogs. Dumonceaux Kennel CUP June 8, 1998 Page 2 CUP Criteria: In granting a conditional use permit, the City Council shall consider the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan and upon the health, safety and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands. Section 1125.01, Subd. 3 lists several criteria that shall examined before action is taken on the permit request. Staff has responded to the applicable criteria in relation to the proposed conditional use permit. 1. The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. Dog ownership does not impose any burden to public facilities. 2. The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. The subject property's yard is fenced in and dog ownership is a common facet of any residential neighborhood. 4. The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. Dog ownership is common in residential neighborhoods. 5. The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. Dog kennels are allowed as a conditional use within the R-1 zoning district. 6. The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The Comprehensive Plan does not prohibit nor discourage owning dogs or other domesticated animals. Recommendation: Based on the information presented above, Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve Resolution 5241, a resolution approving a conditional use permit and license for a dog kennel for Scott and Marcia Dumonceaux, located at 2359 Pinewood Circle. driAivuu Satkeytk, James Ericson, Planning Associate CM CF I 1 (42ii i % • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION • :1: :;:1.7 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View MN 55112 'le `"2s•PartneE°*'p' 612-717-4020 612-784-3462 -FAX PleasePlType or Print Information-Complete Both Sides of This Form Applicant Information ' �`-r'r� Name of Applicant <�C a" '_:.1n,rc o c e .t& - Telephone 'ND--S 9(t.._47 Address o�c_j` cX 't( .10 vJ a c e C r .\ -' Fax Interest in Property(check appropriate box) ._ -,.,_ A. Owner of Property 0 Contract for Deed Owner O Lessee,Operator,Manager _ 0 Agreement to Purchase. ❑ Other(explain) Applicants must provide evidence of interest in prop rty at the time of application,and if you are not the owner of the property,you must provide a letter of permission from the giving consent to the filing of this application. The property owner must sign this application for it to be accepted.._ __ Property Description/Proposal -^ .. - Address or General Location t,,�wQA C2 rL� �i7w.�.pL� �le.A,;5"-- PI\/1 S S1 X2- Legal 2Legal Description Property Identification#(PIN#) t- ._ #of Acres Current Zoning Type of Application ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment 5250 ❑ Rezoning $250/acre; min 5250 max$1500 ❑ Major Subdivision $250+$250 deposit* O Minor Subdivision $200 ❑ Planned Unit Development(PUD) Refer to rezoning fees O PUD Amendment $350 X Conditional Use Permit R-1, R-- others$250 ❑ Variance R.I, R-2$ " all others$250 ❑ Code Appeal 5100 ❑ Develop Review/Site Plan $125/acre;min$I25 max$750 ❑ Wetland Alteration Permit R-1,R-2 5150;all others$200 • ❑ Wetland Buffer Permit R-1,R-2$25;all others$100 ❑ Floodplain Permit 5200 O Other *Deposits shall be paid to cover all costs of public notices,materials and staff or consultant time spent in the review, research or preparation of materials associated with this application. The applicant shall be responsible for all reasonable incurred costs in excess of the initial deposit amount. Any portion of the deposit not spent or encumbered shall be refunded to the applicant within thirty(30)days after consideration of the application is completed. Please complete the reverse side of this application. 'S' S`Ce Le to City of Mounds View,MN Development Application Page 2 Present Use of Property ❑ Undeveloped/Vacant Single Family Dwelling ❑ Duplex/Two Family Dwelling Multi-family Dwelling ❑ Business/Commercial Establishment ❑ Industrial Establishment ❑ Other(explain) Property Classification 0 Abstract ❑ Torrens Description of Proposal BY MY(OUR)SIGNATURE ON THIS APPLICATION,I HEREBY DECLARE THAT,TO THE BEST OF MY ...,,,+ KNOWLEDGE,THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS TRUE AND ACCURATE Signature of Applicant rc.« - tkMo�LeR u�]C Name of Applicant(typed/printed) � � �SignatureofProperty Owner . ... 4 r- . Name of Owner(typed/printed) f ,.. f PropertyAcc:�.� am .1) Address of Owner _ .. Phone Number of Owner .11)D <CIA t'S" ************************************************************************************************ FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date of Submittal Date of Acceptance Assigned to: Planning Case No. – ciE6 60-day Limit I20-day limit Fees Paid: Account# . Check# Receipt# Application: 1 S'- © i. S-7(t(r C,- Park Dedication: Deposits: Other: Total: N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV WORMSADEVAPP.FOR 1/98 cv C r r 'l N •„vu /929 7928 7927 ern ,rt 1‘28 • �c1 Ck `Dc.x N N N 7925 7924 �,, .c' ®%-c,,...,c+`, p 7923: ‘,/,‘430A, ® ., 171 7968 7921 w 79191 N 7920 N 7917 791411 )53 7948 Z 7913 00•21205) 11S113 w79137910 w a931 7909 C�7 79091 gibAIdUI 7930 7906790NInNC _ 790 \1.1-Va N N N N N 7901 HO co en n O N a d' M N O r n N N N N 0 0 �T? g®®® n CdHI '8890 N PF E 4 imi. N N N N N N N N N oOD N N N N N N 7875 -• 786_ 9 7860 7855 DR Mier er of N n n coo °� 7861 �O 7857 785C N N N N N N ' N N 7847 7845 7840 784, N 561 �7%N iii OAK 78377830– � •601 �.: .�1 N N N n N 7833 7827 7820 5601 5601 •••• N N `� N 0. 7815 'n n CA ,.� ��j W N N N N ®®N 7817 ::. n-' J 5562 556 • N N N N N 7749 7807 /,-;'+.lin 0 1$' 1.= 555 o , �,•El 5550 5551 Q 555• N N N N N 7739 775 `v 141 ; 55 554 55 N N N N N N 7729 ME 7741 774• 'INEW00D CIR V `1.1 N 0 - —�.— 853 553• 553 N N N��N 7719 a 7731 F Untlia ®, 5532/ 553. . PI NEW00D 7709 El p 7721 772C 5526 CD _ co, 552 5526 az m co n co to LC)i 7701 •• 770 d' - I �� , 4. .onr 5520 5521 5520 N N N N N N N CO RD I (00 a Uunu O m: v O O 0 c, _ v v —O:. ri ry M M m N N N N'- N �U 7660 N N N VA • en c 'n54, R-4 764 765ncn 8 �1. 7661 N N N Nr541i97, 7641 7658 GR'E304,61 rAFw 7639 7644 7651 5480 5479 7635: y,gliC _ • - R. M M. p 7. 76301 5474 5473 54� 7645 �, 7625 7626\ 7641 R-45468 5467 54 761' 7610 5462 5463 w 7631 7595 759/ to M :a 5445 5454 5455 54 Lithltith., w 7581 758 Y 'n 5446 5447< d 7531 �n 1C 54 co O co 7565 7564 o 5440 5441 N w N 7551 755C co Lo cv 7521 5434 5433 7535 75341 5426 5425 7511 5420 5421 5' 7521 7520 5401 5414 5415 5' 7505 7504 75015406 5405 5' PF - — BRONSON CITY HALL I 5395 5394� I rn I m I ml NN I(I,n 5387 5386 571- ? "4 N .N. N Zoning Map Planning Case 528-98 Applicant: Scott & Marcia Dumonceaux N4 Location: 2359 Pinewood Circle 0o N 00 x .L c4 m U N -0 n cci) co co 0, Ucu Ea3ic °-' Z c � � � o c = N c08pcs a. fAINa2 L ilimIXE 1111,14 - mi 11II1 . • alias ain, N an aims ailla MI - 'Rill Ini ____-7--- 0 II \•t1 %,e%) t44 0111111 gni IIIII 111- t * O v ';44 V Oil 11111111 NI o , Ala 1111111 II. o a ME X 01 .ri4 1 � M !II N Milk o um g ...4. _. No a 1l1 imil • • - ' , - M 0 7/ PETITr N FOR DOG/CAT KENNEL Ir~ENSE As outlined in Chapter 701.03,Subd. 15.a.b of the Mounds View Municipal Code,applicants applying for a Kennel license must present a petition to the City Council signed by over fifty percent(50%)of all registered land owners or those occupying land within 500 feet of the property to be affected. The following applicant(s)Scott Dumonceaux located at 2359 Pinewood Circle,Mounds View,has applied for a kennel license. The number of dogs located at this property will be 4 dogs. If you are in support of the kennel license please complete the following information. Date Name(Please Print) Address Signature 5/31(m eclo u4e,e,f/_,,_. ?-1(..7 (i„,.040,44_ (A64 4,g______, 3 I; DA6 ' 1 > ' tL A 49 g. . .Anti• g( &., iiA_% .LA 4 s/ �� �R�� rows73 j0 elnwo� c;cc. I /197 -5/3/ 63' rATCH 7 , 77/5 EPL .: ,r Vim: 3 r 72 %,_-(:,_ I, . C k, (v-e 1 , ' _..-j 1. -7'2 0 /E I p e-t•-e-rd '-/P-1/fetle, //46 Ge .23g7C" 41, "i ) Co l� Z 37_371�f �� f-r�5 4,a 5 03$ ,� � i'�a� S^/3 /7 8 G e li.ld a n A.....„.:►^ai,+..,��� 2.33 C . �� f � , /_ c /3/ ��, 1 ' - �r :9 4 f-1g. Li , ,i? . 1 4,w o D4' .. .� 3 `hg ,O /4454r,.ef, tisi45'53`�' "70��� :" ol/,4 6./ /w EVENN' kk0/11}9 S5=3 _sr 4,q,v4 o°,;,(,),, 51. ,;t42 -- 51. 118 'kik\cik-rAl \ A ice ,ter- - s*, s n 5 r- 51 � �✓� �7 O •�`" _ r�'1 ua s FCi1 ` 17`7 �?� �i11.74 ` � r�' ,i_,J..44: 5) 7:1 )/8 kobv,1rZ s ,re sty icS� r � s.). ,/,/s/ J ileo _5/ 7‘ eZ":/,/,aift - ,-() , A ..dit_ - 0 6- _ 4 , 'se. ' 40.Ziodk - dr -....._ ' ,r s- 9 ' (/ ,4 ,,, 4 / 7liA4(Q,,,i/4 _ ,,,„4 6. 5 r eirii; .1« 7 CA / - -r i. //! `r1 X11• 4 98r// ^ F---/Ozefri-Lt_. 3,6 9 f� e&. = '/ pCb)40L ,'S"-- /�t ,,Lo Grp �r c t Ylit� ifl- l :�-s--q� A r-A t',,d ti57.( 3-Cs/ S7: n1;chi. ex- ji -5--q ' cl-Li a-cv 6sa,-. c S g 3 Sr /}t i jIk c.e 1 KtV1 4, lam\ 5--5 q g 1. ar bal.u fro ( k 5(00 5-f--M;C-h cta /e - r6-G6e, t SYST 5Y-(-W,4,eM- /4 4 4 PETI' ON FOR DOG/CAT KENNEL < 'CENSE As outlined in Chapter 701.03,Subd. 15.a.b of the Mounds View Municipal Code,applicants applying for a Kennel license must present a petition to the City Council signed by over fifty percent(50%)of all registered land owners or those occupying land within 500 feet of the property to be affected. The following applicant(s)Scott Dumonceaux located at 2359 Pinewood Circle,Mounds View,has applied for a kennel license. The number of dogs located at this property will be 4 dogs. If you are in support of the kennel license please complete the following information. Date Na•s e(Please Print) A Address Sign.hire .„c" ‘1 # 6 - S - ee4V . - " $ -7 ' l���. �► I z3S� �� �� '�. MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 550-98 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A DOG KENNEL FOR SCOTT AND MARCIA DUMONCEAUX, 2359 PINEWOOD CIRCLE; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 528-98 WHEREAS, Scott and Marcia Dumonceaux have applied for a conditional use permit for a residential dog kennel at their property located at 2359 Pinewood Circle, property zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally described as followed: LOT 14 BLOCK 1, EDGEWOOD SQUARE RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA WHEREAS, The Mounds View Zoning Code allows, with a conditional use permit, three to four dogs at a single-family residence; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map . c. 500 Foot Radius Map d. Petition WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the signatures on the submitted petition are valid and meet the licensing requirement for residential dog kennels; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes the following findings regarding the criteria for approval of a conditional use permit, as required by Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.b.: (1) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools,streets and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. (7) The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. (8) Adequate utilities,access roads,drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be provided. Owning dogs, as many as four,will not have an impact to public facilities,nor generate additional traffic or cause congestion. (2) The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. Resolution 550-98 Dumonceaux Kennel CUP May 20, 1998 Page 2 (3) The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. The dogs will be separated from the adjoining properties by a fence,which will prevent the dogs from running loose through the neighborhood. (4) The use,in the opinion of the City Council,is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. (6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Having dogs as pets is a common part of the suburban residential experience,an activity which does not conflict with the zoning code nor the comprehensive plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permit to the City Council. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 20th day of May, 1998. • Jerry Can, Chairperson ATTEST: Rick Jopke, Co unity Development Director (SEAL) N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEVCASES\328-98\550-98PC.RES RESOLUTION NO. 5241 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND LICENSE TO ALLOW FOR A DOG KENNEL FOR SCOTT AND MARCIA DUMONCEAUX, 2359 PINEWOOD CIRCLE; PLANNING CASE NO. 528-98 WHEREAS, Scott and Marcia Dumonceaux have applied for a conditional use permit and license for a residential dog kennel at their property located at 2359 Pinewood Circle, property zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally described as followed: LOT 14, BLOCK 1, EDGEWOOD SQUARE RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, The Mounds View Zoning Code allows, with a conditional use permit, three to four dogs at a single-family residence; and WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. 500 Foot Radius Map d. Petition e. Planning Commission Resolution 550-98 WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council finds that the signatures on the submitted petition are valid and meet the licensing requirement for residential dog kennels; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council makes the following findings regarding the criteria for approval of a conditional use permit, as required by Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.b.: (1) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks,schools,streets and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. (7) The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. (8) Adequate utilities,access roads,drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be provided. Owning dogs, as many as four,will not have an impact to public facilities,nor generate additional traffic or cause congestion. (2) The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. Resolution 5241 Dumonceaux Kennel CUP June 8, 1998 Page 2 (3) The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. The dogs will be separated from the adjoining properties by a fence,which will prevent the dogs from running loose through the neighborhood. (4) The use,in the opinion of the City Council,is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. (6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Having dogs as pets is a common part of the suburban residential experience,an activity which does not conflict with the zoning code nor the comprehensive plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council approves the conditional use permit and license request of Scott and Marcia Dumonceaux, with the following stipulations: 1. No more than four dogs over the age of six months shall be allowed at the property. 2. The applicants shall be responsible for paying an annual license fee (currently thirty dollars)upon approval of this permit and again on or before every first of September thereafter. 3. The applicant shall maintain the yard and kennel area in a clean, quiet orderly, and sanitary condition. 4. The City Council, at its discretion, may review this conditional use permit at any time in the future if the need to do so arises. Adopted this 8th day of June, 1998. Duane McCarty, Mayor ATTEST: Charles S. Whiting, City Administrator/Clerk (SEAL) N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEVCASES\528-98\5241 CC.RES Item No. 1 iS Staff Report No. Meeting Date:6/8/98 Type of Business:CB 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: Rick Jopke, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 617, an Ordinance Amending Title 1100, Chapters 1114 and 1115 of the Municipal Zoning Code Relating to Permitted Uses within the B-3, Highway Business , and B-4, Regional Business Zoning Districts. Date of Report: June 4, 1998 Background: The Mounds View Community Center and the Mermaid Entertainment Complex are both located in B-3, Highway Business zoning districts. At present, community centers and bowling alleys are not listed as permitted or conditional uses in this district. The Planning Commission, at their meeting on May 6, 1998, voted to recommend approval of a code amendment that would allow both the Community Center and the Mermaid as permitted uses within the B-3 district. The City Council, on May 11, 1998, approved Resolution 5236 which approved a development review for the Mermaid to expand their bowling operation with the stipulation that the zoning inconsistency be resolved. The City Attorney has drafted an ordinance to resolve both inconsistencies. The City Council conducted the public hearing on this matter and gave first reading approval to the ordinance on May 26, 1998. Discussion: With regard to the Community Center, a code amendment is required prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits for the building under construction/renovation on the site of the former Bel Rae Ballroom. This type of use is listed as a conditional use in residential districts, a rezoning of the property to a residential zoning designation would resolve the inconsistency but would also require the issuance of a conditional use permit. A community center use would be similar to uses permitted in B-3 District. Therefore, amending the code by adding"Community Centers" and similar uses (schools, and religious institutions) as an allowed uses within the B-3 zoning district would seem to be the most logical course of action. Related to the Mermaid, the zoning inconsistency came to light in conjunction with their request to expand the bowling operation. The zoning for the site is B-3, Business Commercial, which Ordinance 617 Staff Report June 4, 1998 Page 2 does not allow a bowling alley as a permitted or conditional use. It is not until the B-4, Regional Business district, that bowling alleys become an allowed use. Based upon other allowed uses within this district, such as amusement centers, hotels, restaurants and bars, and commercial recreation uses, all of which describe (or potentially describe)the Mermaid facility, staff and the Planning Commission contend that a B-3 designation would be appropriate. Recommendation: While there are multiple alternatives for dealing with the zoning inconsistencies, staff and the Planning Commission recommend that community centers and bowling alleys be allowed as permitted uses within the B-3, Highway Business zoning district, and as such,recommend that the Council move to introduce the second reading and adoption of Ordinance 617. Rick Jopke, Co munity Development Director N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\SPECPROJ\SP062.98\AMNDMNT2.RPT ORDINANCE NO. 617 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 1100, CHAPTERS 1114 AND 1115 OF THE MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE RELATING TO PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE B-3,HIGHWAY BUSINESS, AND B-4,REGIONAL BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICTS THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: Section 1. Title 1114.02 of the Mounds View Municipal code shall be amended by inserting the underlined and italicized language,to read as follows: 1114.02: PERMITTED USES: The following uses are permitted in a B-3 District: All permitted uses as allowed in a B-2 Limited Business District. Amusement centers. Auto accessory stores. Bowling alleys. Commercial recreational uses. Grocery stores, supermarkets. Motels,motor hotels and hotels;provided, that the lot area contains not less than five hundred(500) square feet of lot area per unit. Private clubs or lodges serving food and beverages with use restricted to members and their guests. adequate dining room, kitchen and bar space must be provided according to standards imposed upon similar unrestricted customer operations. The serving of alcoholic beverages to members and their guests shall be allowed; provided,that such service is in compliance with applicable Federal, State, and Municipal regulations'. Offices of such use shall be limited to no more than twenty percent(20%) of the gross 1 See Chapters 501, 502, and 503 of this Code; see M.S.A. Chapter 340A. Ordinance 617 Page2 floor area of the building. Public or semi-public recreational buildings and neighborhood or community centers, public and private educational institutions limited to elementary.junior high and senior high schools and religious institutions, such as churches, chapels, temples and synagogues. Rental stores. Restaurants, cafes, tea rooms, taverns, on- and off-sale liquor. Taxi terminals, stands and offices. SECTION 2. Title 1115.02 of the Mounds View Municipal code shall be amended by deleting the italicized lined-thru language,to read as follows: 1115.02 PERMITTED USES: The following are permitted uses in a B-4 District: All permitted uses as allowed in a B-3 District. Amusement places (such as dance halls or roller rinks). Enclosed boat and marine sales. Bowling alleys. Department and discount stores. Dry cleaning, including plant accessory heretofore,pressing and repairing. Electrical appliance stores, including incidental repair and assembly but not fabricating or manufacturing. Furniture stores. Garden supply stores. Public garage. Theaters, not of the outdoor drive-in type. Variety stores, 5 and 10 cent stores and stores of similar nature. (Ord. 452, 2-27-89) Ordinance 617 Page3 SECTION 3. This ordinance takes effect 30 days after its publication. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View the 26th day of May, 1998. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 8th day of June, 1998. Duane McCarty, Mayor Charles S. Whiting, City Clerk/Administrator APPROVED AS TO FORM: Robert C. Long, City Attorney N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\PLANCOMM\ORD617.ORD 7e_ Item No. Type of Business: CB 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: Resolution 5244 Changing Election Polling Location to Edgewood Middle School Date of Report: June 4, 1998 With election deadlines rapidly approaching, we must decide upon a polling place for the State Primary Election on September 15, and the General Election on November 3. Currently our polling location is City Hall. Many have indicated that the last election held in this location was chaotic due to lack of space. In addition, there is the possibility of construction around City Hall during the election period. In light of these facts, Edgewood Middle School might be a better venue for the elections. Community Education has given their permission for use of the facility (half of the gymnasium) on these two dates. Staff Recommendation: As City Hall space is limited, staff recommends that Council pass Resolution 5244 changing the 1998 Election polling location to Edgewood Middle School. RESOLUTION NO. 5244 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION CHANGING THE POLLING PLACE FOR THE 1998 STATE PRIMARY AND GENERAL ELECTION FROM CITY HALL TO EDGEWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL, 5100 EDGEWOOD DRIVE, MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA 55112 WHEREAS, the deadline for changing the 1998 election polling location with Ramsey County is June 16, 1998; and WHEREAS, the facilities at City Hall may be inadequate to handle the polling activity; and WHEREAS, Community Education has given permission to use the gymnasium located at Edgewood Middle School, 5100 Edgewood Drive, Mounds View, Minnesota 55112 for the Primary Election on September 15, and the General Election on November 3; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City of Mounds View to ensure an ample and efficient polling location for the 1998 Election. NOW THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council in and for the City of Mounds View does hereby authorize the polling location to be officially changed from City Hall, 2401 Highway 10, to Edgewood Middle School, 5100 Edgewood Drive, Mounds View Minnesota 55112 for the 1998 Primary Election on September 15, and the General Election on November 3, 1998. Adopted this 8th day of June, 1998. ATTEST: Mayor (SEAL) City Administrator