HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2012/04/23CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
MOUNDS VIEW CITY HALL
Monday, April 23, 2012
7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL: Flaherty, Stigney, Hull, Mueller, Gunn
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
5. PUBLIC INPUT:
Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give
your full name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three
minutes.
6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
A. Arbor Day Proclamation
B. Building Safety Month Proclamation
7. COUNCIL BUSINESS
A. Street & Utility Improvement Program Area E Curb Cut Appeals:
1. Resolution 7927 - 5177 Red Oak Drive
2. Resolution 7928 - 5176 Longview Drive
B. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 871 Amending Chapter 605 of the
Municipal Code to Include Emerald Ash Borer as a Regulated Tree Pest
C. Resolution 7924, Accepting Work for County Road 10 Trail Segments 1-5
Project and Authorizing Final Payment to Max Steininger, Inc.
D. Resolution 7931, Authorizing Advertisement for the Building Official/Fire
Marshal Position
E. Resolution 7929 Appointing MMKR to Provide Auditing Services for the Years
Ended December 31, 2012, 2013, 2014
F. Resolution 7930, Authorizing Barr Engineering Company to Provide Services
for Part 2 of the Wellhead Protection Plan
8. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Schedule a Public Hearing for Monday, May 14, 2012, at 7:05pm, to Consider
an On Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Moe’s, located at 2400 County
Highway 10
B. Schedule a Public Hearing for Monday, May 14, 2012, at 7:10pm, to Consider
an On Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Mermaid Acquisition Group, Inc.,
(doing business as The Mermaid), located at 2200 County Highway 10
April 23, 2012, City Council Agenda
Page 2
8. CONSENT AGENDA - Continued
C. Schedule a Public Hearing for Monday, May 14, 2012, at 7:15pm, to Consider
an On Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for El Loro, located at 2535 County
Highway 10
D. Schedule a Public Hearing for Monday, May 14, 2012, at 7:20pm, to Consider
an Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for ABC Liquor, located at 2840 County
Highway 10
E. Schedule a Public Hearing for Monday, May 14, 2012, at 7:25pm, to Consider
an Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Vino & Stogies, located at 2345
County Road H2
F. Schedule a Public Hearing for Monday, May 14, 2012, at 7:30pm, to Consider
an Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Big Top Liquor located at 2577
County Highway 10
G. Schedule a Public Hearing for Monday, May 14, 2012, at 7:35pm, to Consider
an Off Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor License for Speedway SuperAmerica, located at
2840 County Road I
H. Resolution 7926 Authorizing Insurance Policies for the Year January 2012
through December 2012
9. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS
10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. March 12, 2012, City Council Meeting
11. REPORTS
A. Reports of Mayor and Council
B. Reports of Staff
1. Capital Improvement Plan
2. Administrative Report
C. Reports of City Attorney
12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, May 7, 2012, at 7pm
Next Council Meeting: Monday, May 14, 2012, at 7pm
13. ADJOURNMENT
Item 06A
Arbor Day Proclamation
April 23, 2012
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
PROCLAMATIONPROCLAMATIONPROCLAMATIONPROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, Arbor Day was first observed in 1872 with the planting of more than a million
trees in Nebraska and is now observed throughout the nation and the world; and
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View has been recognized for 30 consecutive years as a
Tree City USA Community by the National Arbor Day Foundation for its commitment to
urban forestry; and
WHEREAS, trees in our city beautify our surroundings, increase property values, shade
our parks and residences, reduce storm water runoff, reduce energy use, enhance the
economic vitality of business areas and promote healthier communities; and
WHEREAS, the City will be planting shade trees in Silver View Park with members of the
Mounds View Lions Club on April 25th, 2012.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Joe Flaherty, Mayor of the City of Mounds View, do hereby
proclaim Wednesday, April 25th, 2012 as
“ARBOR DAY”
in the City of Mounds View, and I urge all citizens to celebrate Arbor Day and to support
efforts to protect our trees and woodlands; and
FURTHER, I urge all citizens to plant trees to promote the well-being of this and future
generations.
Given under my hand and Seal of the City of Mounds View, this 23rd day of April, 2012.
(SEAL)
Joe Flaherty, Mayor
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
~ P R O C L A M A T I O N ~
BUILDING SAFETY MONTH
May, 2012
Whereas, the City of Mounds View’s continuing efforts to address the critical issues of safety, energy efficiency
and sustainability in the built environment that affect our citizens, both in everyday life and in times of natural
disaster, give us confidence that our structures are safe and sound, and;
Whereas, our confidence is achieved through the devotion of vigilant guardians—building safety and fire
prevention officials, architects, engineers, builders, laborers and others in the construction industry—who
work year-round to ensure the safe construction of building, and;
Whereas, these guardians develop and implement the highest-quality codes to protect Mounds View Residents
in the buildings where we live, learn, work and play, and;
Whereas, Building Safety Month is sponsored by the International Code Council and International Code Council
Foundation to remind the public about the critical role of Minnesota’s guardians of public safety-- our code officials--who
assure us of safe, efficient and livable buildings; and
Whereas, “Building Safety Month: An International Celebration of Safe and Sensible Structures” the theme for Building
Safety Month 2012, encourages awareness of the importance of building safety, including residential fire sprinklers that
enhance not only fire safety, but also green and sustainable building, utilizing the latest in construction technology.
Building Safety Month 2012 encourages appropriate steps everyone can take to ensure that the buildings we occupy every
day are safe and sustainable, and recognizes that countless lives have been saved due to the implementation of safety
codes by local and state agencies; and
Whereas, each year, in observance of Building Safety Month, Mounds View Residents are asked to consider
projects to improve building safety and sustainability, and to acknowledge the essential service provided to all
of us by our building and fire officials in protecting lives and property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that I, Joe Flaherty, Mayor of the City of Mounds View, do hereby
proclaim this month of May, 2012, to be:
BUILDING SAFETY MONTH
Accordingly, I encourage our citizens, government agencies, private businesses, nonprofit organizations and
other interested groups to join in activities that will increase awareness of building safety, and I further urge
all Minnesotans to learn more about how they can contribute to building safety at home and in their
communities.
Given under my hand and Seal of the City of Mounds View, this 23rd day of April 2012.
(Seal) _________________________________________
Joe Flaherty, Mayor
Item No: 7A
Meeting Date: April 23, 2012
Type of Business: Council Business
Administrator Review: ______
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Area E SUIP Driveway Curb Cut Appeals at 5177 Red
Oak Drive and 5176 Longview Drive
Introduction:
Dayton and Lillian Ward, property owners of 5177 Red Oak Drive, and William and Jenna Bohl,
property owners of 5176 Longview Drive are requesting City Council approval to allow their
existing driveway curb cuts to remain wider than the 24 feet that is allowed by the City Code.
Background:
On February 27, 2012, City Staff mailed letters to property owners in Street & Utility
Improvement Program Area E that have driveway curb cuts that do not meet the current City
Code regulations for either setback from property lines or maximum width. The letter stated
that as part of the street reconstruction projects, the City would be installing the new driveway
curb cuts and aprons to current City Code requirements: a minimum five foot setback and
maximum width of 24 feet. Property owners can appeal this decision as stated in Zoning Code
Chapter 1121.09 Subd 5g:
In conjunction with street improvement projects or in conjunction with individual
driveway replacements projects, nonconforming curb cuts shall be made conforming to
whatever extent practicable. If, in the opinion of the directors of public works, and
community development, a nonconforming curb cut cannot be made conforming
without undue hardship or disruption to the property, the curb cut may remain in
existence, unchanged. Decisions regarding curb cuts may be appealed in writing to
the City Council.
City staff met with both property owners to review the City Code and the Council policies about
driveways. As staff explained to the applicants, the City has several City Code provisions that
affect and regulate the placement and construction of driveways, and the City Council adopted
Resolution 7338 (attached) on September 22, 2008, that set the City policies and standards to
address non-conforming curb cuts within the street and utility improvement programs. The City
Code is in place to help improve the look of properties in Mounds View and to provide
consistent policies and standards for all residential properties in the City. The City of Mounds
View has always required permits for all driveways, and when permits are not applied for,
driveways that do not meet the City Code are often installed.
At this time, the City is working with the property owners in the SUIP areas to correct only the
curb cuts, not the entire driveway, even if the whole driveway is also out of compliance. The
rest of the driveway does not have to be brought into compliance until it is replaced.
Discussion:
Resolution 7338 outlines the three conditions and standards where the City will allow a single-
family property to exceed the maximum width requirement stated in City Code Chapter 1121.
Area E Curb Cut Appeals
Page 2
April 23, 2012
The resolution states that all of the conditions must be met. Conditions 3b and 3c in the
Resolution state “The curb cut in question has been permitted by the City through an approved
variance or other acceptable means” and “The City determines that it is not possible to reduce
the width of the driveway to comply with the maximum allowable curb cut width.” In this case,
neither property received any type of City approval for a wider curb cut, and it would be possible
to narrow both curb cuts to 24 feet.
5177 Red Oak Drive – Property owners: Dayton & Lillian Ward
This property has a curb cut width of 28 feet at the street, then one side angles out and the
driveway gets wider. The property owners state that the driveway was originally widened to 28
feet soon after the attached garage was expanded to 28 feet wide in the 1970’s. The City has a
record of a driveway permit in 1973. The permit does not state the driveway dimensions, only
that it was 1,000 square feet, which would be close to the driveway size that currently exists
(excluding the parking area next to the garage). The owners replaced the driveway in 1998 and
state that the contractor told them no permit was necessary since the driveway size wasn’t
being changed (this is incorrect, driveway permits have always been required).
5176 Longview Drive – Property owners: William & Jenna Bohl
This property has a driveway that is 27 feet wide. The current owners bought the property in
November 2011 and have not changed the driveway since they have owned it. The City has a
1976 permit for adding a 30 foot wide attached garage and a new driveway. In the attached
photo, the shape of the original concrete driveway that is narrower at the street and widens at
the top for the 3rd car garage is still visible. There are no other city records of a permit for a
driveway, but at some point, the whole driveway was expanded to 27 feet wide.
Recommendation:
The City Council should consider testimony from staff, the property owners, residents or any
other affected person or interested party. The City Council will need to determine whether it
believes sufficient reasons exist to allow the property owners to keep their existing curb cut
widths. Allowing the curb cuts to remain as is would not be consistent with the standards and
conditions set in the City Code and those in Resolution 7338. Staff has prepared a resolution
of denial for each property for the Council to take action on if they so choose.
Sincerely,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Resolution 7338, Adopted September 22, 2008
2. Photos of 5177 Red Oak Drive
3. Narrative from property owner of 5177 Red Oak Drive
4. Photos of 5176 Longview Drive
5. Narrative from property owner of 5176 Longview Drive
6. Resolution 7927 for 5177 Red Oak Drive
7. Resolution 7928 for 5176 Longview Drive
Photo of 5177 Red Oak Drive
Aerial view of 5177 Red Oak Drive
Narrative from Property Owners of 5177 Red Oak Drive
Photo of 5176 Longview Drive
Aerial view of 5176 Longview Drive
Narrative from Property Owners of 5177 Red Oak Drive
RESOLUTION NO. 7927
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION DENYING A REQUEST FOR A CURB CUT TO EXCEED 24 FEET
AT 5177 RED OAK DRIVE
WHEREAS, Dayton & Lillian Ward have requested City approval to allow their wider
than 24 foot curb cut to remain as is at 5177 Red Oak Drive; and,
WHEREAS, the existing driveway has a 28 foot wide curb cut onto Red Oak Drive
making it nonconforming with current City standards; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 7338 on September 22, 2008 that set
the policies and standards for nonconforming driveways within the street and utility
improvement program: and:
WHEREAS, Resolution 7338 states that the City will allow a curb cut to exceed the
maximum width requirement only if all three of the conditions are met; and,
WHEREAS, Condition 3b of the three City-required conditions states “The curb cut in
question has been permitted by the City through an approved variance or other acceptable
means”; and,
WHEREAS, the City has not given any type of approval for this curb cut to exceed 24
feet wide; and,
WHEREAS, Condition 3c of the three City-required conditions states “The City
determines that it is not possible to reduce the width of the driveway to comply with the
maximum allowable curb cut width”; and,
WHEREAS, it does not appear that there would be any problems with reducing the
width of the curb cut at 5177 Red Oak Drive to the maximum allowed size of 24 feet; and,
WHEREAS, this appeal does not meet all the conditions for nonconforming driveways
set by the Council in Resolution 7338; and,
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. W ard have appealed the decision of City staff to deny their
28 foot wide curb cut.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council makes the
following findings of fact about Dayton and Lillian Ward’s request for a wider driveway curb
cut at their property at 5177 Red Oak Drive:
1. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances do not apply to the property that
warrants approval of the requested 28 foot wide curb cut. The property has
sufficient access without the need for more than a 24 foot wide curb cut.
Resolution 7927
Page 2
2. The provisions of the Zoning Code and of Resolution 7338 would not deprive the
property owners the ability to have adequate access to their property.
3. Granting the applicants approval for a wider than allowed curb cut would confer
upon the property owner a special privilege that the City would not extend to other
property owners in the street and utility improvement program.
4. The approval for a wider curb cut would be detrimental to the purpose of the City
Code, to the street and utility program and to other property in the street and utility
program in that the City desires to bring nonconforming driveways into conformance
with the City Code whenever possible.
5. The wider curb cut could diminish or impair property values within the street and
utility program and negatively affect the city’s vision for improvement to the streets
and to properties within the project area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, based upon the above findings of
fact and testimony provided the City Council meeting, the Mounds View City Council upholds
and affirms the decision of City staff to follow the City standards set in Resolution 7338 for
non-conforming driveways by denying the requested wider curb cut for the property at 5177
Red Oak Drive.
Adopted this 23rd day of April, 2012.
____________________________
Joe Flaherty, Mayor
ATTEST
____________________________
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
RESOLUTION NO. 7928
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION DENYING A REQUEST FOR A CURB CUT TO EXCEED 24 FEET
AT 5176 LONGVIEW DRIVE
WHEREAS, William & Jenna Bohl have requested City approval to allow their wider
than 24 foot curb cut to remain as is at 5176 Longview Drive; and,
WHEREAS, the existing driveway has a 27 foot wide curb cut onto Longview Drive
making it nonconforming with current City standards; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 7338 on September 22, 2008 that set
the policies and standards for nonconforming driveways within the street and utility
improvement program: and:
WHEREAS, Resolution 7338 states that the City will allow a curb cut to exceed the
maximum width requirement only if all three of the conditions are met; and,
WHEREAS, Condition 3b of the three City-required conditions states “The curb cut in
question has been permitted by the City through an approved variance or other acceptable
means”; and,
WHEREAS, the City has not given any type of approval for this curb cut to exceed 24
feet wide; and,
WHEREAS, Condition 3c of the three City-required conditions states “The City
determines that it is not possible to reduce the width of the driveway to comply with the
maximum allowable curb cut width”; and,
WHEREAS, it does not appear that there would be any problems with reducing the
width of the curb cut at 5176 Longview Drive to the maximum allowed size of 24 feet, and,
WHEREAS, this appeal does not meet all the conditions for nonconforming driveways
set by the Council in Resolution 7338; and,
WHEREAS , Mr. and Mrs. Bohl have appealed the decision of City staff to deny their 27
foot wide curb cut.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council makes the
following findings of fact about William & Jenna Bohl’s request for a wider driveway curb cut at
their property at 5176 Longview Drive:
1. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances do not apply to the property that
warrants approval of the requested 27 foot wide curb cut. The property has
sufficient access without the need for more than a 24 foot wide curb cut.
Resolution 7928
Page 2
2. The provisions of the Zoning Code and of Resolution 7338 would not deprive the
property owners the ability to have adequate access to their property.
3. Granting the applicants approval for a wider than allowed curb cut would confer
upon the property owner a special privilege that the City would not extend to other
property owners in the street and utility improvement program.
4. The approval for a wider curb cut would be detrimental to the purpose of the City
Code, to the street and utility program and to other property in the street and utility
program in that the City desires to bring nonconforming driveways into conformance
with the City Code whenever possible.
5. The wider curb cut could diminish or impair property values within the street and
utility program and negatively affect the city’s vision for improvement to the streets
and to properties within the project area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, based upon the above findings of
fact and testimony provided the City Council meeting, the Mounds View City Council upholds
and affirms the decision of City staff to follow the City standards set in Resolution 7338 for
non-conforming driveways by denying the requested wider curb cut for the property at 5176
Longview Drive.
Adopted this 23rd day of April, 2012.
____________________________
Joe Flaherty, Mayor
ATTEST
____________________________
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: 7B
Meeting Date: April 23, 2012
Type of Business: Council Business
Administrator Review: ____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Nick DeBar, Public Works Director
Item Title/Subject: Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 871, Amending
Chapter 605 of the Municipal Code to Include Emerald Ash
Borer as a Regulated Tree Pest
Background/Discussion:
Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) was discovered in the summer of 2011 in a residential
neighborhood of Shoreview less than a quarter mile away from the Mounds View border.
There has been a lot of attention and anticipation of the eventual movement of the pest for
some time, this infestation came as a surprise since it appeared to “skip” a ring of suburbs
from St. Paul. With the imminent threat of finding EAB infested ash trees in Mounds View, a
management plan and municipal code revisions has been developed to address this public
nuisance.
The Council reviewed and discussed the EAB management plan and Chapter 605 revisions
at their April 2, 2012 work session with City Forestry Consultant, Rick Wriskey. The City
has a very manageable number of ash (approx. 300) on public parkland, grounds, and
boulevards that the EAB management plan addresses. However, there are thousands
more on private property that the City currently has no regulatory authority to address if
infected with EAB.
To provide this authority, Chapter 605 needs to be updated to include EAB as a shade tree
pest. The attached ordinance has provided the proper modifications to allow this to occur.
The regulatory and abatement process will be similar to cases involving Oak Wilt and Dutch
Elm Disease. A first reading of the ordinance took place at the April 9, 2012 Council
meeting.
Recommendation:
City staff recommends that the Council adopt the attached ordinance. If adopted, the
ordinance summary will be published in the Sun Focus on May 3, 2012 and take effect 30
days later, or June 2, 2012.
Respectfully submitted,
Nick DeBar - Public Works Director
Attachment: Ordinance 871
ORDINANCE NO. 871
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 605 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO
INCLUDE EMERALD ASH BORER AS A REGULATED TREE PEST
THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Mounds View hereby amends Chapter 605 of the
Municipal Code by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined text as follows:
CHAPTER 605
SHADE TREE DISEASE AND PEST CONTROL
SECTION:
605.01: PlantShade Tree Disease and Pest Control Program
605.02: Inspection and Investigation
605.03: Nuisances Declared; Abatement
605.04: Abatement Procedures; Assessment of Costs
605.05: Disruption of Root Grafts
605.06: Treating of Trees
605.07: Permit Requirements for Transporting Wood
605.08: Storage of Elm Wood
605.09: Licensing Requirements for Tree Contractors
605.0910: Violation of Provisions
605.01: PLANTSHADE TREE DISEASE AND PEST CONTROL PROGRAM:
Subd. 1. Authority: The City Administrator and those agents appointed by the City Administrator
(herein referred to as “tree inspector”) are hereby empowered to conduct a program of
plantshade tree disease and pest control pursuant to authority granted by Minnesota Statutes,
section 18.022 §§ 18G, 89.001, 89.01 and 89.51-.64, including the and elimination of
Dutch elm disease fungus, elm bark beetles, oak wilt fungus, emerald ash borer, and other
potentially non-native invasive pests and epidemic diseases of trees.
Subd. 2. Interference Prohibited: It shall be unlawful for any person to interfere, prevent or delay
the authorized parties from discharging their duties pursuant to this Chapter.
605.02: INSPECTION AND INVESTIGATION: The City Administrator or an agent:
Subd. 1. Inspection: The tree inspector Sshall inspect all premises and places within the City as
often as practicable but not less than that required by the State1, to determine whether any
condition described in subdivision 605.03(1) of this Chapter exists thereon. The City
Administrator shall tree inspector may investigate all incidents of infestations by Dutch elm
fungus, elm bark beetles, oak wilt fungus, emerald ash borer, or any other non-native
invasive pests, epidemic diseases, of trees and suchor other factors which are potentially
contributory to the spread of tree disease and pests.
Subd. 2. Right of Entry: The tree inspector Mmay enter upon private premises at any reasonable
time for the purposes of carrying out any of the duties assigned to the City Administrator
tree inspector under this Chapter.
605.03: NUISANCES DECLARED; ABATEMENT:
Subd. 1. Nuisances Declared: The following are hereby declared public nuisances whenever they
may be found within the City:
a. Any living or standing elm tree, or part thereof, infected to any degree with the Dutch
elm disease fungus Ceratocystis ulmi (buisman) moreau or which harbors any of the elm
bark beetles Scolytus multistriatus (eichh.) or Hylurgo-pinus rufipes (marsh).
b. Any dead or dying elm tree, or part thereof, including logs, branches, stumps, firewood
or other elm material from which the bark has not been removed and burned or buried.
c. Any living or standing red oak tree, or part thereof, infected to any degree with the oak
wilt fungus Ceratocystis fagacearum.
d. Any diseased wood from the red oak group which, by April 1 in any given year, has not
been either debarked, burned, buried or split into quarter sections and completely enclosed
with a covering (at least 4-mil, if plastic) adequately thick and whole so as to isolate the
wood until July 15 of the year immediately following the wilting of the tree from which said
wood originated.
e. Any living or standing ash tree, or part thereof, infested to any degree with the emerald
ash borer Agrilus planipennis by presence of: 1) larval galleries and emerald ash borer larva
or larvae; or 2) emerald ash borer adult beetles and “D”-shaped exit holes.
f. Any dead or dying ash tree, or part thereof, including logs, branches, stumps, firewood, or
other ash material, to which the bark is still attached that may serve as a breeding place for
emerald ash borer.
eg. Other trees with non-native invasive pests, epidemic disease, or other factors which are
potentially hazardouscontributory to the spread of such pests and disease.
1 M.S.A. §18.022, subdivision 9.
Subd. 2. Nuisance Declared Unlawful: It is unlawful for any person to permit public nuisances, as
herein defined, to remain on any premises owned or controlled by that person within the
City.
605.04: ABATEMENT PROCEDURES; ASSESSMENT OF COSTS:
Subd. 1. Notice to Abate: Whenever the City Administrator or an agenttree inspector find that
nuisances, as defined in Section 605.03 of this Chapter, exist on any public or private
property in the City, they shall notify the property owner on which such nuisances are
located, by personal service or by mail, that the nuisances must be abated within athe
specified time below., . not less than ten (10) days from the date of service or from the date
of mailing of such notice.
If mailed notice or personal service cannot be achieved, then notice may be obtained by
publishing same in the legal newspaper not less than five (5) days prior to the date that the
nuisance must be abated pursuant to the notice. Oak wilt nuisances must be abated by a
predetermined date, as established by the City Council.
a. Not less than ten (10) days from the date of service or from the date of mailing of such
notice for dead or diseased elms.
b. Before the date indicated in the notice for red oaks infected with oak wilt disease.
c. Before the date indicated in the notice, but no later than April 15 of the following year,
for dead or infested ash trees. The tree inspector may order the immediate removal of dead
or infested ash trees if said removal will eliminate the likelihood of an imminent threat of
spread to other ash trees from late May to early August.
Subd. 2. Failure to Abate; Cost Billed to Owner: If the owner shall fail to remove the nuisance(s)
from the property described in the notice, the City Administrator or an agent shall tree
inspector may order the work to be done, and the cost of said work shall be billed against the
owner.
Subd. 3. Responsibility for Costs:
a. Trees which are diseased pursuant to this Chapter located on City boulevards in public
street rights -of -way will be removed at a cost of fifty percent (50%) to the owner of the
abutting property with the City assuming the remaining costs.
b. All other materials pursuant to this Chapter are the responsibility of the owner of the
abutting property.
Subd. 4. Special Assessment: If the owner shall fail to pay the bill, as provided for in subdivisions
1 and 2b hereof, within ninety (90) days, the Council may then assess the amount due, plus interest,
plus costs against the property as a special assessment pursuant to Minnesota Statutes1.
1 M.S.A. §429.101.
605.05: DISRUPTION OF ROOT GRAFTS: Whenever a tree is found, which is actually
or potentially diseased with any disease covered in this Chapter, the City Administrator or an agent
tree inspector may take whatever steps are necessary as recommended by the Commissioner of
Agriculture to disrupt all potential root grafts. This disruption shall be performed as soon as
possible. The property owner or the person in possession, if different from the owner, on which the
trees stand and adjacent property owners or the persons in possession, if different from the owner, if
the disruption procedure extends onto that property, shall be notified by personal service or first
class mail that said disruption will be done.
605.06: TREATING OF TREES:
Subd. 1. Whenever the City Administrator or an agent tree inspector determines that any tree or
wood within the City is infected with shade tree pests or disease-causing organisms pursuant
to this Chapter, they may treat all nearby high value trees with the appropriate chemical
treatment. Treating activities authorized by this Chapter shall be conducted in accordance
with technical and expert opinions and plans of the Commissioner of Agriculture or other
State officials. The provisions of subdivision 605.04(1) of this Chapter apply to treating
operations conducted under this provision. Treatment authorized pursuant to this provision
shall be considered an emergency activity by the City and an attempt to abate a public
nuisance, and the City, the City Administrator and tree inspector or an agent, shall not be
liable for any damages resulting hereunder.
Subd. 2. Adjacent property owners may treat non-diseased and non-infested boulevard trees
located in pubic rights-of-way only after obtaining a permit from the City. All treatment of
boulevard trees by adjacent property owner must be performed by a licensed tree contractor
with possession of a current pesticide applicator license issued by the State of Minnesota
and performed in accordance with methods approved by the Department of Agriculture.
605.07: PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR TRANSPORTING WOOD: It is unlawful
for any person to transport within the City any bark-bearing wood, pursuant to this Chapter, which
is known by the tree inspectorCity Administrator or an agent, without first having obtained a permit
from the City Administrator. The City Administrator shall tree inspector may grant such permit
only when the purposes of this Chapter will be served thereby.
605.08: STORAGE OF ELM WOOD: The storage or keeping of any elm wood with
intact bark is only permitted during the season of dormancy from October 1 to March 15.
605.09: LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR TREE CONTRACTORS: Tree services
by private tree contractors shall be performed under the direction of an arborist certified by the
International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) or forester certified by the Society of American
Foresters and employed by the contractor. Licensing of tree contractors shall be required for any
routine or non-routine tree services performed on public or private property, including but not
limited to tree trimming, tree removal, tree treatment by injection or trench methods, and stump
grinding.
605.0910: VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS: Any person violating any of the
provisions of this Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
SECTION 2. In accordance with Section 3.07 of the City Charter, City staff will have the
following summary printed in the official newspaper in lieu of the complete ordinance:
On April 23, 2012, the Mounds View City Council adopted Ordinance 871 that amends
Chapter 605 of the Municipal Code to include Emerald Ash Borer as a regulated pest.
The ordinance establishes conditions for nuisance declarations, abatement procedures and
timelines, and licensing requirements for tree contractors.
A printed copy of the ordinance is available for inspection during regular business hours
at the Mounds View City Hall and is available on-line at www.ci.mounds-view.mn.us.
SECTION 3. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its publication.
First reading and introduction by the Mounds View City Council on April 9, 2012.
Second reading and adoption by the Mounds View City Council on April 23, 2012.
Published in the official City newspaper on May 3, 2012.
__________________________________
Joe Flaherty, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: 7C
Meeting Date: April 23, 2012
Type of Business: Council Business
Administrator Review: ____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Nick DeBar, Public Works Director
Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7924, Accepting Work for County Road 10 Trail
Segments 1-5 Project and Authorizing Final Payment to Max
Steininger, Inc.
Background/Discussion:
Max Steininger, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid for $653,350.31 at the July 23, 2009 bid
opening for the construction of trail segments 1-5 in the north boulevard of County Highway 10.
Max Steininger was later awarded a construction contract on August 10, 2009 (Res. 7484), and
construction was substantially complete on November 13, 2009. A final inspection was performed
the following spring and punch list items were completed in 2010. There were a few issues related
to a cut loop detector for the County Road H traffic signal, and quantity discrepancies between
Steininger and a subcontractor that delayed determination of final payment. In addition, the
Minnesota Department of Transportation required a project closeout submittal for review and
approval. This was required since the project had federal grant funding (up to $525,000). A
detailed timeline of the project approvals is included at the end of this report.
Max Steininger has completed all work and submitted the needed closeout documents, whereby
meeting all requirements of the contract documents in a satisfactory manner. The City has been
withholding 2% of the value of all completed work that Rosenquist has performed, pending
completion of the punch list and other closeout requirements. The following is a summary of the
final construction costs:
Original Contract Amount: $653,350.31
Change Orders (1): - $ 128.26 (deduct)
Quantity Variations: + $ 409.83 (add)
Final Construction Cost: $653,631.88 $96,368.12 below 2009 budget amount of $750,000
The remaining payment amount owed to Max Stieninger is $20,382.50.
Recommendation:
City staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached resolution to accept construction
work and release final payment for the County Road 10 Trail Segments 1-5 Project. The final
payment is not included under Payment of Claims and would need be issued by the Finance
Director if approved.
Respectfully submitted,
Nick DeBar - Public Works Director
Attachments:
• Resolution 7924
• Stantec Notice of Acceptance of Work
Res. 7924, Accepting Work for County Road 10 Trail Segments 1-5 Project
Page 2
Project Timeline and Prior City Council Action Summary:
On January 9, 2006, the City Council authorizing preparation of a preliminary feasibility report
and consultant selection for the County Road 10 Trailway, Lighting, and Landscape Project
(Resolution 6716). At that time, the City Council decided to proceed with two segments of
trailway along the County Road 10 corridor: 1.) The segments on the north side between
County Road H and Silver Lake Road (Segments 1-5) and; 2.) the segments on the south side
between Long Lake Road and Silver Lake Road (Segments 9 & 10).
On November 13, 2007, the City Council reviewed the Feasibility Report for the County Road
10 Trailway Project: Segments 1-5 and held a Public Hearing for the project. The City Council
chose not to proceed with the project for two primary reasons. The first was the increased
project cost relative to the estimated project cost included in the City Capital Improvement
Plan (CIP). The second reason for not proceeding with the Trail Segments 1–5 Project was
the dedication of TIF funds for the Street and Utility Improvement Program (adopted by the
City Council under Resolution 7176 on October 22, 2007). The City TIF account was to be a
funding source for the Trail Segments 1–5 project.
In January 2008, Staff performed an analysis of the TIF account to verify that sufficient
funding existed for the anticipated projects identified in the CIP.
On March 3, 2008, the City Council discussed the results of the TIF analysis and CIP fund
review during their workshop. Based on the results of the CIP and TIF analysis, Council
directed that Staff proceed to develop the Trail Segments 1–5 project with a revised scope.
The revised scope was to include grading necessary only for the trail and to ensure drainage,
trail construction, lighting, and basic turf restoration. Landscaping and other amenities were
eliminated or reduced to a bare minimum.
On June 9, 2008, the City Council approving the Feasibility Report for the project, ordering the
project with the reduced scope, authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications, and
authorizing easement activities for the County Road 10 Trailway Project: Segments 1-5
(Resolution 7279).
On July 7, 2008, the City Council authorized a larger spacing for lighting units along the trail
and instructed that decorative lights be installed at street intersections.
On November 20, 2008, the Parks and Recreation and Forestry Commission reviewed the
proposed impact of the trail alignment on the City Hall Park, and authorized the Parks
Supervisor to submit a letter of concurrence to the City.
On November 24, 2008, the City Council approving the Agency Delegated Contract Process
(DCP) Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) designating
Mn/DOT to act as the City’s agent for accepting Federal funds on the City’s behalf (Resolution
7363).
Also on November 24, 2008, the City Council approved the plans and specifications for the
County Road 10 Trail Segments 1-5 Project and authorized the advertisement for bids
(Resolution 7362). Permanent and temporary easements needed for the Project were
identified with the plans and specifications.
On August 10, 2009, the City Council awarding a construction contract to Max Steininger, Inc. of
Eagan, MN for $653,350.31 (Res. 7484).
RESOLUTION 7924
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ACCEPTING WORK FOR COUNTY ROAD 10 TRAIL SEGMENTS 1-5 PROJECT
AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT TO MAX STEININGER, INC.
WHEREAS, construction of County Road 10 Trail Segments 1-5 (“Project”) was
an Action Step for Goal 2 – County Road 10 Redevelopment and Revitalization of the
City’s adopted 2008-2009 Action Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City applied for and was awarded Federal-Aid in the amount of
$525,000 for the Project scheduled for a 2009 construction start; and
WHEREAS, plans and specifications for the Project were been approved by the
City Council, Ramsey County, and Mn/DOT’s State Aid office, and all temporary and
permanent easements and wetland mitigation approvals needed to construct the Project
were acquired; and
WHEREAS, eight (8) sealed bid proposals for the Project were received by the
City on July 23, 2009, and Max Steininger, Inc. of Eagan, Minnesota was the lowest
responsible bidder with a total base bid amount of $653,350.31; and
WHEREAS, the City Council awarded the Project to Max Steininger on August
10, 2009 (Res. 7484); and
WHEREAS, Max Stininger has completed construction and submitted close-out
documentation, whereby fulfilling the contract requirements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows:
1. All work completed under the contract between the City and Max Steininger,
Inc. for construction of County Road 10 Trail Segments 1-5 Project is hereby
accepted and approved.
2. The Finance Director is authorized to issue final payment of $20,382.50 to
Max Steininger, Inc. for completing construction of the project.
Adopted this 23rd day of April, 2012.
____________________________________
Joe Flaherty, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
POSITION DESCRIPTION
Position Title: Building Official/Fire Marshal/Fire Fighter
Department: Community Development
Accountable to: Community Development Director
Status: Non-Exempt
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES OF POSITION
Perform comprehensive building and fire inspections on residential, commercial and
industrial properties to ensure compliance with existing city and state codes and
policies governing new construction and existing structures. Conduct plan reviews.
Respond to emergency fire calls as needed.
SUPERVISION RECEIVED
Works under the general guidance and direction of the Community Development
Director. Reports to the Fire Chief regarding emergency fire calls.
SUPERVISION EXERCISED
Supervises Building and Fire Inspectors and Interns.
ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Building Official
• Provides guidance and assistance in all areas of building permit applications and
reviews all submitted plans to ensure compliance with established state and local
codes and ordinances.
• Approves and issues permits which are in compliance and provides assistance in
identifying changes required in specifications to meet established codes.
• Conducts or supervises on-site comprehensive inspections to ensure compliance
with existing codes including building, mechanical, plumbing, fire and housing.
• Ensures all related paperwork is completed and full documentation is available
for decisions related to the inspection process.
• Provides concise code interpretations for those circumstances in which there is a
difference of opinion of the specific intent of a specific code provision.
• Reviews contractor license applications for recommendation to the City Council.
• Investigates citizen complaints related to the building and fire code activities of
the City with the goal of resolving issues in the best interest of all concerned,
while providing the highest possible degree of life safety.
Plan Review
• Performs plan review for new structures, expansions and changes of use to
ensure that they conform to all building and fire safety codes and practices.
• Reviews building plans and expansion projects for compliance with state and
federal accessibility requirements.
• May provide plan review services for county and state agencies on an as-needed
basis.
Fire Marshal
• Conducts plan review on new construction.
• Performs or supervises annual site inspections on existing commercial,
industrial, multi-occupancy residential for fire code compliance.
• Inspects or supervises inspections of new businesses and industrial operations
when changes of occupancy occur in a building.
• Conducts fire prevention education as time permits to ensure public and building
owner awareness about fire safety and conformance with fire safety codes.
• Conducts post fire incident investigations and inspection of fire calls and alarms
to determine cause and applicable safety measures.
• Conducts post-fire inspection to determine structural integrity.
• Follow up on false alarm calls in an effort to prevent future calls.
Fire Fighting
• Responds to fire calls
• Responds to emergency medical calls
• Conducts post fire incident investigations and inspection of fire calls and alarms
to determine cause and applicable safety measures.
• Conducts post-fire inspection to determine structural integrity.
• Follow up on false alarm calls in an effort to prevent future calls.
PERIPHERAL DUTIES
• Informs the Community Development Director of any inspection related activities
which require immediate attention or action.
• Consults with the City Attorney as required to review and ensure assure legal
requirements are being met in all building, housing, and fire code activities, or to
initiate legal action to ensure code compliance.
• Continually reviews existing code and ordinances for consistency and ease of
enforcement and interpretation and recommends modifications on a local, state
and national level.
• Attends meetings as assigned or as requested when matters relate to
responsibilities assigned.
• Assumes other responsibilities as apparent or as delegated.
MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS
Education and Experience:
(A) Graduation from a high school or GED equivalent supplemented by two years of
related technical instruction in building technology, construction management,
mechanical, electrical, plumbing or building construction.
(B) Two (2) years of experience in general construction or related field.
(C) State Certification as a Building Official
(D) Two (2) years of post-secondary education with course work in fire science and
/or two (2) years experience in the fire prevention field.
(E) Certification equivalent to Minnesota State Fire Service Certification of Fire
Inspector II
(F) Certification as a Firefighter I, First Responder and member of the Spring Lake
Park, Blaine, Mounds View Fire Department.
NECESSARY KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS AND ABILITIES
(A) Thorough knowledge of uniform building codes, fire codes, plumbing codes,
mechanical codes, general construction codes, and a thorough knowledge of
carpentry; cConsiderable knowledge in electrical work, carpentry work, cement
work, or plumbing, and skill in applying knowledge of the Uniform Building
Codes, zoning and land use applications. Knowledge of methods, materials,
terminology and practices in general building construction. Knowledge of laws
governing zoning and general building construction.
(B) Ability to establish effective working relationships with contractors, architects,
engineers, owners, developers, the general public and city personnel.
(C) Ability to read and understand complicated plans and blueprints and to
communicate effectively orally and in writing
(D) Knowledge of the practices and principles of fire suppression and medical
emergency rescue.
(E) Knowledge of practices, principles and techniques of effective code
enforcement/fire prevention principles.
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
A valid state driver's license or ability to obtain one by start of employment. One or
more Minnesota certifications including but not limited to Plans Examiner and
Combination Inspector. Minnesota Building Official Certification required.
TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT USED
Personal computer, including word processing and permitting software; motor vehicle;
10-key calculator; portable radio; phone; ladder or scaffolding; tape measure.
PHYSICAL DEMANDS
The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by
an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable
accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the
essential functions.
Work is performed both outdoors and in office settings. Outdoor work is required in the
inspection of various land use developments and construction sites. Hand-eye
coordination is necessary to operate computers and various pieces of office equipment.
While performing the duties of this job, the employee is occasionally required to stand;
walk; use hands to finger, handle, feel or operate objects, tools, or controls; and reach
with hands and arms. The employee is occasionally required to sit; climb or balance;
stoop, kneel, crouch, or crawl; talk or hear.
The employee must occasionally lift and/or move up to 100 pounds.
Specific vision abilities required by this job include close vision, distance vision,
peripheral vision, depth perception, and the ability to adjust focus.
WORK ENVIRONMENT
The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an
employee encounters while performing the essential functions of this job. Reasonable
accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the
essential functions.
While performing the duties of this job, the employee frequently works in outside
weather conditions. The employee occasionally works near moving mechanical parts
and in high, precarious places and is occasionally exposed to wet and/or humid
conditions, or risk of electrical shock. The employee will be exposed to hazardous and
lethal environments when responding to medical and fire emergencies.
The noise level in the work environment is usually quiet in the office, and moderate to
loud in the field.
SELECTION GUIDELINES
Formal application, rating of education and experience; oral interview and reference
check; job related tests may be required.
The duties listed above are intended only as illustrations of the various types of work
that may be performed. The omission of specific statements of duties does not exclude
them from the position if the work is similar, related or a logical assignment to the
position.
The job description does not constitute an employment agreement between the
employer and employee and is subject to change by the employer as the needs of the
employer and requirements of the job change.
Approval: ______________________ Approval: ____________________
Supervisor Appointing Authority
Effective Date: Revision History: 042006 (Revised)
1/06
8/01 (244 HAY POINTS)
5/98
6/97
1995 ADA
Item No: 7D
Meeting Date: April 23, 2012
Type of Business: Council Business
Administrator Review: ____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Desaree Crane, Assistant City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7931 Authorizing the Advertisement for the
Building Official Position
Background:
Effective March 18, 2012, Kathi Osmonson resigned from active service as a firefighter.
In addition, Ms. Osmonson also resigned as Building Official/Fire Marshal with the City.
Her last day with the City is Friday, May 4, 2012.
Discussion:
The City is requesting to start the advertising process for the Building Official/Fire
Marshal position. This position is a full-time, non-union, non-exempt position. This
position is required and essential to provide building inspections, and fire inspections on
residential, commercial and industrial properties to ensure compliance with City and
State Codes and policies. Below is the proposed hiring schedule:
Council Authorization to Advertise Position: April 23, 2012
Placed on the League of Minnesota City
Website, City’s website and other related websites: April 24, 2012
Sunday edition of the
Star Tribune: April 29, 2012
City Council Review of Job Description: May 7, 2012 Work Session
City Council Approval of Job Description: May 14, 2012
Deadline for Submitting Applications: May 29, 2012
Review all Applications: May 30 and 31, 2012
Top Candidates Decided: June 1, 2012
Interviews: June 4-6, 2012
Top Candidate Presented to City Council: June 11, 2012
Candidate starts employment: on or about June 26, 2012
Item 07D
April 23, 2012, City Council Meeting
Page 2
Staff and the City Council will be discussing the Building Official/Fire Marshal job
description, to include possible outsourcing of these duties while the City finds a
candidate for the position, at the May Work Session. Attached is a draft of the
proposed revisions to the job description. This position may be quite challenging to fill
since most Building Officials are not trained or certified as Fire Marshals. It is staff’s
recommendation to start the process of advertising immediately to ensure there are no
delays in providing building inspection services.
Recommendation:
Staff is requesting Council approval of attached Resolution 7931 authorizing the
advertisement for the position of Building Official in the Community Development
Department. Once a qualified candidate is selected, Staff would seek authorization
from the City Council to hire the individual. No offer of employment would be made until
such authorization is granted by the City Council.
Respectfully submitted,
Desaree Crane
Attachments:
Proposed Draft to the Building Official/Fire Marshal Job Description
RESOLUTION 7931
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OR RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AUTHORIZING THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR THE
BUILDING OFFICIAL POSITION
WHEREAS, effective March 18, 2012, Kathi Osmonson resigned from active
service as a firefighter; and
WHEREAS, Ms. Osmonson also resigned as Building Official/Fire Marshal with
the City, effective Friday, May 4, 2012; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department will have a need to fill this
full-time, non-exempt position, due to Ms. Osmonson’s resignation; and
WHEREAS, Staff would like to start the process of advertising for the Building
Official/Fire Marshal immediately.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Mounds View authorizes staff to prepare and post an advertisement for a full-time, non-
exempt position of “Building Official” within the Community Development Department.
NOW, MAY IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED, that once a qualified candidate is
selected for the Building Official position, staff would seek authorization from the City
Council to hire the individual.
Adopted this 23rd day of April, 2012.
__________________________________
Joe Flaherty, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
James Ericson, City Administrator
(seal)
M:\MasterFiles\2012\City Council\City Council Packets\04-23-2012\Item 07E Reso 7929 MMKR Auditing Services.doc
Item No: 7.E.
Meeting Date: April 23, 2012
Type of Business: Council Business
Administrator Review: _____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Mark Beer, Finance Director
Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7929 Appointing MMKR to Provide Auditing
Services for the Years Ended December 31, 2012, 2013, 2014
The City’s contract for auditing services has expired with the 2011 audit. The auditing firm of
Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich, & Co., P.A. (MMKR) has performed and provided
audit services that have been beneficial to the City. MMKR has provided at staff’s request an
extension of audit services for the years’ ending December 31, 2012, 2013, and 2014 for
Council consideration. The City has received more than satisfactory service from MMKR and
the proposed fees reflect minimal increases for 2012, 2013, and 2014. The fee for the 2011
audit was $29,800.
The proposed fee for 2012 is $30,400 plus expenses, 2013 - $31,000 + expenses, and 2014 -
$31,600 + expenses.
Resolution 7929 appointing MMKR as auditors for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2013,
and 2014 is attached for your approval. I have also attached the engagement letter that will be
signed by the Mayor, the letter of estimated fees for the next three years, and MMKR’s peer
review.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Mark Beer
M:\MasterFiles\2012\City Council\City Council Packets\04-23-2012\Item 07E Reso 7929 MMKR Auditing Services.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 7929
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPOINTING MMKR TO PROVIDE AUDITING SERVICES FOR
THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012, 2013, 2014
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statue 471.697 requires all cities with a population
over 2,500 to have an annual audit and submit an audited financial report to the state
auditor office; and
WHEREAS, Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich, & Co., P.A. (MMKR)
has provided the City of Mounds View with financial auditing services that have been
beneficial to the City at a cost of $29,800 for 2011; and
WHEREAS, MMKR has provided a letter of engagement that outlines the
services which they will perform; and
WHEREAS, the audit services described include the base audit, GASB 34
requirements, and the fraud audit requirements for an estimated total of $30,400 plus
direct expenses for 2012, $31,000 plus direct expenses for 2013, and $31,600 plus
direct expenses for 2014.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Mounds View does hereby authorize the Mayor to sign an engagement letter with
MMKR for the provision of auditing services for the years ended December 31, 2012,
2013, 2014.
Adopted this 23rd day of April, 2012.
________________________________
Joe Flaherty, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Jim Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: 7F
Meeting Date: April 23, 2012
Type of Business: Council Business
Administrator Review: ____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Nick DeBar, Public Works Director
Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7930, Authorizing Barr Engineering Company to Provide
Services for Part 2 of the Wellhead Protection Plan
Background:
In accordance with Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4720, all public water suppliers are mandated to
implement wellhead protection measures through a Wellhead Protection Plan (WHPP). The
Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) is in charge of enforcing these rules and has been phasing
in the requirements to individual water suppliers over the past few years. Mounds View was notified
in 2009 by the MDH that we are included in the next phase of municipalities required to perform this
planning work based on our vulnerability to potential contamination.
WHPP is broken into two general parts. Part 1 includes detailed analysis of each well and pumping
aquifer characteristics, groundwater flow models, delineating WHP areas, vulnerability
assessments, and identifying the types of potential contamination. Part 2 involves inventorying
potential sources of contamination and developing management strategies for addressing the
potential sources of contamination. This planning process takes some time to complete, and
Mounds View has a deadline of April 15, 2013 for compliance.
Barr Engineering Company was hired by the City to prepare Part 1 of the WHPP and has been
coordinating the work with the City’s designated Wellhead Protection Manager, Nick DeBar, and
MDH staff. The Part 1 Report was submitted to the MDH in December 2011, and subsequently
approved in a letter to the City dated February 1, 2012. A mandated public information meeting
was held as part of the regular City Council meeting on March 12, 2012 to present Part 1 and solicit
public comment.
Discussion:
City staff and Barr Engineering had a Part 2 Scoping Meeting with the MDH on March 26, 2012.
Based upon this meeting and other WHPP requirements, Barr has provided a fee proposal not to
exceed $22,500 to complete Part 2 of the plan. The adopted 2012 Budget includes $15,000 under
the Water Enterprise Fund (700-4825-3030) for WHPP consulting fees. Barr estimates one year to
complete all Part 2 work after notice to proceed. Staff estimates that the $15,000 is adequate to
cover costs to be incurred this year, and $7,500 will be required to be included in the 2013 budget
for completion of the work. A detailed scope of work is attached for reference.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing Barr Engineering
to perform services associated with Part 2 of the Wellhead Protection Plan.
Respectfully submitted,
Nick DeBar
Public Works Director/Wellhead Protection Manager
RESOLUTION 7930
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AUTHORIZING BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY TO PROVIDE SERVICES FOR
PART 2 OF THE WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View is mandated to implement wellhead
protection measures through a Wellhead Protection Plan in accordance with Minnesota
Rules, Chapter 4720; and
WHEREAS, the Wellhead Protection Plan is implemented in two Parts and the
City requires the assistance of professional consulting services to complete; and
WHEREAS, Barr Engineering Company of Minneapolis, Minnesota prepared
Part 1 of the Wellhead Protection Plan, which was subsequently approved by the
Minnesota Department of Health; and
WHEREAS, Part 2 of the Wellhead Protection Plan is required to be completed
by April 15, 2013 and Barr Engineering Company has provided the City with a fee
proposal not to exceed $22,500 to provide professional services associated with this
work.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows:
1. The letter proposal submitted by Barr Engineering Company to provide professional
engineering services for Part 2 of the Wellhead Protection Plan is hereby accepted
by the City. Compensation will be on an hourly basis plus reimbursable expenses
for $19,830 with a maximum fee not to exceed $22,500.
2. The Director of Public Works is authorized to enter into said professional services
agreements with Barr Engineering Company on behalf of the City Council.
Adopted this 23rd day of April, 2012.
____________________________________
Joe Flaherty, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: 8H
Meeting Date: April 23, 2012
Type of Business: Council Consent
Administrator Review: _____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Mark Beer, Finance Director
Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7926 Authorizing Insurance Policies for the Year
January 2012 through December 2012.
The attached Resolution 7926 authorizes staff to purchase insurance policies with the
League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust and to make payment of the premiums and
commission as they become due.
The January 1 renewal date has delayed receipt of our policy from the League of Minnesota
Cities Insurance Trust as there are a number of cities with the same date. The League has a
difficult time processing that many applications. The cost of our property and liability policy
decreased by $15,099 as a result of reduced rates and adjusted property values and a
commission credit of $7,500 per year, negotiated with Maguire Agency for 2012 and 2013.
The premium for workers’ compensation has decreased by $724 in 2012. This is the result of
reduced payroll expenses. We continue to receive non-smoking rates for the police
department as they continue to be 90% smoke free. The overall affect will be a decrease of
$13,823 over 2011.
The LMCIT now includes internet liability coverage as part of the Comprehensive Municipal
Coverage package and not as separate coverage. This added more coverage at no
additional cost. We previously paid Chubb Insurance $2,500 for this coverage.
Staff recommends approval of resolution 7926 authorizing the purchase of insurance policies
for the year January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________
Mark Beer
RESOLUTION NO. 7926
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Authorizing Insurance Policies for the Year January 2012 through December 2012
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View has made application for insurance policies to
cover the period of January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012 and has received
proposed policies from the League of Minnesota Cites Insurance Trust. (LMCIT)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mounds
View authorizes staff to purchase the following insurance policies from the LMCIT and pay
Maguire Agency the proposed commission for the period of January 1, 2012 through
December 31, 2012 and to make payment of premiums as they become due:
Maguire Agency (commission) $ 2,000
Comprehensive Municipal Coverage (LCMIT) 71,205
Worker’s Compensation (LCMIT) 76,092
Total $149,297
Adopted this 23rd Day of April 2012.
______________________________
Joe Flaherty, Mayor
(ATTEST)
______________________________
Jim Ericson
City Administrator
(SEAL)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL 1
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 2
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA 3
4
Regular Meeting 5
March 12, 2012 6
Mounds View City Hall 7
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 8
7:04 P.M. 9
10
11
1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER 12
13
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 14
15
3. ROLL CALL: Flaherty, Stigney, Hull, Mueller, Gunn. 16
17
NOT PRESENT: None. 18
19
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 20
A. Monday, March 12, 2012, City Council Agenda. 21
22
MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Approve the Monday, March 12, 2012, agenda as 23
presented. 24
25
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 26
27
5. PUBLIC INPUT 28
29
Mike Reed, 2208 Lois Drive, thanked the plow truck drivers for clearing the snow after the 30
recent storm. 31
32
Dan Mueller, 8343 Groveland Road, spoke to the Council regarding vacant and foreclosed 33
homes. He understood there were parties interested in buying the vacant homes, but financing 34
was difficult. He encouraged the Council to seek other options for revitalizing the housing stock 35
beyond the CDBG funds as the number of vacant homes within the City was growing. He 36
recommended the Council use TIF funds to assist with renovating and purchasing foreclosed 37
homes. 38
39
Mayor Flaherty stated the Council was reviewing housing stock options to address the vacant and 40
foreclosed homes in the City. 41
42
Tom Carlson, Woodlawn Drive, asked how many vacant homes there were in the City at this 43
time. 44
45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 2
Mayor Flaherty noted the City had 115 foreclosed properties and 43 are presently unoccupied. 1
2
6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 3
4
A. Resolution 7910, Supporting Ramsey County’s “Beyond the Yellow Ribbon” 5
Program. 6
7
Mayor Flaherty stated the Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Campaign was requesting a Resolution of 8
Support from the City of Mounds View. He then read the proposed Resolution in full for the 9
record. 10
11
Council Member Gunn provided further information on the Beyond the Yellow Ribbon initiative. 12
She stated the City does not have many of the amenities (hospitals, clinics, etc.) the program was 13
seeking and was therefore supporting Ramsey County’s program. 14
15
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Adopt 7910, Supporting Ramsey County’s “Beyond 16
the Yellow Ribbon” Program. 17
18
Council Member Mueller noted at the upcoming Ramsey County League of Local Government 19
meeting there would be an update from the County on the Beyond the Yellow Ribbon program. 20
21
Mayor Flaherty encouraged residents with family members deployed to contact City Hall to learn 22
more about this program. 23
24
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 25
26
B. Public Information Meeting for Wellhead Protection Plan – Part 1 27
28
Public Works Director DeBar stated that the City was put on notice in 2009 to complete a 29
Wellhead Protection Plan. This was mandated for all public water suppliers according to 30
Minnesota State Rules Chapter 4720. The plan was broken down into two parts. First, it 31
requires a detailed analysis of each well, the pumps used for the aquifer, ground water flow 32
models, delineating the wellhead protection areas, vulnerability assessments and identifying 33
potential pollution for each well. 34
35
Public Works Director DeBar explained the second part of the plan requires the City to inventory 36
the sources of contamination within influenced area of the wells and developing management 37
strategies. The Department of Health oversees Chapter 4720 and the City has until April 15, 38
2013 to complete the Wellhead Protection Plan. He explained that Barr Engineering worked 39
with the City to complete Part 1, which has been approved by the Department of Health. He 40
noted that John Greer, with Barr Engineering, was present to discuss Part 1. 41
42
John Greer, Barr Engineering, introduced himself and presented the Council with a summary of 43
the Part 1 Wellhead Protection Plan. He noted the City has six wells that pump from a total of 44
four different aquifers. The study needed to address future water demands through 2015. The 45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 3
future flow evaluations were discussed in detail. He found that wells, 1, 2, and 3 were not 1
vulnerable, but that wells 4, 5 and 6 were vulnerable. This vulnerability does not mean the wells 2
are contaminated. 3
4
Mr. Greer discussed the scoring for wells 4, 5 and 6 stating the vulnerability did not mean each 5
well was contaminated. He explained that the geology was more of a concern in addition to the 6
steady use of these wells. He stated the aquifer vulnerability was rated low to moderate for each 7
of these wells by the Department of Health. 8
9
Council Member Mueller requested further clarification on the vulnerability classification. Mr. 10
Greer stated the aquifer vulnerability refers to how long it takes water to get from the surface to 11
the aquifer. A low classification takes surface water several years to reach the aquifer, while a 12
moderate classification can take up to a decade. 13
14
Mayor Flaherty questioned why the City was drawing water from four different aquifers. Mr. 15
Greer stated this was just a matter of when and where the wells were located. In the past, various 16
aquifers were targeted for maximum pumping. 17
18
Dan Mueller, 8343 Groveland Road, asked what actions would be taken if an aquifer were to 19
become contaminated. Mr. Greer indicated it would depend on the contamination and where it 20
was coming from. One action would be to pump the water out, another option would be to treat 21
the water. 22
23
Mayor Flaherty thanked Mr. Greer for his time this evening and for the detailed report. 24
25
7. COUNCIL BUSINESS 26
A. 7:05 p.m. Public Hearing, Resolution 7903, Variance Appeal Request for a 27
Garage to Exceed the Allowed Height Limit at 8027 Woodlawn Drive. 28
29
Planning Associate Heller stated that a variance appeal request from Timothy Downing was 30
before the Council for consideration this evening. The original request was heard by the 31
Planning Commission in December of 2011, where the request was denied. In October of 2007, 32
the applicant requested a building permit to build a second garage on the property and all plans 33
met City requirements. Extensions were granted, as the applicant did not begin construction 34
immediately. 35
36
Planning Associate Heller explained in August of 2010, the applicant requested a footings 37
inspection from the City. She noted a year later, it came to staff’s attention that a garage had 38
been constructed on the site that did not meet the submitted plans. The garage exceeds the 39
present 18 foot height limit as it is 22½ feet high at the peak. The modified plans should have 40
been brought to the City for review and approval before construction began. She stated the 41
garage was mostly complete at this time. 42
43
Planning Associate Heller indicated the Planning Commission heard the variance request in 44
December of 2011. A public hearing was held and comments were taken from neighbors. While 45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 4
several neighbors did not object to the garage itself, the feeling was the rules should have been 1
followed. The Commission could not find the practical difficulty in this case and, therefore, 2
denied the variance request. 3
4
Planning Associate Heller stated at this time, the applicant was appealing the variance denial by 5
the Planning Commission. Staff posted another public hearing for this case, and an email was 6
received from the property owners at 2508 Sherwood stating they did not object to the garage. 7
Mayor Flaherty also received a phone call stating a neighbor did not object to the garage. Staff 8
understood that the garage was well built, but found no reason for the variance to be approved. 9
She presented several photos of the garage at 8027 Woodlawn for the Council to review. 10
11
Planning Associate Heller requested the Council hold a public hearing, allow the applicant to 12
speak, and then take action on the Resolution. 13
14
Mayor Flaherty opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. 15
16
Christy Downing, 8027 Woodlawn Drive, reviewed a written statement with the Council. She 17
requested the Council reconsider the variance request denied by the Planning Commission. Mrs. 18
Downing believed the situation was a big misunderstanding and requested the Council keep their 19
minds open while reviewing the information this evening. She stated the City has been 20
concerned with the height of the garage. It was noted the garage was built according to plans, 21
with the exception of a five inch difference in height and the added dormers. 22
23
Mrs. Downing stated the report from the City states the initial plan submitted showed a height of 24
11 feet at the midway point, this was inaccurate. The original plans had a height of 15 feet at the 25
midway point. She reported the City changed their code regarding garage heights, since the 26
original plans were approved. Their garage was being held to the new limit. A change to the 27
trusses brought about the increase in garage height. 28
29
Tim Downing, 8027 Woodlawn Drive, stated the garage was constructed between August of 30
2010 and March of 2011. He had received permission from the City to build a garage that had a 31
15 foot mid-way height which resulted in an overall height of 21 feet at the peak. This was 32
changed to 15½ feet at the mid-way point which resulted in an overall height of 22½ feet. He 33
understood he did not have permission to add dormers to the garage. 34
35
Mr. Downing stated the staff report claims the garage that was built was different from the plans 36
submitted in 2007. He explained the plans are almost the same, with the exception of the 37
dormers. The original plans were for a single story garage with attic trusses, to allow for storage. 38
The garage that was built was a single story garage with attic trusses with a dormer on each side 39
of the roof. He clarified that the garage was not a two story. 40
41
Mrs. Downing requested the Council to consider the negative impact the community would feel 42
by denying the variance request. She understood the need for Zoning Codes within the City, 43
however, there was some flexibility built into this system through the variance process. She felt 44
her garage was not causing harm to her neighbors and was in line with the character of the 45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 5
neighborhood. Each of her neighbors supported the garage as it was built. She noted the size of 1
the garage was consistent with the design of the house. She felt her lot did have a practical 2
difficulty and should allow for a larger garage due to the larger size of her lot. She requested the 3
Council be flexible and allow for the additional storage space. She noted there were three other 4
homes within 350 feet of her home that had a second garage that was as tall or taller than her 5
garage. 6
7
Mrs. Downing stated the garage and its incompletion caused a financial difficulty to her family. 8
The couple has been unable to refinance their home because the project was incomplete. In 9
addition, if the roof and front portion of the garage had to be removed, this would cause yet 10
another financial hardship and delay the completion. This would decrease the aesthetic value of 11
the garage as well. She requested the Council reconsider the request and approve the variance. 12
13
John Stacey, 8000 Woodlawn Drive, indicated he assisted Mr. Downing with the trusses on his 14
garage. He did not have any issues with the garage or its height. He felt the house height and 15
garage height were uniform. 16
17
Dan Larson, 8046 Woodlawn Drive, stated he did not object to the garage. 18
19
Tom Carlson, 8051 Woodlawn Drive, agreed with the comments thus far. He did not object to 20
the garage height. He felt the buildings were similar in character and did not feel the need to 21
make a change in its height. 22
23
Mike Reed, 2208 Lois Drive, felt the City Code of 2007 should be followed as that was when the 24
permit was approved. 25
26
Hearing no additional public input, Mayor Flaherty closed the public hearing at 8:00 p.m. 27
28
Council Member Mueller requested further information regarding the differences between City 29
Code in 2007 versus 2011. Planning Associate Heller indicated the 15 feet was measured 30
midway between the peak and the eave. However, a steep pitched roof would allow for a taller 31
garage. To simplify this measurement, the overall maximum garage height was changed to 18 32
feet. 33
34
Mayor Flaherty indicated the Downings had a great deal of support from their neighbors. He 35
stated the Downings understood they were not prepared for the Planning Commission meeting 36
and asked for the tone of that meeting. Planning Associate Heller stated the Planning 37
Commission did not support the request because it was a variance after the fact. City Code was 38
not followed and changes were made to the plans without being submitted to the City. The vote 39
of the Planning Commission was 6-1. 40
41
Mayor Flaherty commented the original permit was taken out in 2007. He questioned how long 42
this permit was viable. Planning Associate Heller explained building code allows for the permit 43
to remain in place for six months, so long as work was being done on the site. The Building 44
Official can grant extensions through a written request. She indicated the Downings had 45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 6
requested an extension. 1
2
Mayor Flaherty inquired if an extension was requested by the Downings after 2009, at which 3
time the new City Code would have been explained. Planning Associate Heller was unaware if 4
another extension was requested, or that staff made him aware of the code change. She noted the 5
original plan would have been acceptable under the mid-point criteria. 6
7
City Administrator Ericson indicated because the permit was acquired before the code changed 8
the plans could have been completed as submitted. However, the plans changed, and should 9
have been brought to the City for approval. 10
11
Mayor Flaherty questioned if Mr. Downing had made the City aware of the change in height 12
proposed for the garage and the addition of the dormers. Mr. Downing stated he did not inform 13
the City of the changes. 14
15
Council Member Hull inquired if the Council would be setting precedence by approving this 16
variance. Planning Associate Heller stated this very well could create precedence. 17
18
Mayor Flaherty indicated he was struggling with the fact the garage changes were not brought to 19
the Council or City prior to being completed. A decision was made by the homeowner to build 20
the garage bigger than the original plans allowed. City Administrator Ericson clarified that the 21
original plans would not be consistent with today’s code, but were consistent with the code in 22
2007. 23
24
Mayor Flaherty questioned what options were available for the garage. Mr. Downing stated the 25
garage was not built to comply with the 18 foot height restriction. It could not be engineered or 26
lowered to 18 feet with its current trusses and would therefore need an entirely new roof. He 27
feared much of the materials would not be salvageable. 28
29
Mayor Flaherty feared that a precedence would be set if the variance was approved. It would 30
open the door for others in the community to build a garage or accessory structure that does not 31
meet the City’s Zoning Code and request a variance after the fact. 32
33
Mr. Downing stated he completes construction work in a number of neighboring communities 34
and he has never heard of a resident being forced to tear down a roof or building structure due to 35
non-compliance. 36
37
Mayor Flaherty asked if the garage complied with the previous code. Planning Associate Heller 38
stated the garage was nine inches over the previous standard. 39
40
Mr. Downing commented that he has a neighbor with a garage the same exact size and height as 41
his. He questioned if the Council would take action against his neighbor to bring that garage into 42
compliance. 43
44
Mayor Flaherty questioned how many garage building permits were outstanding and could be 45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 7
affected by the change to City Code. City Administrator Ericson did not recall there being any 1
garage building permits outstanding prior to 2009. He stated this was a unique case as the plans 2
submitted were not followed. The difference in the garage height from the plans submitted was 3
approximately two feet. He understood this was to be a small number, but again, the change in 4
plans was not brought to the City for approval before being completed. 5
6
Council Member Hull questioned how much work would be required to bring the garage to the 7
20 foot height which was originally submitted. Mr. Downing stated this would be much more 8
doable than an 18 feet height. He explained he would not have added the extra two feet if the 9
City’s building the inspector at the time had commented he wouldn’t get up and measure the 10
final height. It did not occur to him that Don would retire and not be available to support his 11
request. 12
13
Mayor Flaherty agreed with Council Member Hull’s suggestion to bring the garage height to 20 14
feet. He did not want to see the Council open the floodgates to residents requesting variances 15
after the fact. 16
17
Mr. Carlson questioned if the Council was going to pursue each homeowner within the City to 18
ensure their garage height matched the plans submitted with the City. City Administrator 19
Ericson stated the key difference is that if the City inspector completed the final inspection and a 20
certificate of occupancy was granted, the City could not take action. 21
22
Mr. Carlson asked why the City was applying discretion to this case and not to all garage height 23
cases. He questioned if the City was diligent about following through with final inspections. 24
City Administrator Ericson indicated the City did not have a large number of structural building 25
permits outstanding. Mayor Flaherty added that this was also dependent upon the inspector at the 26
time the project was completed. 27
28
Mr. Carlson felt the Downings were being singled out and felt this wasn’t fair. 29
30
Mr. Downing indicated the suggestion made by Council Member Hull was more agreeable than 31
removing the entire garage roof. 32
33
Council Member Gunn stated she was on the Planning Commission when the garage height 34
requirements were changed. She explained that part of the homeowners’ responsibility with 35
submitting plans was to follow through on the plans submitted. If the plans were changed or 36
altered, this created new circumstances that needed to be reviewed by the City. This needed to be 37
done before completion and not after the fact. 38
39
Council Member Gunn indicated the applicant admitted he did not submit the dormer plans, as 40
they could be rejected. The applicant knew full well that he had changed the plans without City 41
approval. As to the garage height, if the plans were followed, this would not be an issue, but 42
again, the applicant took it upon himself to make a change without seeking City approval. She 43
recommended the garage height be brought down two feet to the originally approved height of 44
20½ feet. 45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 8
1
Council Member Mueller stated the City of Minnetonka approved a garage variance for a 2
resident several years ago, which was challenged by a neighboring property. The City of 3
Minnetonka then found itself in a very messy and expensive lawsuit because the variance code 4
was not followed properly. For this reason, the City of Mounds View had to strictly follow the 5
variance parameters. She did not see that the case before the Council this evening met the City’s 6
variance codes. She was in favor of the solution proposed by Council Member Hull as a 7
compromise. 8
9
Council Member Stigney asked if the Council were to proceed with the compromise if the garage 10
would be brought into the original parameters and not require a variance. Planning Associate 11
Heller stated this would bring the garage into compliance. 12
13
Mayor Flaherty stated bringing the garage into compliance with the 2007 City Code requirements 14
was the goal. 15
16
City Administrator Ericson questioned how the garage height would be reduced by two feet. Mr. 17
Downing stated he had a friend, Wayne Larson, owner of Larson Engineering, would assist him 18
to reduce the truss height by two feet. 19
20
City Administrator Ericson suggested action on the item be tabled until after Mr. Larson can 21
review the roof and provide engineering comments. Mr. Downing was confident this work could 22
be completed. Mrs. Downing thanked the Council for their time this evening and for hearing out 23
the variance request. 24
25
MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7903, 26
Upholding the Planning Commission’s Denial of the Variance for an Accessory Building to 27
Exceed the 18 Foot Allowed Height Limit at 8027 Woodlawn Drive with the understanding Mr. 28
Downing would be working with an engineer to bring the garage into compliance with the 29
original height from the 2007 plans. 30
31
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 32
33
B. 7:10 p.m. Public Hearing, Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance 869, 34
an Amendment to Zoning Code Chapter 1121 about Accessing Detached 35
Parking Areas. 36
37
Planning Associate Heller stated that one of the most common permits through the City was for 38
driveways and expansion of driveways. She indicated the City allowed for up to 300 square feet 39
of a gravel parking area. Access to these detached parking areas on a frequent basis has become 40
a concern. Staff has drafted a City Code Amendment to address these concerns about accessing 41
detached parking areas. 42
43
Mayor Flaherty opened the public hearing at 8:51 p.m. 44
45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 9
Hearing no public input, Mayor Flaherty closed the public hearing at 8:51 p.m. 1
2
Mayor Flaherty summarized that this Ordinance ensured that residents would be accessing a 3
frequently used detached parking area only through an approved curb cut. Planning Associate 4
Heller stated this would disallow residents from using their lawns to access detached parking or 5
storage sheds. She stated the City did not want residents driving over the new curbs either. 6
7
Council Member Mueller suggested the term “frequent use” be greater defined within the 8
Ordinance. 9
10
Mayor Flaherty was comfortable with the term as it would increase the difficulty for staff to 11
enforce. 12
13
Council Member Mueller questioned how the issue would be enforced. Planning Associate 14
Heller stated staff would monitor the properties in question over a period of time to see how the 15
property was being used and if there was a violation. 16
17
MOTION/SECOND: Hull/Gunn. To Waive the First Reading and Introduce Ordinance 869, an 18
Amendment to Zoning Code Chapter 1121 regarding Accessing Detached Parking Areas. 19
20
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 21
22
C. Resolution 7911, Approving Reestablishment of Precinct Boundaries. 23
24
Assistant City Administrator Crane stated that the County was required to review the redistricting 25
of the City after completion of the 2010 census. She noted all four precincts would remain at the 26
Community Center. She requested the Council approve Resolution 7911 approving the precincts 27
boundaries for the 2012 primary and general elections. 28
29
MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7911, 30
Approving Reestablishment of Precinct Boundaries. 31
32
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 33
34
D. Resolution 7912, Approving Step Wage Adjustments for Agnes Quasabart, 35
Accountant and Police Officer Andrew Olson. 36
37
Mayor Flaherty stepped out of the Council Chambers. 38
39
Assistant City Administrator Crane stated Accountant Agnes Quasabart and Police Officer 40
Andrew Olson were due a step wage adjustment after completing a satisfactory performance 41
evaluation and one year of service to the City of Mounds View. Staff recommends approval of 42
the wage adjustments. 43
44
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Hull. To Adopt Resolution 7912, Approving Step Wage 45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 10
Adjustments for Agnes Quasabart, Accountant and Police Officer Andrew Olson. 1
2
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Absent – 1 (Flaherty) Motion carried. 3
4
E. Resolution 7914, Awarding a Construction Contract to Rosenquist 5
Construction, Inc. for 2012 Reroofing of Community Center and Water 6
Treatment Plant No. 1 Project. 7
8
Public Works Director DeBar explained that in 2010 the City completed a Roof Management 9
Plan. At that time, the Community Center and Water Treatment Plant No. 1 were recommended 10
to be reroofed in 2012. In October of 2011, Inspec was hired to prepare plans and specs for the 11
2012 reroofing project. The City Council approved the project on January 23rd and the 12
advertisement for bid was published in February. 13
14
Public Works Director DeBar reported the City received 12 qualified bids for the project. The 15
prices ranged from $267,000 to $482,793. He reviewed the bid tabulations. The low bidder was 16
Rosenquist Construction, Inc. out of Minneapolis with a bid for the Community Center of 17
$222,000 and $45,000 for Water Treatment Plant No. 1. 18
19
Public Works Director DeBar indicated the original estimate for the Community Center reroofing 20
was $370,000. He was pleased the work came in under this amount as the City had budgeted 21
$250,000 for the project. The overall project cost was estimated to be $281,000 for the reroofing 22
and consultant fees. He explained the City was pleased with the work completed by Rosenquist 23
Construction in 2011 and recommended the Council approve the construction contract. 24
Construction would begin in April and would be substantially complete by June. 25
26
Mayor Flaherty returned to the Council Chambers. 27
28
Council Member Mueller questioned what type of contingency expenses were anticipated for this 29
project. Public Works Director DeBar stated with the 2011 project a $3,500 safety railing was 30
needed to meet OSHA requirements. He did not anticipate a great deal of contingency expenses 31
for the Water Treatment Plant. However, the Community Center may require additional 32
expenses if the polystyrene insulation needed to be replaced. He felt the $19,000 contingency 33
fund would cover any unforeseen expenses. 34
35
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Stigney. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7914, 36
Awarding a Construction Contract to Rosenquist Construction, Inc. for 2012 Reroofing of 37
Community Center and Water Treatment Plant No. 1 Project. 38
39
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 40
41
F. Resolution 7915, Awarding a Construction Contract to Odland Protective 42
Coatings Inc. for 2012 Water Tower Reconditioning Project. 43
44
Public Works Director DeBar stated the water tower reconditioning project planned for the 45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 11
summer involved both painting and structural repairs. He noted the initial inspection conducted 1
by KLM recommended the water tower be completed sometime between 2010 and 2012. The 2
scope of the work being completed has increased slightly with the plans and specifications 3
needing revision. 4
5
Public Works Director DeBar reported the Council approved these plans on January 23rd and the 6
advertisement for bids was published in the Sun Focus on February 2nd and February 9th. He 7
noted a pre-bid meeting was held on February 28th. Three contractors attended this meeting. 8
The City received three bid packages, two for the early schedule and three bids for the later 9
schedule. The low bidder was Odland Protective Coatings out of Rogers, Minnesota and came in 10
at $449,000. Staff recommended the Council award the construction contract to Odland for a 11
late season project. 12
13
Public Works Director DeBar understood the late season project would impact the Festival in the 14
Park which has been discussed with the Festival Committee. He indicated the 2012 budget had 15
$700,000 budgeted for the project and the estimated total project costs with consultant fees was 16
$500,000. A contingency of 10% was being requested for the project. 17
18
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7915, 19
Awarding a Construction Contract to Odland Protective Coatings Inc. for 2012 Water Tower 20
Reconditioning Project. 21
22
Mayor Flaherty was pleased to see the cost savings provided by completing the project later in 23
the season. 24
25
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 26
27
8. CONSENT AGENDA 28
29
Council Member Mueller asked to remove Item C and Item F from the Consent Agenda. 30
31
Council Member Stigney request Item A be pulled. 32
33
Mayor Flaherty asked to remove Item B and D for clarification from staff. 34
35
A. Resolution 7906, Authorizing a 3 Year Contract for Pest Control for the 36
Community Center, Public Works and City Hall Buildings. 37
B. Resolution 7916, Approving Contracts with 4 Seasons Tree Care, Inc. and 38
Upper Cut Tree Services for Tree Removal and Trimming Services. 39
C. Resolution 7908, Amending the Personnel Manual Relating to Uniform 40
Reimbursement for Civilian Police Department Employees. 41
D. Resolution 7909, Approving a Two-Year Labor Agreement with the Public 42
Works Collective Bargaining Unit for 2012 and 2013. 43
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 12
E. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, March 28, 2012, at 7:05 p.m. for the 1
Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance 870, Amending City Code 2
Chapters 514 and 1106 to Allow Massage Therapy as a Home Occupation. 3
F. Resolution 7913, Amending the Personnel Manual Relating to the Retirement 4
Health Savings Plan. 5
6
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Approve the Consent Agenda Item E. 7
8
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 9
10
A. Resolution 7906, Authorizing a 3 Year Contract for Pest Control for the 11
Community Center, Public Works and City Hall Buildings. 12
13
Council Member Stigney commented he did not feel that this was a worthwhile expense and for 14
this reason, he would not support the expense. 15
16
MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7906, 17
Authorizing a 3 Year Contract for Pest Control for the Community Center, Public Works and 18
City Hall Buildings. 19
20
Mayor Flaherty respected Council Member Stigney’s position but was in favor of keeping ahead 21
of any pest concerns within City buildings. 22
23
Ayes – 4 Nays – 1 (Stigney) Motion carried. 24
25
B. Resolution 7916, Approving Contracts with 4 Seasons Tree Care, Inc. and 26
Upper Cut Tree Services for Tree Removal and Trimming Services. 27
28
Public Works Director DeBar stated a three year contract was being signed with the tree 29
contractors. He indicated the contract would allow for pricing to be adjusted on a yearly basis by 30
November 15th. Staff recommended the Council approve the contracts with the term ending 31
March 31, 2015. 32
33
MOTION/SECOND: Flaherty/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7916, 34
Approving Contracts with 4 Seasons Tree Care, Inc. and Upper Cut Tree Services for Tree 35
Removal and Trimming Services. 36
37
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 38
39
C. Resolution 7908, Amending the Personnel Manual Relating to Uniform 40
Reimbursement for Civilian Police Department Employees. 41
42
Council Member Mueller stated she pulled this item to inform the public that uniform 43
reimbursements were being made to allow the City to remain in compliance with union 44
requirements. 45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 13
1
MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7908, 2
Amending the Personnel Manual Relating to Uniform Reimbursement for Civilian Police 3
Department Employees 4
5
Ayes – 4 Nays – 1 (Stigney) Motion carried. 6
7
D. Resolution 7909, Approving a Two-Year Labor Agreement with the Public 8
Works Collective Bargaining Unit for 2012 and 2013. 9
10
Mayor Flaherty thanked staff for completing the negotiations between the City and the Public 11
Works employees. 12
13
MOTION/SECOND: Flaherty/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7909, 14
Approving a Two-Year Labor Agreement with the Public Works Collective Bargaining Unit for 15
2012 and 2013. 16
17
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 18
19
F. Resolution 7913, Amending the Personnel Manual Relating to the Retirement 20
Health Savings Plan. 21
22
Council Member Mueller thanked staff for working diligently to amend the Personnel Manual. 23
24
MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Revised Resolution 25
7913, Amending the Personnel Manual Relating to the Retirement Health Savings Plan. 26
27
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 28
29
9. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 30
31
Finance Director Beer answered the Council's questions related to claims. 32
33
MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Approve the Just and Correct Claims as presented. 34
35
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 36
37
10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 38
A. February 13, 2012, City Council Meeting Minutes. 39
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 14
1
Council Member Mueller requested a correction on Page 3, Line 22, the word ‘‘Dir ector ’’ 2
should be ‘‘Department.’’ On Page 4, Line 40, she requested to add a space between ‘‘15%’’ 3
and ‘‘is.’’ On Page 6, Line 5, she requested staff check the correct spelling for the word 4
“interceptor.” 5
6
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Stigney. To Approve the February 13, 2012, City Council meeting 7
minutes as corrected. 8
9
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 10
11
B. February 27, 2012, City Council Meeting Minutes. 12
13
Council Member Mueller requested a correction on Page 6, Line 22, stating the line should read 14
“Jim Miller, Director of the League of Minnesota Cities,” 15
16
MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Approve the February 27, 2012, City Council meeting 17
minutes as corrected. 18
19
Ayes - -- 5 Nays - -- 0 Motion carried. 20
21
11. REPORTS 22
A. Reports of Mayor and Council. 23
24
Council Member Gunn reported spring break was approaching next week and cautioned the 25
residents to be aware students will be out of school. 26
27
Council Member Mueller stated the Festival in the Park Committee was meeting again on 28
Tuesday, March 20th at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall in the Conference Room. She encouraged anyone 29
interested in volunteering to attend. 30
31
Council Member Mueller indicated on Thursday, March 22nd at 7:00 p.m. the Ramsey County 32
League of Local Government would be meeting at the Community Center to discuss the Beyond 33
the Yellow Ribbon initiative. 34
35
Council Member Mueller noted the Mounds View Business Council meets on Wednesday 36
morning and Representative Tom Tilberry will be the guest speaker. The meeting will be held at 37
the Community Center at 7:30 a.m. 38
39
Council Member Mueller congratulated The Mermaid for being the registration location for the 40
2012 Back to the 50’s event held at the State Fair in June. 41
42
B. Reports of Staff. 43
1. Public Works 2011 Annual Report 44
45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 15
Public Works Director DeBar reviewed the Public Works 2011 Annual Report with the Council 1
in detail noting the department works not only with the City’s streets, but the City’s parks, parks 2
facilities, utilities and trees as well. He noted there were currently nine full time employees and 3
15 seasonal employees. He noted the experience level of the employees was quite varied, which 4
greatly benefited the department. 5
6
Public Works Director DeBar indicated in October of 2011 the vacated sanitary sewer position 7
was hired. He then discussed the work completed by the seasonal employees. He noted there 8
were 256 call back events in 2011, with 80 overtime hours and 50 pre-shift hours. Much of this 9
was due to the snow events that took place in January through March of 2011. He then discussed 10
the number of snow events in 2010-2011 stating it was the 4th snowiest winter on record. 11
12
Public Works Director DeBar explained that the City pumped 466.3 million gallons of water in 13
2011. This was below the allowed amount by the DNR, which was 593 million gallons of water. 14
The lower volume was due to the reduced amount of irrigation throughout the City. He noted the 15
City had eight water main breaks in 2011. 16
17
Public Works Director DeBar reported 80% of the City’s sanitary sewer was cleaned last year. 18
The City’s sewer Vactor truck was replaced last year which delayed the cleaning schedule 19
slightly. He noted the rain last summer increased the water levels in the City and created some 20
issues with sand being pushed into the sewer lines. Several backups were found in the mains, but 21
no backups were caused in homes. 22
23
Public Works Director DeBar explained the rainy summer in 2011 required more trimming by 24
the public works department. He stated the infield at Greenfield Park was cleaned last summer 25
which created a safer playing surface. He noted several sidewalk sections were removed at the 26
Community Center and were replaced with a handicap entrance. 27
28
Public Works Director DeBar reviewed the capital purchases in 2011. The work completed by 29
consultants for the Public Works Department was then described. 30
31
Mayor Flaherty pointed out the City saved $260,000 in engineering costs that were completed in-32
house by staff. 33
34
Council Member Mueller thanked Public Works Director DeBar for convincing the Council to 35
hire an additional staff member to allow him to put savings back into the community by 36
completing in-house engineering services. She was pleased with the vision of Public Works 37
Director DeBar. 38
39
Public Works Director DeBar stated Don Peterson has worked well as the Public Works 40
Supervisor and has assisted him greatly freeing up his time to complete other key engineering 41
tasks. 42
43
Public Works Director DeBar discussed the Area D Street Improvement project that was 44
completed last summer noting an additional 2.3 miles of City streets were reconstructed. He 45
Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012
Regular Meeting Page 16
explained the City had saved $1.34 million over the engineers estimated expenses thus far with 1
the Street Improvement Project. It was noted the City was completing this project at a great time, 2
due to the depressed economy and reduced labor expenses. He explained that the Council closed 3
out Areas A, B and C in 2011. 4
5
Public Works Director DeBar stated City Hall was reroofed in 2011 along with Well Houses 5 6
and 6. Emergency power was now available at City Hall as well. He noted the improvements 7
completed at the Community Center which included painting and furniture. He explained Well 8
No. 2 was converted and would run much more efficiently due to the improvements. 9
10
Public Works Director DeBar noted the Lambrect Park building was being reconstructed in 2011. 11
The work was anticipated to be completed in May of 2012. The City’s Forestry Report was 12
discussed as drafted by Rick Riskey. He noted Emerald Ash Bore was found one-quarter of mile 13
from Mounds View. 14
15
Council Member Mueller thanked the Public Works Department for completing the handicap 16
access to the east entrance to the Community Center. Public Works Director DeBar noted this 17
was funded through Bethlehem Baptist funds in 2011. 18
19
Mayor Flaherty explained the students of Mr. Ken Elders’ class at Edgewood Middle School 20
completed a dog house for the K-9 unit for the police department. He thanked the class for their 21
fine work. He further discussed the K-9 program noting the first dog tested positive for heart 22
worm and was replaced with a new dog named Nikko. 23
24
C. Reports of City Attorney. 25
26
City Attorney Riggs had nothing additional to report. 27
28
12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, April 2, 2012, at 7:00 p.m. 29
Next Council Meeting: Monday, March 26, 2012, at 7:00 p.m. 30
31
13. ADJOURNMENT 32
33
The meeting was adjourned at 10:22 p.m. 34
35
Transcribed by: 36
37
Heidi Guenther 38
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 39
Item No. 11.B.1
Meeting Date: April 23, 2012
Type of Business: Reports
City Administrator Review: ______
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Mark Beer, Finance Director
Item Title/Subject: Capital Improvement Program
The Five Year Financial Plan (FYFP) for 2012 will be considered at the May 14, 2012
City Council meeting. It will cover the years 2013 thru 2017 and will be reviewed at the
May 7, 2012 work session. The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is a component of
the FYFP. Staff is providing the Council with the CIP prior to the work session to allow
for additional time for review.
In most years we do not get to all the projects that were listed and they are
subsequently shifted forward. Council priorities may change and this would further
modify the CIP. This is a tool to provide as much advance notice about possible
projects the Council may consider.
Respectfully Submitted,
Mark Beer, Finance Director
Item No: 11B(2)
Meeting Date: April 23, 2012
Type of Business: Reports
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Administrative Updates & Report
1. At the April 9th Council meeting, I indicated that Chapter 1008 of the City Code
regarding dynamic display signs is not clear as to where a dynamic display sign may be
located. Presently there are specifications for what’s allowed on a monument sign, but
Code is silent about specs for such signs mounted on buildings. I indicated that staff
interprets this to mean that dynamic signs are NOT allowed on a building, but one could
realistically argue that the reverse is true. The City Council suggested that the Planning
Commission review the Code and provide a recommendation regarding the ambiguity.
The Planning Commission reviewed the Code on April 18th and approved a resolution
with recommended revisions. Their resolution is attached for Council review. My
question is this: Would the Council like to review & discuss the proposed revisions at
its work session on May 7 or should the revisions, straightforward as they are, be put
into ordinance format and be presented for first reading on May 14?
2. The following items are scheduled for review at the May work session:
• Presentation by MN Department of Transportation on Area Project
• Cable Franchise Negotiations Update (Cor Wilson, NSAC/NSCC Exec Director)
• Five year financial plan review
3. The Allina Open House is scheduled for Tuesday, April 24, 2012, from 4 pm to 7 pm.
The formal ribbon cutting will occur at 5 pm. Mayor Flaherty has been asked to say a
few words of welcome at the event. We’ve posted a quorum for this event in case more
than two Council members attend.
4. The updated Lease Agreement between Medtronic and Clear Channel has been
executed, and Clear Channel has been issued the building permit to replace the
billboard at the northeast corner of the Medtronic property with a dual face dynamic
sign, per City Code and lease allowances. With BOTH faces converted to dynamic
display, the City will begin to receive $60,000 in annual lease revenue, being the
assignee to the lease agreement.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
James Ericson
City Administrator
401860v2 SJR MU125-11
Kennedy 470 U.S. Bank Plaza
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis MN 55402-1458
(612) 337-9300 telephone
(612) 337-9310 fax
http://www.kennedy-graven.com
Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity Employer
Graven
C H A R T E R E D
SCOTT J. RIGGS
Attorney at Law
Direct Dial (612) 337-9260
Email: sriggs@kennedy-graven.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: April 19, 2012
To: James Ericson, City Administrator
From: Scott J. Riggs, City Attorney
Re: Mounds View Project Status Report
MU125-11: Administration. General discussions with staff regarding various City matters.
Matters are presently pending.
MU125-47: Zoning Matters. Review variance request appeal regarding garage. Review
dynamic wall sign requirements and limitations. Review CUP matter. Consult
with City staff regarding same. Matter is presently pending.
MU210-5 General Real Estate Matters. Review contract development matter and release.
Consult with City staff. Matter is presently pending.
MU210-35: Community Center. Review contract documents and specs. Consult with City
staff regarding same. Matter is presently pending.
MU210-111: Personnel Matters. Review employee resignation issues, etc. Consult with City
staff. Matter is presently pending.
MU210-164: Utility Franchise Matters. Review Xcel correspondence regarding contracts for
street lights. Matter is presently pending.
MU210-166: Billboard Matters. Consult with City staff regarding third amended lease. Work
on document execution issues, etc. Matter is presently pending.
MU210-196: 7337 Spring Lake Road. Review title commitment and recorded easements.
Forward same to City staff.
MU210-199: Water Tower Project. Review contract and related documents. Consult with City
staff regarding same. Matter is presently pending.
SJR:jms
&