Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 1997/04/28 I • '"""'" :: AGFA ..... .. . The City Council is provided background information for agenda items in advance by staff and appointed commissions, committees and boards. Decisions are based on this information, as well as City policy and practices, input from constituents and a Councilmember's personal judgement. If you have comments, questions or information regarding an item on the agenda,please step forward to be recognized by the Mayor during the "Residents Requests and Comments From the Floor"item on the agenda. Please state your name and address for the record. All comments are appreciated. A copy of all printed materials relating to the agenda item is available for public inspection at the Recording Secretary's Table. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL McCarty Stigney Koopmeiners Trude Quick 4. Agenda Additions Item 1: Item 2: Item 3: 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 14, 1997 - City Council Meeting COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: 6. ACCEPTANCE OF ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES: • Planning Commission Meeting Minutes: March 19, 1997 Festival Committee Meeting Minutes: April 8, 1997 Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes: November 21, 1996, January 21, 1997, February 20, 1997, and March 27, 1997 7. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: Resolution No. 5109 Proclaiming May 6, 1997 as"Arbor Day." • 8. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve Just and Correct Claims Against City Funds. Staff Report No. 97-2059C B. Approve Amendment to Fire Protection Services Contract. Staff Report No. 97- 2060C C. Approve Letter of Understanding to the Spring Lake Park/Blaine/Mounds View Joint Powers Agreement. Staff Report No. 97-2061C D. Consideration of Resolution No. 5079, Approving Old Highway 8 Reconstruction Bid Award. Staff Report No. 97-2062C E. Set a Public Hearing for 7:05 PM on Monday, May 12, 1997 on Resolution No. 5104, a Resolution Adopting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential to Mixed Use PUD for Commercial Uses on the O'Neil Property, 2430 Highway 10. Staff Report No. 97-2063C F. Set a Public Hearing for 7:10 PM on Monday, May 12, 1997 on Ordinance No. 598, An Ordinance Approving a Rezoning from B-1 and R-2 to Planned Unit Development (PUD) for commercial uses on the O'Neil property, 2430 Highway • 10. Staff Report No. 97-2064C G. Set a Public Hearing for 7:20 PM Monday, May 12, 1997 to Consider an Ordinance No. 601 relating to Intoxicating Liquor Licenses, Amending Title 500, Chapter 502, Subd. 502.8 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. Staff Report No. 97-2065C H. LICENSES FOR APPROVAL: Excavating License-Expires 06/30/97 F. M. Frattalone Excavating and Grading -New HVAC -Expires 06/30/97 Cronstrom's Heating & A/C, Inc. -New Metropolitan Mechanical Contractors -New Therapeutic Massage Enterprise License Appearance Plus -New COUNCIL ACTION: A T D • Comments: 9. RESIDENTS REQUESTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR Citizens'comments are encouraged to allow individual citizens to address the Council, as a whole, on a • matter of interest or concern to the citizens. The preservation of the Citizens'Comments item on the agenda is important in order to encourage and maintain this information flow. To preserve and protect this valuable communications link, a speaker is limited to three(3)minutes. CITIZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING PLEASE GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:05 Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 599, an Ordinance Approving a Rezoning from B-2 to Planned Unit Development (PUD) for commercial uses for property located southeast of the Highway 10/Silver Lake Road intersection (2704-2740 Highway 10 and 7801 Silver Lake Road). Staff Report No. 97-2066C (Presented by:Pam Sheldon, Director of Community Development and Jim Ericson, Planning Associate) COUNCIL ACTION: A TD Comments: 7:10 First Reading and Introduction for Ordinance 600, to Consider Amending the Assessment Policy. Staff Report No. 97-2067C (Presented by:Mike Ulrich, iDirector of Public Works) COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: 7:15 Continuation of Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution No. 5114 Regarding Modifications of the Development Plan for the Mounds View Economic Development Project and a Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment District No. 4 Pursuant to MN Statutes 469.175, Subdivision 3. Staff Report No. 97-2068C (Presented by: Chuck Whiting,City Administrator) COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: 11 . COUNCIL BUSINESS: A. Discussion Regarding Employee Position Benchmark Service Providers. Staff Report No. 97-2069C (Presented by: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator) 111 COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: B. Introduction of Ordinance No. 601 Amending Chapter 502, Subd. 502.08 of the • Mounds View Municipal Code relating to Intoxicating Liquor License Hearing requirements. Staff Report No. 97-2070C (Presented by: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator) COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: C. Consideration of Resolution 5110, Establishing a Municipal State Aid Street. Staff Report No. 97-2071C (Presented by:Mike Ulrich, Director of Public Works) COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: D. Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 599, an Ordinance Approving a Rezoning from B-2 to Planned Unit Development (PUD) for commercial uses for property located southeast of the Highway 10/Silver Lake Road intersection (2704-2740 Highway 10 and 7801 Silver Lake Road). Staff Report No. 97-2072C (Presented by: Pam Sheldon, Director of Community Development and Jim Ericson, Planning Associate) COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: E. Consideration of Resolution No. 5111 Supporting Subsidized Housing Units in Mounds View as part of the Proposed Silver Lake Commons Development. Staff Report No. 97-2072C (Presented by: Cathy Bennett, Director of Economic Development) COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: F. Consideration of Resolution No. 5112 Supporting the Ramsey County's Allocation of Home Funds to MSP Real Estate for the Significant Rehabilitation of 40 Apartment Units Located at 2665 Highway 10. Staff Report No. 97-2073C (Presented by: Cathy Bennett, Director of Economic Development) COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: . G. Opportunity for Hearing and Consideration of Resolution No. 5115, a Resolution Authorizing Abatement of Nuisances at 8217 Long Lake Road. Staff Report No. 97-2074C (Presented by:Jim Ericson, Planning Associate) COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: H. Consider motion approving a settlement agreement with TR Systems, LLC for the purchase of accounting software and authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to enter into said agreement for and on behalf of the City. (Presented by:Bob Long, City Attorney, Chuck Whiting, City Administrator, and Bruce Kessel, Director of Finance) COUNCIL ACTION: A T D Comments: I. Consider motion approving a contract with Tauges Redpath to conduct the annual audit for the year ended December 31, 1996. (Presented by:Bruce Kessel, Director of Finance) • COUNCIL ACTION: A T D • Comments: 12. REPORTS: 1. Report of Councilmembers: • Trude: Koopmeiners: Stigney: Quick: 2. Report of Mayor McCarty: • 3. Report of Clerk Administrator: 4. Report of Staff: 5. Report of Attorney: • NEXT COUNCIL WORKSESSION: MAY 5, 1997 6:00 PM NEXT COUNCIL MEETING: MAY 12, 1997 7:00 PM ADJOURNMENT: • •• Memo To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator Re: April 28, 1997 City Council Meeting Date: April 24, 1997 Here's what's on the agenda for Monday evening: Consent Agenda - Items B and C: Amendment to Spring Lake Park- Blaine - Mounds View Fire Protection Agreement: and Letter of Understanding to SPL-Blaine-MV Joint Powers Agreement: The Council will recall discussing this item at last week's work session. The Fire Department has negotiated an agreement with the Metropolitan Airports Commission to provide fire protection at the Anoka County-Blaine Airport in exchange for MAC's purchasing of a new fire truck. In order to do this, our joint powers agreement must be amended since it excludes covering the airport area. Chief Zikmund has submitted added information in regards to questions raised during last week's work session. Spring Lake Park and Blaine councils have moved to approved the amendment as well. We expect the full MAC agreement sometime in May. The letter of understanding is the City's acknowledgment of the MAC agreement. • Item H - Therapeutic Massage Enterprise License: All information regarding this license application is included in your packet. Staff did the necessary background checks for this long time local business person and the delay may have caused some misunderstandings. All appears set for Council approval on Monday. Public Hearings: Continuation of Public Hearing Regarding Bel Rae TIF District No. 4- 7:15 p.m.: The TIF plan is enclosed in your packet for your review. Dave Maroney of Community Partners, Inc. will be present to review the plan with the Council. The Council should note, the projected amount of TIF funds used is higher than the current project proposal of$3.3 million. With the Council's discussion last Monday evening, if for some reason the Council chooses to go over the $3.3 million amount, it will not be able to under this TIF plan unless the figure is changes. This change however does not mean the City has to go the full amount in project costs, nor is this change to be considered a staff recommendation to exceed the current $3.3 million estimated project cost. Also, we are to received the architect's study of the existing building this Friday for your packets. That report is pertinent to the TIF plan, and that can be explained in more detail Monday evening. Upon closing of the hearing, the Council should take up the resolution for adopting the modifications to the plan as outlined. Council Business: Item A: Employee Position Benchmark Services Providers: Bruce and Lynette's memo give the background of staff's study of selecting a position bench marking service. Selecting a bench marking service is the first step in re-evaluating position value and worth: Some • confusion or varied opinions have developed regarding this item over the past few weeks. Staff is no longer making a recommendation as to the vendor. Item B: Introduction of Ordinance No. 591: This ordinance amendment will relieve the City of having to conduct a public hearing and mailing for license renewals. Procedures for new licenses will remain the same. This change should relieve some work staff has that to date has not demonstrated a practical need. Items G and H: Bruce's memos cover these items having to do with the Tautges Redpath situation. First, Item G will address an agreement resolving our differences regarding the software package. Second, Item H authorizes Tautges Redpath to proceed with our audit. Bruce and Bob Long worked out this arrangement per the direction of the Council at our closed session of April 7. Staff will address the relationship of the closed meeting to the arrangements made here on Monday evening. Those are the items I will comment on for Monday evening's Council meeting. In other business, I have met with Children's Home Society and Larry Werthiem of Kennedy and Graven on their lease. We are modifying the agreement for final draft. Two items I will note, first, CHS will be unable to commit to a 15 year lease. While am disappointed in this and somewhat surprised, I am proposing to them a 5 year lease arrangement with a one year opt notice to cancel provision for the City. I think this will still be okay. Second, a provision allowing CHS to use the kitchen for $1,000 a year during weekdays from 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. was added. The agreement would start August 15 assuming construction is complete by then. I am waiting from word back from CHS. Also, their board does not meet until later in May to consider this. This will likely mean the City Council will take up this lease prior to CHS. Therefor I am also discussing with them placing some future rent in an escrow for now as a hedge against the City's cost of specifying the building construction and past architectural work. Next week I will meet with Nick Temali of Community Education on their lease arrangement. As you may know,the attempts to gain legislation regarding MAC and the airport failed in committee this week. Other efforts are underway to redo this, including attaching the amendment to another bill. Representative Evans has been doing great work in trying to make this happen. An update will be given Monday evening. There is also discussion about setting up a meeting between MAC and the City with Representative Evans. Mark Ryan, the gentleman who attended our Council meeting two weeks ago also called to set up a meeting as we discussed during that Council meeting. Depending on what else happens between now and Monday evening, there may for the agenda. I need to continue to review the needs of the Bel Rae project for Council action at this point in the game. Staff may want to add to the agenda some time to review Bel Rae matters such as VB Digs and Children's Home Society negotiations. Also, if Council has any questions that can be resolved by myself or staff prior to the meeting, feel free to call. Have a great weekend. 1111 UNAPPROVED • Page 1 April 14, 1997 Mounds View City Council 1 2 3 4 5 6 • 7 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL 8 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 9 RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA 10 11 Regular Meeting 12 April 14, 1997 13 Mounds View City Hall 14 2401 Hwy. 10,Mounds View,MN 55112 15 ********************************************************************************** 16 17 CALL TO ORDER 18 19 The Mounds View City Council was called to order by Mayor McCarty at 7:00 p.m. on April 14, 1997. le 20 21 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 22 23 ROLL CALL 24 25 MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor McCarty,Council members Trude, 26 Quick,Koopmeiners and Stigney 27 28 ALSO PRESENT: Chuck Whiting,Clerk Administrator 29 Pam Sheldon, Community Development Director 30 Jim Ericson,Planning Associate 31 Bob Long,City Attorney 32 33 ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: 34 35 Mr. Whiting asked that two items be added to the Agenda under Council Business,(G)Entering into an 36 Exclusive Negotiations Agreement with VB Digs and(H)Request to Conduct a BelRae Building Assessment 37 with Architect Agreement. 38 39 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 40 41 March 24, 1997-City Council Meeting: 42 43 Council member Stigney noted a change to Page 8,Line 2. He asked that it be changed to read". . . has school 44 gyms that are not being fully used right now." 45 • 46 MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Koopmeiners to Approve the Minutes of the March 24, 1997 City Council 47 meeting AS AMENDED. 48 UNAPPROVNI Page 2 April 14, 1997 Mounds View City Council 1 VO 1E: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 2 3 ACCEPTANCE OF ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES: 4 5 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes-March 5,1997: 6 7 MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Koopmeiners to accept the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 5, 8 1997 as submitted. 9 10 VO Th: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 11 12 SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: 13 14 Mr. Whiting gave a brief summary of the Bel Rae election held on April 5, 1997. He noted that the results 15 were 1,388 in favor of the community center,with 811 opposed. The city spent approximately$9,000 for the 16 election,with an estimated 30%turnout with the mail election. He thanked the staff and election judges who 17 worked so hard to bring the issue to a successful conclusion. Mayor McCarty extended his appreciation on 18 behalf of the council as well. 19 20 CONSENT AGENDA: 21 22 Mr. Whiting read the Consent Agenda as follows: 23 24 A. Approve Salary Increase for City Administrator,Chuck Whiting. 25 26 B. Approve Step Adjustment for Public Works Director,Mike Ulrich. 27 28 C. Approve Just and Correct Claims Against City Funds. 29 30 D. Consider Resolution No. 5108 Authorizing the Acquisition of Property by Proceedings in Eminent Domain. 31 32 E. Set a Public Hearing for 7:10 p.m.,Monday,April 28, 1997 to Consider Ordinance No.600,Amending 33 Chapter 202 of the Municipal Code,Public Improvements. 34 35 F. Set a Public Hearing for 7:05 p.m.,Monday,April 28, 1997 on Ordinance No. 599,an Ordinance 36 Approving Rezoning from B-2 to Planned Unity Development(PUD)for commercial uses,and approving a 37 general concept plan for property located southeast of the Highway 10/Silver Lake Road intersection 38 (2704-2740 Highway 10 and 7801 Silver Lake Road). 39 40 G. Acceptance of Planning Commission By-Laws. 41 42 H. Approval of Bid Award for Two Utility Trucks. 43 44 I. Amendment of Joint Powers Agreement for Construction and Operation of Fire Training Site. 45 46 J. LICENSES FOR APPROVAL: 47 48 Asphalt License-Expires 6/30/97 • Page 3 UNAppROVED April 14, 1997 Mounds View City Council 1 Minnesota Rodeways Co. -Renewal 2 • 3 Window Installation-Expires 6/30/97 4 Donnelly Windows,Inc. -New 5 6 Sheet rock-Expires 6/30/97 7 Gene Anderson Drywall-New 8 9 General Contracting(Commercial)-Expires 6/30/97 10 Flannery Construction-New 11 12 HVAC-Expires 6/30/97 13 Schwartz Construction Co.,Inc. -New 14 Horwitz,Inc. -Renewal 15 16 Therapeutic Massage Enterprise License 17 Appearance Plus-New 18 19 Council member Koopmeiners asked that Item 8(G)be removed from the Consent Agenda. Council member • 20 Trude asked that Item 8(J)be removed from the Consent Agenda. 21 22 MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Trude to approve the Consent Agenda AS AMENDED. 23 24 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 25 26 Discussion: 27 28 Council member Koopmeiners stated he had questions in regard the practice of having the City Council refer 29 applications for filling vacancies in or appointing members to the Planning Commission for recommendations 30 from the Commission. He noted that the Planning Commission is the only commission that has this particular 31 procedure and wondered why this was so. He feels this should be exclusively at the discretion of the City 32 Council. 33 34 Mayor McCarty stated he would prefer to just send the By Laws back to the Planning Commission for re-work 35 with the City Council's objections rather than to approve them in an amended form. 36 37 Ms. Trude noted that this is only a recommendation and that the City Council has the option of accepting or 38 rejecting the recommendations. 39 40 Ms. Sheldon noted that the recommendations are not binding. This type of procedure has worked well in the 41 past as the Planning Commission is very familiar with their responsibilities as a commission. She noted that 42 any vacancy would be treated in the same way,whether it be for a partial term or a full term. 43 44 Mayor McCarty noted that he believes the Planning Commission wants the same thing as the Council-their 45 active involvement in helping the Council select Planning Commission members. He felt perhaps the . 46 language could reflect this in a different way. 47 UNAPPROVED. Page 4 April 14, 1997 Mounds View City Council 1 Attorney Long noted that similar language is in the Municipal Code,and therefore if changes are made in the 2 By Laws,an Ordinance change may be required as well. 3 4 It was the general consensus of the Council that this item be set aside until a future date. 5 6 Council member Trude stated she had requested that Item 8(J)be removed for further clarification. She 7 asked if this was for an Adult Use type of facility. 8 9 Attorney Long noted that this request is for a Therapeutic Massage Enterprise License and not the same as an 10 Adult Use type of facility. In order for someone to conduct therapy,two licenses are required,one for the 11 license for the business and one for the individual therapist showing that they have taken the required number 12 of training hours. 13 14 Council member Trude noted that she had not been provided information to substantiate this and she would like 15 to table approval of this license until staff can provide a more comprehensive report. 16 17 MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Koopmeiners to table Item 8(J)of the Consent Agenda until the next regular City 18 Council meeting and request that staff provide the Council with a checklist of what the requirements are and 19 that they have been met. 20 21 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 22 23 RESIDENTS REOUESTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR: 24 25 Mayor McCarty noted that this is the period of time for residents to address the Council with comments or 26 concerns on items that are not on the Agenda. 27 28 There were no questions or comments from the floor. 29 30 PUBLIC HEARINGS: 31 32 Public Hearing to Introduce Ordinance 597,Adopting the 1996 Long Term Financial Plan. 33 34 Mayor McCarty opened the Public Hearing at 7:20 p.m. He asked if any residents wished to address the 35 council on the issue of the 1996 Long Term Financial Plan. With no questions or comments,he closed the 36 Public Hearing at 7:21 p.m. 37 38 COUNCIL BUSINESS: 39 40 F) Approval of Ordinance No.597,Adopting the 1996 Long Term Financial Plan. 41 42 MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Trude to approve Ordinance No. 597,Adopting the 1996 Long Term Financial 43 Plan and to Waive the reading. 44 45 ROLL CALL VOTE: 46 • 47 Mayor McCarty aye 48 Council member Trude aye UNAPPROVED IlkPage 5 April 14, 1997 Mounds View City Council 1 Council member Koopmeiners aye 2 Council member Stigney aye 3 Council member Quick aye 4 5 Motion Carried(5-0) 6 7 PUBLIC HEARINGS-continued: 8 9 Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution No.5105,A Resolution Approving a Conditional Use 10 Permit for Minor Auto Repair for Spots Quick Lube,2975 Highway 10. 11 12 Mayor McCarty opened the Public Hearing at 7:22 p.m. 13 14 Mr. Jim Ericson,Planning Associate explained that an application was submitted to the city for a conditional 15 use permit to allow for minor auto repair at 2975 Highway 10. This would allow for the operation of a quick 16 lube facility with services to include fluid exchange,wiper replacement,headlight replacement and other 17 similar work. The applicant has indicated his intent to redevelop the site to high aesthetic standards. 18 19 Mr.Ericson noted that as proposed,the building does meet the setback requirements. They are providing an • 20 adequate number of parking spaces and they are proposing to completely redo the access and parking areas, 21 eliminating the accesses from Highway 10 and providing a single access along Spring Lake Road. 22 Additional information was provided in regard to the proposed lighting,signage,drainage,etc.for the proposed 23 facility. 24 25 Attorney Long suggested that an Item 11 be added to Page 7 of Resolution 5105 to read as follows: 26 1 l. Prior to the issuance of building permits,the applicant shall execute a Development Contract in 27 compliance with Section 1006.06,Subd.4 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. 28 29 Council member Stigney noted that in reviewing the site plan he noted that the south side of the property 30 facing Highway 10 is landscaped to the west side of the parking lot,however there is no landscaping East to 31 Spring Lake Road. He thinks some shrubbery in that area would provide a more aesthetically pleasing view 32 from Highway 10. 33 34 Ron Ostrander,representing the applicant,noted that this is the only area on the site where snow can be plowed 35 during the Winter months and therefore he does not think they would survive in that location. 36 37 Council member Trude stated she is concerned that anything there will obstruct visibility. 38 39 Mayor McCarty stated would suggest that the Council deal with the application as presented and direct staff to 40 work with the applicant over the upcoming weeks and see if something can be worked out for that area. He 41 noted that Mr.Ericson could bring any recommendations back to the Council at a later date. 42 43 Mayor McCarty closed the Public Hearing at 7:35 p.m. 44 45 MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Koopmeiners to approve Resolution 5105,A resolution Approving a Conditional • 46 Use Permit for Minor Auto Repair for Spots Quick Lube,2795 Highway 10,AS AMENDED to include Item 47 11 on Page 7. 48 UNAPPROVED Page 6 April 14, 1997 Mounds View City Council 1 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 2 3 Public Hearing Regarding Modifications of the Development Plan for the Mounds View Economic 4 Development Project and a Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment District No.4 Pursuant 5 to MN Statutes 469.175,Subd.3. 6 7 Mayor McCarty opened the Public Hearing at 7:37 p.m. 8 9 Mr. Whiting noted that he did not receive the plan until just prior to the Council meeting. Therefore,he would 10 like to request that the City Council extend the Public Hearing to the April 28, 1997 City Council meeting. 11 He noted a few areas that he wanted the Council to make note of when reviewing the plan. 12 13 Mayor McCarty noted that this concerns the Tax Increment Financing District that will include the new 14 community center. 15 16 David Jahnke,8428 Eastwood Road,asked for a clarification on the TIF district. 17 18 MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Stigney to continue the Public Hearing on April 28, 1997. 19 20 VO lE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 21 • 22 Mayor McCarty closed the Public Hearing at 7:52 p.m. 23 24 10(A) Opportunity for Hearing and Consideration of Resolution No.5106,A Resolution Authorizing 25 Abatement of Nuisances at 2349 Laport Drive. 26 27 Mr.Ericson,Planning Associate,provided photos of the property at 2349 Laport Drive. He noted that staff 28 tried repeatedly to work with this property owner to clean up the property. In July of 1995 the City issued a 29 court citation to them regarding the nuisances. Present staff has been in contact with the property owner since 30 September 30, 1996 in regard to the situation. Mr.Ericson noted that on April 9, 1997,an inspection was 31 made of the property and revealed a number of nuisances code violations. 32 33 Mayor McCarty wondered if the vehicles on the property were insured,operable and licensed. Mr.Ericson 34 stated last time he checked,the Winnebago did not have a current license. 35 36 Ms. Trude commented that many of the nuisance code violations constituted health and safety hazards as well. 37 38 MOTION/SECOND: McCarty/Koopmeiners to Approve Resolution No. 5106,A Resolution Authorizing 39 Abatement of Nuisances at 2349 Laport Drive. 40 41 Cam Obert,8315 Greenwood Drive,noted that code violations could be found on every street in Mounds view. 42 The city has numerous files on properties which are in violation,some inches thick. He feels the constant staff 43 turnover in the city has resulted in difficult follow-up to complaints. Complaints need to be followed up on and 44 unfortunately,staff does not have time to address them. Something needs to be done. 45 46 David Jahnke,8428 Eastwood Road,noted that what one considers"junk"may not be viewed as such by the1111 47 owner. 48 UNAPPROVED Page 7 April 14, 1997 Mounds View City Council 1 VO IE on Motion: 2 3 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 4 5 COUNCIL BUSINESS: 6 7 A. Presentation and Discussion of the Metropolitan Airports Commission(MAC)Response to City 8 Concerns regarding MAC's Draft Long Term Comprehensive Plan. 9 10 Mr. Whiting explained that on November 25, 1996 the City Council sent a letter to the Metropolitan Airports 11 Commission outlining objections to the proposed draft Long Term Comprehensive Plan. He asked that Mr. 12 Mark Ryan of the MAC update the Council on the hearings that were proposed/held at that time in regard to 13 this plan. 14 15 Mark Ryan explained that a draft of the document has been submitted to the Advisory Committee and they have 16 recommended that MAC move ahead with Public Hearings on the plan itself. He noted that several urgent 17 items on the Metropolitan Airport Commissions agenda have prevented them from proceeding with the Pubic 18 Hearings. They are anticipating holding the Public Hearing on the Long Term Plan in July 1997. Prior to 19 that,the document must be brought to the full commission for their review and approval. He noted that they 111 20 will be sure to notify staff and council of the hearing,which they will likely hold in the north metro area. 21 22 Mayor McCarty asked if the city could be represented when the committee meets to go over the plan. 23 24 Mr.Ryan responded,yes. He noted that the meeting would possibly be scheduled for June 3, 1997 and held at 25 the International Airport. A letter of confirmation will be sent to Mounds View. 26 27 Attorney Long asked if there would be some formal feedback of the November 25, 1997 letter prior to the 28 committee meeting in June. 29 30 Mr.Ryan stated he did not believe so,and that the letter would be accepted as comments for the public record. 31 32 Mayor McCarty wondered if it would be better to both the City and MAC to settle some of the court-ordered 33 stipulations prior to the Public Hearing rather than going through the Public Hearing process and then coming 34 back and re-working all that at a later date. That way,everyone involved in the hearing would start from a 35 document that has at much viability as possible and not something that might be set aside under a later action. 36 37 Mr.Ryan stated he would like to refer this question back to his legal staff. 38 39 It was agreed by both Mr.Ryan and the City Council that a meeting should be scheduled with Mounds View 40 staff,including Mr.Long,and MAC staff/legal advisor to discuss these issues. 41 42 Mr.Ryan noted that due to the St.Paul Airport being underwater,several aircraft have been diverted to the 43 Anoka Airport. 44 45 Mr. Whiting noted that he had received a complaint from a resident that there are pilots who have moved their • 46 aircraft to the Anoka Airport after being told they could no longer use the Crystal Airport. He wondered if this 47 was accurate information. 48 UNAPPROVEQ Page 8 April 14, 1997 Mounds View City Council 1 Mr.Ryan responded that he is aware of one individual where this applies. 2 3 Attorney Long stated he was told that after the new tower was in place,the city would be able to get more 4 accurate aircraft counts. He asked if this information was available. 5 6 Mr.Ryan stated he would try to get as current information as possible for Mounds View. 7 8 Mayor McCarty stated he would like to get statistics from the past six months as the tower opened in October 9 and he assumes information should be available over that period of time. 10 11 B. Second reading and action on Ordinance No.594,An Ordinance Amending Chapter 606,607 and 12 1005 of the Mounds View Municipal Code related to the requirement to mow tall grasses and creating 13 an exemption for wetland and native vegetation. 14 15 MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to approve the second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 594 16 and to waive the reading. 17 18 ROLL CALL VOTE: 19 20 Mayor McCarty aye • 21 Council member Trude aye 22 Council member Koopmeiners aye 23 Council member Stigney aye 24 Council member Quick aye 25 26 Motion Carried(5 -0) 27 28 C. Second reading and action on Ordinance No.595,An Ordinance adding day care centers and 29 group nurseries as a conditional use in the B-1,B-2,B-3,B-4 and I-1 zoning districts. 30 31 MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Koopmeiners to approve the second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 595, 32 and to waive the reading. 33 34 ROLL CALL VOTE: 35 36 Mayor McCarty aye 37 Council member Trude aye 3 8 Council member Koopmeiners aye 39 Council member Stigney aye 40 Council member Quick aye 41 42 Motion Carried(5-0) 43 44 D. Consideration of Approval of HAY Consultants to Convert to the HAY Job Evaluation System and 45 to Review and Revise the Compensation System for the City of Mounds View. 46 •47 Mr. Whiting stated he would prefer to defer this item until the next City Council meeting to allow him 48 additional time to address questions the council may have in regard to this issue. UNAPPROVED • Page 9 April 14, 1997 Mounds View City Council 1 Council member Trude stated she would be comfortable approving staffs recommendation. 2 3 Council member Stigney stated at the last work session,additional information was requested on the benefits of 4 the PDI and the HAY systems which all the council received. He spent considerable time going through the 5 information provided and found that the HAY evaluation system being recommended seems to lean more 6 towards the industrial or corporate environment although it could be applied to either system. The PDI has 7 specific applications towards city jurisdictions which are normally found in municipalities. He noted that both 8 systems would end up doing the same thing,however when looking at the bottom line to change the current 9 system to the HAY system,the HAY system is far more costly. He wonders what benefit would really be 10 derived from the change. A system is already in place in the city and he feels it is workable,therefore he 11 would not be in support of converting to the HAY system. 12 13 It was agreed that this item would be further reviewed and discussed by staff and brought before the council for 14 consideration at an upcoming council meeting. 15 16 E. Resolution 5107,Approving Authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to Enter into an 17 Agreement for Architectural Services for the Bel Rae Ballroom/Community Center Project Design. 18 19 Mr.Whiting explained that he had just received the agreement and would like to give the council and staff an 20 opportunity to review it. To avoid further delays he suggested on behalf of the city, that Mayor McCarty, 21 Council member Trude and himself get together and thoroughly review the agreement prior to execution. 22 Additionally,Council member Koopmeiners will be meeting with him and the architect to go over some of the 23 specific questions about the building and floor layout. Mr.Whiting explained that he would like to come back 24 to the Council work session and go through the process in greater detail. 25 26 MOTION/SECOND: McCarty/Koopmeiners that the Council authorize Mayor McCarty and Chuck Whiting 27 to execute the Agreement between the City of Mounds View and the architect after review of the agreement by 28 Mayor McCarty,Council member Trude,Clerk Administrator Chuck Whiting and Attorney Bob Long. 29 30 Council member Stigney asked if the agreement would be subject to modifications. He suggested that all of 31 the Council members take an opportunity to go and tour the St.Anthony Community Center to see what they 32 built for$3.6 million. 33 34 Mayor McCarty explained that the signing of the agreement will delineate the obligations and agreements 35 between the architect and the city. At any time,the city council could make changes if they so desire,however 36 it will be necessary to try to stay within the original plan as determined by the council,committee and 37 community. 38 39 G. Authorization to Enter into an Exclusive Negotiations Agreement with VB Digs. 40 41 Mr.Bob Long,City Attorney,explained the agreement basically states the City and VB Digs intend to work 42 together in good faith in the next 15 days to put together a more complete package to determine whether or not 43 they can move forward. He noted that the last page in Section 8 states that the developer agrees to pay 44 $5,000 in additional earnest money(in addition to the$2,500 already paid),to cover the kinds of costs that the 45 City is incurring in evaluating the project. S46 47 MOTION/SECOND: Trude/McCarty authorizing Mayor McCarty and the Clerk Administrator to enter into an 48 Exclusive Negotiations Agreement between VB Digs and the City of Mounds View. Page 10 UNAPPROVED ,. April 14, 1997 Mounds View City Council 1 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 2 3 H. Request to Conduct Bel Rae Building Assessment. 4 5 Mr. Whiting explained that this would allow the architect to go ahead and evaluate the structural integrity of the 6 Bel Rae. These services would be completed for$2,820. 7 8 MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Stigney to authorize staff and Mayor McCarty to spend funds out of appropriate 9 funds to for the architectural assessment of the Bel Rae building. 10 11 Mayor McCarty noted he would like to see that an air quality analysis is part of the overall assessment. 12 13 It was noted that this may increase the cost of the architectural assessment if it is not included in General 14 Building Quality. 15 16 MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Stigney to amend their motion to INCLUDE an air quality analysis as part of the 17 architectural assessment of the Bel Rae building. 18 19 VO l'E: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 20 21 REPORTS: 22 Report of Council members: 23 24 Trude: Ms. Trude reported that Mr. Stigney and herself met with Mr.Whiting to review the conceptual 25 layout of the building. 26 27 Mr. Whiting provided a brief update and noted that the city is still reviewing the proposal that the voters saw at 28 the Voter Information Meeting with gymnasium options. 29 30 Koopmeiners: No report. 31 32 Stigney: Mr. Stigney noted that he had a copy of the St.Anthony Community Center floor plan and cost 33 breakdown and he would encourage council members to review it and tour the facility. 34 35 Quick: No report. 36 37 Report of Mayor McCarty: No report. 38 39 Report of Clerk Administrator: No report. 40 41 Report of Staff: No report. 42 43 Report of Attorney: No report. 44 45 Mayor McCarty noted that the next Council Work Session will be held on May 5, 1997 at 6:00 p.m. The next 46 Council Meeting is on April 28, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. 47 48 MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Stigney to adjourn the meeting at 9:07 p.m. Page 11 UNAPPROVED April 14, 1997 Mounds View City Council 1 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 2 3 Respectfully submitted, 4 5 Tamara D. Saefke 6 Recording Secretary 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 • S .4 MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING-- 11-1 EETING f4, 1997 Please sign NAME ADDRESS . ra._ Oat() ry\q,i Poe f)ce Mii7 - " 7 /4 /7 ' c c) -(1( W ( 4.V V 6 . tti2rYttts" 2-1 &5 511erwcoct i-d . g ie j4,4-76 4, ,x,1 Xt/e 7 s,✓/6%tom_':4 ��1�'!k/1 r.,On14, (AV 6 ao'fU'( . \)-k\\ r)_\ - -‘4-7.-3 1 tr- r Le:. 1 --C\. , , .Q(-- ((Cc S � 791- (CCTV\ Wosen-virt) Lens etc 5310 f/ecz.ca p1, -14.:ezAJ Oi2 v l e 'sf- /ase 3 I • PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Agenda Meeting March 19, 1997 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 (Held at the Bel Rae Community Center, 5394 Edgewood Drive) 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Acting Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call Members present: Commissioners Brooks, Johnston, Obert, Miller, Brasaemle, and Stevenson. (Chair Peterson had an excused absence.) Also Present: Community Development Director Sheldon, Planning Associate Ericson, Council Liaison Koopmeiners and Recording Secretary Benesch. • 3. Review of Minutes: March 5, 1997 The Planning Commission reviewed the minutes and made minor corrections. 4. Citizen Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda A question was asked about the advisory election on the Bel Rae. Community Development Director Sheldon responded that ballots were being mailed which must be returned by April 5, there would be polls open at the Bel Rae on April 5 and there would be an information meeting on March 27 at the Bel Rae. Index to Minutes Page Planning Case No. 471-97, Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning To PUD For Movie Theater and Office Buildings, 2340 Highway 10 2 Planning Case No. 477-97, Rezoning for Planned Unit Development, Silver Lake Road & Highway 10 15 Planning Case No. 472-97, Conditional Use Permit for Spots Quick Lube, 2975 Highway 10 18 •Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997Page 2 Agenda Meeting 5. Planning Case No. 471-97 2430 Highway 10 Applicant: Anthony Properties Management, Inc. Request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Medium Density Residential to Mixed Use PUD Allowing Commercial and Office Uses, and Rezoning from B-1 and R-2 to PUD to Allow Development of a 16-Screen Movie Theater and Three 11,000 Square Foot Office Buildings. The applicant, Anthony Properties Management, Inc., was represented. Community Development Director Sheldon thoroughly reviewed the Staff Report dated March 19, 1997, regarding this item. She noted that the main issues for discussion regarding this item: whether or not this proposal fits, is there enough buffer from the residential area on County Road H-2, how to guarantee the buffer and to make sure the office buildings get built, the use of the wetland buffer area, whether the access situation is acceptable or could • it be improved, the amount of parking and overflow parking, security of the parking lot, whether a pedestrian system dbe use of the site if the theaters close. walkways in the City, and how to dealwith Director Sheldon informed the audience that SRF Consulting, the Traffic Consultant; SEH, the City's Consulting Engineer, and the City Forester were present to answer questions. Acting Chair Stevenson suggested at this time that, since there have been previous neighborhood meetings, the applicant summarize the changes they have made to the proposal since the last meeting. Wendell Smith, the real estate consultant for Anthony Properties, addressed the Planning Commission. He introduced other representatives present including: Jay Anthony, Principal of Anthony Properties; Alvin Anderson, Architect with Artech Architects; and Joe Beaton, representative for the O'Neil family. Mr. Smith mentioned that Carmike Theaters is the largest exhibitor of movies in the United States. He distributed to the Planning Commission a pamphlet showing similar theaters to illustrate what the proposed theater would look like. He added that the building would be a first rated, first-class Mintype ding. Mr. Smith nesota but none of them 110 mentioned that Carmike owns a number of theaters in • Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 Agenda Meeting Page 3 were built by Carmike. He added that Mounds View could be one of the first with a newer building and within the new building would be updated technology in regards to sound, seating, and the lobby would be all marble. He added that Carmike, being number one in the country, would like to remain number one and are a very good company to work with and he knows that the community would be proud of the project as far as the construction is concerned. Mr. Smith informed the audience that the site search for this theater began early spring of 1996. He knew at that time that the zoning would need to be changed. He spoke with Cathy Bennett, Economic Development Director, to take a straw vote of the City Council at that time and he believed it to be done at a work session in September. He indicated that they received a positive response from the Council and that they would look favorably on this particular project if they were able to work with the neighborhood, but the Council was concerned with the parking for Donatelle's. Based on that information, the applicant began the demographic study and began working in more detail with the Staff. • Mr. Smith explained how the plan had evolved by showing four different layouts and discussed how the input from the neighborhood meetings had been incorporated in the current plan. They moved the theater building away from County Road H2, facing towards the east with the lights from the traffic going towards the theater or Highway 10. Mr. Smith explained that the office buildings were placed as buffers between the neighborhood and the project and would be constructed with a residential look. He added that they would be installing a fence to eliminate foot traffic. Mr. Smith explained that even if they do not develop the property, someone will, and with the present zoning, homes could be constructed along County Road H2 and with homes come automobile and foot traffic. He added that with their present design, they have eliminated all access onto County Road H2, and the office building design is in a residential-type look that will hopefully blend in with the neighborhood. He added that the City Forester, along with Director Sheldon, walked the site and concluded that the best solution would be to leave the wooded area along County Road H2 as natural as possible. He added that they are willing to install a 4 foot berm if that is what the residents want but that a number of mature trees would have to be removed. He pointed out that with this development, the residents on County Road H2 would basically be looking at the same thing they are looking at now. • Mr. Smith informed the Planning Commission that they are working with Mr. Donatelle for cross-easement parking so that in his high-peak hours, customers Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 Agenda Meeting Page 4 can park in the theater parking lot once his lot fills. This would solve the restaurant's current parking problems. Mr. Smith added that he has met with a number of Mounds View businesses along the Highway 10 corridor and reported their comments: Mr. Ed Paster of Mounds View Square is in favor of the project and believes that the vacant spaces in the center would fill up with the attraction of more people to the area; Mr. Greg Dahlberg and Mr. Dan Englesmith of Kraus-Anderson (Silver View Plaza) also believe that this project will help their tenants; Mr. Charlie Hall of the Mermaid believes that this project will increase the business to his establishment; and Mr. Donatelle believes that the more restaurants you have the more people you have coming to the area looking for a place to dine. Mr. Smith added that he had the opportunity to make a presentation to the New Brighton-Mounds View Chamber of Commerce who reportedly indicated that they are in favor of this project and believe that the project would influence, in a positive way, the businesses along the Highway 10 corridor. In conclusion, Mr. Smith expressed that he hopes they are seen as "good neighbors" and added that they have tried to do all that they could to make this • particular project as neighbor-friendly as possible. He hoped that the Planning Commission would see this as a positive addition to the City and hoped that they would recommend to the City Council that the zoning be changed and the Comprehensive Plan be amended. Commissioner Miller inquired as to the amount of parking, if the building was partly in the wetland buffer, and if there was a particular reason for the 16 screens. Mr. Smith indicated that this is a number that Carmike, using their demographic study and expertise in this field, sees as appropriate for this site. Commissioner Obert summarized his concerns so far regarding the project which included the guarantee of the buffer area, the timeliness of the construction of the offices, and what to do if the theaters close. Jay Anthony of Anthony Properties addressed the Planning Commission. He explained that he has developed numerous theaters across the country and believes that this community should be proud of the effort, research, and thoroughness that has gone into the review of this project. He added that in no project has he ever experienced this degree of a thorough review and commended the Staff for its critical review early on and for a professional job. He addressed Commissioner Obert's concerns by pointing out that one choice would be to initially clear the entire area that is to be developed which would be the most efficient method. However, Mr. Anthony is proposing, in an effort to provide a buffer to the neighbors for the short term until • Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 Agenda Meeting Page 5 the offices are ready to be developed, that they not clear the area where the offices would be built until they are ready for construction. He believes this approach would leave approximately 200 feet of buffer. Mr. Anthony added that they could install a temporary fence to eliminate foot traffic until the offices are built. Mr. Anthony addressed the issue of what happens if the theaters close. He informed the Commission that they are dealing with the largest theater company in the country and explained that they are being financed by insurance companies with high institutional credit rating on a twenty-year long term basis and added that, in his mind, some of the most sophisticated institutional investors in the country have great faith in the longevity of the project and the financial strength of the tenant. He commented that twenty or thirty years down the line, he would expect that we may be looking at some alternate use for the theater or tearing it down and building something else. Commissioner Brasaemle inquired as to why Springbrook Theater wasn't considered in their study as one of the theaters within the five-mile radius. Mr. Anthony indicated that Springbrook is a discount theater and serves an entirely different market. Commissioner Brasaemle also inquired if there has been any • analysis available regarding if the R-2 District were fully developed with duplexes, and how many units the area would allow. Director Sheldon responded by saying there are about seven acres in that property, with 6 units to the acre, it would be about 32 units with about 10 trips per day from each individual residence. Commissioner Brasaemle also inquired what would be the peak-hour impact if developed as duplexes instead of the current proposal. Ms. Nancy Heuer, of SRF Consulting, informed the Commission that it is her analysis that there would be 10 trips per unit per day which would be 350 trips per day with ten percent of those trips occurring during peak hours. The current prediction for the theater on County Road H2 is 28 trips during peak hours. Commissioner Brasaemle inquired if there had been any consideration given to cut-through traffic from Highway 694 on Long Lake Road. Ms. Heuer indicated that the trips were assigned to the street system in accordance with the way that travel occurs in the area and is based primarily on traffic volumes on the streets so if cut-through trips are occurring now then that is reflected in the study. Acting Chair Stevenson inquired if the offices will, when they are complete, be using the same ingress/egress and what effect will this have on traffic. Ms. Heuer explained that the traffic analysis was based on the peak-hour of the adjacent street traffic and that intersections operate at a certain level of service during the peak-hour of the traffic on the street and will operate better than that when there is less traffic, and so the time period that was analyzed is at the peak hour of the Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 4111 Agenda Meeting Page 6 office generation and the peak hour of the street. The traffic caused by the offices was included in the traffic study. Commissioner Johnston expressed his concern with safety in regard to the increased number of U-turns that will be taking place at Edgewood Drive and County Road H2. Ms. Heuer explained that it is possible that a U-turn at an uncontrolled intersection such as Edgewood Drive could become a safety problem, and if that were the case, the intersection may need to be posted for no U-turns. Commissioner Johnston also inquired as to the possibility of a signalized intersection at Edgewood Drive and wondered how negotiations were going with MnDOT. Director Sheldon informed the Commission that MnDOT was opposed to adding an additional traffic light to Highway 10 at less than their typical half-mile spacing and that MnDOT was aware that Highway 10 would be changing in character in terms of it being in the middle of Mounds View and having a local commercial corridor purpose. However, MnDOT suggested that the County Road H2 intersection be reworked so that signal could be moved further north to get a signal closer to the property. Director Sheldon indicated that they were very firm with regard to their policy on this issue but that they could have further discussions at a higher level. Mr. Smith added that they will continue to work with MnDOT to try • to get a traffic light approved for the site. Commissioner Miller inquired as to how much of the building was in the wetland buffer. Director Sheldon pointed out on the map the area involved and suggested that approximately 1/4 of the building was in the buffer. Commissioner Brasaemle wondered how far the building was from the actual wetland. Director Sheldon indicated that the closest point was approximately 30 feet. Commissioner Stevenson asked if the Fire Marshal had reviewed the plans which show only one entrance since they normally require two access points for fire purposes. Director Sheldon said that the Fire Marshal saw the diagram, but she would reaffirm his understanding that it was just the one access point and added that with the sprinklering of the building, there is less concern with regard to fire department issues. Acting Chair Stevenson turned the floor over to the audience for questions and comments. Russ Nordstrom, 2536 County Road H2, expressed that at the outset, he was totally opposed to the project but he is less enthusiastic about having it developed as duplexes. He expressed that he is impressed with the way the developer has worked with the neighborhood prior to making an application for this development. • Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 Agenda Meeting Page 7 Mr. Nordstrom indicated that he is the one who proposed the four foot berm and added that the oaks which were recommended to be left are nice during the summer, however, during the winter it becomes quite open. He has talked again with the developer about perhaps developing a smaller berm or planting evergreens. He added that he would like some type of an environmental barrier in addition to the wood fence. Mr. Nordstrom reviewed the changes the developer has made to alleviate some of their concerns and commented that, overall, he is impressed by the project but agrees that there are some changes that still need to be made. He added that his fear is if this project is not approved, a developer may come in that is not as willing to work with the neighborhood. Acting Chair Stevenson asked the audience that no duplicate comments be made for or against the project this evening. Commissioner Obert asked Mr. Nordstrom, in his opinion, how he thought a development like this could impact the community and the quality of life in Mounds View. Mr. Nordstrom responded by saying that he would rather see his daughter • visit a theater nearby and added that he believes, in the long run, it will benefit the community and that people moving into the area will be looking for services convenient to and near their homes. Dan Johnson, 7359 Park View Terrace, expressed his concern with the traffic and wanted to verify that no turn lane is proposed off of Highway 10. Director Sheldon informed Mr. Johnson that there would be an additional lane built so that people could pull out of the current two lanes into the side lane and when exiting, there would be an acceleration lane that would be a third lane for a certain distance so that people could get moving up to the speed of traffic on Highway 10. She added that the developer is responsible for the construction of these lanes and that the lane lengths are based on MnDOT standards. Mr. Johnson expressed his concern with the traffic at the HarMar theater which he believed would be a similar situation as the theater proposed for Mounds View. Commissioner Brooks commented that HarMar is also a shopping center. Mr. Johnson added that he believes most of the traffic is related to the theaters and that we may want to think about working with MnDOT to extend the lanes because getting out onto the Highway is becoming more and more difficult. Commissioner Obert also asked Mr. Johnson about his feelings on the overall impact this project would have on Mounds View. Mr. Johnson indicated that he feels good about it and, in general, thinks it is good for the community, but is concerned with the simultaneous development of the offices and the theater and thinks there still is some work that • needs to be done on the plan. Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 Agenda Meeting Page 8 Sandy Simmons, 5041 Edgewood Drive, asked if the schools had been contacted regarding the project since there are two schools in close proximity to the project . Director Sheldon indicated that they have not contacted the schools but would be happy to do so. Ms. Simmons felt that this proposal may provide jobs for teenagers, although they may be working until 1:00 a.m., and she is concerned with the kids skipping school to visit the theater. Overall, she indicated that she is not happy with the project and thinks they have enough traffic already. Julie Olsen, 2663 Lake Court Circle, wanted to verify that the information contained in the traffic study was derived using only the one access point. She wondered if there was any information derived involving the projected increased traffic to Mounds View Drive. Ms. Sheldon indicated there was no specific analysis done at the Mounds View Drive/Long Lake Road intersection. Ms. Heuer briefly explained that traffic study and how it impacts the area in question. It was added that there would be no benefit to take Mounds View Drive instead of continuing on Highway 10 to gain access to the theater. Ms. Olsen also inquired about the possibility of a smaller theater with fewer screens and wondered how the demographics differed from the demographics in other areas, specifically Highway 10 and Foley Blvd. Mr. Wendell Smith restated that Carmike is the number one • builder of movie screens in the country and it comes down to their expertise and their experience in the movie business. Ms. Olsen wondered if Springbrook would be closed if the Mounds View theater was added. Mr. Smith indicated that Springbrook is a discount theater serving a different market. Therefore, it plans to remain open. She also inquired as to why Carmike is also developing office buildings and again wanted to know if they would be constructed simultaneously with the theater. Mr. Smith explained the plan shows full development and they are looking at maximizing the use of the project and explained that office buildings use parking at different times than the theaters, and therefore, joint parking could be used. Mr. Smith added that once they get a percentage of an office building pre- leased, they would get the needed financing, and then proceed with construction and at the same time, would be marketing the second building. He added that the market generates the construction. Ms. Olsen brought up the Highway 10, Area 9 Study and that the marketing study done by Towle Real Estate states that placing a movie theater in this area was not feasible. Director Sheldon indicated that it was her understanding that the Towle Report was specifically looking at the parcel sizes in Area 9 which are not as big the O'Neil property and that the size of the parcels would not allow a theater development. She added that she can confirm this information. She also noted that the study indicated that there is a lack of cultural and entertainment uses in this part of the corridor. Ms. Olsen wanted to know if tax increment financing will be used. Director Sheldon indicated that the developer has not requested tax increment financing for this project. Ms. Olsen inquired about the Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 Agenda Meeting Page 9 plans for Outlot A. Director Sheldon indicated that there has been some discussion of a restaurant at this site and added that the developer would need to amend their current proposal to add this use because it was not listed as a use in their current proposal. Ms. Olsen asked if any of the drainage system revisions would be made at any cost to Mounds View? Director Sheldon responded that the on-site drainage system would be built by the Developer at their expense. Ms. Olsen commented the staff report recommends against a residential development on this property because it would be walled off from the highway and no activity would be visible. She asked if the same thing would happen with the current theater proposal since the building was placed away from the highway. Ms. Sheldon responded if the theater proposal is built the property would not be walled and the building, and also the activity associated with the building, would be visible from Highway 10. Passersby could look into the site. Ms. Olsen was wondering if this development would become the focal point for Mounds View instead of Bel Rae as a community center. Ms. Sheldon indicated that this development could be an activity center but would not take away from having activities at City Hall or the Bel Rae. 4111 Michael Welsh, 5071 Irondale Road, expressed his concern for the traffic and his belief that vehicles would take County Road H2 to Long Lake Road to Highway 10 which would seem easier than trying to enter the line of traffic at some other point along Highway 10. Director Sheldon responded by saying that an individual may do that but that he may want to consider how many green lights that person would have to hit in order to make that route more efficient versus having to just make one u-turn at County Road H2. Mr. Welsh believes that the traffic study is too optimistic. Ms. Heuer commented that they did not assume that everyone who was leaving the theater, going to the northwest, would make a u-turn. They assumed that the majority of them would make a u-turn either at Edgewood or County Road H2 and also assumed that others would in fact turn right at County Road H2 and go back to Long Lake Road which is reflected in the Study. Mr. Welsh was concerned with the traffic congestion at specific movie times and expressed his concern with too many teenagers congregating at the site. Mr. Anthony explained that there is a national organization that publishes movie-going trends on an annual basis and the trend is that the percentage of movie goers among the older generation is increasing and added that this would be an entertainment facility intended to appeal to an entire family. He added that there would be staggered starting and ending times which makes better utilization of the concession area, restrooms and the parking lot and added, with the smaller auditoriums, the release is not as it would be with one large auditorium. • Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 • Agenda Meeting Page 10 Jim Miller, 7980 Fairchild Avenue, inquired as to the number of seats per screen. Mr. Anthony figured approximately 180 to 200 seats. Mr. Miller is also concerned with the traffic issue and thinks we need support from MnDOT if we are to proceed with developments such as this. Mr. Anthony asked for the endorsement of the Planning Commission and also, at a later date, the Council, in their appeal to MnDOT. He expressed that they are not happy with MnDOT's current position and they intend to appeal the decision to higher levels and would appreciate any support the City could give them in the future. Tom Ernstor, 2504 County Road H2, expressed that he believes the Developer is committed to the neighbors on County Road H2 because he changed the access to use only Highway 10 and took it away from County Road H2. He informed the audience they have accepted a buy-out offer from the Developer and is acting in the best interest of his family, but they also did take it upon themselves to do the best they could to negotiate with the developer and believes that Mr. Anthony's integrity is straight forward. Mr. Emstor inquired as to how the developer plans to . proceed with the financial aspect of the project. Mr. Anthony explained that after a Planning Commission approval, they will move forward with a subsequent appeal to MnDOT, a fully executed lease from Carmike, and then move forward to a local bank for a construction loan. He added that they have done business with several banks in the community previously and that should also be an additional indirect economic benefit to the community. Once they secure a loan commitment, they will turn the project over to Carmike who will get the building facility completed within 6 to 8 months. Mr. Ernstor added that with the offer he has accepted, it shows that the Developer has been active in working with the neighbors and has made a good faith effort to work with the surrounding community. Commissioner Obert asked Mr. Ernstor if his intention would be to stay in Mounds View if the opportunity is there. Mr. Emstor responded that he would like to, overall, because of the benefit of its central location and its access to parks and business facilities. Commissioner Obert also asked what his feeling is on the impact of a development for the community. Mr. Emstor explained that, being directly affected by the development, there is a reason he accepted the offer, but overall the way it stands with the changes that have been made, it could be a good thing. But he thinks that any time you take down trees for a development, its not a great thing, but said that, with the changes, he would have no problem with it. He realizes that this land is prime real estate and that it will eventually be developed, and in the long run believes it will help the other businesses in the area. . Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 Agenda Meeting Page 11 Henry Ruggles, 2629 Lake Court Drive, requested more information on where the ingress/egress will be for Parcel A and expressed his concern regarding short- cuts that may occur using Mounds View Drive and hoped it would be designed to accommodate anything that is developed there. Director Sheldon pointed out on the map that the proposed access point for Parcel A does not line up with Mounds View Drive. Mike Weber, 2512 County Road H2, informed the Commission that he is one of the residents who did not accept an offer from the Developer. He expressed that he does not like the plan at all and is concerned with the traffic, teenage problems and drainage control. He believes that their neighborhood is residential and that the plan is not good for the area and that the Commission should listen to the concerns of the people of Mounds View. Joe Beaton, representing Louise O'Neil, addressed the audience explaining that Louise O'Neil, who is 82 years old, has owned the property for over thirty years. He understands that everyone would like a woods in their back yard, but the property is a great tax burden for her. She pays approximately $60,000 in property taxes each year on this land. He commented that the question is not if there is going to be a development on this property, but it is a question of who is going to develop it and how it is going to be developed and when. He indicated that they have had numerous offers over the last 25 years for this property with quality and non-quality developers. He explained that Mrs. O'Neil has delayed this decision as long as she could and when Mr. Anthony came to them, they found that he is a developer with a sterling reputation offering a very high quality product and hopes that the community will consider his project. Steve Miller, 2614 Clearview Avenue, wanted to know who paid for the traffic and theater studies. Director Sheldon indicated that the traffic study was administered by the City and paid for by the Developer and the market study was submitted by the Developer. Mr. Smith responded by saying that they only paid for the traffic study so the City could use their traffic engineer in order to give an unbiased decision based on the studies already conducted for Highway 10. Mr. Miller indicated that he is not asking that the property not be sold, but that the City consider further what will be developed on that site. He added that he does not have an opportunity for a buy-out and must stay and live with this project, which is part of his opposition. Russ Nordstrom, 2536 County Road H2, wanted to inform the audience that he 111 has opted not to accept the buy-out offer from the Developer, although it was a good offer and believes it was done it good faith. He feels that there are a lot of Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 410 Agenda Meeting Page 12 good things to come out of this community and plans on staying in Mounds View to make things better beyond this project and is still in favor of it. Barb Ernstor, 2504 County Road H2, admitted that she has been one of the most out-spoken residents against this project. She explained that the buy-out that they accepted was an economic decision on their part but expressed that she stands behind the residents in their concerns. David Chase, 5244 Skiba Drive, expressed his concern with the City's curfew hours and conflict that may be created with the theater hours. Director Sheldon stated the curfew hours noted in the Municipal Code. Mr. Chase also expressed his concern with snow removal and potential water problems for the site. Mr. Anthony stated that he would research this question, but added that the engineer's report had indicated that snow removal, stacking and the melting of snow gradually into the wetlands would not be a problem. Mr. Chase expressed his concern with refuse from the site getting into the wetland. Mr. Smith responded by saying that Carmike Theaters is responsible for policing the parking lot and wanted to make sure that the parking lot is as attractive as the inside of the building for customers coming in. Mr. Chase also wondered about scaling down the number of screens • for the theater and doesn't believe that the community needs a 16-screen theater. Ed Donatelle, owner of Donatelle's Supper Club, 2400 Highway 10, and also a resident of Mounds View. Mr. Donatelle inquired as to where the access point would be located. He indicated that he is in support of this project and believes it will bring business into the community. Mr. Donatelle also expressed his concern with traffic during rush hour, but believes that staggering the movie times will help to alleviate some of the concern with theater traffic. He added that he is also in favor of bringing in another family restaurant to the area. Ed Trettle, 7401 Park View Drive, commented that he applauds the study that was done and that he received a lot of information and believes the community has been informed of the pros and cons of the project but asks the Planning Commission to retain the current zoning. He added that should the Highway 610 diversion occur, he would like to see Highway 10 be the City's small thoroughfare, not a 50 mile-an-hour highway. He believes that putting in an attraction such as the theater will bring with it a lot of glamour, draw, and glitz, but he is concerned with the City grabbing at the first project being proposed. It has been his vision, with his 12-13 years in Mounds View, to see the parcel developed, but to see it done under the current B-1/ R-2 designation instead of the mixed use PUD. • • Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 Agenda Meeting Page 13 Dana Mandoza, 2633 Clearview Avenue, believes the Developer is trying his best to make this project feasible but he is against it. He believes that there weren't enough "cons" brought forward regarding the project. Mr. Mandoza inquired if the traffic study was derived by actually counting the cars or was it taken from a MnDOT study that was done years ago. He commented that the City would still generate additional tax revenue with a smaller development and thinks we need "both sides of the story". Commissioner Brasaemle explained that one of the roles of the Planning Commission is to examine both sides of the issue and admitted that he has not made up his mind one way or the other on this proposal because he has not yet received enough information. Mr. Mandoza admitted the he has a problem with the City using only the one traffic study. Commissioner Obert commented that the people who provide the study are educated and trained professionals. Mandoza also expressed his concern with the safety of his children from the additional traffic that will be generated on County Road H2. Mr. Mandoza believes that a theater such as this is not an appropriate business to be placed in the middle of the community and suggested that perhaps a four-screen theater may be more appropriate. He was also concerned with the vacancy rate of the office buildings in the area and wondered if the proposed office buildings will actually be • constructed. He was also concerned with teenager activity in the area if a theater was constructed. Commissioner Brooks inquired if a smaller theater had been thought about by the applicant. Mr. Anthony explained that the four and six screen theaters are no longer the norm of what is being constructed and that the public is demanding multiple selection so that children can see one movie while the parents go next door to see another, and added that this is what is economically feasible and what is justified by the demographic studies for this area. He brought up an article that was published in the Wall Street Journal on how communities across the country are using movies theaters as an anchor to their development for their economic stimulus and indicated that he would provide a copy of this article at the next meeting. Mr. Mandoza wondered how many of the theaters Mr. Anthony has constructed have been placed in a residential setting versus on the outskirts. Mr. Anthony explained that most people like amenities to be located near their homes rather than far away and believes that many of these types of theaters will be built in the Twin Cities area over the next 3 to 4 years. He added that a 16-screen theater is not a big theater in comparison to theaters that are being built across the country today. He explained that they try to construct the theaters off of a major arterial, near an interstate, and as close to a population base as possible. Mr. Mandoza again expressed his concern with traffic. Mr. Anthony assured him that the majority of the traffic will be generated is off-peak. Ms. Heuer again reviewed the area in which traffic counts were taken and delays, if any, that may occur. Mr. • Mandoza concluded by requesting that a second opinion on the traffic study be obtained. Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 • Agenda Meeting Page 14 Terri Leary, 5250 O'Connell Drive, expressed that her main concern is the safety of the children with the increase in traffic. She explained that two of her three children walk to school and there are no sidewalks. She also expressed her concern with children's safety walking to the library which is opposite of the proposed theater or to City Hall for recreational programs. Acting Chair Stevenson asked the audience if there were any other comments or concerns that have not been mentioned. Community Development Director Sheldon asked the Planning Commission if there was any additional research that they wanted done for their next meeting. Commissioner Brasaemle commented that he felt the traffic study was fairly accurate. However, he was concerned with the traffic during the theater's evening peak and requested that additional projected counts be obtained for Fridays and Saturdays, 7:00 p.m. to Midnight. Commissioner Miller expressed her concern with the impact of the project on the wetland buffer zone and also how many screens would be available at what times 4110 of the day. Mr. Anthony explained that part of the building is located in the wetland buffer as a result of its being moved away from County Road H2. Commissioner Johnston also expressed some concern with traffic and how it relates to safety and asked that Staff would concentrate on obtaining an agreement with MnDOT for a signalized intersection which he believes would solve some of the traffic and safety problems. Commissioner Obert commented that a lot of the concerns raised thus far have had to do with teenagers. He informed the audience that he had operated roller rinks around the United States and he rarely experienced problems with teenagers. He is asking that everyone have an open mind until all the research has been put together and added that the Planning Commission's main objective is to do what is best for the City of Mounds View to move into the future in a positive way. In conclusion, he inquired if we could get a better handle on the direction and flow of traffic and what the traffic changes are going to be as a result of this development. Commissioner Obert thanked the audience for coming. Acting Chair Stevenson expressed his concern with the vacancies of the office buildings in the area and asked that Director Sheldon research this issue. He also inquired if, at the development stage, the Developer could perhaps install walking trails along Highway 10 to Long Lake Road and County Road H2 and also on the • • Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 Agenda Meeting Page 15 north side of the wetlands which would intersect with a walking trail that is presently located along Mounds View Drive just south of Parcel A. Commissioner Brasaemle asked if, at their next meeting, this case could be discussed as an agenda item rather than a decision item immediately following their regular meeting. Commissioner Brooks left the meeting at 10:45 p.m. There was a 15-minute intermission. 6. Planning Case No. 477-97 Silver Lake Road and Highway 10 Applicant: D.W. Jones, Inc. • Request for a Rezoning from B-2 to Planned Unit Development to allow a gas station/fast food restaurant/car wash; restaurant; senior housing complex; and office building. Due to time constraints, the Staff Report was bypassed since the Planning Commission had received a copy in their packet and the Planning Commission immediately went to the applicant's presentation. The applicant, D.W. Jones, Inc, was represented at the meeting. Mr. Mike Black of Royal Oak Realty in Shoreview, addressed the Planning Commission. He explained that they are here to ask for the Planning Commission's consideration of this PUD and commented that careful consideration has been given to the City's Comprehensive Plan and on-going Highway 10 Corridor Study. He introduced the representatives of D.W. Jones, Inc., who were present: Dale Jones, owner and President of D. W. Jones, Inc.; Skip Duchesneau, Business Associate; George and Kristine Winiecki of WIN Insurance, 2740 Highway 10; Ralph and Chuck Durand of 5-D Limited; Brian Ross and William Smith of Biko Associates; and Marcel Eibensteiner of Royal Oaks Realty who was present earlier in the meeting. Mr. Black continued by stating that he understands that our Comprehensive Plan • includes this property as part of District 1 and in the Comprehensive Plan it calls for a strong identifying focal point for development within this District. It also Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 • Agenda Meeting Page 16 recommends a PUD development with mixed commercial/residential development, public and open space areas, respect for natural amenities including existing vegetation and wetlands, planning for pedestrian/bicycle trailway systems, and for attention to traffic issues. Their current plan shows four elements of the PUD: the first being a gas/convenience store at the corner of Silver Lake Road and Highway 10 which would also include a car wash separate from the main building. He added that access to the site is being carefully reviewed. The second element is a proposed family-type restaurant facility of approximately 10,000 square feet with 112 parking spaces with emphasis on food instead of liquor. The third element is a 5,000 square foot office building along Highway 10 south of the TJB Homes office building, and the fourth element is a proposed 83 unit, 3-story, senior housing project, half of which would be assisted living units. In terms of the market analysis and feasibility, Mr. Black referred to the Highway 10 Feasibility Study by Towle Real Estate which indicates that the corner property in question is clearly a commercial business corner that calls for impulse traffic rather than destination oriented traffic, such as convenience goods or quick-stop service. The report also calls for low- rise, multiple tenant office buildings and senior housing. Mr. Black believes that they have addressed all of the issues in the study as part of their plan. He added that they are studying a plan that was suggested by City staff for placement of a sit- 4) down restaurant on the site, but need to look at how it relates to traffic circulation. They also would like to take a look at the restaurant setbacks in terms of marketability of the site and its impact on visibility if it is sitting back from the highway, how close it is to the senior building, and parking. He also addressed the wetland buffer issue and the two wetland delineations that have been done on this site and the significant difference in the two. He added that they fully intend to meet City and Rice Creek Watershed requirements for quality and quantity of run off and will address any wetland concerns regarding this site. He added that they have proposed a sidewalk along the site on Silver Lake Road. In conclusion, he inquired about what the park dedication requirements will be for this project. Commissioner Miller inquired if a store and fast-food facility would be located in the proposed gas/convenience store. Mr. Black explained that a food store with convenience groceries and a fast-food restaurant would be available inside as well as a drive-up window on the outside. Mr. Black explained that other representatives were present to address the Planning Commission in greater detail on market feasibility, traffic, and tax revenues. Acting Chair Stevenson indicated that, due to the late hour, they would express their concerns first so that the applicant can address them at their next meeting. Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 Agenda Meeting Page 17 Commissioner Johnston brought up the fact that there already are numerous gas stations/convenience stores and car washes along Highway 10 and questioned the need for another one. Acting Chair Stevenson informed the Commission that he counted seven car washes and six gas stations and asked the applicant to propose another use in place of the proposed gasoline/convenience store facility. He is worried about putting an already existing facility out of business and having to clean up the contamination left behind. He feels that the City does not need another facility such as this. He is also concerned with the amount of water that seven car washes will use for a City of four square miles. He was also concerned with the location of the project as it relates to the wetland. Director Sheldon explained that a small corner of the parking for Outlot A does encroach into the wetland. This encroachment would need to be removed. Commissioner Miller inquired if there would be age or income restrictions for the senior facility. The applicant hopes that there will not be income restrictions. He explained that there would be assisted living which includes meal services, • coordinated outside services, housecleaning, meds services, and an activity director for community events. He added the facility would have a community room. Mr. Dale Jones addressed the Commission informing them that he will not be present at the next meeting since he was in from out of town and would like to make a few comments. He explained that their proposal is exactly what the Comprehensive Plan includes. He added that they are trying to accommodate what the City wants to accomplish and that they are open to any ideas the Planning Commission may have. Mr. George Winiecki, 2740 Highway 10, admitted that he is confused because the last time he was in front of the Council, they indicated that if he came back with a PUD, the Council would be interested and this is what they are proposing. Acting Chair Stevenson responded by saying that in a previous proposal for the site, the applicant had wanted to change the zoning from a B-2 to a B-3 but that the Planning Commission, at that time, was not in favor of this because it would then allow gas stations on the site. Mr. Ralph Durand, of 5-D Limited (franchisee for the proposed Holiday Station), understands that there was a reluctance from the Planning Commission from the start regarding a gasoline/convenience store. He also understood, however, that • everyone wanted to do the right thing under the right circumstances and one of the • Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 • Agenda Meeting Page 18 things was to have a feasibility report done for Highwayl0. He continued by saying that this report, by Towle Real Estate, although not in its final form, very clearly states that this corner should be used for high impulse, convenience-type - commercial uses and added that this is exactly what they are proposing. The report does not consider competition in the area because that is not necessarily the way to make the judgement as to whether or not this use will be allowed. He added that very few things will support the land cost of that particular corner. He asked that the Planning Commission keep an open mind that they are trying to do exactly what the City's consultants have told the City is the best use for that corner. He distributed to the Planning Commission an outline of the taxes that will be generated from this project and briefly explained how the tax figures were calculated. Commissioner Johnston inquired if soil samples had been taken since the underground parking for the proposed senior building would be so close to the wetland. The applicant indicated that soil borings have not been done at this time but that they had looked at proposing a senior project approximately five years ago and they had preliminary drawings and rough elevations done. It is their belief that the underground parking could be accomplished without water problems. • Director Sheldon informed the applicant that this item will be discussed again at the Planning Commission meeting of April 2nd. 7. Planning Case No. 472-97 2975 Highway 10 Applicant: Spots Quick Lube Request for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a car maintenance facility. The applicant, Ron Ostrander General Manager of Spots Quick Lube, was present. Director Sheldon indicated that Mr. Ostrander would like to know if there were any problems with the revised site plan that was submitted. She explained that the applicant made the changes that the City requested of him. Mr. Ostrander briefly explained the changes that were made. Commissioner Miller inquired as to what type of fencing would be installed, and Mr. Ostrander indicated that they would install whatever the City requests. He wanted to know if there were any concerns that he needs to know about before the next Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Ostrander added that he wanted to make it clear to the Planning Commission that • • Mounds View Planning Commission March 19, 1997 Agenda Meeting Page 19 there would be no repairing of automobiles at this facility and that it would be strictly for car maintenance (oil changes, transmission services, fluid changes, etc.). Commissioner Brasaemle thanked Mr. Ostrander for the site plan changes and commended him on his choice of lighting for the site which he believes will appease a lot of the concerns neighbors might have as far as glare from the lighting. 8. Staff Report a. Director Sheldon thanked the Commissioners who attended the City Council meeting on Monday, March 17th and reminded them that there is another meeting on April 7th regarding the report from SRF Consulting on the Highway 10, Area 9 Study. She mentioned that the Towle Real Estate report has not been officially adopted or endorsed at this point. b. The ordinance on family foster homes passed at the City Council. c. The three commissioners (Jean, Marshall, and Jerry) who requested to register for the Beyond the Basics seminar on April 10th have been • registered. Commissioner Obert indicated that he would also like to attend. d. There was no report on the University of Minnesota Design Course. 9. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports No Reports. 10. Adjournment There being no further business before the Planning Commission, the meeting adjourned at 12:00 midnight. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Sheldon • Community Development Director • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW FESTIVAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Tuesday,April 8, 1997 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Steve Schack called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Committee members present: Chair Steve Schack, Stephanie Kirchmaier, Eileen Saldana, Debbie Miller, Pete Severson, Theresa Cermak, Ginny Allenspaen, Amy Hodges, Don Hodges, Carol Johnson, Harlan Lundstrom, Jeanne Kassim, Jerry Johnson and Pat Michna. Visitors present included Mayor McCarty and City Administrator Chuck Whiting. Staff Liaisons included Marvin Johnson and Mary Saarion. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Kathy Harrer made a motion seconded by Deb Miller to approve the minutes of March 11, 1997 Festival Committee meeting. PARADE STATUS: No one was able to find an individual or group that was willing to take on the supervision of the parade. Mayor McCarty was present to receive information from the committee regarding the parade anticipating to ask the Mounds View Lion's if they would sponsor and organize the parade. A unanimous vote was taken supporting this idea. The Lion's Club will meet tonight to discuss this proposal. THEME: Chair Steve Schack reminded everyone that the theme for this year is "Gateway to the North" and inquired why the buttons contest did not request this phrase. Kathy Harrer replied that the theme is much to long to be printed on a button and that the"celebrate" asked for on the button was much more manageable for the size of the buttons. NEW CHAIRS: Chair Steve Schack reported that he is unable to continue as Chair because of work conflicts. Therefore nominations were open for Chairperson. Two c0-chairs emerged: Carol Johnson and Theresa Cermak will serve as co-chairs. • BUTTON SELECTION: Eighteen entries were submitted for the button design contest. A vote was taken and one entry was selected. • PUBLICITY: Kathy Harrer reported that articles have been submitted to the papers and were published on the front page of the New Brighton Bulletin. Ginny Allenspach, advertising Account Representative from the Lillie News was present at the meeting and reported that she would provide as much assistance as possible regardir:u advertising in the New Brighton Bulletin. ENTERTAINMENT: Pat Melina reported that she had lots of possibilities for entertainment but was waiting to hear how much money sue :tad f k entertainment. The Showmobile has been reserved for a cost of approximately $1,050. A unanimous vote was made for the approval of the evening band at a cost of$750, for the 6-9p.m. time spot. A morning church service will take place as tradition. Youth entertainment and afternoon entertainment must still be decided upon. Again, all entertainment depends upon the amount o funding available. FUNDING: Director Saarion reported that the Chamber of Commerce will be meeting April 17 and that they will hopefully decision on the amount of funding that they will provide for both the Festival and Stockyard Days. A$5,000 reques S was submitted. Hopefully a more definite answer will be available at the next meeting. Chamber members were asked to lobby for full funding. STREET DANCE: Representation for the street dance was not present, but im . presumed that everything is underway for the street dance at the Mermaid. Buttons will be sold for admission. Any group or individual that wishes to work at the street dance is encouraged to sign up . The more the better! GOLF TOURNAMENT: Jeanne Kassim reported that the plans for the golf tournament are under way. A flyer has been made and distributed to the businesses. There are 48 openings, prizes, food from Sysco etc. A car is the prize for a hole in one on the 9th hole. Cost is $50 per person. The date of the tournament is Friday, July 11, 1997. MEDALLIONS: Steve Schack reported that the medallions have been ordered. It is requested that the Lillie Suburban Newspaper publicize the vendors that will have the clues each day-with the idea that medallion hunters will need to pay businesses a visit to get the clues. No . clues will be at City Hall this year. ill CAR SHOW: The car show is"a go" with publicity and flyers and advertising all done. More cars are expected this year than last year. Pete will need to have money for prizes. Upon inquiry, Pete replied that there was no damage to cars last year. However, bicycles were a problem. SECURITY: Jerry Johnson reported that last year a food vendor's children posed some problems and requested that that food vendor not be allowed to return. There was reports of drug selling last year. Bicycles are a problem that will need to be handled some way. Jerry Johnson recommended that 2 patrolmen be hired for overtime to provide better safety and security. This will need to be considered along with other needs in relationship to what the budget will allow. How much do we have to spend? will impact the decision such as this one. CRAFTERS: Six crafters have registered to this date bringing in $240 revenue. FOOD BOOTHS: Amy Hodges and Dan Saldana will solicite participation by past groups and organizations that have had food booths. This year all the groups will be asked to supply their own power. A motion was • unanimously passed to allow only non-profit groups to participate in food booths. GAMES: Pinewood and Sunnyside PTA's will be setting up game booths. The Irondale Cheerleaders will be having a cake walk. The train will be available again to give rides. After discussion it was decided that the train should load in the City Hall parking lot - that the lot should not have any parking except for handicapped accessible parking. MVCT will have face painting. SAFETY: The fireworks have been ordered. The Fire Dept will be present at the fireworks. In addition, they will bring the firehouse for children to experience. Also, the fire hydrant robot will come and provide education and entertainment. The fire department will also have units in the parade. PORTABLE RESTROOMS: Mary Saarion will order portable restrooms. Placement was decided to be where City Hall staff cars are parked. In addition, portable restrooms will be scattered throughout the park. • PARKING: It was decided after discussion that there will be no parking allowed in City Hall lot except for handicapped parking. FUNDING: The Committee members agreed to solicite funds from • businesses. The more money, the more activities and . entertainment that can be arranged during the Festival. Currently the City is paying for the Fireworks, and unknown amount of money is expected from the Chamber. If the Lion's take over the parade, they will fund the costs of the parade. Contributions from businesses and donations in coin jars are needed for other expenses discussed here including extra patrolmen, public works, portable restrooms, additional entertainment and portable restrooms.. NEXT MEETING: Next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, April 22 at 4:00 p.m. t . / ' " / ift-4 -(216 .0 eall , 1(1e/o/Ka,/ir ?as--/er -1,i12)-1-.6es/kiv quAre --ep—i: ,i i,c/a-z-.-t-— Gki'la v t 61- ttj ile Ghi/1.4: 71-(jeK5pC(Pd1 . - . _ ' -1 - i‘it / u , • • 6,44 ciiz_ i„...,„(., ,•e,„} ' itad- rn , 0f4tec, _ Alip• p, to I - 77-?V/4c) V • — RESOLUTION NO. 5105 • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERIVIIT FOR SPOT'S QUICK LUBE,INC. TO OPERATE A MINOR AUTO REPAIR FACILITY AT 2975 HIGHWAY 10; PLANNING CASE NO. 472-97 WHEREAS, Ken Clark, representing Spot's Quick Lube, Inc., has applied for a conditional use permit to operate a minor auto repair facility at 2975 Highway 10, property whit_ is zoned B-3 and is legally described as follows: Lot 13 of Auditor's Subdivision No. 89, Ramsey County, State of Minnesota WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code allows minor auto repair facilities in the P. Highway Business District with the approval of a conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: 1. Planning Application • 2. Zoning Map 3. Site, Drainage and Landscape Plan, dated 4/10/97 4. City Engineer Comments 5. Hydrologic Review(prepared by SEH Inc.) 6. Letter from Applicant 7. Letter from Property Owner(Norwest Bank) 8. Letter indicating Tank Removal and Results of Soils Test, dated 4/12/91 9. Executed Roadway Easement Document, dated 4/10/97 10. Site Lighting Photometrics 11. Wall Pack Lighting specifications 12. Planning Commission Resolution No. 500-97 WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings that the criteria for approval for minor auto repair facilities in Section 1114.04, Subd. 3 have been met: b. The architectural appearance and functional plan of the building and site shall not be so dissimilar to the existing buildings or area as to cause impairment in property values or constitute a blighting influence within a reasonable distance of the lot. The proposed use will be going into an existing building, which currently is in a state of disrepair. The applicant will improve the building's and site's aesthetics, which will • benefit the neighboring property owners. This criterion has been met. c. The entire site,other than that taken up by building,structure or plantings,shall be surfaces with a material to control dust,drainage and erosion which is subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Resolution 5105 Planning Case No.472-97,CUP for Spot's Quick Lube April 14, 1997 Page 2 The applicant proposes to remove all bituminous and concrete surfaces and repave a smaller area with asphalt. The lot will be curbed and guttered and will have two drainage catch basins to collect and route water run-off to the Highway 10 drainage ditch, according to existing drainage patterns. The City Engineer has reviewed the drainage plans and has found them acceptable. This criterion has been met. d. A minimum lot area,of twenty-two thousand,five hundred(22,500)square feet and minimum lot dimensions of one hundred and fifty feet(150')by one h dri.i this feet (130')be provided. This site is 27,443 square feet and has dimensions of 166 feet to the north, 244 feet to the east, 219 feet to the south, and 99 feet to the west. This criterion has b e. A drainage system,subject to the approval of the City Engineer,shall be itaed. The City Engineer has approved the site's drainage plans. This criterion has been met. f. A curb not less than six inches(6")above grade shall separate the public sidewalk from • motor vehicle service areas. There are no sidewalks on the site other than a ten foot section behind the building. The site plan indicates that this walkway will be above grade. This criterion has been met. g. The lighting shall be accomplished in such a way as to have no direct source of light visible from adjacent land in residential use or from the public right-of-way and shall be in compliance with Section 1103.09 of this Title. The applicant will be providing photometrics of the on site lighting to ensure that this criterion has been met. Section 1103.09 refers to glare. The light fixtures will be hooded and directed away from adjacent properties and right-of-ways to eliminate glare. h. Wherever fuel pumps are to be installed,pump islands shall be installed. No fuel sales are permitted at this site nor are there any proposed. As such, this criterion does not apply i. At the boundaries of a residential district,a strip of land not less than ten feet(10°)shall be landscaped and screened in compliance with Subdivisions 1103.08 (1)through(5)of this Title. • Section 1103.08 of the Code refers to fencing, screening and landscaping. The applicant proposes to replace an existing dilapidated fence with a new six foot (6') fence of wood Resolution 5105 Planning Case No.472-97,CUP for Spot's Quick Lube April 14, 1997 Page 3 construction. There will be a area at least 14 feet in width of greenspace behind the building abutting the neighboring residential buildings, as well as a buffer in excess of ten feet (10') along the eastern property line. That area not covered by building or parking lot/drive access area will be sodded with the exception of that land behind the fence-line, which will remain natural. No fencing, structures or plantings will be allowed within thirty feet (30') of the intersection of Highway 10 and Spring Lake Road. This criterion has been met. j. Each light standard island and all islands in the parking lot shall be landscaped or covered. There are no islands proposed as a part of this development. As such, this criterion does not apply. k. Parking or car magazine storage space shall be screened from view of abutting residential districts in compliance with Subdivisions 1103.08(1)through(5)of this Title. Again, Section 1103.08 of the Code refers to fencing, screening, and landscaping. This development satisfies the requirements of these subdivisions. Thus, this criterion has been met. 1. Vehicular access points shall create a minimum of conflict with through traffic movement, shall comply with Chapter 1121.of this Title and shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works and the City Engineer. Only one access point is proposed for this site. The applicant will be removing two access points from Highway 10 as well as eliminating a very wide undefined access currently existing along Spring Lake Road. The new single access point is thirty feet (30') wide and is located one hundred and five feet (170') from the intersection of Highway 10 and Spring Lake Road. The Director of Public Works and the City Engineer have reviewed the site plan and find it acceptable. Chapter 1121 of the Zoning Code refers to parking requirements. For this use, 8 off-street parking spaces are required plus 1 space for every 800 square feet of floor area over 1000 square feet. The building's area is approximately 1,500 square feet. Thus, only one additional space is required for a total of 9 spaces. The site plan dated April 10, 1997 indicates the provision of 9 spaces. This criterion has been met. m. All signing and informational or visual communication devises shall be minimized and shall be incompliance with the Mounds View Sign Code. • The applicant proposes one twenty-foot pylon sign along Highway 10 with 48 square feet of internally illuminated signage. The maximum signage for pylon signs is 340 square feet at a height not to exceed 35 feet. The signage proposed is within the limitations of the Resolution 5105 Planning Case No. 472-97,CUP for Spot's Quick Lube410 April 14, 1997 Page 4 Sign Code. In addition, there are also two small direction signs proposed, both 6 square feet in size. There will be four signs on the building: two displaying the company name (10.5 square feet each on the building front and rear), one enter and one exit sign(4.5 square feet each). This amounts to 30 square feet of signage on the building, which is within the 100 square-foot limit imposed by the Code. This criterion has been met, n. Provisions are made to reduce and control noise. This use will not create a noticeable level of noise. No pneumatic tools will be used .the operation other than for occasional tire rotations. If noise were to become a problem in the future, the bay doors can be required to be shut during operating hours. Given this stipulation, this criterion has been met. o. No outside storage except as allowed in compliance with Subdivision 4 of Section 1114.04 shall exist. The applicant is not proposing any outside storage. This criterion has been met p. No outside sale or service except as allowed in compliance with Subdivision 5 of Stiion • 1114.04 shall exist. No outside sale or service will be allowed for this operation and none has been proposed. This criterion has been met. WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council has made the following fndings that possible adverse effects have been taken into consideration in its decision according to Section 1125.01, Subdivision 1.e: 1. Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan While this property is designated as low density residential in the Comprehensive Plan, the site is zoned for commercial use and has been used commercially for the past 30 plus years. Approving this CUP will continue the inconsistency with the Comp plan. The suitability of the site for low density residential is somewhat questionable given its location adjacent to Highway 10. Minnesota State law gives precedence to zoning when there is a conflict between zoning and comprehensive plan designations. 2. The geographical area involved. 4. The character of the surrounding area. This surrounding area has a mix of older housing and recent new home construction. This commercial site exists, however, because of its frontage on Highway 10, which is a typical Resolution 5105 Planning Case No.472-97,CUP for Spot's Quick Lube April 14, 1997 Page 5 • situation in Mounds View. In its present state of disrepair,the site is undoubtedly a detriment. The applicant seeks to redevelop the site, improving its aesthetic and economic potential. Given that this is an existing building, and a commercial business has been in place in this location, the proposed use seems appropriate. 3. Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which the use is proposed. Considering the fact that this site has remained vacant for the past two years, persisting as a negative presence to the area and the Highway 10 corridor, the proposed use should serve as a benefit to the community. The applicant has indicated their intent to develop the property so it will project a very pleasing image and have given landscaping the site a high priority. S. The demonstrated need for such a use. According to the recently completed Feasibility/Highest and Best Use Analysis of the Highway 10 Corridor, an automotive repair or quick lube facility is not listed as one of the • uses"not present" in the corridor. However, only two businesses in Mounds View perform oil changes and other like services, one of which is the Saturn Dealership. The case can be made that there is a demonstrated need for this business. WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council makes the following findings relative to the criteria stated in Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.b. of the Mounds View Municipal Code: (1) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks,schools,streets and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. The use will be a service-oriented business, rather than residential development, and therefore is not expected to create a burden on parks or schools. The use will replace an existing business site which was using existing streets and utilities, and the new business is not expected to increase the demands on public facilities and utilities. (2) The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. (3) The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. The applicant is proposing to construct a screening fence around the east, north and west • perimeter of the site, which will shield this use from adjacent residential properties. There is a landscaped area of at least 14 feet along the perimeter of the site, with sod and evergreens, between the fence and the area to be paved. These improvements will replace an existing fence in poor repair, and non-existent landscaping. Resolution 5105 Planning Case No.472-97,CUP for Spot's Quick Lube • April 14, 1997 • Page 6 (4) The use,in the opinion of the City Council,is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. The applicant will be replacing a closed and deteriorated business site, with a new business and site improvements. The proposed business is less intense, in term of the tuber of vehicles parked on the site, than previous use of the site, and it will be much improved in appearance from the used car lot which was there. . (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and tlth paE c_< district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. The Zoning Code allows for minor auto repair businesses in this zoning dintriot, approval of a conditional use permit. The property is located on Highway 10, which is the City's primary business corridor. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City (,-(0;.„.„.„. approves the conditional use permit for Spot's Quick Lube with the following stipulations: 1. Hours of operation shall not exceed 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. on Saturdays, and 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Sundays. 2. No sales or service shall be performed outside of the building. 3. No outside storage shall be allowed without the prior approval of an amendment to this conditional use permit. 4. The applicant shall obtain a permit from MnDOT before doing any work in the MnDOT right-of-way. The applicant shall supply proof of such permit before building permits can be issued. 5. The applicant shall follow all approved oil disposal guidelines and procedures. 6. The applicant will take appropriate measures to reduce noise from the site. If noise becomes an issue in the future, the applicant may be required to keep the bay - doors closed during business hours, except to allow for the entry and exit of vehicles. Such a requirement shall not be imposed without an opportunity for a hearing before the Planning Commission. • 7. No sales of automobiles will be allowed at this site. Resolution 5105 • Planning Case No.472-97,CUP for Spot's Quick Lube April 14, 1997 Page 7 8. The applicant shall record the conditional use permit and easement d,icument with Ramsey County within 60 days of City Council approval or this permit shall become null and void. 9. Prior to the issuance of any building or grading permits, the applicant shall provide proof of recordation with Ramsey County. 10. Parking lot"pole lights" shall be shut off each night after business hours. Adopted this 16th day of April, 1997. • Duane McCarty, Mayor Attest: Charles S. Whiting, City Clerk/Administrator (Seal) • N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\DEVCASES\472-97\SPOTS-CC.RES 4110 /0 0 7; I6 6; RESOLUTION NO. 5/09 • C ITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING MODIFICATION OF THE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE MOUNDS VIEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, ESTABLISHING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 4, AND APPROVING THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The Mounds View Economic Development Authority ("EDA") consolidated Development Districts No. 1, 2, and 3, pursuant to Minn. Stat., Sections 469.090 through 469.108, control of which was transferred to the EDA by the City of Mounds View ("City"), thereby es,blishirtg the Mounds View Economic Development Project ("Project"), and adopted a project plan therefor ("Project Plan"). • 1.02. The City has determined a need to modify the Project Plan pursuant to Minn. Stat.. Sections 469.124 through 469.134 ("Development District Act") and Minn. Stat., Sections 469.001 to 469.047 ("NRA Act")and to that end has caused to be prepared a document entitled "Modification No. 1 to the Mounds View Economic Development Project" dated April 14, 1997 ("Project Plan Modification"). 1.02. The City has determined a need to establish Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 ("TIF District No. 4") and to adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan ("TIF Plan") therefor, pursuant to Minn. Stat., Sections 469.101 through 469.1081 and Minn. Stat., Sections 469.174 through 469.179 ("TIF Act") and to that end has caused to be prepared a document entitled "Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 4," dated April 14, 1997. 1.03. The Project Plan Modification and the TIF PIan were referred to the Mounds View PIanning Commission, which determined that they conform to the general plan for the development of the City as a whole. 1.04. Estimates of the fiscal and economic implications of the TIF Plan were presented to Independent School District#621 and the Ramsey County Board before the public hearing on the TIF Plan in accordance with the TIF Act The county commissioner representing the area including the TIF District was also duly notified in accordance with the TIF Act • 1.05. The City has fully reviewed the contents of the TIF Plan and has conducted a public hearing thereon, at which the views of all interested persons were heard. 1=120166 MU40S-4 8/S 3Ottd OIESLEEZI9=QI N3ANY80 V AC3NN3N'WOZId 99 °40 48-II-8dtt I ,/101 • Section 2. Findings; Project Plan Modification. 2.01. The findings stated in the Project Plan are incorporated herein by reference. 2.02. It is further specifically found and determined that: a) the land within the Project would not be made available for development without the public intervention and financial assistance described in the Project Plan Modification; b) the Project Plan Modification will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the'me, within the Project by private enterprise; c) the Project Plan Modification conforms to the general plan for development of the City as set forth in the comprehensive municipal plan; d) the Project Plan Modification will provide employment opportunities,and improve the tax base and the general economy of the state; and e) the Project Plan Modification will provide an impetus for €om bwwi l development. Section 3. Findings; TIF District No. 4. 3.01. It is found and determined that it is necessary and desirable for the sound and orderly development of the Project and the City as a whole, and for the protection and preservation of the public health, safety, and general welfare, that the authority of the TIF Act be exercised to provide public financial assistance to the TIF District and the Project. 3.02. It is further found and determined, and it is the reasoned opinion of the City, that the development proposed in the TIF Plan could not reasonably be expected to occursolely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the TIF Plan. 3.03. The proposed public costs to be financed in part through tax increment financing are necessary to permit the City to realize the full potential of the TIF Distdc and to Project in terms of development intensity, employment opportunities and tax base. 3.04. The TIF Plan for TIF District No. 4 conforms to the general plan of development of the City as a whole. • DJGi20166 MO205-4 8/9 3OVd 0TE8LE£ZT9243I N3AVMD 8 AC NN3}i'NO2I3 LS '40 LS-LL-2IdV 3.05. The TIF Plan for TIF District No. 4 will afford maximum opportunity, consistent • with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the TIF District and,the Project by private enterprise. 3.06. TIF District No. 4 is a redevelopment district under Section 469.174, subd. 10 of the TIF Act, based on the findings described in the TIF Plan, which are incorporated herein by reference. 3.07. The City hereby elects to make a qualifying local contribution with respect to TIF District No. 4, and thus anticipates that TIF District No. 4 will be exempt from state aid losses pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.1399, subd. 6(d). 3.08. Certain written reports(the"Report?)relating to the TIF Plan and to the activities contemplated therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and submitted to the City and/or made a part of the City files and proceedings on the TIF Plan. The City hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the Reports, which are hereby incorporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full herein. The City additionally hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the TIF PIan, which is hereby incorporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full herein, including, without limitation, the portion of the TIF Plan in which the facts supporting designation of the TIF District as a redevelopment district. • Section 4. Project Plan Modification and TIF Plan Adopted. 4.01. The Project Plan Modification and the TIF Plan are hereby approved and adopted and TIF District No_ 4 is hereby established. 4.02. The geographic boundaries of TIF District No. 4 are described in the TIF Plan and are incorporated herein by reference. 4.03. The City Clerk Administrator is authorized and directed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution together with a certified copy of the Project Plan Modification and TIF Plan to the Auditor of Ramsey County with a request that the original tax capacity of the property within TIF District No. 4 be certified to the County pursuant to Section 469.177, subd. 1 of the TIF Act, and to file a copy of the Project Plan Modification and TIF Plan with the Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue as required by the TIF Act • ATC120166 MTJ206-4 8/1. 30V 0tC8LEEZt92CI N3AVMD V ACaNN3}i2WO213 LS ' L0 49-tt-2ldtf Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Minnesota this day of 1997_ • Duane McCarty, Mayor ATTEST: Chuck Whiting, City Clerk Administrator • • • WG120166 MO20S-4 8/8 39'dd 0 L E6LCC3I 9°Q I N3AV21O '8 AQ3NN3N'Wo2{3 89 ,L0 L6-I I-21dV • RESOLUTION NO. 5/1 O • MOUNDS VIEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING MODIFICATION OF THE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE MOUNDS VIEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND APPROVING THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 4 Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The Mounds View Economic Development Authority ("EDA") coy Airlated Development Districts No. 1, 2, and 3, control of which was transferred to the EDA L City of Mounds View ("City"), pursuant to Minn. Stat., Sections 469.090 through 469.1 08, thereby establishing the Mounds View Economic Development Project("Project"), and adopted a project plan therefor ("Project Plan"). • 1.02. The EDA has determined a need to modify the Project Plan pursuant to Minn. Stat., Sections 469.124 through 469.134 ("Development District Act") and Minn. Stat., Sections 469.001 to 469.047 ("HRA Act") and to that end has caused to be prepared a.document entitled "Modification No. 1 to the Mounds View Economic Development Project" dated April 14, 1997 ("Project Plan Modification"). 1.02. The EDA has determined a need to establish Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 ("TIF District No. 4") and to adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan ("TIF Plan') therefor, pursuant to Minn. Stat_, Sections 469.101 through 469.1081 and Minn. Stat, Sections 469.174 through 469.179 ("TIF Act") and to that end has caused to be prepared a document Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 4," dated April 14, 1997. 1.03. The Project Plan Modification and the TIF Plan were referred to the Mounds View Planning Commission, which determined that they conform to the general plan for the development of the City as a whole. 1.04. Estimates of the fiscal and economic implications of the TIF Plan were presented to Independent School District 4621 and the Ramsey County Board before the public hearing on the TIF Plan in accordance with the TIF Act. The county commissioner representing the area including the TIF District was also duly notified in accordance with the TIP Act. 111 1.05. The EDA has fully reviewed the contents of the TIF Plan and has conducted a public hearing thereon, at which the views of all interested persons were heard. DJG.201S5 MD205-4 9/Z 39'dd OIEBGEEZt9"QI N3AV O 'S AC3NN3N'WO213 SS ' 40 G6-tt-2[dV Section 2. Findings; Project Plan Modification. .1 stated in the Project Plan are incorporated • 2.01. The findings stated herein by reference. 2.02. It is further specifically found and determined that: a) the land within.the Project would not be made available for development without the public intervention and financial assistance described in the Project Plan Modification; b) the Project Plan Modification will afford maximum opportunity, co is h t with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the land‘,4thin,the Project by private enterprise; c) the Project Plan Modification conforms to the general plan for development of the City as set forth in the comprehensive municipal plan; d) the Project Plan Modification will provide employment opport-anitie , the tax base and the general economy of the state; and e) the Project Plan Modification will provide an impetus for cotrmerciil development Section 3. Findings; TIF District No. 4. 1111 3.01. It is found and determined that it is necessary and desirable for the sound and orderly development of the Project and the City as a whole, and for the protection and preservation of the public health, safety, and general welfare, that the authority of the TIF Act be exercised to provide public financial assistance to the TIF District and the Project 3.02. It is further found and determined, and it is the reasoned opinion of the EDA, that the development proposed in the TIF Plan could not reasonably be expected to oc sd y through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the TIF Plan. 3.03. The proposed public costs to be financed in part through tax increment financing are necessary to permit the City to realize the full potential of the TIF District and the Project in terms of development intensity, employment opportunities and tax base. 3.04. The TIF Plan for TIF District No. 4 conforms to the general plan of development of the City as a whole. • .YG120155 MQ205-4 8/£ 30tVd OICSL££ZL9'QI N3AK2in 'S AQ3NN3N=WO2I3 SS 'L0 LS-LL-2Idtt 3.05. The TIF Plan for TIF District No. 4 will afford maximum opportunity, consistent • with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the TIF District and the Project by private enterprise. 3.06. TIF District No. 4 is a redevelopment district under Section 469.174, subd© 10 of the TIF Act, based on the findings described in the TIF Plan, which are incorporated herein by reference. Section 4. Project Plan Modification and TIF Plan Adopted. 4.01. The Project Plan Modification and the TIF Plan are hereby approved, 4.02. The EDA recommends that the City Council approve the Project PIan Modification and the TIF Plan after the public hearing in accordance with the TIF Act Adopted by the Mounds View Economic Development Authority, Mouids View, Minnesota this day of , 1997. Duane McCarty, Pi • Al LEST: Catherine Bennett, Executive Director • ATG120155 Ki205-4 B/b 30t1d OtCBLEEZt9'QI NSAV210 'S AQ3NN3N'WO213 9S 1..0 LS-tt-del Item No. 10 7: /5 Pm Staff Report No. q7-low-1 Meeting Date: April 14, 1997 Type of Business: PH WK:Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; • CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council From: Jim Ericson,Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Opportunity for Hearing and Consideration of Resolution No. 5106, a Resolution Authorizing Abatement of Nuisances at 2349 Laport Drive. Date of Report: April 11, 1997 Background: The property located at 2349 Laport Drive, owned by Leona Lodmill, is in violation of the Mounds View Municipal Code pertaining to nuisances and requires immediate attention. In the front, sides and rear yard there accumulations of debris and junk, car parts, brush piles and other assorted stockpiles, as well as an abandoned orange pick-up truck in the front yard. In its efforts to have the property cleared of these nuisances, Staff has tried repeatedly to work with the Lodmills. In July of 1995, the City issued a Court citation to Mrs. Lodmill regarding the nuisances. There has been no evidence of any clean-up having been done at the property since present-staff have been involved. Our efforts to get results date back to September 30, 1996. Photo documentation will be presented for the Council's reference. Discussion: On April 9, 1997, Staff performed a site inspection of the property with the assistance of a uniformed officer. Contact was made with the son of the property owners, who was outside at the time. He agreed that the property needed to be cleaned, but he could only do so much by himself. The inspection revealed the following: • stacks of automobile tires(1) • discarded automobile batteries (2) • large brush pile(3) • snowmobiles without a trailer(1) • Winnebago in backyard(4) • accumulation of aluminum cans(3) • assorted junk piles( ) covered plastic barrels(3) (5)(6) • Pile of scrap metal( ) abandoned pick-up w/expired plates • inoperable vehicle(5) • debris under tarps(1) (1) Section 607.03, Subd. 3c: "The outside piling, storing or keeping of old machinery,junk, furniture, household furnishings or appliances or component parts thereof, rusting metal inoperable/unusable equipment, or other debris visible on private or public property." • (2) Section 607.03, Subd. 3n: "All explosives, inflammable liquids and other dangerous substances or materials stored or accumulated in any manner or in any amount other than provided by law or ordinance." City of Mounds View Staff Report Resolution No. 5106, Authorization to Abate 2349 Laport Drive April 11, 1997 Page 2 (3) Section 607.03, Subd. 3e: "The depositing of maintaining,permitting or failing to remove, garbage, trash, rubbish, bottles, cans and other refuse on any property within the City, including large quantities of organic debris materials, which accumulated by other than natural means, except properly maintained compost piles." (4) Section 607.06, Subd. 3c1: "Vehicles which are parked or stored outside shall be on an improved surface as defined in this Code." (5) Section 607.06, Subd. 6a: "Abandoned and junk vehicles are declared to be a public nuisance creating a hazard to the health and safety of the public because they invite plundering, create fire-hazards, attract vermin, and present physical dangers to the safety and well-being of children and other citizens." (6) Section 607.06, Subd. 6d: "Any vehicle shall be deemed to be a junked or abandoned vehicle if said vehicle does not have attached thereto a valid and current license plate issued by the proper State agency." Numerous letters have been sent to the Lodmills regarding these violations. The most recent of these letters dated March 25, 1997 and April 2, 1997 are attached for the Council's reference. 4111 Staff has extended previous deadlines to have the orange truck removed (by April 15, 1997) and the junk, debris and brush accumulations (by May 1, 1997.) The process for abating properties is addressed in Section 607.08, Subdivision 1. It states that if, upon the judgement of the enforcement official, nuisance conditions are being maintained or exist within the City, a notification shall be sent or delivered to the person(s) committing and maintaining such nuisances. The notification shall require the person(s) to correct the violations within a reasonable period of time, not to exceed 30 days. If corrective actions are not taken within the specified period, the City Council may authorize abatement. The person(s) shall be notified at least ten days in advance of the Council meeting and be given an opportunity speak before the Council. The letter sent to the Lodmills on April 2, 1997 satisfies this requirement. Recommendation: Approve Resolution No. 5106, a resolution authorizing the abatement of nuisances at 2349 Laport Drive. duAA, Jim Ericson, Planning Associate • N:\DATA\USERSUIME\SHARE\LODMILL.RPT i_, 8400 0 -•- --_. - 8290 L PF .--- - 82ND 0 t m N ) . • ..r.....i;.::: ' „iiiiimpp. .... . ... . . . — COCFC. CRP OURse -•• Ivp- • I , 1NI N N N ../ 62 r LAPORT DR ihkiiimb.464.10 -- C ^ • • NI N N Ni C t. INA.'.. .. M n n n I,Mj N M O n .« INEZN N M •q N N N N N N N • 8130 0 8141 1834 f 8126 8123 I 8120 8121 I a I _ 4 I812C• CD m M n m4-7-' S 0 s N I < ' alio W 8101 7, Q n n M n n n M p, o N N N N N N N NI N N N N N N ROAD •8080 80851 I;i: I ....I N 18088 809: I I Sr' 0 n n n i Ing o 010 :::::. ... 8081El 1 ^ Ali N( N NIN NIv n 8070 8071 I 8070 5079 Z.,,,,'I N Qs•p V 5741 aoas sa 1 GREENFC-N „ PARK 5731 s 4044 79451 7944 7947 GR;ENFIELD �N\r�NIN IN CN I 121 8024 to 7943 a, N 8027 8016 7941 7940> rn� c+c, DR 7939 PFEl 7937 7936 ,,,, - o X121 Inc l ai l I• 1224 ��o 8000 8005 ( 8012 7935 c.1 NI N r r c‘1 n 793317932 22 5701 c-. 7931. 001)9.'. oi cv A ce��c'N N'o n N ���' 2200 7984 7989 7988 7929! 7928 n‘r Cl N .�`A `cam'N Nl N 2233 7927 7925 i 7924 r� N` i cP® c' D- '4° 2'-op ifec 13) 7980 7971 7968 0 7923! ,1(14°o �'� #110 �e4N 43 I n v n rill792 17920 W791.: ,. N f'G�� O, m N N N N N N (nr El_7944 7953 7948117 I 7914w 7913- N}1 o, ��\mom N N ®s 7913793 7931 7930 79091 7910 7909- N il n N N\tom ��P���N • --y 7906 790G m 1 u°ii I In v „, 79051790 8111-VI o v n n m M n n 7900 N N N N I N 7901 O (D Ir�j M I M M M N CV N K I N I N NIN (nV I N NIN O i ilio O 0� t.- M N r:-N I N I N N N N,N N N N N N N N v o o: f' _...„0", a M 'girl rn HILLVIEW 78897888 PIMP PF o el . MI MI MI MMIM IOI or co tD VI LO VIOL n aCV N b O PIO O NIP N N N - N: N NMN N N N N N N N N N N I N N N N N N OAKI OOD DR N N N N N N N N N N N N N NIN QAKW00D 787 787517868 7869 7860 rl _ r PARK 870 7861178540 7815717860 7855 '561 15616 561 561 N l N I N I NIN _•,INN n��!.N I.^I e,i^I 5590 Zoning Map 2349 Laport Drive N4 Leona Lodmill • CTIT OF 111110iNDS Phone: (612) 784-3055 40 •p �Vv Fax: (612) 7843462 e o�`eSs PartnetS• ' April 2, 1997 Mr. and Mrs. Lodmill 2349 Laport Drive Mounds View, MN 55112 RE: Notification of City Council Authorization to Abate Nuisances Mr. and Mrs. Lodmill: As a follow up to the letter I wrote to you on March 25, 1997, I wanted to let you know, that will be going before the City Council on April 14, 1997 to gain authorization to abate nuisances at your property located at 2349 Laport Drive. You are encouraged to attend this meeting which will begin at 7 p.m. and take place at City Hall. According to Mounds View's Municipal Code, the City Council must approve of an authorization 111 to abate your property. The City is required to give you at least a ten days notice of such action. If approved by the City Council, the authorization will allow the City to have your pickup truck impounded on April 15, 1997 and the debris accumulations removed after May 1, 1997 as outlined in the letter dated March 25, 1997. The City will arrange to have the cost of the performed work plus any administrative fees billed to you directly. If the City does riot receive appropriate payment within 30 days, the outstanding fees will be certified (assessed) againstyour property for payment with your property taxes. If the property is brought up to Code before the City Council meeting on April 14, 1997, I will halt the abatement process. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this process or if there is anything I can do with regards to contacting service organizations. I can be reached at 784-3055. Sincerely, C James Ericson • Planning Associate 4110 cc: Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director I► •TEorM 2401 Highway 10 •• Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 soY INK,,, ,ecvuea wor •!1111or_s;;. .:Dt:D8 Phone: t6s2) 784-3055 n� Fax: (6 12)784-3462 og�esr •PartnerS��QS March 25, 1997 Mr. and Mrs. Lodmill 2349 Laport Drive . Mounds View,MN 55112 RE: Preparations for Spring Clean-up at 2349 Laport Drive • Mr. and Mrs. Lodmill: • Spring is approaching and I thought perhaps we should discuss what will neer .;.;; -. eliminate the code violations present on your property. In the last letter I sent to you, one of the issues that was unresolved was the oFail5 7 - ; ::�'J. This vehicle was supposed to have been properly licensed no later than November 1 i99fi, illwrote that if the truck was not licensed by that date, the City would have the truck impounded.. Due to staff workload, I had not checked up on this until now. I drove through your neighborhood and observed that the truck still has not been licensed. The City Code, r'm : -,`i 607.06, Subd. 7, allows for the impounding of nuisance vehicles such as your track. ,": :€3;:�:: faith gesture, the City will give you three weeks in which to have the truck's license brought up to date. However, if the truck is not displaying current plates by April 15, 1997, T'r - arrange to have the vehicle impounded according to the City Code. In terms of the debris accumulating alongside the garage and upon the property in general, the City will extend previous deadlines and give you until May 1, 1997 to have the property cleanty<t As previously mentioned, the barrels, tires, car batteries and other assorted items represent a violation of the City's Nuisance Code and pose a threat to the health and safety of the community. As such, these items must be removed. If you desire, I am more than willing to come to your property to point out the nuisances that will need to be corrected. If there are circumstances which prevent you from having the nuisances removed from the property, please let me know. I can try to contact service agencies or volunteer groups to help with your clean-up efforts if a need exists. . I will perform a reinspection of your property on Tuesday, April 15, 1997 to verify that the truck is properly licensed. I will revisit your property on May 1, 1997 to verify that the nuisances have • been corrected. If nuisance code violations persist at that time, I will seek approval from the City Council to have the property abated by a private firm with the cost of such work billed to you. OW r iNKImtiawiT�.,, 2401 Highway 10 • Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 rte S OY — , .. _ — 'Pr.recycled oaoer • • • Letter to Mr. &Ms. Lodmill March 25, 1997 • Page 2 • If you have any questions regarding this letter or other matters, please call me. I can be reached at 784-3055. • Sincerely, • •• James Ericson Planning Associate • cc: Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director • • • • • 4110 RESOLUTION 5106 • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ABATEMENT OF NUISANCE CODE VIOLATIONS AT 2349 LAPORT DRIVE,MOUNDS VIEW,MINNESOTA, 55112. WHEREAS, Leona Lodmill is the owner of property located at 2349 Laport Drive, zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally described as follows: Lot 9, Block 1,Laport Meadows;Subject to Highway WHEREAS, Leona Lodmill is responsible for maintaining Nuisance Code violations on above-said property that include, but are not limited to: 1. Stacks of Automobile Tires 7. Assorted Junk Piles Alongside Garage 2. Discarded Automotive Batteries 8. Covered Plastic drums 3. Large Brush Pile 9. Scrap Metal Accumulations 4. Snowmobiles in Back yard 10. Abandoned Truck w/expired plates 5. Winnebago in the Back yard 11. Inoperable Automobile 6. Accumulation of Aluminum Cans 12. Debris under Tarps 4110WHEREAS, on October 11, 1996, staff inspected the property located at 2349 Laport Drive to determine the nature and extent of the nuisances present on the property; and WHEREAS, in a letter to the property owner dated October 14, 1996, staff requested that the vehicles on the property located at 2349 Laport Drive be brought into compliance with the Nuisance Code by November 1, 1996; and WHEREAS, on November 1, 1996, staff reinspected the property located at 2349 Laport Drive to verify the nuisances were corrected as requested and found that only minimal progress had been made; and WHEREAS, in a letter to the property owner of 2349 Laport Drive dated November 5, 1996, staff requested that the remaining Nuisance Code violations be corrected by November 11, 1996; and WHEREAS, in a letter to the property owner dated March 25, 1997, staff notified the Lodmills of the continued presence of nuisances on the property and set deadlines as to when the nuisances would need to be corrected; and WHEREAS, in a letter to the property owner dated April 2, 1997, staff notified the Lodmills of its intent to appear before the Mounds View City Council to request authorization to 41110 abate nuisances at 2348 Laport Drive; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the nuisance code violations at 2349 Laport Drive constitute public health and safety hazards which the City may abate and assess the costs of said abatement against the property pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.101; and Resolution No. 5106 Authorization to Abate 2349 Laport Drive April 14, 1997 • Page 2 WHEREAS, the City has complied with the notification guidelines for nuisance abatement as stated in Section 607.08, Subd. 1 of the Mounds View Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Leona Lodmill, property owner of 2349 Laport Drive, will be personally liable to the City for the costs of such abatement, including administrative costs pursuant to Section 607.08, Subd. 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, if Leona Lodmill fails to pay the cost of the abatement of nuc cock ck violations at 2349 Laport Drive within 30 days after the date of the invoice, the City rtla3P certify the unpaid costs against the property pursuant to Section 607.08, Subd. 4 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 1. The City will abate the following nuisance code violation immediately: a. Abandoned pick-up truck, license plate no. 493-BKK 2. The City will abate the following nuisances after May 1, 1997: 111 a. Large pile of branches and brush g. Debris under tarps b. Stacks of automobile tires h. Other assorted junk piles c. Discarded car batteries • I. inoperable snowmobiles d. Accumulation of aluminum cans j. Pile of scrap metal e. Covered plastic barrels k. Inoperable Buick, plate no. 498-DQB f. Winnebago, plate no. RV 36561 3. Leona Lodmill shall be personally liable to the City for the costs of abatement, including administrative costs. 4. Any unpaid portion of the abatement costs after 30 days of the date on the invoice may be certified as special assessments against the property pursuant to Section 607.08, Subd. 4 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. Adopted this 14th day of April, 1997. Duane McCarty, Mayor ATTEST: Charles S. Whiting, City Clerk/Administrator • C:\OFFICE\WPW]N\WPDOCS\LODMI LL.RES Mm 1/.9- 470 Pillsbury Centel • Kennedy 200 SrAtrtz zzth Street Mnneapolis MN 55402 (612)337-9300 celepbonc 4& Graven (6I2)337-9310 fax aacu7:attysOlc naeay rawn.rnm CHARTERED • ROBERT C.LONG Manley a Law Ditect Dial(612)337.9202 November 25, 1996 Thomas A. Anderson General Counsel . . Metropolitan Airports Commission . Minneapolis/St Paul International Airport 6040 - 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799 RE: Written Objections to Proposed Draft Long-Term Comprehensive Plan Update Dated Jul . 1996 Our File No. MU 125-51 • • Dear Mr. Anderson: This letter will serve as the City of Mounds View's ("City") formal Written objections to the Proposed Draft July 1996 Long-Term Comprehensive Plan Update ("Plan") for the Anoka County/Blaine Airport ("Airport') and response to your October 25, 1996 letter to me. These comments are based on review, comments and final action by the Mounds View Airport Task Force and the Mounds View Cry Council(see attached resolution). Thi City icq>3es •that diesc written objections and the Resolution be made part of the official record being developed in the public hearing process for consideration of the Plan_ ' The Men opolitan Airports Commission ("MAC') must prepare its Plan in full compliance with. the Court Order dated July 28, 1986, Court File No. 54984 (Order). The City's formal written objections stated herein are based on changes the City believes must be made to the Plan for it to be in compliance with the Order. The City hereby requests MAC to maim amendments to the Plan in accordance with the following written objections. If MAC fails to incorporate these changes in the Plan,the City will lx obligated to initiate legal action to prevent MAC from adopting and implementing a Plan not in compliance with the Order. 4110 The City's written objections are based primarily on the following basic legal guidelines governing future development of the Airport as specified in the Order: • RCL1i3340 107125-Sl ' Thomas A. Anderson ° November 25, 1996 • Page 2 • • 1. Pursuant to the Order, MAC must "develop the Airport pursuant to the Airport Master Plan formally adopted by the Metropolitan Airports Commission on August 15, 1983 and approved by the Metropolitan Council on November 22, 1983 (the "1983 Master Plan"):... ... / The 1983 Master Plan was adopted on the basis that "since development of Anoka County/Blaine Airport is limited by law to minor scams, it will be assumed that its fica will consist entirely of types D and E aircraft (see page 50 of 1983 Master Plano 3. Proposed development and capital improvements at the Airport includtff in the Plan designed to accommodate aircraft larger than types D and E aircraft (now referred to as types A and B aircraft - 12,500 lbs gross takeoff weight or less) are in conflict with the Order and the 1983 Master Plan and would therefor not be allowed. 4. The City's community and land use planning since entry of the Order in July 1986 has been based on the provisions of the Order incorporating the terms of the 1983 Master Plan as a guide for future development of the Airport. Airport developments or capital improvements in conflict with the 1983 Master Plan and Order would cause significant dealt' harm to the City and its residents by seriously disrupting existing development • and requiring the loss of the use of property that is permissible pursuant to the terms of the Order and the 1983 Master Plan. Based on the foregoing legal guidelines and provisions of the 1983 Master Plan and Order, the City's formal written objections to the Plan are as follows: • 1. The Airport history section of the Plan srattiag 011 . T1:3 inakcdsno"left ce* . whatsoever to the Order governing future development at the Airport. The Plan should be amended to include a full desciption of the history regarding the Order, the specific provisions of the Order that govern the future development of the Airport,and incorporate by reference a copy of the Order as a new exhibit 2. The Plan, on its face, fails to comply with the requirements of the Order in that the Plan does not include the Comprehensive Noise Abatement Strategy to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens adjacent to the Airport as required by the Order. The Plan should be amended to include a specific section or chapter devoted to the Comprehensive Noise Abatement Strategy required by the Order. In response to your letter of October 25, 1996, the City's official position is that MAC is currently in violation of the Order for failing to have adopted a Comprehensive Noise Abatement Strategy as required by the Order. s • 3. The Plan improperly uses an Airport Reference Code (ARC), Approach Category B, Design Croup II standard (ARC B-II) for design standards for capital improvements, including all runways, taxiways and setbacks for the Airport Using an ARC B-II design Rc i.334o MU125-31 Thomas A. Anderson November 25, 1996 • Page 3 • standard is in conflict with the Order which incorporates the 1983 Master Plan in that the Plan calls for design improvements of the Airport to service larger aircraft than the typical operating aircraft, f1Iss D and E aircraft at the Airport and as prescribed by the 1983 Master Plan. Exhibit 3-1 of the Plan clearly shows that the.use of ARC B-II standards are improper in that it allows for design aircraft greater than 12,500 lbs. gross takeoff weight The Plan must be amended on pages 3-8 and 3-31 and elsewhere to state that the Airport should continue to be designed in accordance with the 1983 Master Plan and Order and should follow an ARC A-I design standard to be consistent with the 1983 Master Plan and Order. Exhibit 3-1 should be removed or amended to reflect this change. 4. Recommendations in the Plan on pages 3-10,3-11 and 3-31 and elsewhere recommending that Runway 8R/26L be extended to a length of 5,000 feet should be removed. Such a recommendation is in conflict with the 1983 Master Plan which does not provide for such an extension and is in direct conflict with the Order which allows for an approximately 800 foot extension to then Runway 8126 to its current length of 4,000 feet In addition, there is no justification based on the data presented in the Plan to extend • runways beyond their current lengths. For example, on page 3-11 of the Plan, it states "according to the FAA runway Iength program, a runway length of 3,200 feet would support approximately 95% of all small aircraft." Since the Airport is to be designed to serve predominantly D and E (now A and B) type aircraft according to the 1983 Master Plan and Order, and since the Plan itself on pages 2-2 and 2-7, states that the FAA projects that there will be a decline in the number of active single-engine and multi- engine fleet of small aircraft, there is no evidence to support a showing of a lack of capacity at the Airport if the Airport continues to be developed in accordance with the 1983 Master Plan and Order which calls for it to be predominantly used by small type D and E aircraft. • Furthermore, to extend Runway SR/26L from 4,000 to 5,000 feet would cause major disruption to the surrounding community that has been built up around the Airport based on the Order which dictates a 4,000 foot length runway. Such a 5,000 foot runway would require a 1,660 foot long safety zone B (see page 3-23 of the Plan) which would be unacceptable to the City of Mounds View. 5. The recommendation that 8R26L should be widened from 75 feet to 100 feet should be deleted. Runway 8121261, should remain at its 75 foot width. As established above, an ARC B-II design standard is improper for this Airport and in conflict with the 1983 Master Plan and Order. Using an ARC A I standard instead, a 75 foot width on Runway • 8R/26L is appropriate. 6. The recommendation for the proposed parallel runway 17R/35L to be developed to a length of 5,000 feet "if it is politically feasible" should be removed from the Plan since R=.1.13340 :(CSl25-SI Thomas A. Anderson November 25, 1996 • Page 4 • it is in conflict with the 1983 Order and Master Plan which states thaz the runway is to be only 4,855 feet long. 7. The recommendations regarding dimensions of taxiways on page 3-31 must also be amended to be in accordance with the Order and 1983 Master Plan. As stated above, it is inappropriate to use an ARC B-II standard for designing a taxiway width of 35 feet. The current 30 foot width should be left in place. It is also inappropriate to consider a 300 foot separation on Runway 17R/35L based on a possible precision approach for that runway. Pursuant to the Order, a precision approach may only be installed on runway 8-26. The recommendation on page 3-14 regarding a 300 foot separation to accommodate ARC B-III aircraft is also inappropriate given that the design standards for the.Airport should be for the ARC A-I smaller D and E aircraft provided for in the 1983 Master Plan. 8. The recommendations for proposed parallel 81.46R 17R/35L.,Runways should be removed from the Plan in that there is nota sufficient increase in the number of operations of the small D and E type aircraft at the Airport to warrant the expenditures on such additional runways at this time. Adding such improvements at the Airport to accommodate a possible growth in commercial aircraft of the ARC B-II standard would be in violation • of the Order and the the 1983 Master Plan, which has not recognized such aircraft as being the typical operating aircraft for the Airport. 9. The recommendations for a GPS precision approach on runway 17R and precision approach indicators (PAPIs) for runway 17R/35L should be removed from the Plan as being in conflict with the Order,which allows for precision approaches only on the east/west runway 8/26. 10. The recommendation for an additional 215,000 square feet of private hangar storage on pages 3-25 and 3-30 should be removed from the Plan. The projections for based aim-aft upon which this recommendation is based are incorrect in light of the fact that the Plan has been based on an ARC B-U design aircraft which is in conflict with the 1983 Master Plan and Order. If the ARC A-I design standard is used,a much lesser amount of hangar storage space would be needed during the planning period based on the FAA projections of a decline in the smaller single and double engine type D and E aircraft IL The recommendations for increasing hangar storage for "historic and unique aircraft" at the Airport should be deleted from the Plan. These "historic and unique aircraft" are not the design aircraft for the Airport and have been shown to be a major cause of noise problems at the Airport The Plan should not provide for additional hangar space and contemplate and increased fleet of such "historic and unique airaft", but rather should • call fora downsizing of the sue of the fleet of these aircraft at the Airport In addition, the Comprehensive Noise Abasement Strategy that must be developed for the Airport in accordance with the Order should provide for a reduction in the number of based "historic RC-113340 10125-51 Thomas A. Anderson November 25, 1996 • Page 5 and unique aircraft" at the Airport to reduce noise. Therefore, the Plan should develop a section showing how a reduced fleet of historic aircraft will be accommodated making room for smaller D and E aircraft which are in compliance with the Order and 1983 Master Plan. 12. An amended Capital Improvement Plan (as compared to the one shown as Table 3-3), should be prepared to reflect a smaller dollar cost in light of the reduced capital improvement needs resulting from switching from an ARC B-II design standard to an ARC A-I standard which is in compliance with the Order and 1983 Master Plan. The written objections contained herein and the proposed amendments are based on the provisions of the Order and 1983 Master Plan which provides the legal guidelines for improvements at the Airport. The proposed Plan is in conflict with the 1983 Master Plan and Order as currently written. The City respectfully request MAC to amend the proposed Plan to reflect the City's written objections and to bring it into compliance with the 1983 Master Plan and Order. The City hopes that MAC will cooperate in making such changes to remain in compliance with the Order and to avoid the cost of additional litigation regarding the Airport. Please inform me as to the next steps to be followed in the official MAC process for consideration of the proposed Plan. If you have any questions regarding our written objections, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, C Robert C. Long Mounds View City Attorney RCL:jes cc: Mayor Jerry Linke • Councilmembers Chuck Whiting Mounds View Airport Task Force 111111 RGI'2340 WT12S-S1 • RESOLUTION NO.5051 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW IIP COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING CITY'S FORMAL WRITTEN OBJECTIONS TO_ i HE METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION'S PROPOSED DRAFT LONG-TERM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE DATED JULY 19% FOR LELE ANOKA COUNTY-BLAINE AIRPORT • WHEREAS,future developmeeat ofthe Anoka County-Blaine Airport("art'.')is governed.by a Court Order dated July 28, 1986,Court File No.454984("Order")which resulted from litigation the • City of Mounds View("City")initiated against the Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Airports Commission("MAC"); and • WHEREAS, the MAC has prepared a proposed Draft Long-Term Comprehensive Plan Update dated July, 1996("Plan")for the Airport and WHEREAS,the Mounds View Airport Task Force("Task Force")has reviewed the Plan at T °k Force meetings held on October 14, October 28 and November 18, 1996;and • WHEREAS, the City Council had previously directed the City attorney to work with the Task Force in reviewing and preparing a response to MAC'S Plan;and WHEREAS,the Task For=at its meeting on November 18, 1996 reviewed the proposed written objections to the Plan prepared by the City attorney and voted u+am;ously to recommend that the City Coumal approve the attached formal written objections to the Plan;and WHEREAS,the City Council at its work session on November 18 received the recomme dation from the Task Force and heard a presentatien from the City attorney regarding the attached ween objections NOW, T.c3EREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED MAT the City Council hereby adopts the attached written objections to the Plan as prepared by the City attorney and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City council hereby directs City staff and the City attorney to forward this resolution and written objections to MAC to be included in the formal public hearing record as the City's position regarding MAC's Plan. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council authorized City staff and the City attorney • to take all necessary steps,including litigation if necessary,to represent the City's position regarding the Plan and to insure that any Plan formally adopted by MAC is in full compliance with the July 28, 1986 Court Order. • Adopted this 25th day ofNoveraber, 1996 ATTEST: ►'ALL�L lMayor Like (SEAL) 62257 -r(it:mt,a4r Chuck Whiting, City • • • /9 30'ctd OLCSL£C?L9' ' ' --- Duane McCarty 4 780-7356 17114110/97 09:31 PM D212 Subject: Anoka County Airport IIIDate: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 21: 14:25 +0000 From: Duane McCarty <duanem@infi.net> To: rep.Geri.Evans@house. leg.state.mn.us Dear Representative Evans: The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) is currently working on a Long Term Comprehensive Plan Update (Plan) for the Anoka County Airport. The Mounds View City Council and a citizens committee have been tracking this process. The City Council directed the City Attorney, Mr. Bob Long of Kennedy & Graven, to notify the MAC of our written objections to the Plan. Mounds View filed those objections with the MAC on November 25, 1996. We did not receive a response from MAC until Mr. Long contacted MAC again in early March of this year, and reiterated our concerns to Mr. Mark J. Ryan Airport Planner for MAC on March 14, 1997. As you know, the Metropolitan Airports Commission is obligated under a Court Order and Stipulation to abide by certain planning criteria at the airport. The Court Order resulted from a complaint brought by Mounds View against the MAC in 1984 and contains agreements regarding future airport improvements. However, our difficulty in communicating with MAC staff and a delay in public hearings on the Anoka Airport Comp Plan until May or June, leaves IIIIIus wondering if the new hearing schedule has anything to do with the Legislature session. Mr. Ryan has again agreed to meet with us this coming Monday April 14, 1997. Hopefully this meeting will actually take place. Please be alert to any legislative proposals this session that repeal existing laws, or implement new laws, that counter statutes protecting cities surrounding the Anoka County Airport. Be especially aware of protections written into MSA 473. 641 Subd. 4 as it applies to upgrading minor status airports under the Metropolitan Development Guide. The Metropolitan Development Guide has been changed in some respects since this law was authored by then Representative Paul McCarron. Nonetheless, the intent of the court order stands untouched. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. The airport is constantly expanding with escalating off-site impacts from aircraft overflight of populated areas. I look forward to our earliest opportunity to review this issue with you. I have requested our City Administrator, Chuck Whiting to contact you with an update. Sincerely, Duane McCarty, Mayor City of Mounds View • • Item No. //6 Staff Report No.q 7-2. 4 Meeting Date: 4/14/97 • Type of Business: CB WK:: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council From: James Ericson,Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Second reading and action on Ordinance No.594,An Ordinance Amending Chapters 606,607 and 1005 of the Mounds View Municipal Code Related to the Requirement to Mow Tall Grasses and Creating an Exemption for Wetland and Native Vegetation; Planning Case No.SP- 012-97 Date of Report: April 2, 1997 Summary: The proposed ordinance would establish certain exemptions from the requirement in the Mounds View Municipal Code to mow"tall grasses"in excess of eight inches. These exemptions would include: So 1. Native wetland vegetation found in wetlands designated as part of the City's wetland zoning district, or in floodplain, drainage ponds or ditches which store and convey stormwater. 2. Native vegetation found in natural areas which are part of public open space,parks and nature centers. 3. Areas on any occupied lot or parcel of land having wetland-type vegetation because of neighborhood drainage patterns,where the drainage pattern is evident on contour maps and from field observation, and the vegetation is confined to a single lot, separated from adjacent lots, and managed so as not to be a nuisance. 4. An area where the land and vegetation appear not to have been graded, landscaped, mowed or otherwise disturbed by human or mechanical means at any time. 5. Prairie land restoration by an educational institution or public agency, in areas of at least five acres Background: This code amendment was prompted by a situation that developed last year when the City asked a property owner to mow an area in his rear yard that had been left to grow natural. Staff learned that this area is boggy, and at times, wet, causing wetland type vegetation to grow if left undisturbed. The 40 Mounds View Municipal Code makes no exception for these situations,nor does it exempt natural vegetation growing in designated wetlands,floodplains, drainage ponds or ditches,parks and public open space, and on undeveloped lands. The original ordinance revision had different wording for#3 noted above. The original wording was as follows: City of Mounds View Staff Report Ordinance 594: Tall Grasses April 2, 1997 Page 2 Natural plantings, wetland and meadow vegetation indigenous to Minnesota, grown on any occupied lot or parcel of land and maintained as part of a landscape treatment or garden area approved by the Director of Community Development. A concern was expressed at the Council meeting on February 24 about this wording, in that areas left natural on individual lots in developed residential neighborhoods may become an annoyance to the neighbors and that the City would be opening the door to a continuing problem. There was concern expressed about native vegetation spreading into neighbors' yards. City Council suggested that Planning Commission discuss the proposed ordinance further and provide additional input. The Planning Commission recommended that Item#3 be changed to read as is noted under the summary section of this report. This change would limit the type of vegetation to wetland-tyln grzaws only rather than also allowing natural plantings and meadow vegetation, which is much more susceptible to spreading into adjacent yards. Planning Commission felt that in some cases it is difficult to fight the natural conditions where there is boggy soil and require mowing. The City Fore1 ,1-:a5 indicated that it is unlikely wetland vegetation will spread into adjacent yards because they require wet conditions to flourish. At your meeting on March 24, Staff presented two options for Council consideration. These included: #1: Include the five exemptions, but modify exemption#3 using the wording noted in the summary section of this report. #2: Drop exemption#3. After discussion, City Council introduced an ordinance which would enact Option#1 for first reading. Ordinance 594 included with this report follows this option. Staff would also note the addition of the phrase"wetlands designated as part of the City's wetland zoning district"to Item#1, since your last meeting. Recommendation: The Planning Commission,by a unanimous vote, and Staff recommend City Council adoption of Ordinance 594 with the change noted above, which would allow exemptions from the noxious weed and tall grass provisions of the Municipal Code. James Ericson,Planning Associate cc: Keith King, 8380 Greenwood Drive N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHAREV SPECPROJ'SPo1297\GRASS.CC3 • ORDINANCE NO. 594 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 606, 607 AND 1005 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO THE REQUIREMENT TO MOW TALL GRASSES AND CREATING AN EXEMPTION FOR WETLAND AND NATIVE VEGETATION THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1: Chapter 606 of the Mounds View Public Health and Safety Code is amended by adding new language and subdivisions exempting certain land uses and landscape treatments from Section 606.02, entitled"DESTRUCTION OF WEEDS BY OWNER": 606.02: DESTRUCTION OF WEEDS BY OWNER: All such grass and weeds shall be cut, pulled or destroyed whenever they shall exceed a height of eight (8) inches. The following 111) areas and types of vegetation are exempted from this provision if managed in a manner so as not to become infested with noxious weeds or to create a stagnant, foul smelling condition: Subd. 1. Native wetland vegetation found in wetlands designated as part of the City's wetland zoning district, or in floodplains, drainage ponds or ditches which store and convey stormwater. Subd. 2. Native vegetation found in natural areas which are part of public open space, parks and nature centers. Subd. 3. Areas on any occupied lot or parcel of land having wetland-type vegetation because of neighborhood drainage patterns, where the drainage pattern is evident on contour maps and from field observation, and the vegetation is confined to a single lot, separated from adjacent lots, and managed so as not to be a nuisance. Subd. 4. An area where the land and vegetation appear not to have been graded, landscaped, mowed or otherwise disturbed by human or mechanical means at any time. The Director of Community Development shall use reasonable judgement in determining what constitutes this type of area based on the present appearance of the area and research as to • the history of the area, if such information is available. Subd. 5. An area of at least five (5) acres used by an educational institution or public agency for Ordinance No. 594 April 14, 1997 Page 2 prairie land restoration, if the prior vegetation is eliminated and the prairie vegetation is planted through transplanting or seed. The area shall be cut at least once per year to a height of no more than eight (8)inches if weeds cover more than 25 percent of the area. If such mowing is necess. and the area is likel to be seen by thepublic, a sign shall be posted advising that a meadow or prairie is being established. The size of the sign shall be one (1) square-foot and it shall be no higher than three (3) feet. SECTION 2: Chapter 607 of the Mounds View Public Health and Safety Code is amended by adding new language to Subdivision lg of Section 607.03, entitled'‘ ,NC T,;c ENUMERATED": g. All noxious weeds, "tall grasses" defined as anything over eight (8) inches io. and other rank growths', except as exempted in Section 606.02 of this Code. SECTION 3: Chapter 1005 of the Mounds View Building Code is amended by adding new language to a footnote within Subdivision 3 of Section 1005.05, entitled"BJ L` SANITATION STANDARDS": Subd. 3. Noxious weeds: All exterior property areas shall be kept free from species of weeds or plant growth which are noxious or detrimental to the public health2. •SECTION 4: EI E J CTIVE DATE: This ordinance goes into effect upon adoption by the City Council and 30 days after its publication in the official City newspaper. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on , 1997. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this day of , 1997. Duane McCarty, Mayor ATTEST: Charles S. Whiting, City Clerk—Administrator (SEAL) • Ordinance No. 594 faApril 14, 1997 Page 3 2 See also Section 607.03, Subd. 1(0) and Section 606.02 of this Code. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Robert Long, City Attorney N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\SPECPROJ\SP012.97\WEEDS.FIN • • Item No. II `: Staff Report No. '97-,2047 C MeetingIII Type of Business: CB WK::Work Session;PH:Public Heaping; CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council From: Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Second reading and action on Ordinance No.595,An Or OrdTtnarime Mc nE day care centers and group nurseries as a conditional use in doe 0-1,0-2, B-3,B.4,and I-1 zoning districts; Planning Case No. SP-013-97 Date of Report: April 2, 1997 Summary: The proposed ordinance would add day care centers and group nurseries as conditional uses in the business and industrial districts in Mounds View, and would establish criteria to be used in evaluating these conditional use permit applications. The criteria would be as follows: a. No overnight facilities are provided for the children served. Children axe;-e :v r;d and removed daily. b. The front yard depth shall be a minimum of thirty five feet(35'). III c. Not less than forty(40)square feet of outside play space per child be p ; ..-w__. �a:;r such space be suitably fences and/or screened in accordance with conditions as specified by the City Council. d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided in compliance with Chapter 1121 of this Title. e. Adequate off-street loading and service entrances are provided in compliance with Chapter 1122 of this Title. f. The site and related parking and service entrances shall be served by an arterial collector street of sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic which will be generated. g. All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be in comp ,•anrA with the Mounds View Sign Code. h. The distance between any outdoor play yard for a day care center or group nursery and the Highway 10 right-of-way line shall be a minimum of 200 feet, except as provided in Section 1123.02 Subd. 1.c. i. No day care center or group nursery shall be permitted where the distance from the property line for the day care center or group nursery to a premise requiring a 57,1i.. license, as provided in Section 502 of the Municipal Code, or a license for an adult establishment, as provided in Section 513 of the Municipal Code, is five hundred(500) feet or less, except that the 500 foot requirement shall not apply to any liquor establishment receiving at least sixty percent of its gross sales revenue form the sale of food. Of these criteria, a. through g. already apply to day care centers and group nurseries in the residential • districts. The ordinance revision would add h. and i. A provision would also be added to the section of the Zoning Code on non-conforming uses which would state that"any day care center or group nursery in existence as of the date of enactment of Ordinance 595,having a play yard less than 200 feet from City of Mounds View Staff Report Ordinance 595:Day Care Centers April 2, 1997 Page 2 • the Highway gh ay 10 right-of-way line, shall not be considered a non-conforming use, and any structure or play yard on the premises may be reconstructed, expanded or enlarged as long as the setback of the play yard from the Highway 10 right-of-way line is not made less by the reconstruction, expansion or enlargement" This revision would allow Kindercare to continue operating without becoming a non- conforming use. Background: At present, day care centers and group nurseries are allowed only in the residential districts. At your meeting on February 24,two issues were raised by Councilmembers. These issues were: ■ If day care centers are placed in business and industrial districts, it is possible the they will be located next to streets which carry higher volumes of traffic, and children will be subjected to higher levels of exhaust fumes. The question was asked whether a criteria should be added which would address this possibility. • The question was asked whether there should be a distance requirement between day care centers and group nurseries and businesses serving liquor, liquor stores and adu b establishments. • City Council referred the ordinance revision back to Planning Commission for more discussion of-these issues. At your meeting on March 24, Staff provided information on ways to address the issues and the recommendation from the Planning Commission. Three options were discussed. #1: Add day care centers and group nurseries to the business and industrial districts as conditional uses. Criteria a through g.noted above would apply to these uses in the residential districts. Criteria a. through i. would apply in the business and industrial districts. #2: Add day care centers and group nurseries to the business and industrial districts as conditional uses. Criteria a. through i. would apply to these uses in all districts where they were allowed (residential, business and industrial). Provision would be made for existing day care centers so they did not become non-conforming if they did not meet the two new criteria(h. and i.). #3: Adopt the ordinance as originally proposed, i.e. add day care centers and group nurseries to the business and industrial districts as conditional uses without adding any new criteria After discussion, City Council introduced an ordinance revision which would enact Option#2 for first reading. Ordinance 595 included with this report follows this option. Recommendation: The Planning Commission, by a unanimous vote, and the staff recommend adoption of Ordinance No. 595 as attached. • ;), ; VIN1/011 in,tLil,t" • Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director N:\DATA\USERS\PAMSSHARE\SPECPROZSP013.9/\DAYCARE.CC3 • ORDINANCE NO. 595 III CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE ADDING DAY CARE CENTERS AND GROUP NURSERIES AS A CONDTITONAL USE IN THE B-1, B-2,B-3,B-4,AND I-1 ZONING DISTRICTS; PLANNING CASE NO. SP-013-97 THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1: Section 1102.02, Subd. 23 and 24 are amended to read as follows: Subd. 23. Day Care Center- Group Nursery: A . • • • • ..•. 11. •• 1 .I... • •• V 11•• . • • • •• I • • •: • •• : ••. . facility for the care and supervision of more than ten (10) preschool and school age children during established business hours for periods of less than 24 hours per day, and which is licensed and approved by the State of Minnesota. Also includes preschools and nursery schools. Subd. 24. Day Care, Home: - • • •• •: • :• •• ; • • , . • • • .. . . • • • IIIIIL •. • .• .. • . •• • . ••'• . •.. n: .., • •. , ••. . The useofa residence for the care of ten (10) or fewer preschool and school age children during established business hours for less than 24 hours per day, and which is licensed and approved by the State of Minnesota. SECTION 2: Section 1102.02 is amended to add the following definition as a subdivision, placed in alphabetical order, and the remaining subdivisions in Section 1102.02 being renumbered accordingly. Subd. XX. Day Care, Grouo Family: The use of residence for the care of fourteen (14) or fewer preschool and school age children during established business hours for less than 24 hours per day, and which is licensed and approved by the State of Minnesota. SECTION 3. Section 1107.05 Subd. 2. is hereby amended to read as follows: Subd. 2. Day care center, group nursery; provided;that: a. No overnight facilities are provided for the children served. Children are delivered and removed daily. b. The front yard depth shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). c. Not less than forty(40) square feet of outside play space per child be provided and 0 that such space be suitably fenced and/or screened in accordance with conditions • Ordinance No. 595 April 14, 1997 • Page 2 as specified by the City Council. d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided in compliance with Chapter 1121 of this Title. e. Adequate off-street loading and service entrances are provided in compliance with Chapter 1122 of this Title. f. The site and related parking and service entrances shall be served by an arterial or collector street of sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic which will be generated. g. All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be in compliance with the Mounds View Sign Code. h. The distance between any outdoor play yard for a day care center or group nursery and the Highway 10 right-of-way line shall be a minimum of 200 feet, exce-t as provided in Section 1123.02 Subd.l.c. No day care center or group nursery shall be permitted where the distance from the property line for the day care center or group nursery to a premise requirinu. liquor license, as provided in Section 502 of the Municipal Code, or a license for an adult establishment, as provided in Section 513 of the Municipal Code, is five ._. hundred(500) feet or less, except that the 500 foot requirement shall not apply to- any liquor establishment receiving at least sixty percent of its annual gross saps = • revenue from the sale of food. SECTION 4. Section 1110.04 Subd. 7. is hereby amended to read as follows: Subd. 7. Day care center, group nursery; provided,that: a. No overnight facilities are provided for the children served. Children are delivered and removed daily. . b. The front yard depth shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). c. Not less than forty (40) square feet of outside play space per child be provided and that such space be suitably fenced and/or screened in accordance with conditions as specified by the City Council. d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided in compliance with Chapter 1121 of this Title. e. Adequate off-street loading and service entrances are provided in compliance with Chapter 1122 of this Title. f. The site and related parking and service entrances shall be served by an arterial dr. collector street of sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic which will be generated. • g. All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be in compliance with the Mounds View Sian Code. h. The distance between any outdoor play yard for a day care center or group nursery aad the Highway 10 right-of-way line shall be a minimum of 200 feet, except as Ordinance No. 595 • April 14, 1997 Page 3 provided in Section 1123.02 Subd.l.c. No day care center or group nursery shall be permitted where the distance from the property line for the day care center or group nursery to a premise requiring a liquor license, as provided in Section 502 of the Municipal Code, or a license for an adult establishment, as provided in Section 513 of the Municipal Code, is five hundred (500)feet or less, except that the 500 foot requirement shall not apply to any liquor establishment receiving at least sixty percent of its annual gross sales revenue from the sale of food. SECTION 5. Section 1112.04 (conditional uses in the B-1 District) is hereby amended to add Subd. 5 as follows: Subd. 5: Day care center, group nursery: provided that: a. No overnight facilities are provided for the children served. Children are delivered and removed daily. b. The front yard depth shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). • c. Not less than forty(40) square feet of outside play space per child be provided and that such space be suitably fenced and/or screened in accordance with conditions as specified by the City Council. d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided in compliance with Chapter 1121 of this Title. e. Adequate off-street loading and service entrances are provided in compliance with Chapter 1122 of this Title. f The site and related parking and service entrances shall be served by an arterial or collector street of sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic which will be generated. g All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be in compliance with the Mounds View Sign Code. h. The distance between any outdoor play yard for a day care center or group nursery and the Highway 10 right-of-way line shall be a minimum of 200 feet, except as provided in Section 1123.02 Subd.1.c. i. No day care center or group nursery shall be permitted where the distance from the property line for the day care center or group nursery to a premise requiring a liquor license, as provided in Section 502 of the Municipal Code. or a license for an adult establishment, as provided in Section 513 of the Municipal Code, is five hundred (500) feet or less, except that the 500 foot requirement shall not apply to any liquor establishment receiving at least sixty percent of its annual gross sales revenue from the sale of food. SECTION 6. Section 1113.04 (conditional uses in the B-2 District) is hereby amended to add Subd. 6 as follows: Ordinance No. 595 April 14, 1997411 Page 4 Subd. 6: Day care center, group nursery: provided that: a. No overnight facilities are provided for the children served. Children are delivered and removed daily. b. The front yard depth shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). c. Not less than fo 40 s.ware feet of outside •la s•ace .er child be R rovide that such space be suitably fenced and/or screened in accordance with conditions as specified by the City Council. d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided in compliance with Chapter 1121 of this Title. e. Adequate off-street loading and service entrances are provided in compliance with Chapter 1122 of this Title. f. The site and related •arkin• and service entrances shall be served b an arterial or collector street of sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic which will be generated. All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be in compliance with the Mounds View Sign Code. h. The distance between any outdoor play yard for a day care center of c 1.3111.71. • and the Hi• wa 10 ri• t-of-wa line shall be a minimum of 200 feet, except as provided in Section 1123.02 Subd.l.c. i. No da care center or t, ou• nurse shall be •ermitted where the distance from the property line for the day care center or group nursery to a premise requiring a liquor license, as provided in Section 502 of the Municipal Code, or a license for an adult establishment, as provided in Section 513 of the Municipal Code, is five hundred (500) feet or less, except that the 500 foot requirement shall not apply to any liquor establishment receiving at least sixty percent of its annual gross sales revenue from the sale of food. SECTION 7. Section 1114.04 (conditional uses in the B-3 District) is hereby amended to add Subd. 9 as follows: Subd. 9: Day care center, group nursery: provided that: a. No overnight facilities are provided for the children served. Children are delivered and removed daily. b. The front yard depth shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). c. Not less than forty(40) square feet of outside play space per child be provided and that such space be suitably fenced and/or screened in accordance with conditions as specified by the City Council. d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided in compliance with Chapter • 1121 of this Title. e. Adequate off-street loading and service entrances are provided in compliance with Ordinance No. 595 April 14, 1997 Page 5 Chapter 1122 of this Title. f The site and related parking and service entrances shall be served by an arterial or collector street of sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic which will be generated. All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be in compliance with the Mounds View Sign Code. h. The distance between any outdoor play yard for a day care center or group nursery and the Highway 10 right-of-way line shall be a minimum of 200 feet, except as provided in Section 1123.02 Subd.1.c. No day care center or group nursery shall be permitted where the distance from the property line for the day care center or group nursery to a premise requiring a liquor license, as provided in Section 502 of the Municipal Code, or a license for an adult establishment, as provided in Section 513 of the Municipal Code, is five hundred (500) feet or less, except that the 500 foot requirement shall not apply to any liquor establishment receiving at least sixty percent of its annual gross sales revenue from the sale of food. • SECTION 8. Section 1115.04 (conditional uses in the B-4 District) is hereby amended to add Subd. 6 as follows: Subd. 6: Day care center, group nursery: provided that: a. No overnight facilities are provided for the children served. Children are delivered and removed daily. b. The front yard depth shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). c. Not less than forty(40) square feet of outside play space per child be provided and that such space be suitably fenced and/or screened in accordance with conditions as specified by the City Council. d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided in compliance with Chapter 1121 of this Title. e. Adequate off-street loading and service entrances are provided in compliance with Chapter 1122 of this Title. f The site and related parking and service entrances shall be served by an arterial or collector street of sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic which will be generated. a All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be in compliance with the Mounds View Sign Code. h. The distance between any outdoor play yard for a day care center or group nursery and the Highway 10 right-of-way line shall be a minimum of 200 feet, except as provided in Section 1123.02 Subd.l.c. i_ No day care center or group nursery shall be permitted where the distance from the property line for the day care center or group nursery to a premise requiring a Ordinance No. 595 April 14, 1997 Page 6 li•uor license as •rovided in Section 502 of the Municisal Code ora license for an adult establishment, as provided in Section 513 of the Municipal Code, is five hundred (500)feet or less, except that the 500 foot requirement shall not apply to any liquor establishment receiving at least sixty percent of itsannual gross sales revenue from the sale of food. SECTION 9. Section 1116.04 (conditional uses in the I-1 District) is hereby amended to add Subd. 21 as follows: Subd. 21: Day care center, group nursery: provided that: a. No overnight facilities are provided for the children served. Chit m:3 ceiF_°ered and removed daily. b. The front yard depth shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). e. Not less than forty(40) square feet of outside play space per child beproyidedand that such space be suitably fenced and/or screened in accordance with conditions as specified by the City Council. d. Adequate off-street parking and access is provided in compliance withClia 1121 of this Title. e. Adequate off-street loading and service entrances are provided in compliance with Chapter 1122 of this Title. f. The site and related parking and service entrances shall be served by an arterial or collector street of sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic which will be generated. All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be in compliance with the Mounds View Sign Code. h. The distance between any outdoor play yard for a day care center or grow)nursery and the Highway 10 right-of-way line shall be a minimum of 200 feet, except aq provided in Section 1123.02 Subd.1.c. i. No day care center or goup nursery shall be permitted where the distance from the property line for the day care center or group nursery to a premise requiring a liquor license, as provided in Section 502 of the Municipal Code, or a license for an adult establishment, as provided in Section 513 of the Municipal Code, is five hundred (500) feet or less, except that the 500 foot requirement shall not apply to any liquor establishment receiving at least sixty percent of its annual Boss sales revenue from the sale of food. SECTION 10. Section 1123.02 Subd. 1 is hereby amended to read as follows: Subd. 1. Continuance of Use: • (a) General: Any structure or use lawfully existing prior to a revision to this Code or r Ordinance No. 595 • April 14, 1997 Page 7 a change in a zoning district designation which makes the structure or use nonconforming shall not be enlarged but may be continued at the size and in the manner of operation existing upon such date, except as hereinafter specified or subsequently amended. (b) Parking Areas for Non-Residential Uses, Allowed by Conditional Use Permit, in the R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 and R-5 Districts: Parking areas in existence as of the;Ate of enactment of this ordinance, and having setbacks which are non-conforming with respect to setback requirements stated in Section 1104.01 Subd. 4, may continue in use and may be resurfaced and restriped, and may be reconstnx;) replaced using setbacks which conform to the ordinance in effect at the time of original construction, except that, a parking lot being reconstructed or replaced shall be made conforming to the current setback requirements in effect at the time of reconstruction or replacement if feasible without reducing the required number of parking spaces. The feasibility of meeting the current setback requirements that be determined by the Director of Community Development. (c) Day Care Centers and Group Nurseries: Day care centers and group existence as of the date of the enactment of Ordinance 595, having.a play yard less than 200 feet from the Highway 10 right-of-way line, shall not be considered a non-conforming use, and any structure or play yard on the premises may be reconstructed, expanded or enlarged as long as the setback of the play yard from the II•hwa 10 ri• t-of-wa line is not made less b the reconstructio e_•gfsion or enlargement. SECTION 11. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance goes into effect upon adoption of the City Council and 30 days after its publication in the official City newspaper. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on March 24, 1997. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this 14th day of • April, 1997. Duane McCarty, Mayor 4110 AUEST: Charles Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator Ordinance No. 595 April 14, 1997 Page 8 (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Robert Long, City Attorney N:\DATA\USERS\DAMS\SHARD\SPECPROJ\.SP013.97\DAYCARE.FIN • • Item No. 1 I D Staff Report No.q 7--24 q 8 C Meeting Date: 4/14/97 • Type of Business: CB WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: 'Mayor and City Council From: Lynnette Morga Item Title/Subject: HAY Proposal ` Date of Report: April 10, 1997 As discussed at the previous worksession, Council expresses an interest in receiving additional information on the benefits of HAY versus PDI. Attached is information from PDI and HAY regarding methods of job evaluation. HAY is more defensible based on the benchmark being specific to the position. HAY allows for variables to be incorporated within the specific position creating a"truer"benchmark value and offers a range of flexibility based on position responsibilities. Using Labor Relations Associates in conjunction with HAY, future amendments or modification will be less expensive because Mounds View is a subscriber City. Based on conversations from the two organizations, HAY • and Labor Relations Associates is significantly more responsive to questions and concerns and has a more efficient response time. The total proposal is estimated at$3,350. Recommendation: Motion to authorize staff to convert to the HAY Job Evaluation System. • Minutes of the Economic Development Commission City of Mounds View • • Ramsey County, Minnesota Regular Meeting APPROVED November 21, 1996 City of Mounds View, Council Chambers 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 • 1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 7:40 a.m. by Vice Chairperson, Cindy Carlson. 2. Roll Call: Members present were as follows: Cindy Carlson, Rosemary Goff, Brian Sjoberg and Ron Schmidt. Members Dan Nelson, Delane Welsch and Bev Terhark and EDA Liaison Sue Hankner and Alternate'`.wino i'7;7; absent. Economic Development Coordinator Cathy Bennett was present. 3. Approval Of Minutes: • Motion/Second: Goff/Sjoberg moved approval of Minutes of September 26, 1996 and October 24, 1996 Regular Meetings and October 29, 1996 Special Meeting. Motion Carried 4 ayes 0 nays 4. Special Business No Special Business 5. EDC BUSINESS A. Update on Contract for Professional Services for the Study of Highway IQ Section with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. Director Bennett noted that she met with representatives of SRF Consulting Group, Inc. To establish a scope of services within the approved $25,000 budget. The contract, revised scope of services and time line as handed out to EDC members for review. Bennett mentioned the importance of EDC participation throughout this process and wanted to make a note of the proposed dates for meetings to discuss the progress of the study process. Motion/Second: Carlson/Schmidt moved to approve the contract for services with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. and the revised time line for the Highway 10, Section 9 Study. . Motion Carried 4 ayes 0 nays B. Discussion of Sample Tax Increment Financing Application/Guidelines for• Analysis of Tax Increment Assistance. Vice Chair Carlson suggested that the EDC take more time to review the . Application/Guideline form but that it would be worthwhile to bring the draft policy and deposit agreement back for approval without incorporating the Application/Guideline form at the December or January meeting. Director Bennett mentioned that if there was not going to be a December meeting if we could try and bring the information back at the January or February meeting. Discussion of Planning Commission and EDA's Comments Regarding EDC's Recommendations for Improved Communication Between the EDC and EDA. Director Bennett explained that this item was once again discussed at the Council since the Planning Commission also made comments regarding Communication between Commissions and the Council. It was decided that this would be a topic of discussion with the new Council at the goal setting retreat sometime in early 1997. 6. Reports From Chair, Commissioners and Staff: No Reports 7. Adjournment . • There being no further business before the Commission, this meeting of the Economic Development Commission adjourned at 9:25 a.m. Respectfully Submitted, CP. Director of E il•mic Development • i 1 Minutes of the Economic Development Commission City of Mounds View . Ramsey County, Minnesota Regular Meeting January 21, 1997 APPROvED . City of Mounds View, Council Chambers 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 6:45 p.m. by Chairperson, Dan Nelson. 2. Roll Call: Members present were as follows: Cindy Carlson, Rosemary Goff, Dan Nelson, Delane Welsch and Ron Schmidt. Members Brian Sjoberg and Bev Terhark were absent. EDA Liaison Duane McCarty, alternate Liaison Gary Quick and Dir.of Economic Development Cathy Bennett were present. 3. Approval Of Minutes: • No Minutes were distributed for Approval. i4. Special Business No Special Business 5. EDC BUSINESS A. Election of 1997 Chairperson and Vice Chairperson The Mounds View Municipal Code Chapter 408.07, Subdivision 1 entitled Economic Development Commission, Organization states that"at the first regular meeting of the year, the Commission shall appoint a chairperson from among its voting members and that this appointment shall be subject to Authority approval and shall consist of a one year term". Motion/Second: Goff/Schmidt moved to approve the reappointment of Dan Nelson as Chairperson and Cindy Carlson as Vice Chairperson for 1997. Motion Carried 5 ayes 0 nays B. Consideration of Resolution No. 97-EDC 16 Accepting 1997 Bylaws Director Bennett noted that according to the Mounds View Municipal Code Chapter 408 the EDC must review the bylaws on an annual basis. She suggested an amendment to Section VII, Subdivision B to change the EDA Clerk-Administrator to EDA Executive Director as there is no EDA Clerk-Administrator. In addition, there would need to be an amendment in regards to the adjournment of meetings according to Section VI if the EDC wishes to change the meeting time to the morning instead of the evenings. EDC members discussed the benefits of holding the meetings in the morning rather than the evenings. Motion/Second: Carlson/Welsch moved to approve Resolution No. 97-EDC16 Accepting the 1997 Bylaws as amended to reflect adjournment in the morning and change the EDA Clerk-Administrator to EDA Executive Director. Motion Carried S ayes 0 nays Consideration of Resolution No. 97-EDC17 Accepting the 1997 Calendar of ED_c Meetings Director Bennett presented Res. No. 97-EDC17 which states EDC regular meeting dates and time. Member Schmidt suggested that the February meeting be changed to the 20th as he will be out of town. Several other members noted that they also would not be able to make e 27th meeting as stated on the resolution. In addition, Bennett mentioned that an amendment would need to be made to reflect the morning meeting time. Motion/Second: Welsch/Goff moved to approve Resolution No. 97-EDC17 Establishing Calendar of Meetings for 1997 as amended. Motion Carried 5 ayes 0 nays • 6. Reports From Chair, Commissioners and Staff: Chairperson Nelson welcomed new EDA Liaison and Mayor Duane McCarty to the Commission and welcomed his participation. • Vice Chair Carlson suggested that the TIF Policy be brought forward again for consideration at the February regular meeting. 7. Adjournment There being no further business before the Commission, this meeting of the Economic Development Commission adjourned at 7:01 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Y " I of Director of Economic Development i • 1 Minutes of the Economic Development Commission City of.Mounds View • Ramsey County, Minnesota Regular MeetingAPPROVED . February 20, 1997 City of Mounds View, Council Chambers • 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 8:55 a.m. by Vice Chairperson, Cindy Carlson. 2. Roll Call: Members present were as follows: Cindy Carlson, Rosemary Goff, Bev Terhark and Delane Welsch. Members Brian Sjoberg, Ron Schmidt and Dan Nelson were absent. EDA Liaison Duane McCarty and alternate Liaison Gary Quick were absent. Dir.of Economic Development Cathy Bennett was present. 3. Approval Of Minutes: • Minutes from November 21, 1996 and January 23, 1997 were tabled until next meeting. III4. Special Business Special Business was discussed prior to when the meeting was called to order. SRF Consulting gave an overview of the work that has been completed to date (base data and inventory collected, interviews completed, market overview and development of preliminary vision, goals and objectives). The final presentation of the recommended plan was scheduled for April 7, 1997 during the Council/EDA regular monthly work session. Patrick Peters handed out an overview of the ideas collected at the Design Workshop and he reviewed the draft goals/objectives. Mr. Peters requested any changes to the goals/objectives as soon as possible so that they may be incorporated into the final document. Three land use alternatives were presented. Alternative A includes a minimal redevelopment of the parcel with limited combing of parcels. Alternative B provides for more partnership opportunities and includes pedestrian pathways along Highway 10 on the north side between County Road I and Silver Lake Road. Alternative C combines most of the vacant parcels into one or two developments for maximum land usage and includes the proposal for sidewalks on the North and South sides of Highway 10 with a trail connection from County Road I to Silver Lake Road and around the wetland. In addition, Alternative C brings the commercial uses up to front Highway 10 for better visibility. A draft of the final recommendation will be available for EDC review prior to the presentation to the EDA. • 5. EDC BUSINESS A. Consideration of Tax Increment Assistance Request • Dir of ED Bennett described the request for$150,000 of tax increment funds to enable the building of a 25,000 sq.ft. office/warehouse facility for a local company called Zep Manufacturing. Bennett explained the staff analysis and reviewed the need for tax increment. Bennett explained the financial analysis and payback of TIF and would propose the recommendation of 50% of the increment for 6 years with a maximum payout of$150,000 net present value dollars. Motion/Second: Welsch/Carlson moved to approve the recommendation of 50%of the increment for 6 years up to $150,000 of tax increment assistance for Zep Manufacturing Motion Carried 4 ayes 0 nays B. Consideration of Tax Increment Policy and Deposit Agreement Vice Chair Carlson noted that the EDC has spent considerable time in putting together the TIF Policy and Deposit Agreement and that even though the Guidelines for evaluating a request are not complete that the Policy and Deposit Agreement should be considered for approval at this time. Motion/Second: Welsch/Goff moved to recommend the approval of the Tax Increment Policy and Deposit Agreement as presented and to direct staff to bring these items to the EDA for final approval. Motion Carried 4 ayes 0 nays C. Consideration of EDC Work Plan for 1997 Motion/Second: Goff/Carlson moved to table and bring to the next meeting for consideration due to a lack of time to review Motion Carried 4 ayes 0 nays 6. Reports From Chair, Commissioners and Staff: 7. Adjournment There being no further business before the Commission, this meeting of the Economic Development Commission adjourned at 9:10 a.m. Respectfully Submitted, Director . 'conomic Development •1 rt{ .4 Minutes of the Economic Development Commission City of Mounds View aRamsey County, Minnesota Regular Meeting AppRovED March 27, 1997 City of Mounds View, Council Chambers 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 7:38 a.m. by Vice Chairperson, Cindy Carlson. 2. Roll Call: Members present were as follows: Cindy Carlson, Rosemary Goff, Ron Schmidt, and Brian Sjoberg. Members absent were Dan Nelson, Bev Tarhark and Delane Welsch. Dir. of Economic Development Cathy Bennett and EDA Liaison Duane McCarty were present. Alternate Liaison Gary Quick was absent 3. Approval Of Minutes: 110 Minutes from November 21, 1996,January 23, 1997 and February 20, 1997 were approved on a 4-0 vote with a motion from Rosemary Goff and second from Ron Schmidt. 4. Special Business No Special Business. 5. EDC BUSINESS A. Consideration of Economic Impact of the Proposal for a 16-Screen Movie Theater and 3 Office Buildings on Highway 10 at H2 and Long Lake Road Director of ED Bennett reviewed the staff report that was prepared by CD Director Pam Sheldon for the Planning Commission which described the proposal and issues related to the development of a 16-Screen Movie Theater and 3 Office Buildings on the vacant land bounded by Highway 10, County Road H2 and Long Lake Road. Bennett particularly pointed out the economic affects of the development such as proposed increase in the tax base of approximately $600,000 annually, direct increase in jobs of 125 and the ripple effect creating an additional 100 jobs. In addition, Bennett discussed the proposed use as noted in the Highway 10 Redevelopment Plan for the area. Commissioner Carlson noted that even though the Plan proposed corporate headquarter office or town home development that this use could still be in line with the plan as long as it take into consideration the impact on the wetlands and neighborhood. Bennett introduced Wendell Smith, local broker for the project who gave a brief overview of the project. Mr. Smith has talked with several area businesses who are in support of the project because they feel this will give a reason for people to come to the area and spend money at their businesses. In addition, the NB/MV Chamber of Commerce will be providing a letter of support to the City Council for the project. Mr. • Smith said that if approvals are received that they are planning on completing the site work before winter with opening in the summer of 1998. The one area that is still being evaluated is the traffic circulation. Mr. Smith said that MnDot is not willing to provide a signalized intersection for the project and that exits/entrances were deleted from H2 to accommodate the neighborhood. This just leaves right in/right out access off Highway 10. It is doable for the success of the project but he would like to work in conjunction with the City to encourage MnDot to reconsider their decision. This decision was done at the staff level and there may be some leeway with City support to discuss the project with Directors at MnDot. Mr. Smith did mention his concern that the planning Commission would make the recommendation for a rezoning based upon being able to obtain a stop light. He said the project would still be successful without the stop light and did not want this issue to hold up the process for the project. Mr. Smith wanted to commend Pam Sheldon and her staff for all the work and research done on the project. Motion/Second: Carlson/Sjoberg moved the favorable support for the 16-Screen, office building development for Section 7 of the Highway 10 Redevelopment Plan. Motion Carried 4 ayes 0 nays Motion/Second: Goff'Sjoberg further moved that the City work with Anthony Properties to encourage MnDot to approve a signalized intersection for the project but would not recommend that approval for the rezoning be contingent upon gaining this approval from MnDot. 41111 Motion Carried 4 ayes 0 nays Commissioner Schmidt requested information regarding the office developments. He wondered if there was written analysis to support the need for 10,000 - 12,000 sq.ft. office uses in the area. Since Mr. Smith had already left, Schmidt requested staff to provide this information at the next meeting. In addition, Commissioner Sjoberg requested updated vacancies from the Business Park and retail centers. B. Discussion of the Recommended Concept Plan for the Redevelopment of Highway 10, Section 9 as proposed by SRF Consulting Group, Inc. Bennett noted that SRF had prepared a draft of the final report for EDC's review prior to the final presentation to the EDA and community at the April 7, 1997 work session. The EDC briefly discussed the key components of the plan and requested that further emphasis be placed on the importance of design and coordinated development in the plan. Bennett will pass these comments along to SRF to be incorporated into the final plan. Bennett also noted that the Planning Commission was reviewing a development for the vacant land on the South side of Highway 10. This plan includes a gas/conveniece store/car wash, restaurant, senior housing and office space. In addition, Bennett said that she has met with the developers of the Silver Lake Pointe Senior Housing and they are interested in the rehab of Pleasant Wood Apts along with the development of 284110 new rental town homes on the North side of 10 in the study area. The developers will be making a presentation to the EDA at the work session on April 7, 1997. C. Consideration of EDC Work Plan for 1997 The EDC reviewed the proposed 1997 work plan as proposed by staff and with some additions and changes from commissioners prior to the meeting. Motion/Second: Schmidt/Sjoberg moved to approve the 1997 work plan. Motion Carried 4 ayes 0 nays D. Consideration of Appointing a Designee to Participate in the University of Minnesota Metropolitan Livable Communities Design Center Course. The City of Mounds View has been approached by the UofM to be one of the communities to participate in a design course specifically dealing with first ring suburb planning and development issues. Bennett said that Mounds View's focus would be the Highway 10 Corridor. This is a six week class which is being offered to the City free of charge. Two of the sessions will focus specifically on Mounds View and will be held at City Hall. The other classes will be held at the Uof M. Commissioner Ron Schmidt volunteered to be the designee for the EDC. Bennett said that she would also ask Commissioner Welsch if he would be interested in acting as an alternate. 6. Reports From Chair, Commissioners and Staff: EDA Liaison Duane McCarty noted that the Council will be reviewing the discrepancey between the City Code and the Charter regarding the amount of votes needed to pass an ordinance. The Charter states that only a 3/5th vote is needed and the Code states that a 4/5th vote is needed. Currently, the Charter provision overrides the City Code. These types of discrepancies can have a big impact on the way decisions are made at the Council level. 7. Adjournment There being no further business before the Commission, this meeting of the Economic Development Commission adjourned at 9:14 a.m. Respectfully Submitted, r ( I Director of cohomic Development 1 zit 7 S STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RESOLUTION# 5109 RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING MAY 6, 1997 AS "ARBOR DAY" WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View has been recognized for fifteen consecutive years as Tree City USA by the National Arbor Day Foundation for its efforts in urban forestry; and WHEREAS, trees in our City beautify our surroundings, shade our parks and residences, increase property values and enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and WHEREAS, students of Pinewood and Sunnyside Schools will be planting trees in adjacent grounds and parks, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that May 6, 1997 be Arbor Day in Mounds View and public-spirited and foresighted citizens be called upon to assist in the planting of trees now for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. '` Adopted this 28th day of April, 1997. (SEAL) Duane McCarty, Mayor ATTEST: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator • • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS AGAINST CITY FUNDS WHEREAS, the City Council of Mounds View, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 412.241, has full authority over the financial affairs of the City and; WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the claim numbers: 55255 through 55357 in the amount of$ 165,937.76 54927 through 54948 in the amount of$ 133,844.45 through in the amount of$ • through in the amount of$ TOTAL AMOUNT OF CLAIMS PRESENTED $299,782.21 and has found said claims to be just and correct; It was moved that the City Council of Mounds View hereby approved the attached list of claims dated 04/29/97 by the vote ayes nayes Mayor Clerk-Administrator • PAGE 1 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER AP-C10-01 MOUNDS VIEW CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE D N��pVENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT 60207 LARSEN, LAURA 55255 04/29/97 04/29/97 44.45 VENDOR TOTAL 44.45 61136 YENISH, DONNA 55256 04/29/9/ 04/29/97 9.00 VENDOR TOTAL 9.00 61228 PETERSON, DOROTHY 55257 04/29/97 04/29/97 100.00 VENDOR TOTAL 100.00 74100 EDGETT , IRJA 55258 04/29/97 04/29y97 49.00 VENDOR TOTAL 49.00 74102 SHOOP, LAURIE 55259 04/29/97 04/29/97 7.78 VENDOR TOTAL 7.78 74200 ERICKSON, MILDRED 55260 04/29/97 04y29/97 154.00 VENDOR TOTAL 154.00 74201 FORSYTH, DANIEL 55261 04/29/97 04/29/97 100.00 VENDOR TOTAL 100.00 74202 1HOMSEN, MARILYN 55262 04/29y97 04/29/97 100.00 VENDOR TOTAL 100.00 4I, 74203 KEPLER , KEVIN 55263 04/29/97 04/29/97 28.00 VENDOR TOTAL 28.00 74204 KERZMAN, CHERYLL 55264 04/29y97 04/29/97 26.00 VENDOR TOTAL 26.00 74206 JOHNSON, GEORGE 55265 04/29y97 04/29y97 11 .00 VENDOR TOTAL 11 .00 A2700 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR 55266 04/29/97 03/13/97 60.02 VENDOR TOTAL 60.O2 A4985 AMER LINEN & APPAREL * 55267 04/29/97 M96040415 04/15/97 199.53 VENDOR TOTAL 199.53 A5123 AMERICAN OFFICE PRODU* 55268 04y29/97 307861 04/11/97 3.71 VENDOR ! OTAL 3.71 A5161 AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS* 55269 04/29/97 603167 03/17y97 44.75 VENDOR TOTAL 44.75 A5220 AMERIDATA 55270 04/29/97 989643 04y02/97 3679.58 VENDOR TOTAL 3679.58 A ANOKA-HENNEPIN TECH C* 55271 04/29y97 04/29y97 75.00 ��� VENDOR TOTAL 75.00 ^ . PAGE 2 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER AP-C10-01 MOUNDS VIEW V CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE D llikVENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT A8350 AUG1E'S, INC. 55272 04/29/9/ 12765 04/07/97 82.20 VENDOR TOTAL 82.20 B0661 BATTERIES PLUS 55273 04/29/97 D18180 04/09y97 78.34 VENDOR TOTAL 78.34 B2005 BEISSWENGER'S 55274 04/29/97 260437 04/11 /97 8.53 55274 04/29/97 259027 04/08/97 13. 10 55274 04/29/97 256829 04/04/9/ 33. 19 55274 04/29/97 256846 04/04/97 21 .80 55274 04y29/97 258399 04/07y97 4.23 55274 04/29/97 258885 04/08/97 26.06 55274 04/29/97 258398 04/07y97 8.51- 55274 04/29/97 258380 04/07/97 12.43 55274 04/29/97 249719 03/20/97 4.98 55274 04/29/97 260538 04/11/97 11 .37 55274 04/29/97 249660 03/20/97 13.58 55274 04/29/97 249678 03/20/97 40.50 55274 04/29/97 233106 02/07/97 2.65 55274 04/29y97 255410 04/02/97 7. 18 55274 04/29y97 250150 03/21/97 18.62 55274 04/29y97 258971 04/08/97 7.37 ���� VENDOR TOTAL 217.08 �� B2050 BEST BUY CO. , INC. 55277 04y29/97 0110111587 04/04/97 31 .59 55277 04/29/97 11011 1979 04/11/97 8. 19 55277 04/29/97 0110111476 04y02y97 127. 78 55277 04/29/97 8705650 04/21/97 5.31 VENDOR TOTAL 172.87 82070 BEST LOCKING SYSTEMS 55278 04/29/97 047181 04/09y97 127.60 VENDOR TOTAL 127.60 B6820 BRENNAN, TIM 55279 04y29/97 04/29/97 66.52 VENDOR TOTAL 66.52 B6880 BRIGGS & MORGAN 55280 04y29/97 03/31/97 2907.33 VENDOR TOTAL 290/ .33 B7070 BRW INC. 55281 04/29/97 254-00281 04/04/97 14173.98 VENDOR TOTAL 14173.98 B7180 BUMPER TO BUMPER 55282 04/29/97 053691 04/07y97 40.36 55282 04/29/97 D53064 03/31 /97 23.21- 55282 04/29/97 D53804 04/08/97 2.00 VENDOR TOTAL 19. 15 C CARPETCLEAN 55283 04/29y97 C-15726 04y03/97 591 .08 ��� VENDOR TOTAL 591 '08 1 . PAGE 3 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER AP-C10-01 MOUNDS VIEW VE CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE D N� VVENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT C0590 CAR-X 55284 04/29/97 SP03431 04/08/97 86.05 VENDOR TOTAL 86.05 C0635 CARLSON TRACTOR & EQU* 55285 04/29/9/ 198173 04/09y97 11 .23 VENDOR TOTAL 11 .23 C2090 CENTRAL SiORES 55286 04y29/97 727470 04/08/97 61 .53 VENDOR TOTAL 61 .53 C301 / CHAMPLAIN PLANNING PR* 55287 04/29/97 04y29y97 85.00 VENDOR TOTAL 85.00 C5841 COMMUNITY PARTNERS IN* 55288 04/29/97 04/01y97 1715.90 VENDOR TOTAL 1715.90 C5996 COPY EQUIPMENT , INC 55289 04/29y97 0051286 04/09/97 22.01 VENDOR TOTAL 22.01 C6000 COPY SALES, INC. 55290 04/29/97 053728 04/10y97 913.93 55290 04/29y97 053840 04/16y97 29. /9 55290 04y29/97 053568 04/03y97 188.69 VENDOR TOTAL 1132.41 • C6010 CORPORATE EXPRESS 55291 04y29/97 16824050 04/15/97 35.21 VENDOR TOTAL 35.21 C6025 COTTENS INC 55292 04/29y97 208196 04/11/97 26.61 55292 04/29/97 209105 04/17/97 29.44 VENDOR TOTAL 56.05 D0050 DCA, INC. 55293 04/29y97 91161 03/31/97 158. 10 VENDOR TOTAL 158. 10 D0461 DAHLIN, MARION 55294 04/29/97 04/29/97 27.O0 VENDOR TOTAL 27.00 D0500 DAKOTA FENCE 55295 04/29/97 04/29/97 5. 00 VENDOR TOTAL 5.00 D0696 DAVID - GEOFFREY & AS* 55296 04/29/97 0693676 04/08/97 216.20 55296 04/29y97 0689776 04/02/97 656.20 VENDOR TOTAL 872.40 E0315 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE 55297 04/29/97 136652 04/15/97 184.75 VENDOR TOTAL 184.75 E9075 EVERGREEN LAND SERVIC* 55298 04/29y97 6903 04/02/97 410.40 ill VENDOR TOTAL 410.40 PAGE 4 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER AP-C10-01 MOUNDS VIEW CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE C NMNVVENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT F1925 FEDORS MARKET 55299 04/29/97 04/02/97 18.06 55299 04/29y97 04/22/97 15.54 VENDOR TOTAL 33.60 F2000 FEED-RITE CONTROLS IN* 55300 04/29/97 10435 04/03/97 600.80 55300 04/29/97 10677 04/04y97 1113.30 VENDOR TOTAL 1714. 10 F3800 FIVE STAR CONTRACTING* 55301 04/29/97 04/11/97 8030. 10 VENDOR TOTAL 8030. 10 F6895 FRIENDLY CHEVROLET GE* 55302 04/29/97 101889 03y25/9/ 46.22 VENDOR TOTAL 46.22 00150 G T E DIRECTORIES COR* 55303 04/29/97 04/03/97 13.57 VENDOR TOTAL 13.57 05835 GOODHUE COUNTY NATION* 55304 04/29/97 04/12/97 257 .08 VENDOR TOTAL 257.08 05880 GOPHER STATE ONE-CA! L* 55305 04/29y97 7030444 03/31y97 19.00 VENDOR TOTAL 49.00 H6AI�� HUGHES & COSTELLO 5�306 04/29/97 04/07/97 3000.00 �' VENDOR TOTAL 3000.00 10021 INTERNET 55307 04/29/97 04/29y97 19.99 VENDOR TOTAL 19.99 10036 I S D #621 55308 04/29/9/ 04/10/97 4076. 13 VENDOR TOTA! 4076. 13 I0075 I C M A 55309 04/29/97 04y29/97 VENDOR TOTAL 86.95 15105 IMAGE DESIGN 55310 04/29/97 51508 03/31/97 1722.75 VENDOR TOTAL 1722.75 15500 INT'L CONF . OF BLDG. * 55311 04/29/97 97170241 03/26/97 195.00 VENDOR TOTAL 195.00 15535 INSTY-PRINTS 55312 04/29/97 12060 03/2//97 32.48 VENDOR TOTAL 32.48 K1000 KENNEDY & GRAVEN 55313 04/29/97 14660 03/07/97 3914.56 55313 04/29/97 14659 03y07y97 97 .50 55313 04/29/97 14658 03/07/97 122.21 55313 04/29/97 15134 04/08/97 207.50 410 55313 04y29/97 15135 VENDOR 0 /0TA8L/9/ 1610.73 TO5963. 10 PAGE 5 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER AP-C10-01 MOUNDS VIEW VE CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE D N���VENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT L0254 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES I* 55314 04/29y97 04/01/97 8.00 VENDOR TOTAL 8.00 M0330 MAC QUEEN EQUIPMENT I* 55315 04/29/97 29705148 04/15/97 675.21 VENDOR TOTAL 675.21 110760 MATCO TOOLS 55316 04y29/97 55388 04y10/97 90. 10 VENDOR TOTAL 90. 10 M2075 MENARDS 55317 04y29/97 24061 04/09/97 105.89 55317 04/29y97 24063 04/09y97 36. 17 55317 04/29/97 23761 03/25/97 26. 12 VENDOR TOTAL 168. 18 M2170 METRO. COUNCIL ENVIRO* 55318 04/29/97 51320597 04/01/97 60132.00 VENDOR TOTAL 60132.00 M3444 MIDWEST COCA-COLA BOT* 55319 04/29/97 09590323 04/15/97 664.40 55319 04/29/97 09552661 04/10/97 261 .35 55319 04/29/97 00185855 04/01/97 14.91 VENDOR TOTAL 940.66 M3411M3���� MIDWEST RADIA | OR 55320 04/29/97 23-07097 04/08/97 78.48 MIDWEST 04/29/97 23-07108 04/08/97 23.43- VENDOR TOTAL 55.05 M3990 MINNESOiA DEPARTMENT * 55321 04/29/97 04/17/97 23.00 VENDOR TOTAL 23.00 M4260 MINN FESTIVALS & EVEN* 55322 04/29/97 04y09/97 25.00 VENDOR TOTAL 25.00 M5175 MINNESOTA UC FUND 55323 04/29/97 04/17/97 7.99 VENDOR TOTAL 7.99 M6085 MOUNDS VIEW 66 55324 04/29y97 090998 04/29/97 100.00 VENDOR TOTAL 100.00 N2045 NELSON, ROBERT O 55325 04/29y97 04/29y97 28.00 VENDOR TOTAL 28.00 N2900 NIKE INC 55326 04/29/97 23469164 02/14/97 42.83 55326 04y?9/97 23844399 03/10/97 442.27 55326 04/29/97 24056037 03/25/97 102. 15 55326 04/29/97 23539378 02/19y97 628.50 55326 04/29/97 23880352 03y13/97 166.34 VENDOR TOTAL 1382.09 N3�N�� NORTH SUBURBAN CABLE * 55327 04y29/97 03/04/97 15188.74 PAGE 6 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CliECK REGISTER AP-C10-01 MOUNDS VIEW VECHEcK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE D @�N� VENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT VENDOR TOTAL 15188.74 N4200 NORTHERN STATES POWER* 55328 04/29y97 04/29/97 4028.83 VENDOR TOTAL 4028.83 N4222 NORTHLAND SCHOOL BUS * 55329 04/29/97 084131 04y04/97 25.30 VENDOR TOTAL 25.30 P2120 PERSONNEL DECISIONS, * 55330 04y29/97 0I102831 04y04/97 11 .0O VENDOR TOTAL 11 .00 ' P2200 PHILLIPS 66 COMPANY 55331 04/29/97 04/09y97 1787.88 VENDOR TOTAL 1787.88 P5915 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE , * 55332 04/29/97 725069 04/09/97 15.00 VENDOR TOTAL 15.00 R0762 RAMSEY COUNTY PUBLIC * 55333 04y29/97 04/29/97 92.00 VENDOR TOTAL 92.00 R0866 RAMSEY COUNTY 55334 04y29/97 659 01/21/97 235.31 VENDOR TOTAL 235.31 0 S01�N��� SAFETY KLEEN CORP 55335 04/29/9/ 953881 04/19y9/ 123.27 � VENDOR TOTAL 123.27 S0676 ST PAUL, CITY OF 55336 04/29/97 047769 04/14/97 80.00 55336 04/29/97 047690 04/09/97 70.92 55336 04/29/97 047667 04/09/97 1808.37 VENDOR TOTAL 1959.29 83191 SHELDON, PAMELA 55337 04/29y97 04/29/97 83.99 VENDOR TOTAL 83.99 83225 SHORT ELLIOTT & HENDR* 55338 04/29/97 39781 03/31/9/ 360. 19 55338 04/29/97 39780 03/31/97 1175.77 VENDOR TOTAL 1535.96 S3825 STATE OF MINNESOTA - * 55339 04y29/97 MN06205007J 04/03/97 510.00 55339 04/29/97 MN062050M7J 041'03/97 270.00 VENDOR TOTAL 780.00 S5605 SNYDER'S DRUG STORES,* 55340 04/29/97 5044-000035 04/15/97 6.81 55340 04/29/97 5044-000013 04/21/97 46.41 55340 04y29y97 5044-000046 04/10/97 13.07 VENDOR TOTAL 66.29 86250 SPRING LAKE PARK FIRE* 55341 04/29/97 04/29/97 12559.00 55341 04/29/97 04/03/97 492.50 ��� VENDOR TOTAL 13051 .50 . PAGE 7 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER AP-C10-01 MOUNDS VIEW VEldIF CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE D NW VENDOR. NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT 36300 SPRING LAKE PARK LUMB* 55342 04/29/97 162175 03/31/97 53.25 55342 04/29/97 164517 03/01y97 53.25 VENDOR TOTAL 106.50 86350 SRF CONSULTING GROUP,* 55343 04/29/97 2600-2 03/31 /97 1995.28 55343 04/29/97 2551-4 03/31/9/ 2861 .05 VENDOR TOTAL 4856.33 86500 A.D.STARR 55344 04/29/97 9r46 01/31/97 223.50 VENDOR TOTAL 223.50 87400 STREICHER'S PROF. POL* 55345 04/29/97 IN.79192. 1 03y17/97 80.28 VENDOR TOTAL 80.28 38025 SUBURBAN TENT & AWNIN* 55346 04/29/9/ 4662 04/10/97 106.50 VENDOR TOTAL 106.50 39600 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES 8* 55347 04/29/97 704151814 04/15/97 328.06 55347 04/29/97 7040817/3 04/08/97 256.09 55347 04/29/97 7041 /0124 04/17/97 58.52 VENDOR TOTAL 642.67 T54��� TOLL GAS & WELDING SU* 55348 04/29/97 553056 03y31/97 5.27 �� 55348 04/29/9/ 111134 03/31/97 110.64 • VENDOR TOTAL 115.91 U0400 U S WEST 55349 04y29/97 04/29/97 1955.50 VENDOR TOTAL 1955.50 U0401 U S WEST COMMUNICAT5350 04y29/97 04/29/97 41 .54 VENDOR TOTAL 41 .54 U6000 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE* 55351 04y29/9/ 740080482 01y09/97 34.84 55351 04y29/97 740081409 04/16/97 26.82 55351 04y29/97 740080484 04/09y97 24.45 55351 04/29/97 740080483 04/09y97 47.90 55351 04/29/97 7400804/4 04/09/97 141 .63 55351 04/29y97 740081402 04/16/97 208.88 55351 04/29y97 740076707 03/12/97 46.40 VENDOR TOTAL 530.92 V2086 VICTORIA BERGH CREATI* 55353 04/29/97 2045 04/11 /97 84.00 VENDOR TOTAL 84.00 W0700 WASTE MANAGEMENT - BL* 55354 04/29/97 899-848049 01/24/97 766. 16 VENDOR TOTAL 766. 16 W WODNICK, CRAIG 55355 04/29/97 08255 04y14/97 200.00 410 VENDOR TOTAL 200.00 PAGE 8 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER AP-C10-01 MOUNDS VIEW VE CHECK CHECK INVOICE IN�OICE N�N� VENDOR NAME NUMBER DA / � INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT W8000 1,‘11:::$1 IN MAGAZINE 55356 04/29/97 04y29/97 24.00 VENDOR TOTAL 24 .00 Z4600 ZIEGLER INC 55357 04/29/97 SW140001210 04/11/97 353.23 VENDOR TOTAL 353.23 GRAND TOTAL 16593/ .76 • PAGE 1 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PRE-PAID CHECK REGIST AP-C10-O2 MOUNDS VIEW V CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE ��N� VENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT W1919 WESTERN BANK 54927 04/10/97 04/10y97 3142.82 54927 04y10/97 04/10/97 867.92 5492/ 04/10/97 04/10/97 71430.72 54927 04y10/97 04y10y97 11552.35 VENDOR TOTAL 86993.81 U6500 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE 54928 04/10/97 04/10/97 742.35 VENDOR TOTAL 742.35 H0888 HEALTHPARTNERS 54929 04/10y97 04/10/97 611 .64 VENDOR TOTAL 611 .64 10075 I C M A 54930 04/10/97 04/10/97 116.54 VENDOR TOTAL 116.54 K1000 KENNEDY & GRAVEN 54932 04/14y97 04/14/97 6432.44 VENDOR TOTAL 6432 .44 P7900 PUB EMPLOYEES RETIREM* 54932 04/14/97 04/14/9/ 5600.83 VENDOR TOTAL 5600.83 K4500 KINNEY , THOMAS 54933 04/14/97 04/14/97 33.40 VENDOR TOTAL 33.40 U0055 U.S. ARBITRATION & ME* 54935 04/14/9/ 04/14/97 150.00 VENDOR TOTAL 150.00 N3694 NORTH SUBURBAN CABLE * 54936 04/14/97 04/14/97 15188.74 VENDOR TOTAL 15188. /4 W0449 WAI CONTINUUM 54937 04/14y9/ 4355 01/16y97 2562.00 54937 04/14/97 4388 02/16/97 1392.04 54937 04/14/97 4429 03/16/ 7 35. 10 54937 04/14/97 4361 01/16/97 8316.20 54937 04/14/97 4393 02/16/9/ 20.20 VENDOR TOTAL 12325.54 10075 I C M A 54938 04/14/97 04/14/97 84 .95 VENDOR TOTAL 84.95 M4999 MINNESOTA STATE TREAS* 54939 04/16y97 04/16/97 61 .96 VENDOR TOTAL 61 .96 N1200 NORTHERN STATES POWER* 54940 04/16/97 04/16/9/ 4561 . 16 VENDOR TOTAL 4561 . 16 E4437 ELAN FINANCIAL SERVIC* 54941 04/16/97 04/16/97 32.33 VENDOR TOTAL 32.33 74411 BATTMER, JOHN A 54942 04/17/97 04/17/97 23.42 . ' PAGE 2 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PRE-PAID CHECK REGIST AP-C10-02 MOUNDS VIEW V CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE [ NM�� VENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT VENDOR TOTAL 23.42 S0800 SAINT PAUL PIONEER PR* 54943 04/17/97 04/17/97 41 .25 VENDOR TOTAL 41 .25 M4200 MINNESOTA DEPT REV* 54944 04/18/97 04/18/97 368.00 VLNDOR TOTAL 368.00 M5779 MONTGOMERY WARDS 54945 04/18y97 04y18/97 191 .69 VENDOR TOTAL 191 .69 N4200 NORTHERN STATES POWER* 54946 04y21y97 04/21/97 206.80 VENDOR TOTAL 206.80 T0636 TARGET CENTER 5494/ 04/21/97 04/21/97 55.00 VENDOR TOTAL 55.00 H0575 HANGGI , WILLIAM 54948 04/21/97 04/21 /97 22.60 VENDOR TOTAL 22.60 GRAND TOTAL 133844.45 ���� � n-7 '7 / • Fire Department Memorandum To: Mayor McCarty From: Nyle Zikmund, Fire Chief Date: April 23, 1997 Re: Follow Up on MAC Truck Agreement Please accept the following information as follow up to your questions and concerns raised at the Monday night workshop. 1. We have had some type of agreement with MAC since 1972 and have been responding as such. We experience an average of 3 calls a year onto the property with a prolonged (4 or more hours) incident about once every two years. 2. Engine 11, which is housed at Station Five is due for replacement in 1998 and was on the capital 4, budget for funding with $75,000 to be appropriated this year to pay for the chassis and the remainder to be appropriated in 1998. Mounds View's budget share would have been about $60,000 for the entire project. 3. MAC may elect to put a super foam system on the truck raising the cost to $320,000. If we were to purchase the truck it would be closer to $300,000. In either scenario, the fire truck becomes the property of the cities as defined under your Joint Powers Agreement. 4. Working with Finance Director Kessel I came up with the following figures. The $1,000 per month we are currently receiving would have a present day value of$115,000 over the fifteen year period during which we will provide protection in exchange for the truck. To pay off the truck in the same fifteen year period on a monthly basis would require a $2,600 monthly payment for a total of$468,000. All numbers assume a 6.5% interest rate. 5. With respect to the depreciation concern I talked with Bruce and our department accountant. The private sector does depreciate capital good's as allowed by the IRS to cover the cost of doing business. The public sector typically does not depreciate equipment and buildings, rather; a capital improvement plan is implemented to address the needs. I hope this addresses your concerns and should you have any further concerns, please do not hesitate to call if I can be of assistance. • Exhibit B Q� �� ( � Letter of Understanding • Background: The Spring Lake Park Fire Department, Inc. is a Non-Profit Corporation that contracts for fire services with various political subdivisions. The Metropolitan Airports Commission [MAC] is a political subdivision that operates the Anoka County/Blaine Airport located geographically within the City of Blaine. MAC has agreed to transfer a first line engine known as the "fire truck", not to exceed $320,000.00 in value to the City of Blaine in exchange for fire protection services. Under this agreement the City of Blaine is authorized to contract for the fire protection services to be provided to MAC. The term of the agreement between the City of Blaine and the Metropolitan Airports Commission is 15 years. Purpose: To convey the asset of the "fire truck" received by Blaine into joint ownership under the "Joint Powers Agreement for Fire Protection Services at Anoka County/Blaine Airport" which runs from January 1, 1997 to December 31, 2011 to the terms and conditions of the Joint Powers Agreement For The Provision of Fire Protection Services dated the 11th day of December, 1990 between the cities of Blaine, Mounds View, and Spring Lake Park.. Transfer: The City of Blaine agrees, upon receipt and delivery of the "fire truck", to transfer the asset known as the "fire truck" to the joint ownership of Spring Lake Park, Blaine and Mounds View under the agreements and conditions set forth in the Joint Powers Agreement For the Provision of Fire Protection Services dated the 1 lth day of December, 1990 between the Cities of Spring Lake Park, Blaine, and Mounds View. • City of Blaine, Minnesota Dated: , 1997 By: Its Mayor Pursuant to the authority granted by Blaine Resolution No. By: adopted the day of Its City Manager , 1997 City of Spring Lake Park, Minnesota By: Its Mayor Dated: , 1997 By: Pursuant to the authority granted Its City Clerk - Administrator by Spring Lake Park Resolution No. adopted on the_ day of , 1997 City of Mounds View, Minnesota By: • Its Mayor Dated: , 1997 By: Pursuant to the authority granted Its City Clerk- Administrator by Mounds View Resolution No. adopted on the day of , 1997 • • Item No. Staff Report No.97--� Z� Meeting Date: April 28, 1997 • Type of Business: C.A. WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Resolution No. 5079, Approving Old Highway 8 Reconstruction Bid Award Date of Report: April 23, 1997 At the January 27, 1997 Council meeting no action was taken on Resolution No. 5079 which approved and concurred with the reconstruction of Old Highway 8 bid award. Even though this is a Ramsey County project, the Municipal Code require the City to conduct a public hearing for the project since the improvements were proposed to be assessed. A public hearing was held on February 24, 1997, to consider public input. A period of sixty (60) days has elapsed during which residents have had the opportunity to petition against the proposed assessed project. No petitions were received. At this time staff is again presenting Resolution No. 5079, Approving Old Highway 8 11/ Reconstruction Bid Award for adoption. No changes from the original document have been made. If Council has any questions regarding this resolution, please feel free to call me. • Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 5079 Approving Old Highway 8 Reconstruction Bid Award. I RESOLUTION NO. 5079 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING OLD HIGHWAY 8 RECONSTRUCTION BID AWARD WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View has entered into a cooperative agreement with Ramsey County to reconstruct Old Highway 8 within the City of Mounds View; and WHEREAS, Resolution Numbers 5033 Approving Construction Plans, 5034 Approving Cooperative Agreement, and 5035 Approving Parking Restrictions were approved by the City Council on November 12 , 1996; and WHEREAS, Ramsey County advertised for bids for the project; and WHEREAS, the bid of Forest Lake Contracting Company is the lowest responsible bid for the construction of Old Highway 410 8 Improvements, City Project 97-3 , the Mayor and City Council are hereby authorized and directed to notify Ramsey County that the city concurs in the award of the contract to said bidder; and WHEREAS, the project budget is $1, 228, 258 . 15 of which approximately $108, 684 the City of Mounds View will contribute to the construction project in accordance with the cost participation policy adopted by Ramsey County and approved in Resolution Number 5034 ; and WHEREAS, the City Council authorizes the Director of Public Works to sign all change orders not to exceed fifteen per cent (15%) of Mounds Views share of the project expenses . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mounds View Minnesota, that the bid of Forest Lake Contracting Company is the lowest responsible bid for the construction of Old Highway 8 Improvements, City Project 97-3 , the Mayor and City Council are hereby authorized and directed to notify Ramsey County that the city concurs in the award of the contract to said bidder. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the project budget is $1, 228, 258 . 15 of which approximately $108, 684 the City of Mounds View will contribute to the construction project in accordance with the cost participation policy adopted by Ramsey County and approved in Resolution Number 5034 and the City Council authorizes the Director of Public Works to sign all change orders not to exceed fifteen per cent (15%) of Mounds Views share of the project expenses . Adopted this 28th day of April, 1997 . ATTEST: MAYOR (SEAL) CITY ADMINISTRATOR S I V Item No. Item 10& 11.D. Staff Report No. • Meeting Date: April 28, 1997 Type of Business: Public Hearing Council Business WK.• Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council From: Jim Ericson, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 599, and Ordinance approving a rezoning from B-2 to Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Commercial Uses for Property Located Southeast of the Highway 10/Silver Lake Road Intersection(2704-2740 Highway 10 and 7801 Silver Lake Road); Planning Case No. 477-97 Date of Report: April 22, 1997 Overview: Proposal: The applicants, D.W. Jones, Inc. and George and Christine Winiecki, are requesting • approval of a rezoning from B-2, Limited Business District, to a mixed-use PUD, Planned Unit Development and approval of a General Concept plan for properties located southeast of the intersection of Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road. Excluding that property occupied by TJB Homes, the eight parcels in this application cover approximately 13 acres. The property owners and Five D Limited, which has an option on part of the property, have joined together to develop their properties using an overall concept plan. The uses proposed with this development include: • gas station/convenience market with fast food restaurant/car wash • sit-down style restaurant • 83-unit senior housing complex • one-story office building Located on the site is a DNR protected wetland of approximately 4.5 acres. The proposed development would not encroach into the wetland itself, but does occupy 45% of the 100 foot wetland buffer established by the City. Rezoning Process: In Mounds View, planned unit developments go through three steps: Review/Approval/Public Hearing General Concept Plan (see Section 1120.04 Subd. 2) PC,CC(PH-yes) Q Development Plan (see Section 1120.04 Subd.3) PC,CC(PH-yes) • Q Final Plan (see Section 1120.04 Subd. 4) Administrative This application is at the general concept plan stage. This step allows the applicant to submit a plan to the City showing the applicant's basic intent and the general nature of the entire City of Mounds View Staff Report Planning Case No. 477-97:D.W. Jones Property April 26, 1997 Page 2 • development without incurring substantial cost. The concept plan serves as the basis for the public hearing so that the proposal may be publicly considered at an early stage. The following elements of the proposed general concept plan represent the significant elements which the City shall review and for which a decision shall be rendered: • overall maximum PUD density range Q general location of major streets and pedestrian ways Q general location and extent of public and common open space • general location of residential and nonresidential land uses with approximate type and intensities of development • staging and time schedule for development Q other special criteria for development Planning Commission Action: At their meeting on April 2, 1997, the Planning Commission, voted by a three to two margin to recommend approval of this concept plan. The issues with which the Commission struggled in its decision concerned the extent of the encroachment into the wetland, redelineation of the wetland, and the overall density of the project. In addition, the appropriateness of the gas station and car wash components was questioned in a development which will be at the gateway to the City's city center and commercial core. Status of Issues: The plan submitted with this application appears to be in a much more finished form than staff feels is warranted at this point. (Please refer to the concept plan dated April 22.) 411, You will note that building footprints and sizes are shown, and access drives and parking lots. The diagram implies that all of the uses will fit at the densities proposed. Staff is concerned that there are some key pieces of information which the City does not have, and are needed, before the amount of development and its arrangement is decided. These include: Extent of the wetland; encroachment into the wetland buffer: There are two wetland boundaries shown on the concept plan, one of which is larger than the other. If this PUD is approved, we have included a requirement that the wetland boundary be delineated prior to approval of the development plan, and that densities may need to be reduced downward based on that delineation. The extent of the wetland has a significant impact on how much development will fit on this site. The present proposal shows encroachment into 45% of the wetland buffer. Q Drainage system: The applicant has shown two NURP or water quality ponds on the concept plan. It is unknown at this point whether they are sized correctly or placed so the drainage system will work and protect the wetland. There is a requirement in the PUD that a preliminary drainage plan be prepared and be approved by the City Engineer prior to approval of the development plan. If the ponds need to be larger, there needs to be more of them, and/or they need to be in a different location due to topography, it could have an effect on the site layout and the amount of density which will fit. Q Underground parking for senior citizen apartment building: There have been questions • raised whether underground parking will work with the water table. There is a City of Mounds View Staff Report Planning Case No. 477-97: D.W.Jones Property April 26, 1997 Page 3 requirement in the PUD that soil testing be done, and the feasibility of underground parking be determined prior to approval of the development plan. If parking cannot be put under the building, or if the building must be raised to accommodate underground parking, it will change the character of the project design and may require that densities be reduced. Design quality: The project is located at the gateway to the City Center district, and the City's commercial core. Staff continues to be concerned that insufficient attention has been given to the layout of uses on the site and how they relate to each other, and to the significance of the location of this property relative to the Highway 10 corridor. This needs to be a signature development, not a typical highway development. The current layout tends toward a strip development of uses along Highway 10. A requirement that a design study be done by a design professional (either an architect, landscape architect or urban designer), to be selected by the City and paid for by the developer, is included in the PUD. The design study would be completed prior to consideration of the development plan. Q Design theme along Highway 10: There is a community desire for a more unified image along Highway 10, and there are discussions occurring now as part of the University of Minnesota Design Course on how an overall design for the highway corridor could be • achieved. We do not know how much room may be needed along the Highway 10 frontage to implement a design theme. Staff is recommending that at least 15 feet be reserved for this purpose. The proposed plan shows five feet between parking areas and the Highway right-of-way line. Once again, it is desirable to know the spatial requirements for achieving the community's design objectives before agreeing to the setbacks shown. The City Council has three options at this point. #1. The first is to approve the PUD with sufficient restrictions that everyone is on notice that the densities proposed for this site may go down, the arrangement land uses may change, and not all of the uses may fit when more information is available and a design study is done. #2. The second is to continue the hearing on the PUD to a date certain on June 9, and direct the applicant to obtain the information on the wetland boundary, drainage system and water table, and to have a design study done for the layout of the site, prior to further consideration of the rezoning. Direct the City Staff to work with the University of Minnesota Design Center to develop proposals on the design theme for Highway 10. (The first reading would have to be scheduled no later than June 9 and the second reading no later than June 23, to stay within the 120 day time limit on decisions. The 120 day limit on this case is July 3. Deadline for submittal to staff of the information, in order to obtain • review by the City Engineer, would be May 16). Planning Case No.477-97 D.W. Jones PUD Project April28, 1997 Page 4 • #3. The third is to disapprove the PUD, and request the applicants to get the information noted above and have the design study done, before they reapply. If City Council chooses#1, introducing Ordinance 599 for first reading is the appropriate action. We have prepared suggested motions, which are stated at the conclusion of this report, if City Council chooses either#2 or#3. Discussion: Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: According to the Comprehensive Plan, this area of District 1 is designated as mixed use planned unit development. The Comp Plan suggests that development of this land should include provision for a pedestrian/bicycle trail system to tie the various elements of the"City Center" together and to provide connection to community-wide trails. The applicant proposes to construct a sidewalk parallel to Silver Lake Road from Highway 10 to County Road I. The use of planned unit development zoning and the proposal for a mixture of uses is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comp Plan does not include much information on how developments in the Highway 10 corridor are to be designed. There has been more recent attention to the need to establish an overall development plan for Highway 10 which would include design elements. Highway 10-Area 9 Study: SRF Consulting prepared a redevelopment plan for this section of the • Highway 10 corridor which was presented to the City Council on April 7, 1997. The study included a market analysis done by Towle Real Estate. The SRF report suggested that a Planned Unit Development would be the preferred alternative for developing this group of parcels, and that a different alternative would be to join the two properties nearest the corner of Silver Lake Road and Highway 10 and re-zone them to B-3, Highway Business District. This zoning would be consistent with the types of uses best suited for this location: non-destination types of commercial development, based on impulse buying and catering to the needs of the high volume of traffic present daily on Highway 10. Land Uses; Demonstrated Need for Uses: The Towle market analysis identified the following uses as either non-existent or deficient within Mounds View: • Heavy industry • Health and fitness center • Wholesale trade • Movie theaters, museums or art galleries • Major or discount food markets • Assisted living senior housing • Regional retail center • Medical facilities • Cemeteries or mortuaries • Drug store The Towle report provides specific conclusions related to the D.W. Jones property as follows (pp. 16-17 of the report): "From all of the above information and analyses, and considering the physical,political, environmental • and socio-economic factors affecting the subject area, it is evident the larger tract of land in the southeast Planning Case No. 477-97 D.W. Jones PUD Project . April 28, 1997 Page 5 corner of Silver Lake Road and Highway 10 has a highest and best use which is oriented for some type of mixed use development that may include one or more of the following: 1) some type of more intensive commercial development, located in the immediate southeast corner of Silver Lake Road and Highway 10, maximizing the exposure and excellent access to this site; 2) a low rise office and/or medical/professional building that would be oriented for either a single tenant or multiple tenants; 3) some type of destination-oriented commercial service facility(or facilities)such as light auto repair, a mortuary, a bank, etc; 4) a higher density residential project or partially-or fully-assisted senior housing complex. Not all of these uses could be built on the property because the site isn't large enough, but a combination of two or three is definitely possible. We need to stress that the most valuable undeveloped land in the entire study area is the immediate southeast corner of Silver Lake Road and Highway 10. This part of the subject site should be oriented for commercial business that relies on "impulse"traffic, rather than destination-oriented traffic. Due to the inability to build on or around the wetland area, we suggest this part of the subject property to be some type ofpublic park or to be incorporated into a private development as an amenity feature. We also suggest making walking trails around this area and creating a small park or picnic area which would benefit the existing senior housing facility and the surrounding residential property on the west side of the subject area. • The third vacant site on the southwest side ofHighway 10 is found on the southeast side of the TJB Homebuilders property. We have been told this site does have buildable soils, and a portion of the wetland area could be used as green space and setback area for any development of this small parcel...This small site is best suited for a smaller office building like the TJB Homebuilders structure next door, or a light auto repair facility that creates much less traffic and requires much less parking. Access to this parcel is also an issue, and it would most likely have to come directly off Highway 10 from the southbound lanes only. The uses proposed by the applicant are described below, along with information for the Towle report on the demonstrated need for the uses: • Apartment project: The applicant proposes an 83-unit, three-story senior living facility, half of which would be assisted living, the other half unassisted living. The project will be similar to the Silver Lake Pointe project immediately south of the subject property. A significant portion of the building would be located in the wetland buffer zone. The Towle report identified Area 9 as a"prime area" for senior, assisted living housing developments. • Office building: The applicant is proposing a one-story stucco building, similar in design and construction to the existing TJB Homes building, to host a variety of small, professional businesses. With regard to its physical location on the site, the building would be located totally within the wetland buffer zone. Office uses were identified in the • Towle report as a good fit for this site. • Planning Case No. 477-97 D.W. Jones PUD Project April 28, 1997 • Page 6 • Restaurant: The applicant has indicated that they are attempting to market the site to a sit- down, food and drink type of establishment, as opposed to fast-food, of which the City currently has many examples. The site plan date stamped 4/22/97 shows the restaurant footprint set back away from Highway 10 to take advantage of the wetland amenity. • Gas station/fast food/convenience market/car wash: The applicant proposes a convenience type of gas station with eight pumps under a canopy offering a fast food component and a quality detached car wash on site. While the community has indicated that the City does not need another gas station, the applicant points out that this site is perfect for such a use and the use is consistent with the Towle report. A second market analysis was prepared by Biko Associates for the applicants that targeted the feasibility of the gas station use alone. The study calculates that the five gas stations on Highway 10 are capturing 36% of the household and through-traffic markets for gasoline sales, based on a series of assumptions noted on page 2-3 of the report. It concludes that the market saturation by existing retailers is fairly low, and there is sufficient market to support an additional gas station in Mounds View on Highway 10. While staff does not have the expertise to critique the marketing study, one point deserves mention. The study indicates that of the 40,000-plus daily trips on Highway 10, approximately 28,500 are through trips, meaning the trip neither originates nor terminates in Mounds View. The study estimates that only 36 percent of the gasoline market is being captured by Mounds View service stations. The conclusion made from the Bike study is . that because of the low saturation levels, an additional station would not negatively impact the existing gas stations in Mounds View but would redistribute the market share on a regional basis. While this may be true, the question then becomes,just how much of the regional gasoline market does Mounds View want to capture? Staff notes that a 36 percent share of the regional market is significant for a 2.3 mile stretch of Highway 10. Tax Impact of the Project: According to data supplied by the applicant at the March 19 meeting, this project with the four identified uses would be expected to bring in an additional $215,000 to $269,000 in property taxes, depending upon which assumption(low, average, high) is used. The City's share of the anticipated property taxes with development would be approximately $35,150 to $43,980. The remainder would go to other taxing entities such as the school district and Ramsey County. The current taxes on the property amount to $21,000 per year, of which the City receives approximately $3,430. Overall Project Design: The proposed layout for this project places the high volume, high intensity commercial uses close to the intersection of Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road, as is to be expected. The placement of the senior citizen housing project is appropriate, especially as a complementary building to the existing Silver Lake Pointe project and takes advantage of the amenity provided by the wetland. Planning Commission and Staff are concerned about how the gas station relates to the corner and 40 the image it would project. The intent for this group of parcels is that any development be of a Planning Case No. 477-97 D.W. Jones PUD Project April 28, 1997 • Page 7 "signature" nature to represent a gateway into the City Center district and commercial core of Mounds View. There is also an overall concern about the amount of density on the site. Staff has proposed three ways of dealing with this issue: Require a design study be done between approval of the concept plan and the development stage plan, as a condition of approval CI Continue the public hearing on this rezoning, and undertake a design study prior to approval of the concept plan, as long as this work can be completed within the 120-day time limit on decisions on rezonings(i.e. submitted by May 16 for consideration on June 9 and 23). Deny the PUD rezoning request, with the direction that a design study be done before the applicants reapply. Access and On-Site Circulation: Circulation on the site between the gas station/fast food restaurant/car wash site, TJB Homes and the proposed office building will be provided by a private access road off of Silver Lake Road and connecting to Highway 10. Three accesses are proposed onto Highway 10: one at the gas station, one serving the sit-down restaurant, and one for the office building. The access currently serving the TJB Homes site would be closed pending a cross-access driveway agreement. Preliminary comments from MnDOT indicate that they would oppose more than three access points onto Highway 10 and would require detailed • drainage information regarding the use of their drainage ditch along Highway 10. There are five access points proposed on Silver Lake Road: three for the senior housing facility, one for the private drive, and one for the gas station/fast food restaurant. Dan Soler, the Ramsey County Traffic Engineer, has stated that one of the access points to the senior housing building should be eliminated to reduce the accesses onto Silver Lake Road to four. Traffic Study: A traffic study prepared by Biko Associates for the applicant estimated that approximately 3,914 daily trips to this site would occur on the average weekday. During the peak hours, more than 50 percent of the convenience store/gas station trips would be pass-by, or impulse trips. These are people who are already on Highway 10 (or any of the roads) for other reasons, destined for a different location. The study estimated that the level of service (LOS) for the Highway 10/ Silver Lake Road intersection will not decrease as a result of this development being built. The current level of service is level C. Dan Soler, Ramsey County Traffic Engineer, concurred that this development would not negatively impact the level of service at the intersection. There probably would be stacking of vehicles on Silver Lake Road during peak periods that would block the first driveway into the gas station, but that is not uncommon nor unexpected. He has indicated that he did not have a concern with the stacking on Silver Lake Road. (Refer to the attached letter from Dan Soler.) Drainage Plan: From the contours on the site plan dated 4/22/97, the current drainage and water run-off flows primarily into the wetland with lesser amounts flowing into the Highway 10 ditch. • Two NURP ponds are proposed on the site although no calculations have been provided to determine the expected drainage volume nor capacity of the ponds, nor has an analysis be done on Planning Case No.477-97 D.W. Jones PUD Project April28, 1997 • Page 8 whether they are placed to work with the topography of the site. Staff has included a requirement that a detailed drainage analysis be submitted by the applicant and approved by the City Engineer before the development stage plan is approved. Natural Features and Open Space: This proposed development would replace what is now vacant land with commercial and residential uses, preserving the wetland that is present on this site. The wetland itself will not be altered in any way as a result of this project, although the applicant has indicated a willingness to remove debris and deepen the wetland Wit would improve its ecology. Much of the site is covered in prairie-type grasses and scrub trees, although there are a number of significant trees as well. The developer has incorporated many of the significant trees into the design and landscaping of the project. Staff has included a requirement that a walking path around the wetland be evaluated when the development plan is submitted, and be built by the developer if required by the City, in addition to the boardwalk and overlook proposed by the applicants. The SRF study indicated that a pedestrian way around the wetland and over the St. Paul Waterworks would be desirable. Encroachment into the Wetland Buffer: Both the Planning Commission and Staff are concerned with the degree to which the senior building and the office building at the east end of the site encroach into the wetland buffer. The applicant has calculated that 45% of the buffer area is proposed to be in impervious coverage(either building or paving). Staff contacted surrounding communities to determine how other cities regulate wetland buffers and to what extent. Of the • eleven cities contacted, only two (Maplewood and Blaine) had a wetland buffer ordinance; the other nine did not. Maplewood's buffer requirements range between 10 and 100 feet depending upon the type and class of water involved. Blaine's buffer is 100 feet. The following cities had no buffering requirement: New Brighton, Spring Lake Park, Fridley, Coon Rapids, Shoreview, Arden Hills, Little Canada, White Bear Lake and Vadnais Heights. Park Dedication Requirements: The applicant will need to provide a park dedication payment in an amount required by the City's subdivision ordinance as a condition of this PUD. The fee for the residential component is 10 percent of the land value given the ratio of 10.3 residential units per acre, less the wetland acreage. The fee for the commercial and office uses are also based upon 10 percent of the land value. The applicants have indicated a willingness to satisfy this requirement. Provision for Common Open Space: The site plan does not designate any specific area for common open space. The Zoning Code establishes criteria for PUD approval, one of which is that a sufficient amount of"usable" open space is provided. The Zoning Code does not include standards as to what is considered sufficient. In addition, the Zoning Code requires 625 square feet of usable open space be provided for each multiple family residential unit. (This requirement could be modified through the PUD, and some modification may be warranted since residents of the building will be senior citizens rather than families, and there is an extensive visual open space by virtue of the wetland on the property.) The usual requirement for the 83-unit apartment • building would be 1.2 acres of useable open space. The site plan dated 4-22-97 shows approximately 30 feet of open space in the form of the wetland buffer behind the senior complex Planning Case No. 477-97 • D.W. Jones PUD Project • April 28, 1997 Page 9 (6900 sq.ft.) and areas on the northwest and southwest corners of the building(approx. 16,000 sq.ft.) or approximately 0.5 acres. It seems logical that of all the uses, the senior building would benefit the most from the useable open space. Landscaping and Screening: The only landscaping indicated on the site plan thus far is a row of trees along Silver Lake Road in front of the senior building and a row of proposed and existing trees between the senior building and the gas station and restaurant. A row of trees is also proposed in front of the office building along Highway 10. As part of the development plan, the applicant will be providing a more comprehensive landscape plan showing a detailed planting list with sizes, species and quantities proposed including all types of groundcover. Any landscaping proposed within the St. Paul Waterworks' right-of-way will need to be approved by the St. Paul Water Utility. Easements: Ponding and drainage easements will be required for any on-site stormwater holding ponds or areas that perform water drainage functions that are created by this development. In addition, a perpetual drainage easement shall be conveyed to the City for that area laying within the wetland boundary. A cross-access easement over the private drive will need to be provided that ensures the uses within the development will have permanent, non-rescindable access to the private drive. The uses being served by the drive shall share all maintenance responsibilities for the drive. As a condition of approval of this PUD application, the site will need to be replatted. • Perpetual drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated to the City as a result of the replatting process. Parking: The concept plan does not show enough detail for staff to check if there is sufficient area for the required parking. This will be done at the development plan stage when more specific information is available on the sizes of the buildings. The applicants are aware that they will have to adjust building sizes so that adequate parking can be fit onto the site. Trash Disposal: Each use within the proposed PUD will provide for its own trash disposal. The locations of trash enclosures will be set on the development plan. Requirements for the design of the trash enclosures have been included in the PUD stipulations. Snow Storage: The applicant has not indicated as to the method that will be utilized for snow storage and/or removal. The uses served by the private road shall share in the responsibility for plowing of the private drive. This information will be required as part of the development plan. Site Improvement Agreement: A requirement has been included that the applicant, developer or builder execute a development agreement providing for the installation within one year of all of the on- and off-site improvements as approved by the City Council, secured by.a cash escrow or surety bond in an amount and with surety and conditions satisfactory to the City. Effect on Abutting Properties: With the exception of TJB Home Builders on Highway 10, the Silver Lake Pointe senior apartments to the south, and two small commercial uses next to the senior building, there are no properties abutting this project. The TJB Home Builders property Planning Case No. 477-97 D.W.Jones PUD Project April 28, 1997 • Page 10 will be surrounded by the proposed PUD. The initial plan is to have a drive access cross through the TJB property to link the office building to the rest of the PUD. The existing senior apartment building to the south will be buffered from the development by the existing wetland, although it will lose the scenery beyond the wetland. This should not pose a significant impact upon the apartments, as they already look out onto Silver View Park, Super America, and vacant land to the south; Highway 10 and the commercial development across Highway 10 to the north and east. Dimensional Requirements:' Required Proposed in PUD Provided •Building Setbacks 2 Front: 30 feet Highway 10/ Silver Lake Road 30 feet 42-160 feet;varies Side: 10 feet Private Drive 15 feet 12 feet(car wash) Rear 20 feet 35-80 feet(other) Interior Lot Lines 0 feet' 0-120 feet;varies Wetland 100 feet' 0-100+feet;varies St. Paul Waterworks 30 feet 98+feet • Parking Lot Setbacks 2 Front: 30 feet Highway 10 15 feet 5 feet Silver Lake Road 30 feet 25 feet Private Drive 10 feet6 0-18 feet Side: 5 feet Interior Lot Lines 0 feet5 0-115 feet;varies Rear: 5 feet Wetland 100 feet6 0-100+feet;varies • St. Paul Waterworks 30 feet 162+feet •Building Heights3 Gas station/convenience store 3 stories 26 feet maximum N/A Car wash 3 stories 26 feet maximum N/A Sit down restaurant 3 stories 36 feet maximum N/A Senior Housing 3 stories 3 stories;48 feet maximum N/A •Parking Requirements Code Requirements Proposed in PUD Gas station 4 spaces +2 spaces for each service bay same Car wash not mentioned 5 spaces in stacking lane Convenience market not mentioned 4 spaces per 1000 sq.ft. GFA Fast food restaurant 1 per 40 sq.ft.of dining; 1 per 80 sq.ft.of same kitchen Sit down restaurant 1 per 40 sq.ft. of dining or 1 per 3 seats, 1 per 100 sq.ft.of GFA or 1 per 3 seats whichever is more; 1 per 80 sq.ft. of kitchen whichever is more Senior housing not mentioned lspace/unit+.15 visitor space/unit Office 1 space/175 sq.ft. +4 spaces 1 space per 250 sq.ft.of GFA •Minimum Project Size: 5 acres 13 acres • Minimum Street Frontage Silver Lake Road: 200 feet 960 feet IIIHighway 10: 200 feet 1,348 feet •Lot Area per Dwelling Unit:3 2,500 sq. ft 1,155 sq. ft • Open Space per Dwelling Unit:3 625 sq. ft N/A Planning Case No. 477-97 D.W. Jones PUD Project April28, 1997 Page 11 1 The dimensional requirements listed can be adjusted(increased or decreased)as a part of the PUD concept plan approval process. 2 These requirements apply to the present underlying zoning of the site,B-2,Limited Business District 3 These requirements are from the R-4,High Density Residential zoning district. 4 Setbacks from interior lot lines(not abutting streets)may be reduced to 0 feet as part of an approved development plan,as long as Building Code requirements are met. 5 Except as shown on the approved concept plan and with approval of a wetland alteration permit by City Council. 6 The minimum setback from the private drive may be reduced to zero(0)feet where it functions as a drive aisle through the parking lots for the uses east of the gas station/convenience market/car wash. Recommendation: Option#1: Conduct the public hearing and introduce Ordinance No. 599 for first reading, an ordinance approving the request of D.W. Jones, Inc. to rezone their properties located at the southeast corner of Silver Lake Road and Highway 10 south to the southern boundary of the St. Paul Water Utility easement, zoned B-2 (Limited Business District)to PUD (Planned Unit Development)with stipulations as listed in Exhibit 1 to the ordinance. • Option#2: Conduct and then continue the public hearing to a time certain on June 9, with direction to the applicant that the following information by submitted to the City no later than May 16: Q wetland delineation Q preliminary drainage design showing runoff volumes, pond sizing, routing of storm water, and water quality impacts for review and approval of the City Engineer feasibility of underground parking for senior citizen housing building design study by a design professional, selected by the City and paid for by the applicant, as to how to achieve a"gateway" or"signature" development on this property including the combination of uses and site layout Direct staff to work with the University of Minnesota Design Center to develop proposals for a design theme for the Highway 10 corridor in order to estimate setback requirements needed to allow enough room for it to be implemented. Obtain comments from the UofM on the site layout. Option#3: Conduct the public hearing, and move to deny Ordinance 599, with direction to the applicants to obtain the information listed above before reapplying. 41 James Ericson, Planning Associate Planning Case No. 477-97 D.W. Jones PUD Project April 28, 1997 Page 12 11111 Attachments: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Concept PUD Plan(dated 4-22-97,separate attachment) 4. Letter from Applicant(dated 3-5-97) 5. Letter from Developer(dated 3-27-97) 6. Estimated Tax Impact(dated 3-19-97) 7. Market/traffic Analyses(dated 3-19-97) 8. Letter from Ramsey County Traffic Engineer(dated 4-23-97) 9. Letter from MnDOT(dated 4-23-97) 10. Letter from Minnesota DNR(dated 3-3-97) 11. Letter from Army Corp of Engineers(dated 3-24-97) 12. Letter from St.Paul Water Utility(dated 2-24-97) 13. Memo from Fire Marshal(dated 3-22-97) 14. Letters from Residents 15. Planning Commission Resolution No. 505-97 Recommending Approval N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\DEVCASES\477-97UONESCC 1.RPT • • 1 ORDINANCE NO. 599 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A REZONING FROM B-2 TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) FOR MIXED USES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF THE HIGHWAY 10/SILVER LAKE ROAD (2704-2740 HIGHWAY 10 AND 7801 SILVER LAKE ROAD),AND AMENDING THE CITY'S OFFICIAL ZONING MAP. THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: Whereas, D.W. Jones, Inc. and George and Christine Winiecki have applied for a rezoning from B-2 to Planned Unit Development (PUD) for properties located within an area bounded by SilverLake Road, Highway 10 and the southern boundary of the St. Paul Waterworks right-of- way (excluding that property owned by TJB Homes), and described as follows: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 30, Range 23,Ramsey County,Minnesota described as beginning at the southwest corner of said Southeast Quarter;thence easterly along the south line of said Southeast Quarter 1,346.90 feet to the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 10; thence northwesterly along • said center line 1,434.13 feet to the center line of Silver Lake Road;thence southwesterly and southerly 1,219.64 feet along said last centerline to the point of beginning. Subject to State Trunk Highway No. 10,Silver Lake Road and St.Paul Waterworks Right of Way. Except that part of said Southeast Quarter described as commencing at the southwest corner of said Southeast Quarter and measuring easterly along the south line of said Section 6 a distance of 1,346.9 feet to the intersection of the center line of Highway No. 10(Anoka Cut-ofd;thence northwesterly along the centerline of said Highway No. 10,a distance of 765.9 feet to the point of beginning;thence southwesterly at right angles to the center line of said Highway No. 10 a distance of 275 feet;thence northwesterly and parallel with said centerline 100 feet;thence northeasterly at a right angle to the centerline of said Highway No. 10;thence southeasterly along said Highway No. 10 to the point of beginning. WHEREAS, the proposed uses include a gas station/convenience market/fast food restaurant, car wash, sit down restaurant, senior citizen housing development, and office building; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map 3. PUD Concept Plan,dated 4/22/97 110 4. Letter from Applicant,dated 3/5/97 5. Letter from Developer,3/19/97 Ordinance 599 April28, 1997 Page 2 6. Letter from St.Paul Water Utility,dated 2/24/97 7. Letter from Minnesota DNR,dated 3/3/97 8. Letter from the US Army Corp of Engineers,dated 3/24/97 9. Letters from Residents 10. Market Needs Analysis/Traffic Analysis,dated 3/19/97 11. Tax Impact Analysis,dated 3/19/97 12. Planning Commission Resolution No. 505-97 Recommending Approval WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council has received a recommendation of approval from the Mounds View Planning Commission as stated in Planning Commission Resolution No. 505-97; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council does hereby find that this proposal meets the general requirements and standards for Planned Unit Developments (Section 1120.02)through the stipulations established in Exhibit 1 to this ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council finds that this proposal meets the special requirements and standards for mixed-use PUDs (Section 1120.03, Subd. 3) as follows: Required Provided • Minimum Project Size 5 acres 12.96 acres Minimum Street Frontage 200 feet 960 feet Minimum Property Width 200 feet 780 feet Landscaping, Screening and Surfacing: (1) The entire site,other than that taken up by structures or landscaping shall be surfaced with a material to control dust,drainage and erosion. The applicant is proposing to pave all parking areas, access drives and the internal roadway. (2) A drainage system conforming to the comprehensive storm drainage plan and subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall be installed. The applicant will be required to provide a preliminary drainage plan with the development stage plan. Approval for the location and sizing of the NURP ponds and for the system of directing drainage flows shall be obtained from the City Engineer and from the Minnesota Department of Transportation prior to approval of the development stage plan. A stipulation has been included that adjustments shall be made in the density and layout of the development if needed to accommodate the necessary drainage improvements. • • Ordinance 599 April28, 1997 Page 3 (3) Development abutting an R-1,R-2,or R-3 District shall be screened and landscaped in compliance with subdivisions 1103.08(1)through(5)of this Title. This requirement is not applicable since the subject properties do not abut any R-1, R-2 or R-3 Districts. The proposal would meet the requirements of Section 1103.08 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED that the Official Zoning Map for the City of Mounds View is hereby amended to change the zoning designation on the property described above from B-2 to PUD (Mixed Use) subject to the stipulations contained in Exhibit 1 to this ordinance, attached hereto and made a part thereof by this reference, and to the requirements for approval of a general concept plan, development stage plan and final plan stated in Section 1120 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this day of , 1997. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this day of • , 1997. Duane McCarty, Mayor ATTEST: Charles Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator APPROVED AS TO FORM: Robert Long, City Attorney N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\DEVCASES\477-97\DWJONES.ORD • • ORDINANCE NO. 599 EXHIBIT 1 The attached Exhibit 1 are the stipulations which would govern the D.W. Jones Property Planned Unit Development (PUD). The portions which are underlined have been added since the Planning Commission meeting to address issues raised by Planning Commission regarding the amount of development on the site, the need to have the wetland delineated and a drainage plan prepared, and concern about how the development is designed, given it is located at the gateway to the City Center district and to the City's commercial core. In addition, some of the changes are being suggested by staff to either complete information that we did not have at the time of the Planning Commission meeting or address additional issues. The underlining has been added to assist the City Council and the applicant in knowing what text has been added. It would be removed if the ordinance is passed. • • m m oEEw f� v7 a) c O_ 0 03• cp . +.. �! Citi 4.,,, c c ° c Z O O - 0 ., , O • .. co .2 D o y V 0 W iE ..,„2 co m c 0 0 'O N p 03• a) Z Z U O <o t � c co 0 c Z. is •.0. a) o 10 to _ VWI Z ,�? a •... L � _ co a> co a) 0 � ,c c o 3 N �7j O _ 4. ,C+ _ E 0 ,C S O L O a) r D U G cr ": mc0c 7 co• 0 0 v 3 •a� a, h 0 — O ,0 a) y O X O r.. vco -,s, O o O O a O a) 0 tri .c .c •' . O O N COcohO a) 00 U O •O - Ot - v.. 0 a.0 CO O 0 a.. E" O •c o - �, c a 2 c <c • O c 0 0 0 a as O c0 0 0 00 a � � . 0 . 0 ` - 3 � — a -,• za, 3oao sa ° E O ,, � Z a •c Q W 0 co as 0 O c = as 0 y ¢ O W N O O N 0 F O •03 s 0 _01 V C' ap O aa> v.- 0 0 0 U �. � ,� h 0 r-- W O 0 h co � Z 1)i 8 ..0 z C W a"i ° .2 '_ , bo � 'ooZ3 ,; c 0 co .�03 '0Z o -o o La • a v cool . o E-1 � � °' yascW = coati = , � - 0 a O . Cco 1,-, •2 _ `. co ] ,.. icO 0 apE• l+ c' E.-4 � c ° r -2 0; �O a � -cams. ca oNJm0z ° acv � xocca ' ay,WCG W • .c o .. o ° oaiai � Ca N- Is. is' O � � � F � O W Ca y U U G = h 0 +.. NO > Q W W Q0 W 1--. -..! O i l fF , 9 Q� /hr 4/ 44 s Q .. QOOMJSV3 8; / vo^ p., ..1 ^o .;...,..4, t ' 0 Wig. iS !o= "� b '. •. 11•17,,. •;,-II....x. itio,.. .94‘ ., ,*; ) 1 --.4k„ 2:-.A... ,, 1 N ,f44 s. • v r a ar3 C. • _ . ° a' i4 , .: e rnn OW '" ; s 2 .,1 /a ) a -� ./ a > . LE) �.F 1 ^21 * ' .. ' .'-.,/ ,t. ."1 . L F--: .../ ,.,449 e v W H • 0 ` ty •.1 O• 1rJ W >. • a. . -1 W t �--; t a C7 0 2 � [d-�� • •�idl��iiE• - e 414404 Z O > 7 �/ � + 1 D `F. •j.-�' Ids $ O N L� '� , - .-----..--, 3 a � '_ • _ - - Z, Glc a > 51:•14. ..' 1 eit!es tit Its t--- Cs a\ a, N t-- O as z PCj..0 awe zL) as vlQzE OC� 0oy N v) 0 =p :_ a 0 -' N 0 •� �'• O O N C7 X x x 0 x Q" CT CCT..: ..7 O �...•. Cu Cu Cu -1' C0 a c 47 w C Ls N- csi CO A- EEEME al --'Cpyu�L O .. .-. .. a) ... fl. 0Or00 0 0 •4 . ~ z as a) a) a) 0 0 a) a) a) a) a) 0 a) a) a) •L a) Nom. H M a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) ... wO .N Nrn '- 'aOrn a( H0 O L Ou 0000 U) 0000M coOOaOCI) yN } g_ Zr) a) �� U Cj cr) ,- CTM .- O NNNtCOCO 0 0 CA iZC2N r ; w AQ0. . 0. 0-0 � Q N •O Cu Nt in 'd' .— c- CO ›"' C Cu O O CI)E c U L. asas L c 0 = J a) .r > CT 0 i N Q . -�•C .r C C. Cuc a) cis Ce C > 20 C OOZ > N E 2 E A To (n rn C - Cu 0 G w O C7) .e i cu o C Cu Cu CO O Cu Cu '.. V .,. c s a) Ti; z CQ > Cu ap IX > •- N 'N C o 'al N c O N O W < y � 'c o _ v, � 'c o = o . '- o 2 .c a) -13w �. Cu oasa) ,.. Cm VC0 _IOLc = z.`°.. al5L �� avi '00c o x; Ha E C ..-. oCca (13 ,.. .- . ,ocUC , c00C Y ( › .. F' P4 a 15 xa .c c .cc -4, a. � s 0 > a) r. a 0 LV E F N L c n' w-+ W o 0 .o'•C � a) �.. Q) .�.2c � O .s mecum = off cu CU000CU CC1 O > F- it) cn = a _ � cn C) Iinn. — > cn mOUcnc/ O a. 000u_ A ilek P. a) Sir `4F, a w ,-. a z �. O o vas o a A 0 a) m W C 1 to al 0 •C C A .. a -0a) c x O 0 0 in . a) E E cu C E o Cu ••` w E E U) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a. L o a= o Cu cu Cu Cu Cu Cu Cu cu _C cn Cu .c .E10 • •o L v •Z 00000 �tMMO "I- " . .r., co U) -0 c • x x x o X Cu M M N- 11 0 co CON 0 O O 0 C0 E N C -0 W 03 C0 03 0 C0 a. 0 0 0 r• Nt• CA �. ` U) n c m EEEgE A O _o o y a) o 0 cu :t• O PG c E a) -cu) -13 "Ci EV c a) .« c . a= cn Cu o � •N c rn a) a) 0 E v- a- 0-03 O- . 3 c• E E t L N w. 'C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0cu CU CU CU 0 o z Tu. a c co co C (1) .c) E cts It)) 0 0 co Q 00_ 00_ NCV 44 <4 a) co csi � •XL a) Nom - N 0y •a COMOcoco E � e- 0 � C7 " a IA C0 .a a) C O C O a) O O > O E �u -0 a) 3 'co i- a= w a a) m c ov a) : as c W - c cn o y E N • c a) as C c A o Coco • � � = a) L L � � CO C N O m 0 as O .0 N o coCr ._. � c > c E c c a) cs U) Cl, 0 0 . cu0ocucn • ocuo ,• C � Cu c Q v . E :. ::. a) 41 z O .0mQ • aCiNaCuL oL --� o ' �' d iii ov c 2 cu 0v) vcn c p cu 2 o f 2 `o u) m ca v M a') o v n a) o a) rn i Cu o rnC a) a0 C0 ') a) f�. d E) .0 O c 0 V V — U N C C t a) O '6 as O 'C N L c a Z C 0 .1. E m a) c as 0 as - ac) N ct .0 A Cu "" 3 cn2 v) � 5- OHcsi O O > O a) . O N N ... -0 co tom/) c 3 0 O a) C = u) c ,_ O a) O rn cu Cu N w Q O CD E > - fa 8 2 8 N N 0 C`0 a E cu N CCU C). 0 0 CO a e- ac) U N a O • a d ri < •.• c my c Cu cCu 3 cCu �' 0 OcOCO00_ 4 0 coOco < co I- Acva t•-• ON Dui is - N . c = o\ N 0 • O cp U) co a) -c1.3 a) 0 N 0 O N s to E Let - • a) C 0 C O c _ 0 C C O a u1 U Q. N Z >+ L ° a) C F- to >. 0) E0 rn'E- a) C c Z c 'a) o a) ,mac-. 0 a) o 2 oo c a) cOw > � O wz v p ` . •� ca O > a) . Tei `o ,_ w c � a`0i LI _ E cc O _c cv c -c o Q � a)-0 '0 d U O E O .0 O 0 7 0 2 co C c 0 c a) 1.= E - O 0 U L 0o ca0) as � 0E • O w• 3 co c . Cu - a3 CO o c -aap c c c`a ~ � 03 o w o CV rn 0. >. fl 0' a) c 0 m a) c rno c � ami CO -0 C cU ° o adz c) 0r ma) t a) 0 c >,O ' - o C co a 0- o =a c. a) C g c c rn o c cas 'a r U N a) �; CO o p N 0- 0. a. E" O Uoy ° v, •� oma :° ccayy oa) 2oOacrn ° U F-9. 01 a) Q.,- ani --a• -0 o = �ci `-• L a) ° c > 4N) E � > c 0 0 W U `p ) acid a' "a p .0 a� o a) 0 0 o 0. 0 a) o _ o.- 0 0 — N > w a)"� E L Q . __° ui to • 3 ....16 .a o a) ca..c .a 0. -0 -0 »r vs C 0-= p O U Y N O V O c -0 .0 0. 0„ 0 N.3 .> a) o q 'a 0 0 3 C 0 CC N u) :,,- .-* C ... < C N p • c 3 = s L. .. -a co '� O > U 0 C.:Q C N a p C O • O "a N = C 0..- a) 0.. � N a) C -a C 0 0 u) N T C fo :_. a) U 1:3 a O O 3 O ° a O �-, rnU a a') mo 0 _D) V -°o E E o N � C co rn �� 0 co o � c >+_ �•v_' L .c _ a as in o O ° 8 ~ c ° o -0 > c U o 0 o > la `o a) E � .t� � No . cpOtoca .� � a)•ulc 0n • U 0a) `0c`8 c_ -vc°aoocM -a • v� al E ca �' o cU c -E O N 0 vac') c; (I) C cUC CI' ° C a .61) 0 8 0•° � Cr) O.. 7 0 0.:-, ca ca E co C a) C .r c ca a a) g NC as 0 ca w N p of w o_ U to Q. 0.V 'c = o u) • a. N > c 'a u)) c F, a) .N �« cao0. a' cn . .. � N .� oo3CC o3E 0 > oC � :? aioca 0Cao °? c0 ° 0_ ca0oo3c .0g) ca) Z ,.....0 c m 'F'so c cn •c ' E a. -a cn E 0 a.� > :-. '. -a CO 'C L c 0•a W o c � .g ami c0i 0 CO No .E o o o CO t_ L ,.�0_ V "C3 ° c_ -0 x � O L t_ c0 3 io � t `a 3 ami 0 o c`a '= o cn ti) E 0 o p Q'p '> W > ° .3u) 0 > vcZ .0 u- No .� ■ a`. .) oc�a2co) c°) a..DonCDrn � PI � � ■ a n � c° �' q et if > W 3I- O ca 0 ` ao a) •c.,c 0 .. , a - � rn d Q " c a 3 ° o 0a a 03 -c - ac to Q. o� o' W yc � ycai � � o � > U.,- 7• Q c U y `] aM3 'O �_ o CG t- L. Q0) •O U ",. 40 foON O p N 0Li: c 3 0 tU N aQ oN Q E ° NCoa ...... ..c, ,z ai o13 h ,, cc � E ca • •:33oo• � +yyaN c La) � E 0) ° � "ca o om 0c0 ,� N = COCO 4) ..9. � =. tp -0 >cG � .� O a ° cU a 0 p C OVl 0 .te xp D w ti .0• + co 0 E ` y O- G a) - 0) Z � 1- cv co co E a) Qg0 , .. a .0 W a) cO 4 O a coo W = o 00Co0 aa) aC0EP-. ,,P4 i �'c hOaC0occac) c mco � 3Oorb � � a ' ca E us o • e ° W > �oWUao ocnvUZ ° C Q. o f a 0 O O j O y0 • C> p a a) > C to v) . u) � Q U 4 r , O 'Q> 0o0a a) '-c• t O N w _, • r- E .,- •y 0 ,b, O O O *`rCW O ; ,a -a p a • > q o 00V oo, 4j v1o � c o c .E cacn `o > z � a C a) 8 � z = u) (.) c ,o Uncg cca q r. c °) c co 0 -- °, 0.0 c ) $ co 'c 3 w � � 0 m c O 0 w •*-' `asa •EWE 3 o o cD � a c `° ° co 0 0 V 0 0-°— aa)i " � d • a Eco ° _ `) cc aHca � O `II 'o �a �' 0- *- cC CD o W EcoO cam. > o3 � c Baa) 0-•- a a, C7 N N y O .y y 'Ca ,C La -" .W t�0 03 O O c w T. C c C x t=, t 0 0 0 a-0 0 co Ea ° �) op a, °) 3 d O N ° a fl o E Z (4 O 0 Om 0 0 O 0 h 1- k O a) co V co as O ._ -a a• a)) m 'c .0 o 0 •v) w. a) ca ~' w -a •E U 0) „ie. W o m °)1:3 Zb c $) -c a) o II 0_ C c •0 U 0. 2✓ a O - a) . °) a• --. 3 -..ca) c -. 5 � , ,n,.0k 0. a, CUCcaa) • t•••• ''c CO CO 0 .4•••• 00� c`v. ca 3 � � c ,° es).c a, co ■ Q rn n m fl.0 A cNI a o NC 410 v m C _ CTs c w•- „° s D c ill ns E „' 3 m m m m .. ° � � O ° m as m _ C. CO m � O m .a a°i m mom, rn m cn � " 7 a) 3 .. � �. Z • c6 m 4' L C 2 E O- a c N .� c. O O C O` m s c Cu O O w o N C O C CO N m to V c L •C t. CO '�- m L L = •p O o C >, z U >. CO p_ m '-- CO) L a) O Cp O co c O a •C C c. O > ..• m a) m m •• E 0as > w Q m L N w O L m > U Tit; m O m m V w • O L o a) al Cfl L Q o - m •«- = N 0L .c - mom' P4 a vi LE oa4- mm a. E _ m .. cna= c - . E � ma ` 0) C7 i- N "- L •U O C O O O L_ 'a - o t. •N m C - 0c - E - = m 0 m L 4O Q- > O 0 ..- C N > O. w L > -cu) > p N .m � Cj 'O tmn ° O , O fN4 m L N C ° O) N 0 -0 N 0 N N 7 O U V .L. 7 .. C O Z O m cn w m cn "cO - UO OL cj 0 0 j E •' a 'mENC0 � 'v -- flU2vc ` V ° c. y a-oc m v ? _3r t c a Z tmcv c. mgmNCUmma � 0 • om -- CUm2o •OcC OEO -. .. c C f- ° C . . mEU C a Lam O a - • - a - ,_ "cc. O 0-4. L- mm ° n m � U cmcco00 ... - Lma) mmmW~ 5U Ncv) � CD 3 •C ° m C c •� E am �m c c ° a) O) ac c 8 • o 'm o - vmV E > >. w • o E .Oc. 3 .0 y a �.U) o N co H cc 0 > . CC ' o a)3oCO i 0 � ` C _ oa Uo 00 � 003 io m ,o -0 y= >, mC0 -° . ) '7) E = 0 m ' Qo v ccn ` � Q. l- QLmaooN � oo3 - al - a O H �- N m ° 0o >, ° , )t 0 > hcp 4 0 . .. L m03OOcn2 ` = L �.0m ACO mL >' 3L •c L L c. L c m U 3 flo - c o Q . ° • mcn .. •m o g N Qom04) aa, oU - ) wIi O •Qo -c - N .0 cN m Tel .= -c ' ° a) m m : " m prF- CC C - m .0 N CoEP a. a) N L - .-. T ._. = m " c E > m O . OO 15 ocL _ a- •C . 2 • . . . - m ,_ an .• a. . a) p n - c ° . ca NE O • C > Nm ° L a Q o o 'mcoa) vE " yQrEac o `o ` 0 (� . maEc = n -0 vE . I) •.... cn m ° t • ccucamm - • m >, m o � w - c oa .E m a > . 0o = � om > O E., -0 u) mO o � .n 7 m as c - ev as •,_- o , c -ao �o -•• m E m Z '- m m a m 0 .- o m .>.• m e . r- E m •C •- o • L c.- C NNNL _ Eac Ey ° � m3C N "am .° Ti ° 3vm m m m s w ?' CA .. x E a L vimcyOcmma � CNQ ° p• N° C cvn vN F" • " E •t .-. cn0toJaiN ) tCUC n f+W N c. -C; 0,,, ' 4 cN L CrnCc • mOLmmmL q A-, w L L m m V mO a aQnUcvV .0 0 ,- nVU0 _ 0a CS < .a.Cv "-u) ,-° o c ._ La o A 4dikW Z .3QteL,-1� > 70o . .t 0 o C4 ° '5 o >,,� m C o • Qd c E • c Lcv (71 oCmas "- c ' C =v o Lm aN7, 0mc = 0 ° Lo a. - moa ' �°� .00 - Cmm ¢ c • a - CD O m . L O o m N m >c5 . a aY wp o c. Cl- ' E _ N ,- >+L m � L m n m -� . 0 Ummc. 6. a oL •o ° Eam � a mc. Nrn c ° cmE � N o ` oc � 3 ai it � o -- mas • •• c � 3mE aa- a `- 2Ea o3 � oo E asa2 . ,c " ct _ 0 oo . .' UNO ' n" c ONC , D N . > ° Nm ' Cma >' N c >+ m t O � L n so O v) O '8 > U C . L m C O O m L r c. -. O a o . a O co > a. cu mmCCm N 0F, C >' 0 .. . m O m m (0E ° C ` 0mMom 13 'nal mca) v� c13 .n zoLa >. aicmO .) Egism 'OCaCu - w a" a) wO .. '. . O - >' mc 'O � pO 35o' 0c cC - Cu cmy au) 3 > oa) >, ; o ° ai r >, '5 ° mvut ° o 3 :. ` myc > N E " 'cmp E m 0 ►�W aw n oUO m 0 > _ U v C w N c m co O O L c° 00 m> C 8 O a m0.1 � o — CA m L c > �.]-amacEwa� F' vco oa) camm c. 0N E ° > -a c Q - - v N a � a -8 � naa0. E o Ummpo 3 - ciw Eas 0o _ c N m a00S N •5 . 13 a E CL O C .. yc '-L ° 0 > a) Um D ' "' aJ Z 03 - ct � LNN > y � sq • ma > c iE � o >, c... mQ :5 E. c..) Q U c O ° > = O E w m L a U) 5 .0a C C) o a>i,- C ' C co m CwQ > .. - = . aCO to m 5 ca as 'a c -0 o c o •5 C 15 � + v7.1 nwU zd m O o m ° o C 3 Le• Za0OCm EmNc - to .0 ' m mO ° ELC m L m . 00 mLc. • ° 3 ) o2cc nomL ° c oo o � c o > oNa � XoaCUv a2Zc :° Hom a7 m • m 00 � 2 � a) • pocu >' ° O CC7l OmmEe O O c. m O L > ,--. 0 . O W x m5ai o � C ° oaa ig ii) ` 0- -6D Ncoa..0cECU •a= 0Vma) aan2 :0 acE E Q Q N .V _ 0 Q V N `D o N m ° ° 00E0 =c. _ L O E L N w O a m 7 U .N >.•tn E CU -a a3 N -E ° c. Q U m o +N v 'V •` my o m U ° c m o ° .� .c E ° aL ° c ° m .«.. L c mL Sod ■ a as Cu ° ac. v U ■ E0 o a ° .. C cn r. z m U ao o ao v 3 Acs1a •' — N O N >+ r-: .. p :D .— C >. h L 0) ulL03 L •0 L 0 o N ...L.. c0 r 0)0 a) ° " 1-5, O • Co '0 co .. a) +� Q. "' #17; c — N s c Z a�i .� °��' orn0m o ° 5E'to Zm C0 nv3 � ZV N ., S. N c c D) •0 '0 ° O C C CL .0 N O L W Z ° � � � � � 2 � 0 .c .C >. ecu wcL.. ooNccLN col L. IL_• .0 D a) N .E co O u1 ±n E O- o -a > to C O C e- Z c ld ° .0 .c :.= r Era C E N m a) N C7 cc C D c ° "• L_ N E • fl. o ELL. v L K N Z O -0 co o N .=. ..... ..r: n� c m � � -ao U - , ..mac ° �, 2 Q. c N 3 c N .c to ° Q N 3 n '`_ — O a) cu _ IP = N N L m c 0 d O E � � ° sc0crnaa)) ° c � c5oculE0 3L° = .c — p_� a.. H0 .0 ..r I- - C C 'O `v 0 co 0' N c0 .0 c .0 N co as L. -p a+ r-. O N � c c Ego � 0) c) aa)) .2 co vi • 0- a01 11) -C -0 CO) C 3 w_ x�x02 v c°i ° n-ui ° E E ami ° ° � ° ° � o a' 0) o � mo o > W L O 0 "E" N > N E N N C •. = N N L Q 0)L V • ••-. N cC .. O c 0 N a) E O E N 0) a) > .. O C .. C C L ` N 4X-- c ° A C..) a) 00E .. -a0U 'QC •_ a) L z • N ° E ° CO .� OL Q L c ° c C. o iv (g O '� ° v- Q) c c— = H N a) . = L. ctI , 0 0)y- ° a) O L tricr"; UvE m e aa)) m 3 s "cum E o Ercc ` m 9--0c0 o 0 0) c ° '0 O ' 3.) 0 co L. ° .co u)" c :.. L J a)0 E 0 (1) n rno. u) a) o ..- 0.Z N 0o o m m � Q• cc°i � t N � 4.1 co Q. a) = p o d •t0 ° ° E C U o C in N p N 0 L a) n L c cl O N -0 N C cC L. COp al C ° 1' c U CO c N N "Cr c a) N a) ° a) 0 ° 0 ti a) 13 E ..- M p 1. j E 0 p L. 0 p > C L 0)L 0 L ° y .r 0). N -0 E' 0) N -" C OL 00 ', c+0 C C ate) 'N u) OL co .En" N .� :LIL 0 c`u c O0 CD C y o N c O O z ca a) a) p 0_15 •c -0 E E ° a) m 0-,.., a) c 3 Q) 0 3 a) rn r o v am L ° aP W E c a) ° Oma' ° 3 N cODW ° � (A ° t > 3V C ~ �0 W � O p � w �� ° °) c E > o •Lm � °) c `° o " .• N � E" EJ v • L • c N N 0 N 0 0 CL Q c ._, C nj L ° w U .0 0 It 01 O W � C co a. as ° R .- .� o a o ■ • ■ � H Q. N tCLL CO A IL W O a O � 0i N m Lo o d ,_, — c > cn a) c co O N c •c 2 Q N •E- ? CO O ` 0 0 .0CO .0 a) Es C N C >,.......— N L A co 0 5L. > "-' .. - w. ° mt4 vasa) -tcLu ° ° ai 3 m cLu .. c ° oa L E c c0� o ac) 'in me c1— c) co o as a) C o E � 13L: cccuuE ° •. 0 0Q3 ° cQ-c XEN -t a) 2bio)-a alio c ,- 3 CU 3 0 ° C °°� m 0 �- c 2 .0 ° �, v a) 0 o-o a) c TL° o 13 enn � � .E. c ° o 0 an N Gs µ? a) • 3L°• c o 30 mow; a) m aL o • o > c .0 �' o � ° ° CU 0Z c > o EC) ° o ~ • O L. 0i -0 ° ° O L 0 0 N O c0 a� . .� cu w ,C N N L ' ° w0 , •• •••• 0 N E v` � o c o E o f F' 0) j 0 Q N a) • a) a) t ° Cr)• C •0 ° ° Tu E "E Z ca)>. ma-1:1, ,- 5c ° � .- - ~ Op - Co CD •N T 0 u°) a°) co Q E os- os_- ° a Q".«- CO •N N .0 N 0 y° ° N E a) N ° p) .0 L ° cis0 C C `• > 0 V > a) p O "0 .. ... o :4 a )) N a' d O c a) ° ,� a) •U E Cr.0 ° C cC L cL0 �-, > C ° L. d N 10 I— • O N 3 a) •X L a) L m C ° "Q L .ell c Ca a) a) W a� ° ° L. ai � •N N mU � E N o ° L C ccnn ° a) c 3 c Acro V c 3 C c O c2). .. c a) .._. 0 a) L 3 C Q a) _ •� 03 aN) CI .0 0 F t, a all ccu ala) 0 N ° a0 a) •C U ° •5 •N N c o N E ° • ccoo L C Eu._ Z cki c, 13-"EC a) 3 N N ai c C ° _ tea) .. a) � L L O L " '� a) '0 5 ° h O v v ° ° C L —O C c 0 '.CO— O CU C a) LO .- 0 C A — w a) m N C cLu •0 c c C ° -� 3 T. L' — . a) ° a`_ 3 a) a) w >. p ,... N ca O ° Ca)> ° co ° L N L c o '� E Q L 3 • Z ¢ 4) L 1-13 0i a) .1.-. a) ...• N ° N N N ° N O a N t -0 N L '— — a) >cu 0 Q c° N Z C L • 00 2 L L. C .. C N ° a) ° C a) ° t0 r E `� N Z ao 3 L ° cu N O C c0 o N L • '0 a) ., W • N O "0 U .0 C o : N L ° O L p C n tJ L p N LO O p 04 O 7 . _ .. a) N .«- = N N a) > O O ° o a) E m C W0 w ° c vi E c_ ° C ac) ct° ° Eft 0v EZ -5 c.o C o = a) C o c .0 C. z � 0 °a�a CO CO d � E 3 ° o NV13 0 -DU 3 2 nc ) C E C U '� 3 cov0 ON '^ 41 CD N •0 .c u0i 3 O N >O N N Zs co c at N —°.. 0 C U O ° O N L a) F .N O N `. •,-= 1... 0 ,C 0„ o • NN3a) s0a) opoa) oa) c3a) oC2 QNa 0 � E E cu r- I-- O o • cu Nz a) 0 3 .. 3 3 0 c.� aL .Do o o... N .. C-.- ON to CT a a= C N °. as a) m 0 C CO 4; a) a) U)CO -O O c r6a) cc $ as1- a) • 00 aa) � ca) � c Oz CO V 0 .0 O .. N 7 L 4- .... — • m L -p • a) C o 0 0 Z V .. .. 0 a) a) CO n c • c a) t a) c c t- 0 y v .- as 'cH ° C • — ovC •• LU0$ 0Ec cN C m v oa) rn V) z _ a .o U l•-• .0 °? CO aa) o c a) a) L c m E ai c d4 a) O . > ° c o9 vim .. N v o v -vv 3 .r 0 c >. Uq m a) c6 E O 2 C O O N t a)CO U C N c t0 t c.f a) a) N a C7 c�� L Cd E V .• • • _ N - � — a) •- o C o E 47, 0 . v) z0 c U > � ° aNimcvc�'amc• `� ° � � • ayi � � `-° c � � 0 �,� O o — to aim a) o 'N C ` > — ` o a) 0 •a . u) N O 0 a t U V .da Z a) 0 aa) ;7 .._-- °? : -o u) .. c� c � m Y ar COC0 C U) o _a a _., O c 4) 'm0Vco s - -0 CSSOa? Nom a5 c ' - = ° - ma) v �xd ,� vw . .cocc_ . .0c > c .ccaoc • 3 a) amici 75 m _a — W U L •� E c CU v .12 0 3 (0 'V 3"l C c -v E Ev c° = > > w0 mU o ca aNi � a) 42 0c ma N oc co - N o . 0 °? •v N N= A 0 a0 V ra 0 ._. � ocv � 0c • O ° c .c �0 to c� aO)0a—N) v) •v c° c U o 0 — a) c0i a) a) `a' .) o o cu � w c ° .5 c0 m 0r ,- E ,c C Q Eq v) " 4., N N C 3 C O ... C •- ... o as COD L o 0 L v) U CIS 0 cn ° a) cE m oc� .. o moo. 0 cco — . c�a = � 0E CDi .co � . .c •c .n � caOac) a) o � c� ° ° a) ca -a -r,-, a) .- opo a� > o ,� .. ° ma) > . cu •� z0oL ` occc ooma' c • ; ° -v ) cii.2E � E a) .a 5 E c m -co a) c o -8 vv) = v o 8 a) mw o c a cnv -. gR. cc .- c � .- oNNcac .00 > ca) 'm_ Em ° ,aa) a `) m •C ° 0 E-+ ° � o �. a) _. (U . wa) a) .0 • �. mc3 Z cc 0 8 -) -v ca O o L w 0 C -a V .c o 0 O = c v a) O p 0 v) O O O a) ° E xi .. O 7 a) .. N - ca ° O r -O c . Ha : n > a) > •Cviia--) cc .� a°)it° �, � moEo ` .0 H � O v) E COO - Uo > o3 - -E • = — cv •c5a) 3 — C °? = -0v, ° OW Q- O CD 03 L V) O • • L L C • L .• v) • L O O L C 08 a) N a) O O r'" .> o � E- a) .N Q ` Q U) co m cs v) v) 'v ,_ o F- .5 " I- u) w c/1 v) cn < O C raw Q aq P Za a) a) � a � q tea) � m N .0 oo CO t vi d 3 w '» - - c c° o .Ec ca ) c o "" c ° A >. Q ca L O 0 ..0 O o N N Q N — N rn L y O EL L co o` ..-.4) ca v) m 3a) L a Lb. V L as N v o C w v) uJ -De ' N Q) > . •5_'> c a) L CU C O- O C vl as O N a) C c C L v) o L 0 E a) v) EC C E-- a) m _ •N Ei Q v) .0 -c„ .a a) O a) c V F- m 'O O L E O . r) a) O O 22 a) E p) Q a) "C3 " ° v, U C fn O o C ...0 C O V O .N O C a) 0 co amii CO Nt o �.� v v •y .c E v c) -c E c c° a) z .- �-'U -c U C2 0 a) N L co E 'a-) O e2 " v) CO :_. ' += 0)"O O N N �, O N C N L ., 0. - N O-_ co E N C N � E-' oa) °) calcco co L .E3c°`ao •—°a •- °- ! cla 3oNaL wd of o cII -cw 3 a) E E .- v � CO c . r EO. 55 5513 rn C ) E O w 0 C L C v) E 3 m va)) ami c m � C o �' c° o °" °) ` o 0f1in niv W w m a a) — E a) C a) 3 S •vc-, 3 ° a`> > o o- o .c E w n- oo. > v C a) c 2 c > vi a) -0 t 00- 3 v �, wc.) a) co Oa_ a) O -p C 3 a) O 0 O > c - ° rn A c) E C U) 0 .-5 O) 0. L C M c (n ig +. > N A N Q'v) A 00 C8 c > LJoocco - •c o0 �' U) as a) V a) O > ° � 3 � a) c� a) mac` 0 •, N a) F- a) a N CL 'OD C a) C O t- cu V a O N H Vclil o a vi E ca v) v, N 'v) a) N �. �. a) 5 3 ca 0 yO a) CL-0,,‘ N c'�i ai � a "° � = o c `� o • U q — a .4: aa)) aa ( a) ooY � 2 c � .L. c -c ° N0 v;o L.0o = � • Wiz N -C) N �' a) ° -5v) U O -cin C C L O' > p U N C N O ° 0) y al ) 3 o Eaci aciov' - .- 0 ac 'S.- m ctsn s- al ax w > E as c .. C � .. EoE a) al ° >,s � CCOOE — �'" � 0 O m CI a O c ca O U N >' .as .t >. E N «O. ' N N C)"t 8 R w. v) v) O s w o - t o S) --S mn 2 a) -0 C o ,_ •- lg � � al a) .° E _a ,t; a) V cn Zo _ u) a) ... — cn • = " Q a) co „ o O O o °? c n. L o cn cm Z 0) as m c -p E .0 °O > ~• tom/) r O` U > c p)L v) C •o Oo as as c C a) C ca 0 - o ca) -• F- ° a) a) 0 -0u) Ea) E NCL ov°) Eo03 ° y Na) 000 ° N � o 3oCW7 X L ri L . , O c 0 al ° s! L v, .. C a) lei L 2 2 — E ° 2. n d a) Ca E- ° n. c.) co . ea a F- CU m c. cn E Cl) v r- f- ez es ct c� a A c� a L c as a C) C 0 O U O .°C — >+~ n m a) CO — �a ca CO ` co o N L -p .... Z • E Q) `' N a) a) O "' U N N y C O W v • 2° •c c c m (j c a)Ce ai � 'EE O wZ O "a O a) L m Q_ i. C a- „,(1) N ° L O w CO N E Oo C m >, Q u) 0 u) 0.- 0 O ° O a) .0 ._ N 0 J E N 0 tI1 tail U a) cam N a) I- ,� `o -t cE � l- 3 o E ;5. � > O -• ca as Xc ° m Y a' �= o = • ;n ° Q 0 . NUV cU ' � a) ° a� ci zzwiZ Om m 112 � xN . c aO t° ocE > sc oU V L ai E o l Ufl01- ° I- L . O n y � y N LN L� u) ° L .; a) ,4 r, z a. HO• N a ' C N 0 c O ` /f •�=N � aCc° L � co U c yEia)" o N > ° vac - ° ) 0o• 3- at- 3C la oMa •QNiaW Ux0 � c ° 3 Xa) o ' Lt , 0U) _ si > w; N° ' � ° � > ° � -(j) am c � - c � cU° aNO ° ° ° co al O� mC0 > > cc .� aU-E -8aaE c Q _ca) caoE p N 00 , Np . aNONaO Ct/ p Q ›.o ° •� t ° .7.) -- 3 ° c oa) a) >.E -0 . 'ca) o >, 0pa ° . 0. > acaa) 003a) 0 VI la c E-+ , a) N •X N to O c � O o � L O C 6 ›. W • U5 a) darn ° 3 p ca a) p O p o c L ca c V 0 ° > 0v c -. N 0 > _ E. .c • C " o .- > 6 ' mea a) cao� 3oa •- 0 a, ca) vl c N N m a) N p ` C . C r L �� Q O U O > vl .a o ° a) '�H c>a o o a.' m : c E ° a>i o °) vi c co c = am m N ° c c m - Q c 3ca .- 0 ...._ Z CO V 0 0 - of •,� _ > 0 0 o 0 L i N O °'= O ++ O.. 0aO N . L ca C O p O L O a) 0 -- N 0) >, L +• V 3 Z •U o > V ccu 0 o C O _ O C .0 N •a N C 0 0 > = N 0 > 04- N 2 ca 00 _7. m° -° P2 m � '5 tan) ) 0 ° c • � ° i ° no o u) Q ° ° ° 0-11:. H x ›-' m L 0" L L v) � ° ° • a) ° a) o 51)- L F- O a) c p a a 0 E-I Ey C, = Ccac ;aca ° Eca0 •c .Sac .Co 40 � � cv ' a) W O ca 'a a) -p N a) 0 U N 0 _ ° 7 > ': a) > a) .c a) 0 .'' > E O O 0 CQ a) 5 O. 0 0 a) Q. o. O O O C L a) 1� L O L C O a) 0 0 COL a) C a. LTJ 0 > ■ m L co L O as o ■ co < ca ca a L • W 3 -O r• E- 0-I- 2 -0 C 0 e- E- -c, w MEQ o z z w ,� c c Cu E a O a) p •C O S E a) ` •N ca •0 u) 0 0 O N Q Q L .7., CuCa) L . Hca) O O 13 .> N w • ca ca y L ,� L_ 3 z «) m o n . U •c w ,. L- as U) 0 8 . Hca) = � ami a) L L > c a) ° m v c ° a)_Ca o c 0- ac L •gip ° as cu pa) � - 0) a) : oyc .rpa) Ec000) 0) . -• „ rnEv ° -, c > c � 0 m .• ° _a E c E � -o - o 0 'a -U.) .0"-C '° O 0 65 ;n N c = •° N a) ° ° O — N t .� •• -p N C '> ;, 0 ca . ... N C - -pL V -. ° u) C a) C ° o o L 3 3 ' 3 u, > 20N I- ca g ca - -p ` G. p 0 ° 0 i c a '- C = T.5 C u1 a) c o Ta ¢ 0 O IL •N C O o ca > L C O U O C a) = a) . Cua N .. a) .- -•' - C E ' s ° _- 'o UL N E ° N „a) E" •C a) C ° U N ° a) o ca N a) L ° N a 3 L 0 .`.., C ca 3 N 0 W Q 0 N76 QL u- EL •3 '>- 3 ami ° uv) u m c'a E c aa) - CCa c E a, a � '� � � N O0) a, -- ccLic � tLncoa) uo) c = wcoO OW Q,� 3 c Cu > af -° a`) E _c us E ° 11 o ° -c ayi � V 13 o .-) w .4 S Eo 48 v O ° o • m ° s4" � L- 0 cca cu N � N a o -- 0 c o a)0) � m tLn c 0 > = a? ._ pa amica � s � � a • Ao au) ° LO a) ECL ° ° ° y ` ~- cod 3 -. -3 = E,yoo a) a) -+ C �•- ° O �°- a) L a) O• a) c O C O Q' 0 L O .., ° �. N o U O N L-• — � U O O to ca E o 'O .c -c N 6 c" u' a) ° 3 c a) N ° capCa) . " 00 Ca) N ° OL 'c �L ::Ca 0 N V O O C N N O N 0 Cp 0 �>. 0 . ) t-n v°i a) o)0 a N A ?' U 'LM ` occ0ca) -. • � - a) m .-- a) a) C .C _c, zz ' ° x a) a) )' o • Zs o � m 'v = v ca0 u) w ° a Qmv 3 L ,� Z L ° -0Lc - a, _ Lo• cp .. c c c . o Q ° — L ca la ° ° O m • L O L L ' .L.' N •• 3 •.. Z`.N ° O C > >. a. T►1 • o c c (-) ° c cn to O ° a) EL .0 a) m c N O E � D v rncat 'No a oxo ° O C N a) ° ° C •� N ° -' E L t' .� p _ N p ° ... 0 ca w O w ° w O E O '� ca a) C .L.+ ca 0 > -. > to OC N . :a ° p) ca ... O N t� U C a) c A C a) ti N N C of ° ° ° O O N .0 co N - v «L+ O E.Q 0 p to • O a ca 3• N C7 ..-d 00 00 O a) 'C • F- fa .g. 7 0 5) wo a) r = ° ■ W .0 c- to . Q2 E A N a, m 'v L N .0 C SC ° c O� ON o .. oan "-' -C � m e t.. 0.cap aiEcC � � woH m m � m3flcm04'-' = .00 .0 H ° - � vi O. zU Cum oN «: m H 4= .r to • N 0 %.,.. 0 ,- a)c o :. C C V N .- C o ..m.. V Cud N a •c Q CL v ` p ca ca m E. y ... p m 'c N E ¢ m me m aE .o -v E -v mV co o , m m ' oc Q, M 00 • • U nCUCUmCUom7c0omc mc>. mamQ s = omE ,,-- 0Q3o O ZQ2om mmym r" C4) o cmc3mmN � va >. ENmUL .n mmC coo, . C -0 O3° m •5 ¢ .U = E t 0) m cm-C U - . cx5 .c • 3 m m a �VS a. 75 0C m = >, c � mo .° : O = vm3om vo 3 �9 ..a"m = Ny >s°'o . U : a = tm m Q. mfl. E ,cm > momm -a > m .. C m _w_ U >. '' 0 •5ofc m ° N ° CC 'vm N3CVOccm .0CQo C . y3m2 c ' ›. m ° L m mm QW m W m C Y o m 4- .0 0 fl. = oo C >'7 • LN= 4) 01- � co Z v oLNmC5 .- a > r- no cmcaw Z. 7i >- ,� 3 � m o> 3pf- m ° m ~ = mmp 0 mm3 -ormc . namapc cv > ofl- aom Ua - - mom ; mo �cQcn. m m > cocao2 . � c � ww - mmm - mE � N 3= m - 00. - . w Wo myza ° C Vm _ Vm2mQca Em D >. - = pCoU)c u) v.L — m 0- p n N . z U m : ~- mo C co m v1m6 cnLva .. mLamECm .. 4- Al v � o -vmoUc = o ° � 3 Vm C • m . Illcm ' c — Cm - c - : •cm = . Z> E Q p m 'v O m — p- 2 O• C 'O ° , o > ° • oOmC a) ..- - • '~ t4B.' o ° � 0 0 >. o -v Nom.0o m >. Cua - � mCu � = . m 0m > c : mc . 0yz . .0 oaCNE Noco - E � xw cm, UQma ;2mo0 0CC Womm9i� �� � mE0a °- Eccm L ` En ilAi HE' a � � c, m nC = mO mm Cm .- oC .CcwN V L ° 0cC CamQ.° C 1 .c em cH .�a" W 0 0. EElmca ■ I— mica E m ■ 0-• 0 CI H mo pa aQ ADcnH W . zQom¢ Cu ` a° w aOoo 00 ° .c ¢ mw C _c vnmQ ° cmm - UmoC • w > --cac v Ca °- c o )- - °Q . 3cacSm N ° m mC . -cmUmo c o " m - iQmc °� UL „ N a.' m .. E .«_ mm 'Qm mv om � La mm . cm OmN > 0a. cOCLQ T .0t > 7Oac� D _ 13mcv0)c O Cl) m m m 0..Q > 0 .>..c t U - m o °C7 " O0 HN 3Y N COpm° ° — , m i pO • mCE . , 'C Et" (DC • _ -,� >..Cmm - min. v_) o" Ec cn • E0 . ca CL m � 3 UW ,,.. o c 2 -. o •), Q vi a- r. p .. E o m m m rx 3 � a,'-` mo,5oa) = mciab m >.� = omcnmcL a.0 .n .5 v o ° = 3w ° c 0 C lc o '• M 2 E ate) 0 E > � LL. E NCO 0 2 r caECEC .0CUE0 cav • me 2..) 0...cn-vc •~ Cc.w a) �' �' a) .. as c ca c Y 0- 0 � n- o co m � ° c v_ ccu ate ._ 0 ._ %_ 0 mL .. m m ... m mo m m m m oD o o -v c o > ° a= ow 2 = -15N O O m C Lm .� o N m ° m ° >+ co d 7, U ca O .0 .n m p ".a �' c 0 mw of Ec m 7. 0c1.478 op as 0)L >_ n._Nc- 150 ° .0cv > ci- o .L- .0 o y o m W ...7. 0454- D L '- a • L () ca rn ''= m ° m cY o m "' m ma r o a m v, � moo = w ,.., — w co co u) v co t ca v, f— v .. a,•— v C 0. Sc c c cn Q o L o o .1 `a ° > :0 v L 3 0 po LEI a = - ,.. .4- Cu o 'mCcca •� 00 H � L13 c > al v a c o m c Qw 3 aci o m � 0 -5 = 0 Z 3 m m m '-'/^. c m o c .a > s c m � m -� ° a» n E mom. n TiT, C E aE o p {.L V/ m •� m •" '�• o O ; .N m 1+ m L (m/) o m Q >. 000 comma) Eoan,L >. o •vo mo .0 ) vca � mcaxn- Z < ai CU am) � •0w_ m m / m � CL c m m C o� w o oc -0 �vc -o 3 m m 0) zx 13 L al a3 p � � m ca 52 m 0 CU) cna o ap) =v O Lp 43 ° ° m 0 � 0 mm Cm 'a - 'v3 v, 0 c , ..... 221.7,32 , „ .0 >+ mmL c4 ,._, c > a ca m c � cm mac o, - =... ° 000g0 -61) = 0 ate) c o rn cax _ 0 .c0co � � cmm .0Em c mmcmc_ .cmjo- n. mLo Wop 0004, 1- 0740 m m cn ,(D = ,c Qm •c "Z a E o m n. .. E y = o 2E Q z d ac) >.f _ 3 Ell c>a o mm c 0.f-- m - -v .NO2 o my c > 0. 2g2 2 'c"-;1 °„71 00c0 -00E E 3 n- 3 w► CO a. s c0 = - o v = m m m y .r/. ° ca.. o m p O mp U p ca _c •C p c C .r L p m L N CO C p ¢ an0 Q.Q o oU 31- :-. (7) 9_ 02 , ■ Q 3 .- °• v) , LCM• 7 ..- eam Q N a _�'` * a) a) O t m c t ON O o .4- . .93... -.5 0, o c o ° aIT) c � 0 •- 0 �rz . or.. v cn m ° — o — "- c'0 co m o '�• CO ° •' ti ° o ° 2 c ovUo Z W o U : ,Z jaw Ca y +� a) a) -0 ca _ - c Z ! UD � a � W ° = aria o cn a) ._ 3 0 m e —— E • +. N C C) .0 N. co c°, .c .oc -t a cmc = � c n. >, 0 C7 "" 03 O ac)• a -ca 0 a) o co) v ai = 0 0 o coin � � w -c yoy- v) � cp . 0 a) 3 cn . � U v O L. C ayi c c ;a E '- a0i O p 03 0 N ` I r, Z a co nsw- • oCcp • O0 aa) E N o N sfOW L. ° CO (a co — s 0 13 CO , • C i C o - COhM h a) -4- Y -t a) o o h •C CO N C C W _ � 3 �° `° a s m Wa .-. ms •� c 0 mrn is a) Cil A O c `mom m "Z i s w CY coCO 0 49.). 'C a o > cn o o U f7o t ,15 x w j y t0 .� C O W ^ c y N L. O p 0 O 0E 6 ,L. co O c co c � N a ¢ � N a) O � , o.Z C C) I � - O c0 U -4,... V w 0 c0 O ° • O C C .E a) 03 o O N 0) c . U O OCca CL O WOy W ° 0 ` 1 a) ,C O NC ce O ° C � aoZ3 � os n cai — tea d a) •� 6 0oZ aE . 6 cc 0 — itc mU v > E OCa0 . O .y a "' C) C/O° a . o CD hoC Q'Oo lo _c A O � co 4-. o . a) Z c � aaZi a0 m 43 o as Hco L. co co CD 3 CO °c' a = 04..., o o c 3c .-on CO CD Tli a) ( 3 TH ) ` "� � si � = . ON c2 ° Ci; ;" ° . C cG c.= S J a. . c, a) o , n E.acc a °, a ° as ,Ea? +a� . m' o o JC) CO wSf _ w3koocC -- ciaNa03 aa) h - r_ • C' oO oi - WygvVG = v) o .. 2D ca � — � Q 0 W 4ri > O— 2 Z a) as 0 = o >• oc au • d 3u _ a) ami ° aiEL. "6 "E" o ° � '~- o ``' ccav � co ,c QZ u- Ea) � -Evs) � coE. yUcsn0 � — U0 0 .o >. c • z 0 0 N •c .- v o o 2 — as co c o c 'L- ° a) _¢ � � n o .c . O fEO • roccno .- v N0E 0 � G. .. a) 'O D O O a) a) 't E L 7 C _c C .c d O O W NLS ,E5 Jo CSL 0 > ° °0 c O O � y ' C -afx a 73 q) . a —_ O U CO a) o C U w. — a) O 0)...- O a) C .. c0 TU. N = • 13 L a) - O L -p -' C o i, ;O O C O > L . > ° a) c0 L N += 7 a) �? >, U O C CO " v- C a) , • . `) — 0 5 o `-' H O c o a) OL. L 13 CO 0 N C) co �• 0 O O ° CO C O O a) c 0 a) c o c H C O N cC C) U •... �i �- a) Q • 0 E N -• . N C a) O o O a) t O co F" r[ YO >. ci)o O o c c c o o .0 c `oma ~ o ° W d eft ,_ c as > . a) ° 0 � 2 , 0 o .7,- o al (1•) �5 3 .c W -- 0 ALL- ca v o > -a � � "_ CU co CO m a) vci Z ' co aa! co o_ c -0 a) a) c ... -c � 0 3 o z ` •O O W CL = D w 'nv p a) N — : 3 o ca w o c a) .1 > ca. 0 � caov) cce > — mcou) m � om w o 4- 0 o W � COO � w � o � co itEcca" ccvM -p � o � ° U W ,_, cmc 01 co cn = '` Lc • 'aoo •. . — as ca > CL -.4- a) AO CL 3 vO UJ 0 zz�R1 c flcE > a U C C) •= c N Q. NEN CO .O c Em co — «• o — a N O _ 00coO O > '11 w C U CY co ct8 }1>, 0� 5oL = mh C 7 coC)c E O. i a COC . ,� = EE co ! n � 3Aal ocN Lmn . no N W•-, 0)3 •C2 .. cN m . •cc.o � o c � ov) 9a2Eco9N0l — av6 a g1,1 o 15 o (.) 22 o_ 0 o - >,t u) - . otod0 -coc _ cw >, rnoo „° cia)°-- oo — c N cn W .• o ~ c c CO ao «. a) ccCUaCTu o clQ03 N � � = � � oQ - i► � o 2 a � ra � y � aC7xc oa) > ' >~ co W w CU c4) cn Nvao Ecamooc ' c oo C < c° >, ID 4 Z4) 0 O C ° V E O EE-0 .02 = CO) CO aaQ — a4) - 0� . C Cl) > 0) CC 4 0) N W — O i- _ ANaO O Q N ;rLc`' . CO .-• Co +OC cN . C > DN O X fro Z O 2 •C o •• dL O r — C y O L P. N Q 'aNYUQO !- 1- A N av) 0 0 N < — ON 'OJo O O• O Na. o ... a C rn an O, ii) c c `n CI O t.zi- O V CuL C y v, � ' W 2 • m a. L "Q •- c Q d p ow0 v a) O .w+ 51- U aNc0 Q EOa2 0 0. a as In fl. Cu G .oOL yO 3E �fl15 W 03 o aucO Cu ... Cl >+ O O c co Cu V O W C� U cota. Cuc >: .cU 3 (Q 9.-. ; ✓ Vo `in a)co c2 Cu C ' OCOi c) w0 a. aN O 0_c co v, p a) Cu «1 al V 'E Z' O ca � � .Sv c t 3 = CO 0 v O c .� O O N 7 L Q C c E ° Z ° ° 0 0...2 CCD 0 F- >- a) cC a Z 4 c 'c� ` ca_ 00i CO) E >. 5 > rn .Z' o0) c .0- z g 2 2 > A 1E 0 In co F., (-) Z c u- c -c c 0 z >.0 a� .W u.. 0 'o of = 2 w cp8EO 0 >- Cu .42 cg w • O a) al w w Z 0 o H LI) ,_ O I „ s r F- O s ,� -- >" 0 > v - OO vv) Q CO 0 F-- OU) O A • W W aA C- ;-1) as V > a. L4 Cu ,_.0 � Cu c � � �1 3 w '. -a E d aa) N E- -Oa c C a N cB 0 _, 0 L = L C O U E 3 c 0 0 E c � viN - ..-- c p � L U rn _ O O a) .c = we •cp� • ce a) cu • P � 0 O rn0 - c c O 5 0) - - rn Z o � � ai T- actsco -a i C - Waaa) ()) O ap cn .c c 0c6 Y U Co W .a.. .c c c a) .0 v O . 0 6I • ca p p) v Q L Cu .c o � > a) 6 -c O w c N > V- • me ° a Cucr'I A � p c 2)c Cu No Cl- O Y Z+ p co L� :-c c off VO ' VCcN ato ?I s a) 0 O .EN Ta a .N I - >- > 8 > :0 - V F- >- A 0 W - cn O � O O Ica 0 W E w >. CO▪ CO p �4.L ._ 44 ii O ... 0 W (0 L d Z cUCcO0 .-, s c a) Z g 3 .< E a) L0-1 ° cw at � 'n � � � p g -o A. � U- O aicuiooc I3 .c0 o g Wx O >- Iv o :� v vim vi > 0 >- -Q IF Zro W F- ypcLocLo ,u? p � wa) N W F- L c QN - ? � p O av � .a Jct F- Z .0 ca W 2- L a) 2v 3 ,C3gC7 Cl) 00 OCCo6axibo I.L. - 3 C/) 00 I-- c -c ANa, • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 505-97 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO TM CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A REZONING FROM B-2 TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT(PUD),AND OF A GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES AS REQUESTED BY D.W. JONES, INC.; PLANNING CASE NO. 477-97 WHEREAS, D.W. Jones, Inc. has applied for a PUD rezoning to develop properties located within an area bounded by Silver Lake Road, Highway 10 and the southern boundary of the St. Paul Waterworks right-of-way, (excluding that property owned by TJB Homes,)property zoned B-2, Limited Business District, described as follows: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 30,Range 23,Ramsey County,Minnesota described as beginning at the southwest corner of said Southeast Quarter;thence easterly along the south line of said Southeast Quarter 1,346.90 feet to the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 10; thence northwesterly along said center line 1,434.13 feet to the center line of Silver Lake Road;thence southwesterly and southerly 1,219.64 feet along said last • centerline to the point of beginning. Subject to State Trunk Highway No. 10,Silver Lake Road and St.Paul Waterworks Right of Way. Except that part of said Southeast Quarter described as commencing at the southwest corner of said Southeast Quarter and measuring easterly along the south line of said Section 6 a distance of 1,346.9 feet to the intersection of the center line of Highway No. 10(Anoka Cut-off);thence northwesterly along the centerline of said Highway No. 10,a distance of 765.9 feet to the point of beginning;thence southwesterly at right angles to the center line of said Highway No. 10 a distance of 275 feet; thence northwesterly and parallel with said centerline 100 feet;thence northeasterly at a right angle to the centerline of said Highway No. 10;thence southeasterly along said Highway No. 10 to the point of beginning. And having the following PIN numbers: 06-30-23-43-0003 06-30-23-43-0008 06-30-23-43-0004 06-30-23-43-0009 06-30-23-43-0006 06-30-23-43-0036 06-30-23-43-0007 06-30-23-43-0037 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map • 3. PUD Concept Plan,dated 3/26/97 4. Letter from Applicant,dated 3/5/97 5. Letter from Developer,3/19/97 Planning Commission Resolution No. 505-97 • April 16, 1997 Page 2 6. Letter from St. Paul Water Utility,dated 2/24/97 7. Letter from Minnesota DNR,dated 3/3/97 8. Letter from the US Army Corp of Engineers,dated 3/24/97 9. Letters from Residents 10. Market Needs Analysis/Traffic Analysis,dated 3/19/97 11. Tax Impact Analysis,dated 3/19/97 WHEREAS, The Mounds View Planning Commission makes the following findings regarding the possible adverse effects of this rezoning according to Section 1125.01, Subd. 1.e: 1. Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan According to the Comprehensive Plan, the properties included in this project should be developed on a staged, planned-unit basis. The District 1 (City Center) Comp Plan map designates these properties as mixed use PUD. The Comp Plan also suggests that the natural features on this site be preserved and that consideration be given for the dedication of a bike or walking path. The proposed plan includes a mixture of uses including convenience commercial, restaurants, office, and senior citizen housing, to be zoned under a planned unit development. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • 2. The geographical area involved. 4. The character of the surrounding area. This subject area is for the most part vacant. The only improvement is a small insurance office near the corner of the subject property. A large proportion of the area is federally protected wetland, the balance is uplands covered in prairie grass and scrub trees. There is an 83-unit senior residential building to the south of this project, Highway 10 and commercial developments to the east, and a service station and multi- and two-family residential districts to the north and west. TJB Homes has an office building within this section of land to be developed, but it is not included in the proposal. The proposal will fit in the surrounding character in that it includes a mixture of commercial and residential uses with the commercial uses concentrated along Highway 10. The residential use, proposed as a senior citizen housing development will coordinate with the existing senior housing project on an adjacent property. 3. Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which the use is proposed. The applicants have provided an estimated tax impact analysis of the subject property showing the current taxes paid and the projected taxes paid with the uses proposed. Taxes paid are expected to increase a minimum of$215,000 as a result of this project. It is anticipated that the proposal will have a positive, rather than negative, effect on 11111 surrounding properties since the uses proposed blend well with existing development, and • • Planning Commission Resolution No. 505-97 April 16, 1997 Page 3 the plan coordinates the improvements on this property. The traffic study indicates that the intersection at Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road will continue to function at an acceptable level of service. The senior facility to the south should benefit as a result of this project with the added facilities within walking distance and the prospect of more seniors with which to gather. 5. The demonstrated need for such a use. According to the Towle marketing study prepared as part of the Section 9 Redevelopment Plan for the Highway 10 corridor, the uses proposed with the exception of the gas station/car wash/fast food component are listed as being well suited for the area given the market. While a demonstrated need was not exhibited specifically for the gas station, car wash and fast food, the Towle study stated that high impulse, convenience commercial was the highest and best use for the parcels at the intersection of Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road. A separate marketing report supplied by the applicant shows that a large percent of the volume on Highway 10 is not being captured by the existing service stations. The car wash proposed is a soft cloth wash, as opposed to the existing"touch- less" and self-wash options already present in the City. • WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that this proposal meets the purpose and intent of Planned Unit Developments as stated in Section 1120.01 of the Mounds View Municipal Code in that the applicant has planned the overall development of this property and included an appropriate mix of uses which compliment each other and will add to the vitality of the City. Requirements have been included to ensure high quality architectural design and coordinated signage. WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that this proposal meets the general requirements and standards for Planned Unit Developments (Section 1120.02)through the stipulations established in Exhibit 1 to this resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that this proposal meets the special requirements and standards for mixed-use PUDs (Section 1120.03, Subd. 3) as follows: Required Provided Minimum Project Size 5 acres 12.96 acres Minimum Street Frontage 200 feet 960 feet Minimum Property Width 200 feet 780 feet Landscaping, Screening and Surfacing: • (1) The entire site,other than that taken up by structures or landscaping shall be surfaced with a material to control dust,drainage and erosion. Planning Commission Resolution No. 505-97 April 16, 1997 Page 4 The applicant is proposing to pave all parking areas, access drives and the internal roadway. (2) A drainage system conforming to the comprehensive storm drainage plan and subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall be installed. The preliminary drainage plan indicates the creation of two NURP ponds, one between the proposed senior building and one at the south easternmost portion of the subject area. At the last Planning Commission meeting, the issue was raised as to whether the second NURP pond was actually located within the delineated wetland area. The applicants indicated that there were other locations within the subject area to accommodate another pond if necessary. The City Engineer was unable to provide comments as to the drainage system capabilities without the run- off calculations and the ponding specifications. This information will be provided by the applicants at the development stage of the PUD process. A stipulation has been included that adjustments shall be made in the density and layout of the development if needed to accommodate the necessary drainage improvements. (3) Development abutting an R-1,R-2,or R-3 District shall be screened and landscaped in • compliance with subdivisions 1103.08 (1)through(5)of this Title. This requirement is not applicable since the subject properties do not abut any R-1, R-2 or R-3 Districts. The proposal would meet the requirements of Section 1103.08 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the rezoning from B-2, Limited Business District to PUD, Planned Unit Development and approve the general concept plan as shown in the alternate site plan dated 3/26/97, for the Winiecki/Jones properties between Silver Lake Road and Highway 10 to the southern line of the St. Paul Waterworks right-of-way, excluding the parcel occupied by TJB Homes, all subject to the stipulations in Exhibit 1, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and with the following condition: 1. Prior to forwarding this case to the City Council for action, the applicant and staff consult with the Ramsey County traffic engineer to resolve any concerns from Ramsey County regarding possible traffic congestion on Silver Lake Road which would be created by this proposed development. • • Planning Commission Resolution No. 505-97 April 16, 1997 Page5 • BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward . this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 16th day of April, 1997. Jerry Peterson, Chairperson Attest: Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director (Seal) • N:\DATA\USERSTAMS\SHARE\DEVCASES\477-97\JONESPCI.RES • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 505-97 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A REZONING FROM B-2 TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT(PUD), AND OF A GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES AS REQUESTED BY D.W. JONES,INC.; PLANNING CASE NO. 477-97 WHEREAS, D.W. Jones, Inc. has applied for a PUD rezoning to develop properties located within an area bounded by Silver Lake Road, Highway 10 and the southern boundary of the St. Paul Waterworks right-of-way, (excluding that property owned by TJB Homes,) property zoned B-2, Limited Business District, described as follows: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 30, Range 23,Ramsey County,Minnesota described as beginning at the southwest corner of said Southeast Quarter;thence easterly along the south line of said Southeast Quarter 1,346.90 feet to the center line of State Trunk Highway No. 10; thence northwesterly along said center line 1,434.13 feet to the center line of Silver Lake Road;thence southwesterly and southerly 1,219.64 feet along said last centerline to the point of beginning. Subject to State Trunk Highway No. 10,Silver Lake Road and St.Paul Waterworks Right of Way. Except that part of said Southeast Quarter described as commencing at the southwest corner of said Southeast Quarter and measuring easterly along the south line of said Section 6 a distance of 1,346.9 feet to the intersection of the center line of Highway No. 10(Anoka Cut-oft);thence northwesterly along the centerline of said Highway No. 10,a distance of 765.9 feet to the point of beginning;thence southwesterly at right angles to the center line of said Highway No. 10 a distance of 275 feet; thence northwesterly and parallel with said centerline 100 feet;thence northeasterly at a right angle to the centerline of said Highway No. 10;thence southeasterly along said Highway No. 10 to the point of beginning. And having the following PIN numbers: 06-30-23-43-0003 06-30-23-43-0008 06-30-23-43-0004 06-30-23-43-0009 06-30-23-43-0006 06-30-23-43-0036 06-30-23-43-0007 06-30-23-43-0037 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map • 3. PUD Concept Plan,dated 3/26/97 4. Letter from Applicant,.dated 3/5/97 5. Letter from Developer,3/19/97 Planning Commission Resolution No. 505-97 • April 16, 1997 Page 2 6. Letter from St.Paul Water Utility,dated 2/24/97 7. Letter from Minnesota DNR,dated 3/3/97 8. Letter from the US Army Corp of Engineers,dated 3/24/97 9. Letters from Residents 10. Market Needs Analysis/Traffic Analysis,dated 3/19/97 11. Tax Impact Analysis,dated 3/19/97 WHEREAS, The Mounds View Planning Commission makes the following findings regarding the possible adverse effects of this rezoning according to Section 1125.01, Subd. 1.e: 1. Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan According to the Comprehensive Plan, the properties included in this project should be developed on a staged, planned-unit basis. The District 1 (City Center) Comp Plan map designates these properties as mixed use PUD. The Comp Plan also suggests that the natural features on this site be preserved and that consideration be given for the dedication of a bike or walking path. The proposed plan includes a mixture of uses including convenience commercial, restaurants, office, and senior citizen housing, to be zoned under a planned unit development. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • 2. The geographical area involved. 4. The character of the surrounding area. This subject area is for the most part vacant. The only improvement is a small insurance office near the corner of the subject property. A large proportion of the area is federally protected wetland, the balance is uplands covered in prairie grass and scrub trees. There is an 83-unit senior residential building to the south of this project, Highway 10 and commercial developments to the east, and a service station and multi- and two-family residential districts to the north and west. TJB Homes has an office building within this section of land to be developed, but it is not included in the proposal. The proposal will fit in the surrounding character in that it includes a mixture of commercial and residential uses with the commercial uses concentrated along Highway 10. The residential use, proposed as a senior citizen housing development will coordinate with the existing senior housing project on an adjacent property. 3. Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which the use is proposed. The applicants have provided an estimated tax impact analysis of the subject property showing the current taxes paid and the projected taxes paid with the uses proposed. Taxes paid are expected to increase a minimum of$215,000 as a result of this project. It is anticipated that the proposal will have a positive, rather than negative, effect on . surrounding properties since the uses proposed blend well with existing development, and • Planning Commission Resolution No. 505-97 April 16, 1997 Page 3 the plan coordinates the improvements on this property. The traffic study indicates that the intersection at Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road will continue to function at an acceptable level of service. The senior facility to the south should benefit as a result of this project with the added facilities within walking distance and the prospect of more seniors with which to gather. 5. The demonstrated need for such a use. According to the Towle marketing study prepared as part of the Section 9 Redevelopment Plan for the Highway 10 corridor, the uses proposed with the exception of the gas station/car wash/fast food component are listed as being well suited for the area given the market. While a demonstrated need was not exhibited specifically for the gas station, car wash and fast food, the Towle study stated that high impulse, convenience commercial was the highest and best use for the parcels at the intersection of Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road. A separate marketing report supplied by the applicant shows that a large percent of the volume on Highway 10 is not being captured by the existing service stations. The car wash proposed is a soft cloth wash, as opposed to the existing"touch- less" and self-wash options already present in the City. WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that this proposal meets the purpose and intent of Planned Unit Developments as stated in Section 1120.01 of the Mounds View Municipal Code in that the applicant has planned the overall development of this property and included an appropriate mix of uses which compliment each other and will add to the vitality of the City. Requirements have been included to ensure high quality architectural design and coordinated signage. WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that this proposal meets the general requirements and standards for Planned Unit Developments (Section 1120.02)through the stipulations established in Exhibit 1 to this resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that this proposal meets the special requirements and standards for mixed-use PUDs (Section 1120.03, Subd. 3) as follows: Required Provided Minimum Project Size 5 acres 12.96 acres Minimum Street Frontage 200 feet 960 feet Minimum Property Width 200 feet 780 feet Landscaping, Screening and Surfacing: • (1) The entire site,other than that taken up by structures or landscaping shall be surfaced with a material to control dust,drainage and erosion. Planning Commission Resolution No. 505-97 • April 16, 1997 Page 4 The applicant is proposing to pave all parking areas, access drives and the internal roadway. (2) A drainage system conforming to the comprehensive storm drainage plan and subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall be installed. The preliminary drainage plan indicates the creation of two NURP ponds, one between the proposed senior building and one at the south easternmost portion of the subject area. At the last Planning Commission meeting, the issue was raised as to whether the second NURP pond was actually located within the delineated wetland area. The applicants indicated that there were other locations within the subject area to accommodate another pond if necessary. The City Engineer was unable to provide comments as to the drainage system capabilities without the run- off calculations and the ponding specifications. This information will be provided by the applicants at the development stage of the PUD process. A stipulation has been included that adjustments shall be made in the density and layout of the development if needed to accommodate the necessary drainage improvements. (3) Development abutting an R-1,R-2,or R-3 District shall be screened and landscaped in • compliance with subdivisions 1103.08 (1)through(5)of this Title. This requirement is not applicable since the subject properties do not abut any R-1, R-2 or R-3 Districts. The proposal would meet the requirements of Section 1103.08 NOW, 1'1iEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the rezoning from B-2, Limited Business District to PUD, Planned Unit Development and approve the general concept plan as shown in the alternate site plan dated 3/26/97, for the Winiecki/Jones properties between Silver Lake Road and Highway 10 to the southern line of the St. Paul Waterworks right-of-way, excluding the parcel occupied by TJB Homes, all subject to the stipulations in Exhibit 1, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and with the following condition: 1. Prior to forwarding this case to the City Council for action, the applicant and staff consult with the Ramsey County traffic engineer to resolve any concerns from Ramsey County regarding possible traffic congestion on Silver Lake Road which would be created by this proposed development. • Planning Commission Resolution No. 505-97 April 16, 1997 Page 5 BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 16th day of April, 1997. Jerry Peterson, Chairperson Attest: Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director (Seal) • N:\DATA\USERS\DAMS\SHARE\DEVCASES\477-97\JONESPC 1.RES 11 :///)/ �1 cr z COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 14"; nrtam rr: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View MN 55112 A612-784-305 5 • .2 ':t.Par.tcs`t 1Q�'� 612-784-3462 -FAX Please Type or Print Information-Complete Both Sides of This Form Applicant Information Name of Applicant P.W. Jones,Inc. - Telephone 71 R-S1�7-320.7 Address PO Box 340 Fax 718-547-*62 Walker MN 56484 Interest in Property(check appropriate box) X Owner of Property X Contract for Deed Owner c Lesser, Operator,Manager X Agreement to Purchase c Other(explain) Applicants must provide evidence of interest in property at the time of application,and if you are not the owner of the property,you must provide a letter of permission from the owner giving consent to the filing of this application. The property owner must sign this application for it to be accepted. •Property Description/Proposal Address or Geral Location Highway 371 & Silver Lake Road Legal Description Attached on site plan -- Property Ideatizicadon#(P #) 06-30-23-43-0004,00360,00 .73,.440 2,000Gp,QOO ,0008 ,0003 of Acres Current Zoning B-2 — Present 1:55e Type of Application X Undeveloped/Vacant a Comprehensive Plan Amendment $200 Single Family Dwelling a Rezoning 5200/ac;-.._:.T$200 max$1000 c Duplex:Two Family Dwelling 0 Major Subdivision $250+$250 deposit" C Minor Subdivision $150 .Liulti-family Dwelling Unit Business/Comrnercial EstablishmentCX Plarmed Unit Development(PLD) $350 Indw-a-iai Establishment c PUD Amendment S150 C Other(explain) ❑ Conditional Use Permit R-1,R-2$75;all others£200 c Variance R-1,R-2$75;all others$200 o Code Appeal $75 Develop Review/Site Plan S 100/ac;min$100 max$500 c Wetland Alteration Petznit S50+deposit* c Wetland Buffer Permit ? Floodplain Permit $200 c Other • 'yee Municipal Code for explanation of deposits \ Please complete the reverie side of this application. I , I M. ' City of Mounds View,MN - �. . Development ApplicationPage 2 • Property C1P i cation t Abstract N Torrens Descripdon of Proposal To develop the entire vacant land 1u-cared on the southwest corner of Hwy. 10 and Silver Lake Rd. in the Section 9 Redevelopment study. - The proposal calls for a fast f ood/ga_g convenience store . . . • - ... - - -• ,..- office building and senior housing. The plan provides alternative access from Silver Lake Rd. to the Hwy. 10 properties. It also integrates the current sidewalks into the proposed project. BY MY COUR) SIGNATURE ON THIS APPLICATION,I HEREBY DECLARE THAT,TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE,THE INFORMATION FROVEDED F TRUE AND ACCURATE. D.W. nesc. Siaturc of Applicant By: Ro ' 5ucnesneau, Jr. Its V> Name of Applicant(typedrprinted) Sisnature of Property tv Owner �'� r . Le-tA-C-164-'1" . Norrie ofProperry Owaev(typed/printed) Ron Duchesneau, Jr. D ',. Jones,Inc."E, .......,„. • CL"` -e Wi' 1 C---- : ' 't_c ,_ ' iec Ron Duchesneau, Jr.JIts o +,J} I� Trustees of D.W. Jones, Inc. � 5A(.1.Q.a‘''.,-c-k-- of it Sharin- Plan C/..i.1/4-7- ./A 1;4— • Ron Duchesneau, Jr. h rustee FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Datc of Submittal 1-P I - 1 Datc of Acceptance 3-5 - 1 Assigned to: ,:s-t, Planning Case No. 1411-et 1 60- av Limit zr,-�1-9'1 120-day limit U -,21..-9 7 Fees Paid: Account# Check# Q e.c e IPA is Application: 0,u 0 544 4'f ?ark Dedication: Deposits: _ 54Ut2, Othcr: ,J.h.r- 50,00 Tots:_ -i00.00 • • C:`.OFFICE',W'PWL\AW'PDOCSl4DMLN\F'ORMS\DEVAPP.FOR 1/97 * V �v8138 0 ,n m ao m a8o 8147 •'`,'' .d 8145 8140 �..: 2�3 N N N N N 8135 ' dis' 8140 8141 PLACE 8132 l 8127 Maar .ca 8132 • e49 811• n in' 0. 01 on N w WI n N n nn :Ft' - 8111 n w WI In N � INJB7O6 n N _ o m N pt.: M NN NN ND N Nm N NN N N N N N 812 '12N t° m N NN N iCO m v n h N N N N N N N • 810• - WOOD -; M 1N t0 N 0808• NNm roNN18080 t0 D 8081 I P. BOBS 8075 e 1 52 8099 co co . a N N N N N O 8085 f N N (8086 ! 8 8068 8071 80721 8060 8065 8084 8070 8071 8066 8071 8072 8071 O i i8040 1 , _ 8075 8060 8059 8050 8055 8060 8065 8050 8060 iX.; B-3• 8045 8046 q 8045 8042 8045 8052 8051 8044 8045 1 8046 ,..,R-0 8030 8036 I 8040 8039 8032 - o' 8033 8040 8035 8032 8031 8038 N 8020 8025 8026 8025 8028¢Yg011 8000 8022 8019 8030 - 8016 8015 0 8025 8018 8021 \ '•. 7980 8005 8000=,8005 8016 8009 8006 8000 8001 8010 _ 7990 7985 8004 7981 7990 0 7981 7990 0 7989 7996 7993 7990 - '� CC 0: ^^.. B,3 7980 . 7975 7970 7979 7980 7969 7980 7979 7980 G 7985 7970 rn t N 7960 7965 7960 0 7959 7970 7965 7969 I 7960 7961 7964 N • M Lig 7949 7954 7959 7966 7950 7951 7954 N 2 7954 7955 7956 O1 N 7940 7945 7946 7927 HILLVIEW, m - 7933 a-4 N 7932 7950 7930 7935 7930 7917 7940 PARK - nI 7901 N a 70 N N N 17900 7901 7900 N N N 7900 7901 N c10- 7900 P� `c ' ROAD HILLVIEW 10 444 •7 bi Ell d :. . - N 78911 N N 7880 7895 N N 17890 78851 COCO tO 7864 7 _: n0 0 Z 7885 7866 7867 7870 7869 7858 7876 )-Z(7) 7860 ` N B-2 7877 7854 7851 7860 7865 7852 w _ N7870 3 785012:21 B ,y,.‘••:' >� N 7863 7842 7841 7850 7855 7846 g _ g N N N 780• 7801 AO 0. 7851 7830 7840 7835 f 7840 r OAKWOOD DR 7791 R-444:-3p, 7820 7815 7790 7815 7800 R 3 rn 778= 7781 7750 �, ti^ tt. 7810 7805 7780 rst •7688 7769 7780 ��O B-2 7800 .7809 7770 3 7801 I 7760 - 7758 7759 7770 _ , ���'�Y, 4"):-44# q R-4 7801 w 7751 7750 7748 7749 7768 7767 'tib ,�A 7767 7760 7741 7740 _ ' 77380 773 7729 R-3 tip 77617750 77317730.. b),40011‘ '+� 7755 7730 7721 7720 7728 3 7729 7728 7723 R-2 )04 - 773• rt,‘") 7745 7710 7711 7718 0 7719 7718 772 ' 0 _ Z o 7711 o 7700 ,_,17710 Y 770917710 7711 N 7744 ,����- 7775 N N .. L9 R-2 co r v. 7692 � NIIM: 2 2 2 to N 2 2553 i 7685 N 7692 ®N 7690 PUD O...----............T .n 8-3 N N N N n N N N N N 2551 U � N fD 2549 01 0 7669 7670 w N N N 2547 _a Y •w 7665 7660 7653 5 pkp B-4 2545 7647 7644 o B-3 'b N. 2539 7629 7634 7635ON N 2537 tP 7625 7620 • lo le I 7619 7600 7601 SILVER VIEW ( , ,��• 1 7585 7594 7575 C` N ° '-1% yah 7579 7588 o PARK " N N• N NW Vi B-2 : L - ( O 7565 7584 Om�i N N ° N. n Nik o 7555 7572 S ell min c rn s 2:4"N its, J- La to n n r O 7545 7560 o N N p^ p E2 r: _ Y 7515 � � PF N N N N N i 0> 100 O-c., ���N N N ,r N O — hWM] ..., O II IN°n O N N — OtD . n 7 MEM R1 N NII N p,.N PS . CO co co N M tp cT•4• N O O t0 tp N O c0 11110, i cC"N N �N T"'�1 DRIVE ® N �'1/t.+ ' Nt1 Il, t0 O 2""N D_1 Zoning Map Case No. 477-97 7SE Corner of Silver Lake Road & Highway 10 N Applicant: D.W. Jones, Inc. 1 11* JONES Box 340 WALKER MINN 5 8 4 8 4 March 5, 1997 Pamela Sheldon Director of Community Development City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 Dear Pamela: The PUD that has been submitted is a well thought out plan that will allow the city to achieve the highest and best use out of the subject property while complimenting the needs of the surrounding neighborhood as well as the entire community. The plan calls for commercial properties to be located along Highway 10 such as a fast food/gas convenience store and car wash, fast food restaurant and small office building and then transitioning the back land into high density residential accompanied by tasteful treatment of green space and wetlands blending into the neighborhood. The Comprehensive Plan calls for the site to be developed into a Mixed Use PUD just as being proposed. The plan states that District 1 should contain a mix of commercial, public, low, medium and high density residential and open space uses. The plan also recommends that provisions for dedication of land to a pedestrian/bicycle trail system be provided. Because of this we have included a sidewalk the entire length of f Silver Lake Road which will accomplish this goal. The plan states that access to Highway 10 should be limited and concentrated. For this reason we have included a private road which accesses the site from Silver Lake Road to provide an alternative approach for the commercial properties. The commercial properties also share some access points to Highway 10 to help control the congestion._ We believe that in addition to complying with the Comprehensive Plan, the • proposal will also fit the recommendations of SRF Consulting Group, Inc's t N A N F - • Section 9 Redevelopment Study. We have attended all of their public forums, have had dialogue with them and believe that our proposal will resemble one of their recommendations. SRF, as well as Towle Real Estate, have stated that the corner of Silver Lake Road and Highway 10 needs to be a high traffic use. The Towle study states that this part of the subject site should be oriented for commercial business that relies on "impulse" traffic, rather than destination-oriented traffic. Its study also states that some type of convenience or service-oriented retailer may be a good possibility to be developed. All the other aspects of our plan, such as fast food/restaurant, office, senior housing, treatment of green space and integration into the neighborhood are in the present Towle study. Before action is taken on this project, the SRF study will be presented and we believe very strongly that our plan will fit within their recommendations. If you have any further questions, please give me a call at 218-5470-3307. Thank you. Skip Duchesneau ipVice President SD;db MAR-27-97 THU 10:56 FAX NO, 6123495230 P, 02 • 7 FIVE D LIMITED • ! Gas/Convenience Srore Operations and Land Development Charles E.Durand President, CEO. Robert B.Durand Vice P,rsident, Treasurer Ralph S.Durand Director of Development March 27, 1997 • Ms. Pam Sheldon Community Development Director City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 Dear Pam: We are sorry that our presentation at the Planning Commission meeting needed to be cut short due to time constraints. We had a number of experts available at that time ready to supplement their reports and answer questions of either staff or Planning Commission members. We would now like to summarize what we perceive to be the major areas of concern acknowledged by the Planning Commission, 1) IMPACT ON THE BUFFER ZONE The conceptual plan indicates that the buffer zone of 100 feet has changed dramatically from 1988 to 1992. We do not feel however, that the amount of actual wetland ponding has necessarily increased from 1988 to 1992, but rather wetland vegetation has expanded and this accounts for the wet land area growth. We know for a fact that the wetland pond actually dries up may times in the summer and is therefore not a specified area. With proper approvals, we would like to enhance the wetland area by deepening the pond and establishing a permanent body of water. Our plan shows the impervious area encroaching on approximately 40 percent of the wetland buffer zone as determined by the 1992 delineation. The existing office building *TB Homes" is almost entirely in the 1988 and 1992 buffer area and if we consider the change in the restaurant site proposed by the city approximately 2/3 of the restaurant building would be with in the 1992 buffer area. The point we are making is that a certain amount of encroachment on the 100 foot buffer zone has already taken place • !luno FinAnriA1 PIHza.Suite 2500 • 120 South 6th Street•Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Mg-27-97 THU 10:56 FAX NO. 6123495230 P. 03 41/ Page 2 and more seems to be inevitable. Thus we must deal with the encroachment problem as best we can. The entire buffer zone area is 1.9 acres and accounts for 24 percent of the entire buildable P.U.D. Our goal is to create an overall plan that will be attractive and respectful of the buffer and ponding areas, while still allowing reasonable and economical use of the buildable land. We are open to other suggestions you might have. 2) GAS/CONVENIENCE/CAR WASH STORE The Gas/Convenience Store/Car Wash questions seemed to deal with a perceived problem of "saturation" and "competition." Before addressing these two questions, we wish to point out that the proposed use for this corner site is precisely in accordance with guideline contained in the preliminary SRF/Towel Report and also meet the City's comprehensive plan guidelines. Regarding the question of saturation, our needs analysis report which we Ilk presented at the Planning Commission meeting, indicated that only 36 percent of the need is currently being met. The "blight" concern expressed by the council is not really warranted in light of the small number of stations available to meet the demands of the surrounding neighborhood and the more than 50,000 cars per day which are moving on it's streets. The second concern expressed by the council had to do with introducing competition into the area. The problem of competition existed when the last fast food permit was granted, as well as when the last gas/convenience store was admitted to the corridor. Both of them were approved in light of the increased competition that was expected at that time. This is to be expected! Increased competition is the cornerstone of our country's economic system and city ordinances are obviously not written to reduce or eliminate competition. In fact, increased competition is good for the Mounds View Community and provides improved goods and services. In summary therefore, we feel we are meeting all of the City's guidelines and ordinances when including the gas/convenience store/car wash site within our P.U.D. submission. 3) CHARACTER OF THE PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING S The proposed Office building is a 5000 square foot structure architecturally designed to be in harmony with the "TM Homes" office site. There will be MAR-27-97 THU 10:57 FAX NO. 6123495230 P. 04 r Jonss. Inc. 21Ww47WOO7 P.B1 110 Page 3 accessos to Silver Lake /iced eM Highway 10 with adequate parking for both buildings. There are a few other items which warrant comment. As a roauit of discussions with staff, we have aubmitted an alternate layout of the P.U.d. This propotel moves the private 'Common Drive' to Silver Lake Road and allows the proposed restaurant to take advantage of the wetland views and amenities. in order for our P.U.D. to work, D.W. Jones and Five 0. Limited are entering onto a Joint Venture Agreement for the entire development As part of this agreement. Five 0. Limited will be required to sell approximately.7 acres of ii's geeconvenience site to the Senior Citizen's Project in order to allow that protect to work property. The Joint Ventura is cooperating In a number'of other areas in this development, so it is imperative that this P.U.D. be approved In total. We hope this synopses psvides you with additional information that you may need. We stand ready to answer and all questions or requests should you have them. Thank you for you consideration in this matter Sin reiy..Yu ° „. • / Charles E. Durand Skip Duche$neau Five 0, Limited D.W. Jones • PRESENTATION TO CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 19, 1997 • ESTIMATED TAX IMPACT I. Discussions with Marvin Deike, Ramsey County Assessor Approx. II. Use Size High Low Average Gas/convenience 5500 SqFt 56,000 44,000 50,000 Restaurant 7000 SqFt 44,000 40,000 42,000 Office 5000 SqFt 21,000 21,000 21,000 Senior Housing 83 Units 169,000 131,000 150,000 TOTALS: 290,000 236,000 263,000 Approx. Current Taxes 21,000 21,000 21,000 Approx. Tax Increase 269,000 215,000 242,000 • s MARKET NEEDS ANALYSIS AND SITE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY 10/SILVER LAKE ROAD PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT • Prepared for: Five D Limited 1 Financial Plaza, Suite 2500 120 South 6th Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Prepared by: Biko Associates, Inc. 2501 Dupont Avenue North Minneapolis, Minnesota 55411 March 19, 1997 • • TABLE OF CONTENTS MARKET NEEDS ANALYSIS Introduction 1 Purpose 1 Methodology 1 Market Analysis 2 Real Estate Market Issues 2 Gasoline/Service Station Market Saturation 2 Summary 5 SITE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 6 Introduction 7 Purpose/Background 7 Adjacent Land Use 7 • Traffic Analysis 10 Approach/Methodology 10 Background Traffic 10 Proposed Site Trip Generation 10 Weekday Trip Distribution 13 PM Peak Hour Analysis Period 13 Intersection Capacity Analysis 16 Conclusions 18 APPENDIX 19 LIST OF FIGURES 1. Regional Location 8 2. Site Plan 9 3. Trip Distribution 14 4. Existing Two-Way Daily Traffic 15 TABLES 1. Average Weekday Trip Generation Estimates 11 2. PM Peak Hour Turning Movements 12 S MARKET NEEDS ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION PURPOSE This study examines the market issues concerning the proposed development of a gasoline and convenience market at the corner of Silver Lake Road and Highway 10 in Mounds View. The market issues include the value of a gas and convenience store within the commercial real estate market (does the proposed development use the competitive advantages of the site), and the market saturation issues of adding another gasoline supplier on Highway 10 in Mounds View. METHODOLOGY This study examines the question of market saturation from two perspectives. First, the market area was divided into two segment; household demand within a 1.5-mile radius of the proposed development, and non-local through traffic on Highway 10. The study then examined the market saturation of these combined market segments. This study uses the following set of assumptions to estimate the size and saturation of the household gasoline market. Number of Households 9,274 households Average Vehicles per Household 1.95 vehicles per household Annual Miles Per Vehicle 11,839 miles Typical Fuel Efficiency 21.48 miles/gallon Average Cost per Gallon $1.20 per gallon 1994 National Average Gas Station Sales 1.15 million gallons Through traffic on Highway 10 was estimated by examining vehicle counts along a six-mile stretch of Highway 10, and vehicle counts at major intersections along the household market area. Total traffic along Highway 10 is approximately 40,000 vehicles per day. Through traffic accounts for approximately 28,500 vehicles per day. Second, the study examined the gasoline market comprised primarily of the traffic along Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road. Applying the following national and state averages for typical gasoline sales, this study estimates the size of the regional gasoline market and degree of supply saturation along Highway 10 surrounding the proposed development. Typical Absolute Market Share 1% capture of daily vehicles 1995 Avg. Minnesota Gas Station Sales $1.3 million (gas and convenience items) 1994 National Average Gas Station Sales 1.15 million gallons -1- • MARKET ANALYSIS REAL ESTATE MARKET ISSUES There are two "market" issues regarding the proposed development: 1) The fit of the proposed development within real estate markets, and; 2) The fit of the proposed development within its target service or product market (gasoline sales). The Feasibility/Highest and Best Use Analysis conducted by Towle Real Estate for the City of Mounds View in January, 1997 concluded the following on pages 16-17: We need to stress the most valuable piece of undeveloped land in the entire study area is the immediate southeast corner of Silver Lake Road and Highway 10. This part of the subject site should be oriented for commercial business that relies on "impulse" traffic, rather than destination-oriented traffic. Several aspects of the corner parcel necessarily lead to the above conclusion: • The high visibility of the corner parcel, • Easy access from both Highway 10 at the signaled intersection and from Silver Lake Road, • • The high traffic volume on Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road, • The adjacent residential market, with both single and multi-family housing. The proposed gasoline service station appropriately utilizes the competitive advantage of the corner parcel. GASOLINE/SERVICE STATION MARKET SATURATION The second market issue is the saturation level of the existing market for gasoline and service station services in the market area to be served by the proposed development. The demand for gasoline and service stations is comprised of two components; the demand resulting from through traffic, and the demand from area residents. Local Gasoline Market An estimated 9,274 households reside within 1.5 miles of the proposed development. Average annual household income is estimated to be over $52,000, with most households having two income-earners. The vast majority of workers drive a single occupancy vehicles to work, for a typical commute of between 20 and 25 minutes. Within the market area there is an average of 1.95 cars per household. Approximately 90% of employed residents commute to work outside their city of residence. Using the national average figures for fuel efficiency and annual miles per passenger vehicle, each household will purchase approximately 11 gallons of gas seven times per month. The total annual household gasoline market totals 10.0 million gallons. • -2- This result is corroborated by estimating middle income household gasoline purchases using the U.S. lip Department of Labor's Consumer Spending Survey. The Consumer Spending Survey notes an average • annual gasoline purchase of approximately $1,200 per household, which totals $11.1 million for the market area. The above market area estimate of 10 million gallons is, at 1.20 per gallon, $12 million. Through Traffic Gasoline Market 40,000 cars travel daily along Highway 10 between Highway 65 and Interstate 35W (a distance of about three miles). Silver Lake Road carries approximately 5,000 cars daily. Approximately 28,500 are non- local, or through traffic. Applying the same national averages for mileage and fuel efficiency to the estimated 28,500 through-traffic vehicles on Highway 10 reveals the through-traffic gasoline market to be 15.7 million gallons annually. Total Gasoline Market • Combining the household and through-traffic markets, the annual gasoline market is 25.7 million gallons. Existing Capacity There are four gas stations within approximately a mile (measured along the Highway 10 corridor) of the proposed development. An additional gas station is outside the 1.5-mile radius market area and is included in this analysis for a total of five gas stations along the Highway 10 corridor. At least two other gas stations are located in the market area neighborhoods although the market area for ip these stations is not commensurate with the proposed project, and gallonage is likely to be considerably lower from the assumptions used in this analysis. To fully capture the effect of surrounding gas stations on the market area, this analysis assumes the presence of three additional stations to those on Highway 10, and assumes all stations sell at national average levels. Given the above assumptions, existing gas stations account for approximately 36% of the gasoline market in the proposed development's market area. Market saturation levels thus appear to be fairly low within the market area. Alternative Market Analysis Rather than examining the local and through traffic market segments, a much more conservative perspective is to treat the traffic along Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road as the complete market for the proposed development. Making the same assumptions regarding fuel efficiency and mileage per vehicle as above, and assuming that all trips are single-destination round trips (all vehicles pass by the proposed development twice) the total annual market for gasoline along the site of the proposed development is estimated to be 12.4 million gallons. The national average service station capture of gross market is one percent. Assuming a one percent vehicle capture, a station on or near the proposed site will sell approximately 3,383 gallons per day, or just over 1.2 million gallons per year. Five stations would sell 6.2 million gallons annually. • -3- For comparison, the gallonage and revenue figures resulting from this estimate are in excess of national and Minnesota averages for convenience/gasoline stores gasoline sales; using the national average for gasoline sales provides an annual sales of 5.7 million gallons. Similarly, looking at each station individually, given large capacity differences and associated convenience draws, four stations are likely to sell volumes around the national average,while the fifth is considerably larger than average. The large station could realize sales of 4 million gallons, making a total of 8.6 million gallons. The range of annual gasoline sales by existing stations is probably between 5.7 and 8.6 million gallons. The existing stations fail to serve between 34% and 55% of the immediate traffic market along Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road. Even under the conservative assumptions used above, market saturation by existing retailers appears to be fairly low. Additional Market Issues The proposed development must not be analyzed as if the market share of Mounds View gas stations is fixed. The proposed development includes not only a gas station, but a car wash, a fast food outlet, additional office space, and a number of senior housing units. The car wash, fast food outlet, and convenience center add value to this location as an "impulse" stop for the 45,000 vehicles passing this site daily. The proposed development, particularly the housing, office space, and to some extent the car wash, provides "destination" value to the site. For instance, traffic is expected to increase on both Silver Lake Road and Highway 10 (as noted in the attached traffic analysis). The likely result of the proposed development is to increase the size of the total gasoline market share captured by gas stations on Highway 10, rather than redistribute the existing market share. • S -4- SUMMARY • The findings of the market analysis are as follows: • The proposed use of the corner at Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road captures the competitive advantage of that location. • The existing market share of gas stations along Highway 10 in Mounds View is fairly small, capturing approximately 36% of the household and through-traffic markets. • The addition of another gas station along Highway 10 will likely capture market share from retailers outside of Mounds View rather than redistributing existing market share among Mounds View retailers. • The total regional market share of Mounds View gasoline retailers will likely increase as a result of the proposed development. S • -5-, SITE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS -6- INTRODUCTION • PURPOSE This report was prepared to document analyses conducted to identify the extent of traffic impacts that would occur with implementation of a planned urban development (PUD) in the City of Mounds View, Minnesota. The analysis considered trip generation for proposed on-site uses and impacts site-generated traffic will have when it interfaces with background traffic on Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road. Issues such as intersection capacity at the signalized intersection of Highway 10 with Silver Lake Road, vehicle stacking (queuing) on Silver Lake Road, and unsignalized intersection capacity and operations are addressed. The analysis also considers on-site circulation. BACKGROUND The proposed development site is a 16.2 acre parcel located on the southeast corner of Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road. The regional location of the site is shown on Figure 1. The PUD is proposed by Five D Limited to consist of the following uses: • 8 pump gas station and car wash, combined with a 5,541 square foot fast food/convenience store • 10,000 square foot, sit-down restaurant • 5,000 square foot, one story office building • 83 dwelling unit, senior citizen residence complex A 3,640 square foot office building currently sits on the development site. It was assumed in the analysis that this business will continue to operate with implementation of the proposed development. 41110 The site plan for the proposed development is illustrated on Figure 2. As shown, the development would front on Highway 10, where three driveways would provide right-in/right-out access. Five driveways that would provide full movement access are located on Silver Lake Road. One of these, Driveway D, would provide access to the gas station and would be aligned with a driveway on the west side of Silver Lake Road that provides access to a neighboring gas station. ADJACENT LAND USE The proposed development site is currently zoned B-2, an appropriate zoning for the PUD. Land uses adjacent to the site include: • Gas station on the southwest corner of Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road • Day care facility on the northwest corner of Highway 10 and Red Oak Drive • Bank building, auto parts store, office building, and multi-family residence on the northeast corner of Highway 10 and Red Oak Drive Sharing the southeast corner of Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road with the proposed development are: a fast food restaurant, electronics and bicycle shops, and a senior residence. The proposed development is compatible with existing uses. It should be noted that the residential element of the proposed development would front on Silver Lake Road and, like the existing senior residence that fronts on County Road I, would not be adjacent to Highway 10. An on-site wetland and the St. Paul Waterworks right-of-way would also shield this particular use from traffic on County Road L • -7- I - - 1 OD racaeTlcK .K. �� Airport y la.+om • : n. m catrmAVIA ax.olunt .k .lanes Mid / d �� au Q rat c.•nws. K. J�/ o - OS WtLt •M. all l.st'A/O NM- r�J OD Ol200 DO. 00 1.1.t1 an. �^�. ' _ • N raw am'i.aiwW.ln:'tit mei`.mO81Y1iei, .SRR. 1400. III >✓ R.I.!__email® OIL I•= �:,••• 1111;.: V .�m••o _ ..= aq » Tr 1\l W -•• 11(11)1.- E' 'C\\f ° atmw ; w e t - -�jC wf its illsn .R »• .d°R- E m.a L.. 1� CzErm...1 d I I: IP-OrAll_ HMI , , S ) : . "." O LL RL} 1_1 iM .yam I-= tQt. J — m ,.� d NO SCALE N ' III., \ :R ,, wM.R , 4 a', R , �: .ti- i $ J ®�_ � -Il;Y . tit. „try Cw'Ti 4 irg.E wil ,, wM L4 �� J ti r1miry r ... toI' Naio. zY 1 �y 1 1 1 g /® }1 Qi • 111 OaFTr t6 -1 AI'tOjA ISO U. -'711 / ill i I• /- 1•L.C. . "�1 NO \\\ \ ` y \\ •\\ ,I.I • Int ' /A. c 11A00 +n l+ d 2 `" 1ZAN�EY 'ti'st II• E P t t'-'_)/ .,* 0 N,.. tip SARIN,. iiis\ w ii .t \\ ,7111 X111 X111 . /tKrai i •„Ii s4 : ciPARKI'ihlh NMI a.rwr a -�'+`S/ auras m. Tr0 _'f' ¢ �' p� ??�� Court �� Armee r. A I twos1. •tAing N lir d 11Kc. Sl-' -'' .�. N �11 ti001ve r.rtil I �1. • �� .'�� ra• h . Ad. 1o �: �� SITE +� 7 •t �t 11 !�'�iL:l:�.L.A.t ,� � a LOCATION ..1 o i�=! � � d 'I ,'s �La1�.J� � �`• 1111! $ �,% ta..Ia.n ru 61','0 ' O..11a1 LL �iy�.I ®®(= 'aa' STATE n ural m IR !Pr t. EXAM. ,-, .It - •e c-.1 v 7 LW STATION R corns 1R r 1 ..J"I L a,'t]� O \ - CZ .O•11WV Cl. - -•�.• 'e• � t•its6o •1...( y n RL'or w `aO.ssR LL 7100 \O O ��� 'I `7.I . ire �, IL atew•11. ta. A.COL in. i �-�.�tw- C R t l't� ....... .... ...... ....r�wIL..ten10 'n. DICII nw•.t Kx . x r t _ © �el N „,„ ,, /t env. n. ��yy l� CO C < 3®� MOUNDS EW „.;11_ ( K t`a aO RA %� ti 1990 POP.12511 \� 1 .1 t.l[RF ...K. tl.' rr. 22-'-:.6., u. •, / K. I we M. Sl.out. - ..:S iii $ U`..- °tr. r 1. p.svt.sac amu.n.0 �1®' It �: r _ . -,i. .� '4.144rrn Y O y'Iwn`"s Ironer . �`� ARDEN HIL • :<..1..EDOC w.. 6"160ss"M S.QA q. XL � '.'..um sr. d Court \I 1))0 POP.).19- a tlei"re o CI �r 1.t1r �lil�- I :ar qyS •1• a 41 "�r d 4�cr. r� °1 nurre 11e.-�j ..111....4101010..10 I p ar 1 31.WACO.CR 7s.rn....r 4. 'O '`' AO sr.a..•^�6 :s r. '�- www 11 '''\::-., � O. c ■ �' K. fi /� Trdler 1' .� .rrE O ..1 i cRu c.3050 MR rt 0 ,. Park p1. ...g..?sOc o t.O 3050®'•.rtA , NEW 1{ r \\ mom' ae .. , ! ...o.% 4 m :Q r®sl. 5' BRIGHTON199PCP. ID 11 tar 0 ,. M• a O ^� s.•c°�,• wRa.� rR 22.207 111 I '1,'' �7c_. t` txc a.-al. u.n sr AD r+ _ 17000 3' �P''an.n. S` n OD.t cr-yt.t LI= sr. /t5 ` O d RAA L.,: 1 r RP' '''. •' 2600 3176 17bOt: ^fit ^tif* tta.e `�7, 'I°"' r +.1 ��$( .: Um IT.1LL��!.��ry�O��� r., [tet. 3 caJ. `i� .1sh V ... f / Fjd w K C H MiW O.ii•~���� x' �G - .I V T u y _ alt C / .y\, . . sr �1. r.r. I«n QFI�-rl!IF1A1 � ,.s .d a° NIe sp.: x �ec•L lY.; `t 1FIVE D LIMITED • Highway10 Slider lake Road PUD Associates, Regional Location I����I Associates, — Inc. • 9 . u.4 0< ril z 7,,, / , , c // (1)A. I . /1/ !: ' 'iL. / , yi k = cv . / / - 1. i -t _,__•---- = 4-. x 7 / / . .• -..... 2 \j, . - / _ __ ...._ / .-- .,29. ••‘°1-9' .' • . - ---- i.' / , , , .4 , //. .., t.,, , Er 1 . . = , / (iy -/,' / • , . 4; •.r. • 0 0 . tl 0 2 =<,... .., . 4 c)- n, .= 0 Kill _ -z, •6 r'':: --, _- •- .-- , ,., -,, - ''AL ti - -. .//,- -. / /• ,. , i i , /, _ :i......-...... -• • : 1. f: 1 , .., , / . • / /- • . . ".1 A7// / : i • \ . i ( . , if.-•//- Ilr ' 11,..., 4 " 4° VI k ; 1 ' "... /7. 'ii./i/' ' • Nit ....ft l'`11 t. ,..:,...„,.... e .., It. . % ''..:., . 1 , . ''' -//% '-1:;:e; 4, Ni. i - ' - -,- / •--,... ..-4- 1 .' GI , .,, ../ „ ,:ri t• i• . \ • I( ...Ak. •-• i . ''....\, *..:'. .. . ' 'g =Imo ,I,' /(.., c , •'. ""- .,1-..l..f.' 6 il 4.4=5 - -. k --..., x...,-,• , . ...,,,, _ , or 7, '•., ‘7:41K tiM, /7 !'11' 2,',./ 0 ,6,,,N. .,• . trt'l. 1=1 .1 NN'•'.'si ''''1,..,.'.• .j / ,4-.-...—/-) \ . i C2.0) • -•= .0.`-- ....!. :‘ fel 'Ilk. / / - N ; I ,_,.., --k-. ...„,__ __....,......!... • / ,,.,,„_1_: – __. C.._„,=_-:-. — 1.n.,_- z ,: s_-_..._____..-_.... ye 2 ................... l' [ • C=::0 ,••••••-••• VC:: • ..m.e= = TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS S APPROACH/METHODOLOGY The approach that was followed for this study is the standard Traffic Impact Analysis(TIA)methodology. This methodology includes analyses of trip generation, trip distribution, traffic assignments, and intersection capacity. The methodology used to identify, and otherwise quantify, input data consisted of: 1) review and analysis of previous data, 2) field observations, and 3) turning movement counts taken during the PM peak hour. Previously prepared reports reviewed to conduct this analysis included turning movement counts taken by Mn/DOT in April, 1996 and the Technical Memorandum IV of the Trunk Highway 10 Traffic Study, prepared for Mn/DOT by HDR Engineering, Inc., in November 1996. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC Current (1997) peak hour turning movements were counted on Wednesday, March 12. These were compared to counts taken by Mn/DOT in 1996 PROPOSED SITE TRIP GENERATION Trip generation for the proposed PUD was calculated based on data provided by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in Trip Generation, Fifth Edition; 1991. Table 1 shows that the proposed development is forecast to generate the following unadjusted trip totals: • 3,914 daily trips on the average weekday • • 467 AM peak hour trips on the average weekday (239 trips inbound and 228 trips outbound) • 517 PM peak hour trips on the average weekday (259 trips inbound and 258 trips outbound) Studies have shown that many of the trips made to gas station/car wash/convenience stores, are not new trips (destination trips). Instead, these are pass-by or impulse trips. The Institute of Transportation Engineers has found that during the AM peak hour, as many as 54 percent of the trips to such uses are pass-by trips, and during the PM peak hour, as many as 58 percent of the trips are pass-by trips. It is appropriate to adjust the number of trips that will be generated by the gas station/car wash/convenience store to reflect the fact that(during certain periods of the day) less than half the trips made to the site will be new trips on Highway 10 or Silver Lake Road. These adjustment are made on the next page. 11111 -10- 0 o : : : : : co o FC2. O NIL,FLco• x O__, «S G) M., ac en en opo '� v' In N h wO� 0\ poLe-) coo —4 N b CL O N e! 's. F F L 0 O .. O in M N d a OM CR dam' d- N M r.. .-. N . O\ Q\ .-, O O o a, N 0 cu 15 cc. cu E- ^ __, M = rn C cm. w 'L F M N vo d ' d•' -rin ••- O Q1 M N ces — ct s. A 0 a c c mt 111r OR M d' E"' A c C V W = [ c" ,Q r. . c LL LL. V) Lt. O, .et CV C.oo ,o e o w F ' 00 M - - to d• et ... za � ›- c) •° ca Q a) -o a) (24 Qet c FCat o o A y v�c a.) o c/2 - *0 • :� W3U = y n F,4i:1:1 E-. o 0c 1Wcil -- .a.) 7 • r„ vo ,W.7 A a c c = 4.74 V 7, o o sV.. vL.) w3 in ¢ Z F g • 0 H w O O o kr) , n 0. O %0b E-1 L O en .=i O M s co co) M coo x 0 .- as a> a 3 �r o o in o py C NON 00 --+ s .Hen t H L O O x45 roslkr) . M a 0 et o, O1 O` • Tii co oci F — r.i a. a .L w E" S. re)n N 0 oo 00 � en h ch O oO\ M V'1 Ow cg A t O Ca. A = O., O M N '0 '- � �t u c r..i O1 M in Q\ E"' A — o 0 CYi W a) `n N 0 Ll- I-. O1 O.cn to O V ; .. E r o >> CLQ c 00 o o O b W W Z > oo rec. •.-� � vi � � O .1 C.• .. ▪ ti Q o w x a v o . W• d a> ;v = $".., o . 0. o Q 04 i V Q "" '° v, -a y a, o _ o E- 0.1 cq41• LIJF � 7 uo., 0 0 4 w v� O v. 2 Q 6 ^ 6 MI ti O c 0 c a aai V) o 0 � Q ax 0U w3 � ( < Z F o Hda VI Weekday Trip Distribution Weekday trip distribution to and from the site was estimated based: 1)on the geographic distribution of residences 40 within the market area for the site and 2) the distribution of traffic volume along major roads within the market area. Weekday trip distribution for the project is presented below: • 37 percent to/from the northwest on Highway 10 • 4 percent to/from the north along Red Oak Drive and streets in that area • 4 percent along County Road I to/from the east • 42 percent to/from the southeast along Highway 10 corridor • 7 percent to/from Silver Lake Road to the south • 6 percent to from the west along County Road I Figure 3 illustrates trip distribution for the site, and Figure 4 presents the most current daily traffic volumes on area roads. PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS PERIOD The PM peak hour was selected as the analysis period for this study because traffic volumes on streets adjacent to the proposed development are at their highest during the PM peak hour. The on-street traffic conditions that occur between 4:45 and 5:45 PM are the worst-case, and it is against these conditions that analyses of site- generated traffic should take place. S 110 -13- 0 w - 0 :rr(, O : O c `r 40 n; y ii ,`1' ti ~ " r 1 rr , f . J:r O 0 ter.,: u 0 om Lz1 xgu g s<- p=�II o W ? • . w O ..� lig' O fir: U Z M Y• x3i li rt O mss; r`` H tt 11 �A Qc -` >. '` C TA ,:0:3:....,..,:...5.:;:5. t. %ptit 7. uW.ry , 1'3r>I ;s%f O;r s H IIA zi rt r 0 ii.:,, ,,,,00-2"'''''''.4." O � A {i �tl tin a I00 1 kJ _ 0 661 f+ I 'JQ �IeO Pa21 .:::..,:.z<mrl...r,.`:•'i%�'�o..l.<:n:;;«:.yt<:,f /,'7<av;��,:..x<s<%.:.ro .s, ....__..::..:<<�,r;<....::.---�.......�... _.<;�ss... .... f '00Si? p� al e�aan�isf 000rL /./;'= � �� Q ' O cc ;r ye O ` O c D� . moi, i �` `r INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Analysis was conducted in this study to determine intersection capacity at two intersections, Highway 10/Silver Lake Road and Driveway D/Silver Lake Road. The capacity analysis considered both existing and proposed conditions for the Highway 10/Silver Lake Road intersection. The analysis evaluated intersection level of service (LOS), which is a measure of the average stop delay vehicles experience at stop sign-controlled and signalized intersections. LOS A represents the shortest delay, and LOS F represents extremely long delays and congestion. LOS A, B, C, and D are acceptable, LOS E is tolerable, and LOS F is unacceptable. Results of the capacity analysis, detailed in the Appendix, show that the Highway 10/Silver Lake Road intersection currently operates at LOS C. The addition of traffic that would be generated by the proposed development would not negatively affect capacity at this intersection, and under the proposed condition, LOS C is maintained. The analysis also showed that the intersection formed by Driveway D with Silver Lake Road will operate at LOS A under the proposed condition. ON-SITE CIRCULATION Location of Driveways and Access Operations As presented on the site plan(Figure 2), three access driveways are proposed to be located on Highway 10. The centerline of Driveway A, the westernmost access point on Highway 10 is shown on the site plan to be 270 feet from the centerline of Silver Lake Road and 210 feet from the curb return. This access point exists today at a • distance of 180 feet from the curb return and serves a structure (an office) that will be demolished and cleared to implement the proposed project. It has been relocated to the east 30 feet to bring it closer to the Mn/DOT standard, 300 feet. Driveway D is shown on the site plan to be the northernmost access point on Silver Lake Road. As shown, this driveway will be directly aligned with an existing driveway that serves the gas station west of the proposed development site. Driveway F, directly south od Driveway D, provides access to an internal loop road. The loop road would permit movement between on-site uses; e.g., the gas station and the restaurant. The loop road is not intended to be used as a short-cut to avoid the intersection of Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road. Instead, its inclusion in the design of the site supports one of the purposes of PUDs, the ability to travel between on-site uses while minimizing impacts to the adjacent road system. Vehicle Stacking A consequence of vehicles waiting at an intersection is queuing or stacking. Analysis was conducted to determine if, under the proposed condition, the distance provided for queued vehicles would be adequate to prevent the northernmost access point, Driveway D, from being blocked. Driveway D is 170 feet south of the Highway 10 curb return. The analysis indicated that a minimum of 225 feet would be required for northbound vehicle stacking, and the available distance for stacking is 55 feet(approximately two stacked car lengths) short. This shortage, however, should be weighed against five factors: -16- • The intersection will operate at LOS C, with an average intersection delay of 15.2 seconds. The northbound movements will experience overall LOS D with only a 28.1 second approach delay. • When possible it is good policy to align driveways to prevent dog-leg turning movements. • All turning movements at Driveway D, an unsignalized intersection,will operate at LOS A. At 170 feet south of the Highway 10 curb return, adequate stacking distance is provided to prevent southbound vehicles at Driveway D from backing up to Highway 10. • The distance between Driveway D and Driveway E is 100 feet. It is likely that northbound drivers will leave Driveway D open and stack between Driveways D and E. Combined, the available space for stacking is 270 feet. • Driveway E provides access to an internal loop street, which serves the corner gas station use and others. If Driveway D is blocked by queued, northbound vehicles, Driveway E will be available for ingress and egress. • -17- CONCLUSIONS The following conclusions are presented based on results of the study: 1. Over half the trips to the gas station use, during the most critical periods of the day (the AM and PM peak hours), will not be new trips attracted to Highway 10 or the surrounding streets. Instead, the majority of trips to the gas station during these periods of the day will be trips that are already on Highway 10 and nearby streets. 2. The two major intersections of concern are at Highway 10/Silver Lake Road and Driveway D/Silver Lake Road. The capacity analysis showed that both these intersections will operate at acceptable Levels of Service during the PM peak hour, the period of the day when traffic is most congested. The Highway 10/Silver Lake Road intersection will operate at LOS C, and the Driveway D/Silver Lake Road intersection will operate at LOS A. 3. On-site circulation provided by the loop road, assists in minimizing impacts that could result from the interface of traffic on the adjacent streets and site-generated traffic. 4. Analysis showed that a minimum of 225 feet would be desirable for northbound vehicle queuing at the Highway 10/Silver Lake Road intersection. The placement of Driveway D in alignment with an existing access drive on the west side of Silver Lake Road, allows 170 feet of stacking for vehicles on the northbound approach. While the minimum distance for stacked vehicles is not met, safe operations and unrestricted flow 40 should still be provided for the following reasons: • The intersection will operate at LOS C, with an average intersection delay of 15.2 seconds. The northbound movements will experience overall LOS D with only a 28.1 second approach delay. . • When possible it is good policy to align driveways to prevent dog-leg turning movements. • All turning movements at Driveway D, an unsignalized intersection, will operate at LOS A. At 170 feet south of the Highway 10 curb return, adequate stacking distance is provided to prevent southbound vehicles at Driveway D from backing up to Highway 10. • The distance between Driveway D and Driveway E is 100 feet. It is likely that northbound drivers will leave Driveway D open and stack between Driveways D and E. Combined, the available space for stacking is 270 feet. • • Driveway E provides access to an internal loop street, which serves the corner gas station use and others. If Driveway D is blocked by queued, northbound vehicles, Driveway E will be available for ingress and egress. 410 -18- APPENDIX Highway Capacity Manual Unsignalized and Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Print Outs 411 1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1 ********************************************************************* IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET30 PEAK HOUR FACTOR 1 AREA POPULATION 25000 NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET driveways NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET Silver Lake Road NAME OF THE ANALYST Wm. Smith DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy) 03-19-1997 TIME PERIOD ANALYZED PM peak OTHER INFORMATION. . . . Build proposed development : Driveway D INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL INTERSECTION TYPE: 4-LEG MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH CONTROL TYPE EASTBOUND: STOP SIGN CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES . EB WB NB SB LEFT 20 0 20 39 THRU 0 0 36 10 RIGHT 20 32 9 20 411 NUMBER OF LANES AND LANE USAGE EB WB NB SB LANES 1 1 1 1 LANE USAGE LTR LTR III ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Page-2 PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS EASTBOUND 0 . 00 90 20 N WESTBOUND 0 . 00 90 20 N NORTHBOUND 0 . 00 90 20 N SOUTHBOUND 0 . 00 90 20 N VEHICLE COMPOSITION 96 SU TRUCKS s COMBINATION AND RV' S VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES EASTBOUND 0 0 0 WESTBOUND 0 0 0 illNORTHBOUND 0 0 0 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 CRITICAL GAPS TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL (Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP MINOR RIGHTS EB 5 .50 5 . 50 0 . 00 5 .50 WB 5 .50 5 .50 0 . 00 5 . 50 MAJOR LEFTS SB 5 . 00 5 . 00 0 . 00 5 . 00 NB 5 . 00 5 . 00 0 . 00 5 . 00 MINOR THROUGHS EB 6 . 00 6 . 00 0 . 00 6 . 00 WB 6 .00 6 . 00 0 . 00 6 . 00 MINOR LEFTS EB 6 .50 6 .50 0 . 00 6 .50 WB 6 .50 6 .50 0 . 00 6 .50 IIIIDENTIFYING INFORMATION NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET driveways NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREETSilver Lake Road DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS 03-19-1997 ; PM peak OTHER INFORMATION. . . . Build proposed development : Driveway D 411 CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE Page-3 POTEN- ACTUAL FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS p M SH R SH MINOR STREET EB LEFT 22 764 719 > 719 > 697 > A THROUGH 0 871 837 > 836 837 > 792 837 >A A RIGHT 22 999 999 > 999 > 977 > A MINOR STREET WB LEFT 0 771 731 > 731 > 731 > A THROUGH 0 866 832 > 998 832 > 963 832 >A A RIGHT 35 998 998 > 998 > 963 > A MAJOR STREET SB LEFT 43 1000 1000 1000 957 0 NB LEFT 22 1000 1000 1000 978 A • IDENTIFYING INFORMATION NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET driveways NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREETSilver Lake Road DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS 03-19-1997 ; PM peak OTHER INFORMATION. . . . Build proposed development : Driveway D 40 O HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets : (E-W) Highway 10 (N-S) Silver Lake Road Analyst : Wm Smith File Name: SLRD.HC9 Area Type : Other 3-19-97 PM Peak Comment : No-Build Existing Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 I > 2 < 1 > 2 < Volumes 42 995 72 19 1838 27 158 187 5 17 55 15 Lane Width 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 10 15 3 3 Signal Operations Phase combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru * Thru * Right * Right * Peds Peds WB Left * SB Left * Thru * Thru * Right * Right * Peds Peds ill NB Right * EB Right SB Right * WB Right Green 15A 60A Green 11A Yellow/A-R 7 0 Yellow/A-R 7 Lost Time 3 . 0 . 3 . 0 Lost Time 3 . 0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #2 #5 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/c Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB L 1881 357 0 .12 0 . 19 25 . 5 D 8 . 9 B T 3960 2257 0 .49 0 .57 8 .4 B R 1683 959 0 . 07 0 .57 6 .2 B WB L 1881 357 0 . 06 0 .19 25 .2 D 15 . 6 C T 3960 2257 0 . 90 0 .57 15 . 6 C R 1683 959 0 . 01 0 .57 6 . 0 B NB DfL 1750 262 0 . 63 0 . 15 33 . 7 D 31 . 3 D TR 1987 298 0 . 67 0 . 15 29 .2 D SB LTR 2983 447 0 .21 0 .15 24 . 1 C 24 . 1 C Intersection Delay = 15 . 2 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C HCM: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY III ' Center For Microcomputers In Transportation Streets: (E-W) Highway 10 (N-S) Silver Lake Road Analyst : Wm Smith File Name: BUILDSLR.HC9 Area Type: Other 3-19-97 PM Peak Comment : Build Development Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 > 2 < 1 > 2 < Volumes 42 1046 87 61 1838 27 212 200 6 24 61 15 Lane Width 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 RTOR Vols 10 15 3 3 Signal Operations Phase combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 EB Left * NB Left * Thru * Thru * Right * Right * Peds Peds WB Left * SB Left * Thru * Thru * Right * Right * Peds Peds NB Right * * EB RightIII SB Right * * WB Right Green 10A 60A Green 16A Yellow/A-R 7 0 Yellow/A-R 7 Lost Time 3 . 0 3 . 0 Lost Time 3 . 0 Cycle Length: 100 secs Phase combination order: #1 #2 #5 Intersection Performance Summary Lane Group: Adj Sat v/c g/c Approach: Mvmts Cap Flow Ratio Ratio Delay LOS Delay LOS EB L 1881 263 0 . 17 0 . 14 28 . 8 D 9 . 1 B T 3960 2257 0 .51 0 .57 8 . 6 B R 1683 959 0 . 08 0 .57 6 .3 B WB L 1881 263 0 .24 0 .14 29 .2 D 16 . 0 C T 3960 2257 0 . 90 0 .57 15 . 6 C R 1683 959 0 . 01 0 .57 6 . 0 B NB DfL 1644 329 0 . 68 0 .20 31 . 9 D 28 . 1 D TR 1986 397 0 .54 0 .20 24 .1 C SB LTR 3037 607 0 . 18 0 .20 21 .4 C 21 .4 C Intersection Delay = 15 .2 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C 0 Ms. Pam Sheldon March 3, 1997 Page 2 b. If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000 gallons per day or one million gallons per year, a DNR appropriations permit is needed. You are advised that it typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit application. c. If construction activities disturb five acres of land, or more, contractors are required to apply for a stormwater permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency(Scott Thompson @ 296-7203). d. The comments in this letter address DNR-Division of Waters jurisdictional matters and concerns. These comments should not be construed as DNR support or lack thereof for a particular project. Sincerely, Molly Shodeen 111 Area Hydrologist MC S/cds c: Jim Ericson, City of Mounds View Wetland Files 62-171 and 62-258 • 04/24/97 THU 09:28 FAX 6124825232 RAMSEY CO PUBLIC WORKS 0002 _ Department of Public Works Paul L.Kirkwold,P.E.,Director and County Engineer III ENGINEERINO/OPERATIO ADMINISTRATION/i.AND SURVEY 3377 N.Rice Street 50 West Kellogg Blvd.,Suite 910 Shoreview,MN 66126 RAMSEY COUNTY St.Paul,MN 55102• (612) 286-2600• Fax 266-2615 (612) 484-9104•Fax 482.5232 April 23 , 1997 Mr. Jim Ericson City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 .. Mounds View, Minnesota 55112 Dear Mr. Ericson: The Ramsey County_ Public works Department has reviewed the plansfor the Mixed Use Planned Unit Development proposed along Silver Lake Road south of TH 10 . The plan shows five access points to be constructed onto Silver Lake Road. One directly across from the entrance to Amoco and four additional access points located further south • along Silver Lake Road. The County has reviewed the development plans and the traffic study prepared for this development . The County would like to make the following comments regarding the proposed access onto Silver Lake Road. 1 . The south portion of the development (proposed senior • housing) shows three access points onto Silver Lake Road. One of these access points should be eliminated. Two access points will be adequate to serve this portion of the project . This will allow the underground parking access to combine with the main entrance to the housing complex. 2 . The traffic study concludes that the intersection of TH 10 and Silver lake Road will pot be negatively impacted by the proposed development . Ramsey County concurs with this conclusion. TH 10 and Silver Lake Road should remain at an acceptable level of service . The majority of trips to this site should be trips already located on these two roadways . 3 . The proposed location of the access to the gas station portion of the development is 170 feet south of TH 10, directly across from the entrance to the Amoco Station. During the pm peak hour vehicles will stack south of TH 10 beyond this access . The location of this access point0 should not present significant operational problems to Silver Lake Road. However; the owner needs to understand that backup past this driveway will be considered an acceptable occurrence in the pm peak hour. Minnesota's First Home 8nie County 04/24/97 THU 09:29 FAX 6124825232 RAMSEY CO PUBLIC WORKS ra 003 • 4 . The developer will be required to obtain access permits from Ramsey County for access and construction on Silver Lake Road. If you have any questions or concerns please feel free to give me a call at 482-5209 . Sincerely, Daniel E. Soler, P.E. Traffic Engineer • • • Mn/DOT Metro W .E . TEL :612-582-1368 Apr 23 97 8 :49 No .003 p,02 , Ostaero Minnesota Department of Transportation (t(?) Metropolitan Division ►a Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 • Roseville, MN 55113 April 23, 1997 Jim Ericson City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 Dear Jim Ericson: SUBJECT: D.W. Jones Site Plan Review S97-017 Southeast Quadrant of Trunk Highway(TH) 10 and Silver Lake Road • • Mounds View, Ramsey County CS 6204 The Minnesota Department of Transportation(Mn/DOT)has reviewed the D.W. Jones concept PUD. We apologize for the delay in responding to this submittal. We find the concept PUD • acceptable for further development with consideration of the following comments. • Please submit the preliminary plat and final site plan for our review before any site development. We will not issue any permits until we have the opportunity to review these plans. • We also request the opportunity to review the drainage and grading plans before site development. We may require a Mn/DOT storm water drainage permit for the proposed development. Potential permit requirements include submittal of hydraulic computations and drainage area maps, showing before and after conditions and addressing 100-year storms. Existing drainage patterns and rates of runoff affecting Mn/DOT right of way should be perpetuated. The site's storm water discharge rate must not increase. Any questions regarding Mn/DOT drainage concerns may be directed to Gene Bovy of our Water Resources Section at 779-5053. Questions regarding the permit process may be directed to Lars Impola of our Permits Section at 582-1447. • We will require access permits for access to TH 10. We strongly oppose the proposal of four accesses to TH 10 between Silver Lake Road and the site's east limits. We constructed arterial highways such as TH 10 to serve regional mobility needs rather than to accommodate direct property access. Proliferation of accesses is inconsistent with the highway's purpose and reduces the highway's capacity and safety. Control and reduction of access is critical in reducing highway congestion, and are important factors in reducing accidents on highways. We strongly recommend that the project proposer consolidate accesses before our final plan review. An equal opportunity employer Mn/DOT Metro W .E . TEL :612-582-1368 Apr 23 97 8 :50 No .003 P.03 II Jim Ericson April 23, 1997 page two We also recommend consistent spacing between accesses. In addition, any proposed access requiring installation of culverts should use 6:1 slopes. Placement of culverts should occur beyond the clear zone. We will further address access permit requirements after our review of the preliminary plat and final site plan. • • Any use of or work within Mn/DOT right of way will require an approved Mn/DOT permit. The permit required depends upon the nature of the proposed work, Lars Impola of our Permits Section may be contacted at 582-1447 for further information regarding the permit process. Please contact me at 582-1654 with any questions regarding this review. Sincerely, 41, Scott Peters Senior Transportation Planner/Local Government Liaison c: Dan Soler, Ramsey County Traffic Engineer David Claypool,Ramsey County Surveyor Bill Smith, Biko Associates • Alit ,c� Minnesota Department of Natural Resources WMetro Waters, 1200 Warner Road,St.Paul,MN 55106-6793 i �o�tTelephone: (612)772-7910 Fax: (612)772-7977 NATuiPN.P March 3, 1997 Ms. Pam Sheldon City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 • Mounds View, MN 55112 Re: Project Reviews, PUD's Dear Ms. Sheldon: The DNR recently received two development proposals for parcels in the city. Neither one appears to impact the DNR protected waters on site. Conceptual PUD Plan-D.W. Jones, Wetland 62-258 • The project will create a high degree of impervious surface. The plans do not show the locations of any treatment basins. Anthony Properties PUD, Wetland 62-171 The DNR has determined an ordinary high water elevation of 895.8 feet. The site plan does not show enough topographic detail to determine if encroachment will occur. The wetland delineation shows"bottom 894-895 feet." DNR permit rules prohibit development fills below 895.8 feet. On both of these projects we support the city's buffer requirements of 100 feet. If encroachment is allowed, additional planting should be considered. The buffer should remain unmowed and natural. If enhancement of the buffer is allowed, native species of grasses and wildflowers should be considered. The following comments are general and apply to all proposed developments: a. Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during the construction period. The Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook(Board of Water& Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan and Soil and Water Conservation Districts) guidelines, or their equivalent, should be followed. • DNR Information:612-296-6157, 1-800-766-6000 • TTY:612-296-5484. 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer ti Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a ` Who Values Diversity i Minimum of 10%Post-Consumer Waste E"Kr of o\ . A-te ., DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY -t ST.PAUL DISTRICT,CORPS OF ENGINEERS Q' ;t" ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS CENTRE 190 FIFTH STREET EAST .�; moi```'.atelir' ST.PAUL.MN 55101-1638 REPLY TO March 24, 1997 ATTENTION OF Construction-Operations Regulatory (97-02886-NP-TJF) Mr. Jim Ericson Community Development Department 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 Dear Mr. Ericson: We have reviewed the concept plan provided us for a development proposed by D. W. Jones, Inc. at a site along Highway 10. The project site is in the SE 1/4 Sec. 6, T. 30N. , R. 23W. , Ramsey County, Minnesota. The Corps of Engineers has regulatory jurisdiction over the discharge of dredged or fill material, including some excavation and land clearing activities, within waters and wetlands. The concept plan included two lines delineating the edge of wetlands. Given the age of these wetland boundary lines (from 1992 and . 1988) , we recommend the wetland boundary be reviewed again for accuracy using current delineation methods and definitions. A Corps permit will not be required for the project provided it is constructed without the need to encroach into the wetlands. In most areas the proposed development appears to avoid encroachment into the wetlands. Also, there is no indication how storm water from the site would be managed. We recommend that all retention ponds be constructed in upland areas. An activity, such as the installation of the boardwalk/viewing platform, shown on the plan, will not require a permit provided no wetland filling or grading is involved. Some minor filling/grading may be allowed under an existing nationwide permit. If the final project design involves encroachment into the wetland, our office should be contacted so that a final jurisdictional determination can be made. If you have any questions, contact Tim Fell in our St. Paul office at (612) 290-5360. In any correspondence or inquiries, please refer to the file number shown above. Sincerely, PI'I_� , 711 'J�� r L q lJ LS Mi hael M�/W burg • iPj Chief, Western Permits Section t!- -, By -1.- _V-4.k 4 --^ rb Painted on Oa Recycled Pacer Y�; Tjs. e �:/' BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS TA" � Dino Guerin,President Janice Rettman, Vice President Stephen Haselmann,Commissioner Michael Harris,Commissioner Michael Arcand,Commissioner . • February 24, 1997 Ms. Pam Sheldon Community Development Director City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, Minnesota 55112 RE: Conduit Maps Dear Ms. Sheldon: As we discussed last week, enclosed are maps that show the location of our two (2) 60-inch raw water conduits, within our 60 foot right-of-way. Any work to be done within this 60 foot right-of way will have to be permitted by the Water Utility. We will be happy to work with you to meet your • development goals while protecting our water conduits. If you have any questions, please contact Bill Tschida at 266-6265. Sincerely, Z, /(L. G e E. ever Engineering Manager GEM/pdd Enclosures 1 - 191 jFEB 2 5 1997 By . tA. Saint Paul Water Utility Commerce Building,8 4th Street East,St.Paul, MN 55101-1007 • Tel.(612)266-6274 Fax(612)292-7811 TTY: (612) 266-6299 Bernie R. Buliert.General Manager James M.Graupmann,Distribution Manager Roger A. Mohror,Central Services Manager James L Haugen,Production Manager The Saint Paul Water Utility provides quality water service to the following cities: Arden HillsAFalcon HeightsALauderdaleALittle CanadaAMaplewoodAMendotaAMendota HeightsARosevilleASaint PaulAWest St.Paul N:\CLERICAL\GMEYER\SHELDON.WPD February 24, 1997 Ms printed on recycled paper c • • MEMO To: James Erickson From: Mark Bishop Subject: D W Jones PUD Development. Date: March 22, 1997 This project has adequate access roads, as drawn, and existing fire hydrants are acceptable. • , pmulllwR MAR 2 5 191 • By....1(Z21,4 :JZ_--- : 410 March 18, 1997 Temrorary Address : Homeowners of: 660 E . Butterfield Rd 7755 Eastwood Rd. NBTS #14 Mounds View, MN 55112 Lombard, IL 60142 City of Mounds View Planning Commission 2401 Hwy. #10 Mounds View, MN 55112 Dear Planning Commission: We are writing to voice our opposition to the proposed plans for Case #477-97, Tract B-2 . It is our opinion that there is no need for another convenience store/gas station & car wash in Mounds View. We already have 2 Amocos, (or an Amoco and a Standard) , Spur, Phillips 66, and a self-service car wash which • all send polluted water into our sewer systems and contribute to run-off into the rivers and ground water. And, we have a Super America convenience store/gas station. We would like further information about the size of the proposed office building and senior condominium project . Will the restaurant be serving liquor? Will there be ade.~uaze parking? Will it have a bar and entertainment? We are living in a suburb of Chicago while Molly is a graduate student at Wheaton College. We would appreciate it if you would keep us informed of any development plans in Mounds View. Sincerely, '`'E'er/5:',/etIC- 0 IT 11 T IT Molly K. Ryan r 4) r--/ Patrick . Ryan • James Ericsson 2401 Hwy. 10 Mounds View, MN. 55112 Craig Zuidema 2809 Cty. Rd. Mounds View, MN. 55112 Dear Mr. Erickson; As a 19 year resident of the City of Mounds View, I've had the opportunity to watch the area grow in many ways, most of them good, some of them, not so good. I don't believe construction of a convenience store/gas station/car wash on the s.e. corner of Hwy. 10 & Silver Lake Rd. is a benefit to the City of Mounds View. The city already has a convenience store/gas station/car wash adjacent to the property on the s.w. corner of this intersection, as well as a convenience store/ gas station on the s.e. corner of Hwy. 10 and Cty. Rd. I. Yet another such facility exists just 1 block away at the n.e. corner of Hwy. 10 and Long Lake Rd. • Regardless of my personal feelings toward this kind of development of the property, the planning commission ought to be able to recognize the multiplicity of these types of businesses concentrated in this area of the city provides no benefit to city residents. If the dearth of creative thinking towards property development in the city continues, the quality of life in Mounds View will be sorely affected. I beseech the planning commission not to approve this development as proposed. I will personally continue to oppose it until the developer can present a plan for the property that will provide both immediate and long-term benefits to the residents of the City of Mounds View. Sincerely, Crai• u"•ema -----------rc 1 \ (P ra,- rl Vfi 11. til=... • By - ' 3---e-1-A-t- 6-21 ? : 3/ 01 I 'J / t_12. (,t)ri 4-1%va- 6.-1,;t1_,-1' -1-11-4 I . "M-e- 01-C242Z� rv�.z�.f-v, �.-'� � �GLfi G,1("4,0 Getz-L+L ) S t/ 1 U-'t Ct�2ait `�lc,v� ( �-2��-v� ��v-� L7�- Gy - l,4wt_ci.,-1tii f�Lt�Ltgf� T v�A -fes 0-MA c, s 4-1) rte/ AL„t,if()Y- 41(A...Z /1:1-en • 1(14-€_OL "f7.1-1/t4P) 0-"AAA £) �-�-(.— .- CA.,n ! lir CtA 4 t Cz- C+E L^..Z t-LC,!j (C C.���LG (tet;r`rG��� 2_ viii /_' r, J t J , J /1/L cp t e- cJ �J c OL0 IA o - 04-A-1-Q r s ccs o -,=V1 t/� /J'f- J cyL =3 0 a.A 0.-€,A1-11 D 6 (/ 4 - a— stY,:t t .e.r J'k.t.Ot 1LetL b0 Ss i Yi `11a-,n a.4,1 v5-AA • oN- v(- La ki 4.w it . 0 I rvk_c71,-1- A S t eitAcc `(LA S c)vi • Glenn & Ursula Karlen 1643 Suzi Street Punta Gorda, Florida 33950 City of Mounds View Att: Mr. James Ericson 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, Minnesota 55112 Att: Planning Commission Mayor& City Council Members Ref.: Case No. 477-97 Dear Commissioners We received your notice of an informational meeting in regards to the mixed planned unit development that is proposed across from our property in Mounds View. We will not be able to attend this meeting as we are out of town. However, • we want our voice heard in this matter. We are opposed to having any of the commercial part of this mix on the corner of County Road I and Silver Lake Road. This means that we do not want a car wash or convenience store on this corner. We feel that the commercial should be kept up on Highway 10. We do not want the extra noise and traffic across from our duplex. We feel that it will destroy the peace and tranquillity of our duplex home at 7720-7730 Silver Lake Road. We are not opposed to the senior condominium project at the corner of Silver Lake Road and County Road I. Your informational map did not call out the location of each project listed in the mix. ely, .'" Glenn are / Ursula Karlen UK/uk 111 @ � � r l� MAR 2 0 1997 Bye • 4 Item No. P14- (• 10 Staff Report No.97- 2047 C • Meeting Date: April 28, 1997 Type of Business: P.H. WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing to Consider Amending the Assessment Policy Date of Report: April 23, 1997 Discussed at the April 7, 1997 Council work session, were a few recommended revisions to the assessment policy. The proposed revision will provide greater equity to the storm sewer assessments and corner commercial/industrial property street assessment. I have copied the section of the primary revisions in this report for easy reference and attached the entire ordinance for further review. The revisions are underlined and the deletions are struck out in the document. Changes are on pages 2,3 & 9. h. Drainage Improvements . Storm drainage and ponding/basin systems are usually constructed to serve a specific drainage or "watershed" district . The cost of d-iainage impiovemei u��C-half (1/2) assessed. These drainage districts have trunk lines, which are large diameter pipes that transport large volumes of water from one or more drainage districts . Property owners within drainage districts that would receive benefit from a trunk storm sewer, would be assessed a unit amount ($400 . 00 per lot) for a single family residential lot. This amount would be determined and adjusted annually by resolution using the Engineering News Record (ENR) . Multifamily housing that exceeded 1/3 acre (the acreage for determining a single family residential lot) , would be assessed based on the number of acres, divided by the unit cost ($400 . 00 per 1/3 acre, $1, 200 . 00 per acrel . Commercial / Industrial property would be assessed by the amount of property (acres) that are determined to benefit from the trunk line divided by the unit cost ($400 . 00 per 1/3 acre, $1, 200 . 00 per acre) to maximum amount of three (3 ) acres or $3 , 600 . 00 . The remaining cost will be paid for by the Storm Water Surface Utility and/or by an ad valorem property tax paid by the entire community or by other funds that may become available to the City for infrastructure cost recovery. Should a project be initiated on a particular street that requires storm sewer laterals which would be connected to the trunk lines , the Surface Water Utility would fund these expenses . • - • takes place together with st-ieet £Cuuritruk.tiuii projects and the 411 policies-ielaLed Lo street improveiients . Site specific - City of Mounds View Staff Report April 23, 1997 Page 2 • Lenefitting properties . 7 . b) General Commercial Zoned Corner Lots . No allowance - - ..- • i��l ���ecl�ons . The adjusted front footage shall be the entire frontage lueci u.] .1 alviig l lie setLack line comprising the Luildi,.ly -el/velope. After closing of the public hearing staff recommends waiving the reading and introducing Ordinance No. 600. If Council has any questions or concerns regarding these revisions, please feel free to call me. (-1-(Y vv Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works S RECOMMENDATION: After closing of the public hearing staff recommends waiving the reading and introducing Ordinance No. 600. 1110 110 ORDINANCE NO. 600 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 202 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ENTITLED "PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS" The Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby ordain: SECTION I . Chapter 202 . 09 : Improvement type and Apportionment Of Cost is amended by renumbering the existing paragraph as Subdivision 1 and by adding the following: Subd. 2 a. Street Reconstruction Including Curb and Gutter. The cost of street reconstruction shall be recovered by the adjusted front footage method. The front footage rate shall be determined by dividing the project cost by the total number of adjusted front feet in the project area x the individual adjusted front footage x one-half 411 (1/2) . The assessments per adjusted front foot may vary depending on the underlying zoning of a parcel . Assessments for residential properties which are on collector or arterial streets shall be adjusted so that the amount of the assessment shall be the same as if the project were constructed to residential street standards . The remaining cost shall be recovered by means of the general ad valorem property tax paid by the entire community or by other funds that may become available to the City for infrastructure costrecovery. b. Street Resurfacing. Street resurfacing is commonly known and referred to as street overlaying whereby a new bed of road material such as bituminous is installed over an existing paved road to a specific thickness . Assessments shall be determined by the adjusted front footage method. c. Sidewalk. Sidewalk improvements may be done in conjunction with a street reconstruction or as a separate project. In any event, cost of sidewalk improvements shall be recovered by means of the general ad valorem property tax paid by the entire community or by other funds that may become available to the City for infrastructure cost recovery. d. Sealcoating. Sealcoating, patching and cracksealing 411 are considered general maintenance activities and the expenses of such acts will be paid for by ad valorem property tax or any other funds available to the City at that time. e. Sanitary Sewer and Water Mains . Repair and replacement of sewer or water mains is usually done in conjunction with a street reconstruction project and the cost of this work should be included as part of the total major street project cost and should also be considered to be included in the rate assessed for street reconstruction. If it is determined that the repair and replacement work results in a greater benefit to some properties and not to others, the Council should consider establishing a different assessment rate based on the benefits received. f . Sanitary Sewer and Water Trunk Improvements . Trunk sewer and water mains are usually designed to carry larger volumes of flow than are necessary within an immediate property area in order to serve additional properties beyond the area of their immediate placement. Therefore, 100 percent (100%) of the cost of trunk improvements will be assessed on a unit basis to all110 properties within a district deemed to be benefitted from the trunk improvements . g. Sewer and Water Services . Individual sewer and water services benefit only the properties they serve and 100 percent (100%) of their cost shall be assessed to the property for which they are installed. h. Drainage Improvements . Storm drainage and ponding/basin systems are usually constructed to serve a specific drainage or "watershed" district . The cosi. of These drainage districts have trunk lines, which are large diameter pipes that transport large volumes of water from one or more drainage distrists . Property owners within drainage districts that would receive benefit from a trunk storm sewer, would be assessed a unit amount ($400 . 00 per lot) for a single family residential lot . This amount would be determined and adjusted annually by resolution using the Engineering News Record (ENR) . Multifamily housing that exceeded 1/3 acre (the acreage for determining a single family residential lot) , would be assessed based on the number of acres, divided by the unit cost ($400 . 00 per 1/3 acre, $1, 200 . 00 per acre) . Commercial / Industrial property • would be assessed by the amount of property (acres) that are determined to benefit from the trunk line divided by the unit cost ($400 . 00 per 1/3 acre, $1, 200 . 00 per acre) to maximum amount of three (3 ) acres or $3 , 600 . 00 . The remaining cost will be paid for by the Storm Water Surface Utility and/or by an ad valorem property tax paid by the entire community or by other funds that may become available to the City for infrastructure cost recovery. Should a prolect be initiated on a particular street that recruires storm sewer laterals which would be connected to the trunk lines, the Surface Water Utility would fund these expenses . _ • - - . place togeLher with street ieconstiuction projects and - . _ .- _ - -. _ . ._ - .. _ - - .. ' - _ -0 . -- ' . . ♦ - - . ' - . . - - - - - 0- - . . 00- - i . Special Conditions . Special consideration shall be given to the "age" of a street or utility system when determining the proportion of cost to be assessed to benefitted properties . If it is necessary to reconstruct or resurface a street or perform major repair/replacement work on sewer and water utilities, before a reasonable • amount of time (10 to 12 years for resurfacing, 12 to 17 years for partial reconstruction and 17 to 25 years for total reconstruction) the assessment shall be calculated on a pro-rated basis . The remaining cost shall be recovered by means of the general ad valorem property tax, paid by the entire community or by other funds that may become available to the City for infrastructure cost recovery. Subd. 3 METHODS OF ASSESSMENT a. The nature of an improvement determines the method of assessment. The objective is to choose an assessment method which will arrive at a reasonable, fair and equitable assessment which will be uniform upon the same class of property within the assessed area. The most frequently recognized assessment methods are: the unit assessment, the front footage assessment and the area assessment . Depending upon the individual project, any one or a combination of these methods may be utilized to arrive at an appropriate cost distribution. City staff will consider all methods and weigh their applicability to the project and present a recommendation to the City Council in the form of a mock assessment roll (or rolls) . A description of each assessment and its corresponding policy application is presented. A separate section (Section III) will identify the appropriate matchup of method with a specific type of project and analyze why each is generally used. The purpose of assessment formulas is to allocate assessed costs among benefitted properties, the formula should result in a allocation of assessments which is reasonably related to the benefit received. Any one predetermined formula will not be appropriate in all cases because of circumstances unique to the relationship between the specific project and the specific properties benefitted. When considering an assessment method or formula for any given project, it may be necessary to combine assessment methods or to modify the methods described below. Therefore, the following description of methods of assessments should be regarded as guidelines, which may not be appropriate in all cases . b. Unit Assessment. A unit assessment shall be derived by dividing the total project cost by the number of Residential Equivalent Density (RED) units in the project area. A RED unit is defined as a single family residential unit. All platted and unplatted property will • assigned RED unit values equivalent to the underlying zoning. When the existing land use is less than the highest and best permitted use, the Council may consider the current use as well as the full potential of land use in determining the appropriate number of RED units . Otherwise, the following RED chart will apply on a per unit basis, subject to adjustment by the Council for any inequities : Single Family 1 . 00 RED Duplex 1 . 00 RED Condominium 0 . 80 RED Multifamily (3 units or more) 0 . 80 RED Townhouse 0 . 80 RED Commercial 2 . 00 Units Industrial 2 . 00 Units The unit approach has proven to be the best method in those instances whereby the improvement largely benefits everyone to the same degree and the cost of the improvement is not generally affected by parcel size. c . Area Assessment . The assessable area shall be expressed in terms of the number of acres or the number of square feet subject to assessment . When determining411 the assessable area, the following considerations will be • given: 1 . Ponding Assessment Consideration. Lakes, ponds and swamps may be considered a part of the assessable area of a parcel . 2 . Road Right-of-Way Assessment Consideration. Up to 20 percent (20%) of the gross acreage may be deducted for street right-of-way purposes within unplatted parcels of five acres or more depending upon the parcel configuration and is only applicable to single family residential use. Parcels of less than five acres may not qualify and may be assessed full acreage. The reason for this size restriction is that, in most instances, parcels of less than five acres cannot support an internal public road system. 3 . Park Dedication Assessment Consideration. When park land is dedicated as part of a residential development, as required by Subdivisions Code - Chapter 1204 . 02, the developer shall not be assessed an acreage charge on the portion of land dedicated. d. Front Footage Assessment . The actual physical 111 dimensions of a parcel abutting an improvement (ie. , street, sewer, water, etc . ) will generally not be construed as the frontage utilized to calculate the assessment for a particular parcel . Rather, an "adjusted front footage" will be determined. The purpose of this method is to equalize assessment calculations for lots of similar size. Individual parcels by their very nature differ considerably in shape and area. The following procedures will apply when calculating adjusted front footage. The selection of the appropriate procedures will be determined by the specific configuration of the parcel . All measurements will be scaled from available plat and section maps and will be rounded down to the nearest 1/2 foot dimension with any excess fraction deleted. e. Categorical type descriptions are as follows : Standard Lots Rectangular Variation Lots Triangular Lots Cul-de-sac Lots Curved Lots Irregularly Shaped Lots Corner Lots 410 Flag Lots Double Frontage Lots • . • 1. Standard Lots. In this instance, the adjusted front footage for rectangular lots will be the actual front footage of the lot. •l he frontage measured shall be the lot width at the front lot line. MAIN AVE. . -- so• 90' Adj. Front Footage EXAMPLES B Lot A-50' A • Lot f3-90' 2. Rectangular Variation Lots. For a lot which is approximately rectangular and uniform in shape, the adjusted front footage is computed by averaging the front and back sides of the lot. This method is used only where the divergence between front and rear lot lines is 20 feet or less. • NI A I N A V E- Adj. Front Footage 411/ 90" 7-(.7' I EXAMPLES Lot.A-90: 110 = 100' • rrc' . AF eo' 2 Lot B-701- 80 = 75' 2 3. Triangular Lots. For a triangular shaped lot, the adjusted front footage is computed by averaging the front and back lot lines. The measurement at the back lot line shall not exceed a maximum distance in depth of 150 feet. MAIN V F • Adj. Front Footage !cc 4-� \ -7.0 ' /• EXAMPLES Lot A-100 i 40 = 70' \ r / ISO" 8 \ � / 2 \ / Lot B-40 :�30 = 85' ! \`J1Lot C-12�; 0 — GO' 0 \ 2 . \/ • • 4. Cul-de-Sac Lots. The adjusted front footage for those lots that exist on cul- de-sacs will be calculated at the midsection of the lot at the most reasonably defined and determinable position. This line will be computed by connecting the midpoints of the two side lot lines. Or, if the lots are similar in nature and configuration, a common lot width, such as the standard set back of 30' may be assigned based upon an evaluation of typical lots within the subdivision. Adj. Front Footage MA �� CIRCLE: ----; - - EXAMPLES Lot A- 75' \ ; C Lot B-110' Lot C- €30' %s • __>l A E3 5. Curved Lots. In certain situations such as those where lots are located along meandering trail system streets, read patterns create curvilineal frontages. In such instances, the adjusted front footage will be the width of the lot measured at the midpoint of the shortest side lot line. ' A Adj. Front Footage % Q\,.' r- EXAMPLES /' r-r Lot A- 70' Lot B- 90' • j Lot C-150' i • • i 6. Irregularly Shaped L . In many cases, unplatted parcels that are legally described by a metes arid bounds description are irregular and odd shaped. The adjusted front footage will be calculated by measuring the lot width at the 30 foot building setback line. } MAIN A V E_ Adj. Front Footage rg 115EXAMPLES . 1Lp _ - �1._ - _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ Lot A-115' • Lot B-140' A Lot C-125' i 7. Corner Lots . a) On a corner lot, 100 percent (100%) of the adjusted front footage of the short side will be assessed and 25 percent (25%) of the adjusted front footage of the long side will be assessed for improvements benefitting the respective sides. The length of the property sides and riot the orientation of the principal building shall determine adjusted front footage in this case. A series of.lots (two or more) under common • ownership shall be considered as one parcel or lot for determining which is the short or long side of a property. However, this shall only apply to series of lots on which only one principal building is situated. Adj. Front Footage EXAMPLES • Lot A-Side 1 = 43.75' • Side 2 = 95' Lot B-Side 1 = 87.5' "1• Side 2 = 125' •M A. I r'\1 A ic. _ •, _ r b) . General Commercial Zoned Corner Lots. • . : ... :- - - - improved traffic frontage and greater visibility along business district find inductrial park intorcoctionc. l l ie adjusted front footage shall be the entire frontage,measured along the sett ack lino; comprising the building cMvclop0. Adj. Front Footage / EXAMPLES • /,4 Lot L.ot 13-300' 3 0 0 p• 'Si-. .11 MAIN 300 ,A 1V E. F • B. Flag Lots. Properties which utilize a narrow private easement or maintain ownership of access to their property exceeding a minimum length of 125 feet, thereby having a small frontage on a street, will be • assigned an adjusted front footage of 75 feet. This dimension is consistent with the subdivision ordinance which prescribes such length as the minimum lot frontage along a public roadway. The adjusted front footage for flag lots whose driveway access is under 125 feet will be measured at the building setback line from the access terminus. Adj. Front Footage EXAMPLES Lot A-75' ITN AVE. Lot [3-90' . I _ + 30' to f� 72.1 -<i --- i I'0' • • 9. Double Frontage Lots. If a parcel, other than a corner lot, comprises frontage on two streets and is eligible (or subdivision, then an adjusted front footage assessment will be charged along each street. For double frontage lots lacking the necessary depth r (or subdivision, only a single adjusted front footage will be computed. The frontage with driveway access to front of house, shall be assessed. • Adj. Front Footage MAIN AVE. i\4A ►N AVEC EXAMPLES no' go' Lot A-220' Lot E3- 80' 1° r, N1 ! f • • 4110 411 The ultimate objective of these procedures is to arrive at a fair and equitable distribution of cost whereby consideration is given to lot size and parcels are comparably assessed. SECTION II . This ordinance is effective thirty days after its publication. Introduced and read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on April 28, 1997 . Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 12 day of May, 1997 . ATTEST: MAYOR 411 (SEAL) ADMINISTRATOR APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY • The ultimate objective of these procedures is to arrive at a fair and equitable distribution of cost whereby consideration is given to lot size and parcels are comparably assessed. SECTION II . This ordinance is effective thirty days after its publication. Introduced and read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on April 28, 1997 . Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 12 day of May, 1997 . ATTEST: MAYOR • (SEAL) ADMINISTRATOR ' APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY • • • RESOLUTION NO. 5/,L/ 1110 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING MODIFICATION OF THE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE MOUNDS VIEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, ESTABLISHING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 4, AND APPROVING THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN . THEREFOR Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The Mounds View Economic Development Authority ("EDA") consolidated Development Districts No. 1, 2, and 3, pursuant to Minn_ Stat., Sections 469.090 through 469.108, control of which was transferred to the EDA by the City of Mounds View ("City"), thereby establishing the Mounds View Economic Development Project ("Project"), and adopted a project plan therefor ("Project PIan"). 110 1.02. The City has determined a need to modify the Project Plan pursuant to Minn. Stat., Sections 469,124 through 469.134 ("Development District Act") and Minn. Stat., Sections 469.001 to 469.047 ("HRA Act") and to that end has caused to be prepared a document entitled "Modification No. 1 to the Mounds View Economic Development Project" dated April 14, 1997 ("Project Plan Modification"). 1.02. The City has determined a need to establish Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 ("TIF District No. 4") and to adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan ("TIF Plan") therefor, pursuant to Minn. Stat., Sections 469.101 through 469.1081 and Minn. Stat., Sections 469.174 through 469.179 ("TIF Act") and to that end has caused to be prepared a document entitled "Tax Increment Financing Plan for Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 4," dated April 14, 1997. 1.03. The Project Plan Modification and the TIF Plan were referred to the Mounds View Planning Commission, which determined that they conform to the general plan for the development of the City as a whole. 1.04. Estimates of the fiscal and economic implications of the TIF Plan were esented to Independent School District #621 and the Ramsey County Board before the public hearing on the TIF Plan in accordance with the TIF Act. The county commissioner representing the area including the TIF District was also duly notified in accordance with the TIF Act. 1.05. The City has fully reviewed the contents of the TIF Plan and has conducted a public hearing thereon, at which the views of all interested persons were heard. DJG120166 MU205-4 t1 1 Section 2. Findings: Protect Plan Modification. 2.01. The findings stated in the Project Plan are incorporated herein by reference. • 2.02. It is further specifically found and determined that: a) the land within the Project would not be made available for development without the public intervention and financial assistance described in the Project Plan Modification; b) the Project Plan Modification will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the land within the Project by private enterprise; c) the Project Plan Modification conforms to the general pian for development of the City as set forth in the comprehensive municipal plan; d) the Project Plan Modification will provide employment opportunities,and improve the tax base and the general economy of the state; and e) the Project Plan Modification will provide an impetus for commercial development. Section 3. Findinsts; TIF District No. 4. 3.01. It is found and determined that it is necessary and desirable• for the sound and orderly development of the Project and the City as a whole, and for the protection and preservation of the public health, safety, and general welfare, that the authority of the TIF Act be exercised to provide public financial assistance to the TIF District and the Project. 3.02. It is further found and determined, and it is the reasoned opinion of the City, that the development proposed in the TIF Plan could not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be Iess than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the TIF Plan. 3.03. The proposed public costs to be financed in part through tax increment financing are necessary to permit the City to realize the full potential of the TIF District and the Project in terms of development intensity, employment opportunities and tax base. 3.04. The TIF Plan for TIF District No. 4 conforms to the general plan of development of the City as a whole. DJG120266 MU205-a 1 3.05. The TIF Plan lbr TIP District No. 4 will afford maximum opportunity, consistent . with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the TIE District and the Project by private enterprise. 3.06. TIF District No. 4 is a redevelopment district under Section 469.174, subd. 10 of the TIF Act, based on the findings described in the TIF Plan, which are incorporated herein by reference. 3.07. The City hereby elects to make a qualifying local contribution with respect to TIF District No. 4, and thus anticipates that TIF District No. 4 will be exempt from state aid losses pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.1399, subd. 6(d). 3.08. Certain written reports(the "Reports")relating to the TIF Plan and to the activities • contemplated therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and submitted to the City and/or made a part of the City files and proceedings on the TIF Plan. The City hereby confirms,ratifies and adopts the Reports, which are herebyincorporated rporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full herein. The City additionally hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the TIF Plan, which is herebyincorporated rporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full herein, including, without limitation, the • portion of the TIF Plan in which the facts supporting designation of the TIF District as a redevelopment district. 110 Section 4. Project Plan Modification and TIF Plan Adopted. 4.01. The Project Plan Modification and the TIF Plan are hereby approved and adopted and TIF District No. 4 is hereby established. 4.02. The geographic boundaries of TIE District No. 4 are described in the TIE Plan and are incorporated herein by reference. 4.03. The City Clerk Administrator is authorized and directed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution together with a certified copy to the Auditor of Ramsey County with a request that the Project riginal tax capacity the pn and roperty Plan within TIF District No. 4 be certified to the Countyonp �' pr perry subd. 1 of the TIF Act, and to file a copy of the Project Plan Modification and TIF Plan with the Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue as required by the TIE Act. . • . i DJG120I66 MOS-4 • Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Minnesota this • day of 1997. 411 Duane McCarty, Mayor Al f EST: Chuck Whiting, City Clerk Administrator • • • . I • W0120166 MU206-4 • • , ii, . ,-, , .,.. 4 . Astrk0. 10- 1 .,,:.. 1 `r~= tom{. COMMUNITY PARTNERS LYCORPORATED April 23, 1997 Mr. Chuck Whiting City Administrator 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 Re: Bel Rae TIF Plan Dear Chuck: Sections G and Y and Exhibit No. 4 have been revised adding $600,000 to the Public IIIImprovement budget and $60,000 to the Administration/Contingency line item. Also, please see Exhibit No. 5. See you Monday evening. Sincerely, David M. Maroney Community Partners, Inc. DMM:ln enclosure cc: Robert Long • CENTRAL BLOCK BUILDING 405 DIVISION STREET NORTHFIELD.AIN 55057-2019 FAX(507) 645-6037 (507) 635-604-1 • MODIFICATION NO. 1 TO THE MOUNDS VIEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2 AND 3 AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 4 i MODIFICATION NUMBER 1: PLAN DATE April 14, 1997 PUBLIC HEARING DATE April 14, 1997 APPROVAL DATE • COMMUNITY PARTNERS, INC. .. • - k}.sem Y x[ ;mak �[ • 3 tm--- m}N,�..:+..•�^ ..".. �.,,�s..-. o- .,ic r- tis " � 'y�-. -.,. r A �.-.- qy, - -t `[E' z Y Et - _.--- ^"•.c: fr a•a�"'a' �' , 3. yY-Tq.•� .T'-x^..+,y -y-..F,+ .x,�`„�a .x,'y,yr.+ p `� • ;ir , ' •tL( ' •t "a �r�a ,a� iys,1, 3 cr. L Y'Y s re- 'fir: 4x .•.a .-. .j tt. .. _ �.,w„�• .st l'k.�: .. ., Jaen . 1;:'°Y ,... • ¢ _ M' BALLROOM • Photograph of Site SECTION I. MODIFICATION NO. 1 TO THE MOUNDS VIEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT April 14, 1997 The Mounds View Economic Development Project (the "Project") was duly created on May 9, 1994. No changes to the 1994 Project Plan are proposed by Modification No. 1. Modification No. 1 to the consolidated Development Program or "Project Plan" for the Project does include budget considerations to coincide with the Finance Plan relating to Tax Increment District No. 4. Proposed development related to Modification No. 1 will be consistent with the goals, objectives and plans expressed by the Economic Development Project and Development Programs. The current project proposes the following development: 1. Renovation of the existing Bel Rae Ballroom currently owned by the City to be operated as a community center. Portions of the renovated facility may be leased to other social service providers such as the Children's Home Society of Minnesota and Independent School District No. 621. 2. V.B. Digs, LLC, a for-profit Minnesota Corporation intends to construct an addition to the existing Bel Rae Ballroom facility which will offer space for a variety of recreational uses. 3. Various site improvements including construction of parking areas, landscaping and a infrastructure. Certain costs associated with the proposed project are to be paid in part with tax increment funds. The Project Plan and the Tax Increment Plans of the Tax Increment Districts currently existing within the Project are hereby amended to incorporate and reflect the additional goals, activities, costs and expenditures referenced in Sections I and II hereof. • • Establishment of the Mounds View Economic Development Project, Adoption of its Project Plan and Amendment of Tax Increment Financing Plans (As Approved May 9, 1994) Section 1.1. Definitions. The terms defined below, for purposes hereof, shall have the following respective meanings, unless the context specifically requires otherwise. The term "development" includes redevelopment, and the term "developing" includes redeveloping. "Board" means the Board of Commissioners, the governing body, of the EDA. "City" means the City of Mounds View, Minnesota. "Council" means the City Council of the City, its governing body. "County" means Ramsey County, Minnesota. "Development Districts" means Development District No. 1, Development District No. 2 and Development District No. 3, and references to the "Development Districts" shall, unless the context clearly precludes it, also refer to said Districts as they may heretofore have been amended or may herein or hereafter be amended. 411 "Development Programs" means the Development Programs for the Development Districts, being specifically Development Program No. 1, Development Program No. 2 and Development Program No. 3, and references to the "Development Programs" shall, unless the context clearly precludes it, also refer to said Development Programs as they may heretofore have been amended or may herein or hereafter be amended. "EDA"means the Mounds View Economic Development Authority, established pursuant to the Enabling Act and pursuant to a certain "enabling resolution" adopted by the Council on March 28, 1994. "Enabling Act" means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 through 469.108, including all statutes and powers incorporated or referenced therein. "Project" means the Mounds View Economic Development Project established hereby, including without limitation the areas of the City encompassed herein, and initially constituting all of the Development Districts, as the same may be amended. "Project Area" means the total area within the City included within the Project. "Project Plan" means the plan adopted hereby for the development of the Project, constituting initially the Development Programs, as amended hereby and as the same may be • further amended. "State" means the State of Minnesota. • "Tax Increment Districts" means the Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Districts which have heretofore been established within any of the Development Districts, or which may hereafter be established within the Project, as the same may heretofore have been, are hereby or may hereafter be amended. "Tax Increment Act" means the Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act, presently codified as Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.179, as the same may be amended. "Tax Increment Plans" means the respective tax increment financing plans adopted for the Tax Increment Districts, respectively, as the same may be amended. "Development District No. 1" means that certain Development District No. 1, originally approved and established by the City and the Council (pursuant to its Resolution No. 1951) as of December 12, 1985, as the same may have been amended prior to the date hereof. "Development Program No. 1"means that certain Development Program for Development District No. 1, originally adopted and approved by the City and the Council as of December 12, 1985, as the same may have been amended prior to the date hereof. "Development District No. 2" means that certain Development District No. 2, originally established and approved by the City and the Council (pursuant to its Resolution No. 2091) as of September 22, 1986, as the same may have been amended prior to the date hereof. "Development Program No. 2" means that certain Development Program for Development District No. 2, originally adopted and approved by the City and the Council as of September 22, 1986, as the same may have been amended prior to the date hereof. "Development District No. 3" means that certain Development District No. 3, originally established and approved by the City and the Council (pursuant to its Resolution No. 2294) as of February 22, 1988, as the same may have been amended prior to the date hereof. "Development Program No. 3" means that certain Development Program for Development District No. 3, originally adopted and approved by the City and the Council as of February 22, 1988, as the same may have been amended prior to the date hereof. Section 1.2. Background and Purposes. The City established the Development Districts and adopted their respective Development Programs pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Development District Act, previously found in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 472A, and now codified in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.124 through 469.134, and the City established Tax Increment Financing District Nos. 1, 2 and 3 within the Development Districts pursuant to the Tax Increment Act. 111/ Pursuant to the Enabling Act, on March 28, 1994, the Council adopted an enabling resolution and thereby established the EDA. Pursuant to Section 469.094, Subdivision 2, of the Enabling Act, the City transferred to the EDA, and the EDA accepted from the City transfer of, the control, authority, and operation of the Development Districts, including the existing Tax Increment Districts therein, thereby empowering the EDA to exercise all of the powers that the City could exercise with respect to the Development Districts, subject to the covenant and pledge by the EDA to perform the terms, conditions, and covenants of all bond indentures and other agreements executed for the security of any bonds issued and any other activities undertaken with respect to the Development Districts. The EDA recognizes and finds that, while appropriate uses and emphases may vary between various portions of the City, efforts to develop the City will be enhanced and their success will depend upon a unified, consistent, and broad-based approach which is unrelated to the respective boundary lines which currently exist for the Development Districts. In particular, the Board believes that it is important to have the flexibility to use tax increment and other resources generated within any of the Development Districts for the preservation and enhancement of any and all portions of the entire Project Area, all as may be permitted by applicable law. Accordingly, it is the EDA's purpose, consistent with the stated purposes of the Council, to consolidate and amplify the City's development areas, goals, objectives, development costs, and activities to the fullest extent permitted by the Enabling Act, the Tax Increment Act and other • applicable law, and the Board hereby finds that through such consolidation the necessary development of the City can be accomplished more consistently, efficiently, and economically. Pursuant to Section 469.094, Subdivision 2, of the Enabling Act, the EDA is authorized to exercise the powers of a city with respect to a development district under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.124 through 469.134, and the powers of a housing and redevelopment authority under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, among other powers, and it is the intention of the Council and the Board that the EDA shall have and be empowered to exercise any and all of said powers as may be necessary or appropriate for the development of the Project in accordance with the Project Plan. The Development Districts, the Development Programs, and the Tax Increment Districts and Plans are hereby incorporated herein to the same extent as if set forth in full herein. Section 1.3. Enlargement and Consolidation of the Development Districts; Designation as Mounds View Economic Development Project. Each of the Development Districts is hereby enlarged to include the area of each of the other Development Districts, and said consolidated and enlarged composite area is hereby designated as the Mounds View Economic Development Project (the "Project"). • The Board finds that each of the Development Districts, as so enlarged pursuant to this fir Section 1.3, and the resulting Project Area, together with the goals and objectives which the EDA seeks to accomplish or encourage with respect to such areas, constitutes without limitation a "development district" within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.125, Subdivision 9, and a "redevelopment project" within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.002, Subdivision 14. Section 1.4. Amendment and Consolidation of the Development Programs; Designation as Project Plan. Each of the Development Programs is hereby amended to include all of the goals, objectives, activities, and development costs heretofore identified in each of the other Development Programs and in each of the Tax Increment Plans; it being the intent and effect of the foregoing that each of the Development Programs and Tax Increment Plans shall be and hereby is amended to include the other Development Programs and Tax Increment Plans. Said consolidation and amendment of the Development Programs shall be known as the Project Plan for the Project. It is also the Board's intention and determination that any amendment to any of the Development Programs, the Project Plan or the Tax Increment Plans made herein or hereafter shall constitute and be deemed to be an amendment of all of the Development Programs. The Council hereby fords that each Development Program, as amended pursuant hereto, together with the composition thereof into the Project Plan, constitutes and shall be deemed to be a "development program" within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 409.125, Subdivision 3, and a "redevelopment plan" within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.002, Subdivision 16. . The City has heretofore identified significant development activities and costs within and for the benefit of the Development Districts and has financed such activities through substantial bonding and investments of tax increments and other revenues; and the Project Plan is hereby amended to include, as development goals, activities and costs for the Project Area (1) the attraction, retention, rehabilitation and preservation of commercial, industrial, retail, residential, recreational and public service facilities, including necessary or desirable park and recreational facilities, both active and passive; (2) new and rehabilitated public infrastructures; (3) community and other public service centers; (4) senior/mature adult and/or other housing development partnerships or other multi-use housing projects and facilities; (5) other public utilities (including telecommunications); (6) business incubator loan and other business programs; (7) transportation systems; (8) and all related activities or undertakings that may be desirable or necessary in connection with the completion and integration of such community development. The City has heretofore identified, and the EDA hereby restates, reaffirms and incorporates herein, long-range plans for the preservation and development of the City. The EDA acknowledges the potential and desire for significant new development projects within the Project Area. As these expected developments materialize, the EDA and/or the City may also be faced with significant additional expenditures involved in acquiring property, relocating businesses and other current users of such properties, clearing sites for development, and participating in the installation of necessary public infrastructures, as well as such other • • undertakings and forms of assistance as may be necessary or appropriate for any particular project. While it is not possible to predict with precision the overall magnitude of such costs or specific activities, or in all cases the feasibility of financing them in whole or in part, over the term of the Project and its Tax Increment Districts, the total additional principal costs hereby added to the Project Plan (to be eligible for financing through tax increment and other revenues, including bond proceeds) is estimated to be not less than $20,000,000, but the budget for the Project Plan is hereby amended to include all of the tax increment and other revenues generated heretofore or hereafter by the Project, based on the determination by the Board that the development needs of the City exceed the resources available through continued implementation and utilization of the Project and the Tax Increment Districts. These projects are also expected to require the use of the legal authority of the City or the EDA to issue bonds or other debt, including general obligation bonds (of the City) and revenue only obligations, to cover all or a portion of the related development costs. The Board finds that it is necessary and hereby does amend the Project Plan to include such additional activities and related costs as may be involved in such undertakings, as and when the opportunities arise and are approved by the Board. In addition to such other costs, the EDA would expect to incur certain financing costs, such as capitalized interest, bonding discount, costs of issuance, and administrative expenses. These additional costs, together with the interest to be paid on any debt issued by the EDA or the City to assist in financing such projects, would also be part of the "development costs" of the Project and would therefore be included within the Project Plan. • Accordingly, the EDA anticipates utilizing all future tax increment receipts from the Tax Increment Districts to retire outstanding debt and other obligations heretofore and to be incurred for the betterment and development of the Project Area. The EDA hereby amends the Project Plan to provide for the issuance of bonded indebtedness in an aggregate principal amount equal to and necessary to finance the activities described in the Project Plan, as adopted and amended herein. The EDA shall also acquire and expects to acquire those properties within the Project Area which may be needed for purposes of or helpful in implementing the Project Plan. In addition to the costs described above, the EDA intends to pay from available tax increment such qualifying administrative costs as may be permitted by but subject to the applicable limitations provided in the Tax Increment Act. Section 1.5. Amendment of Existing Tax increment Plans. Each of the Tax Increment Plans for the existing three Tax Increment Districts is hereby amended to incorporate all of the public development costs, programs, goals, and activities heretofore and herein incorporated into the Development Programs and the Project Plan pursuant to these Sections 1.1 through 1.5, inclusive, including without limitation all of the development costs identified in the Development Programs and in each of the other Tax Increment Plans. Accordingly, the EDA intends to use tax increments from these three Tax Increment Districts to finance activities on an as-needed basis throughout the Project Area. • SECTION II. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF) DISTRICT NO. 4 April 14, 1997 A. Foreword The Mounds View Economic Development Authority (the "EDA"), staff and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite and create Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 (the "Tax Increment District"). The Tax Increment District lies within the Mounds View Economic Development Project which arose from the consolidation and expansion of Development Districts Nos. 1, 2 and 3. The objectives for the improvement of the Project Area are set forth in the Project Plan for the Mounds View Economic Development Project as amended pursuant to Sections I and II hereof. Proposed development related to Modification No. 1 will be consistent with the goals, objectives and plans expressed by the Project Plan for the Mounds View Economic Development Project. The current project proposes the following development: 1. Renovation of the existing Bel Rae Ballroom currently owned by the City to be operated as . a community center. Portions of the renovated facility may be leased to other social service providers such as the Children's Home Society of Minnesota and Independent School District No. 621. 2. V.B. Digs, LLC, a for-profit Minnesota Corporation intends to construct an addition to the existing Bel Rae Ballroom facility which will offer space for a variety of recreational uses. 3. Various site improvements including construction of parking areas, landscaping and infrastructure. B. Use of Tax Increment Pursuant to Section 469.176, Subd. 4, of the Tax Increment Act, all revenues derived from the Tax Increment District shall be used in accordance with the tax increment financing plan. The revenues shall be used for the following purposes: 1. to pay the principal of and interest on bonds used to finance a project; 2. to finance or otherwise pay the capital and administration costs of the Development District pursuant to the Development District Act; 3. to pay for project costs as identified in the budget; and • 4. to finance or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in Section 469.176, Subd. 4, of the TIF Act. These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limits. C. Excess Tax Increments Pursuant to Section 469.176, Subd. 2, of the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Act, in any year in which the tax increment exceeds the amount necessary to pay the costs authorized by the tax increment financing plan including the amount necessary to cancel any tax levy as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, Subd. 3, the City shall use the excess amounts to: 1. prepay any outstanding bonds; 2. discharge the pledge of tax increment therefor; 3. pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of such bonds; or 4. return the excess amount to the County Auditor for distribution as provided in Section 469.176, Subd. 2, of the TIF Act. The EDA expects to spend all tax increment received and in accordance with the TIF Plan and consequently no excess tax increments are anticipated. 1111 D. Limitation of increment/TIF District Classification Pursuant to Section 469.176, Subd. 1(a), of the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Act: 1. No tax increment shall be paid to the EDA for the Tax Increment District after three (3) years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity value of the taxable property in the Tax Increment District by the County Auditor unless within the three (3) year period: (a) bonds have been issued pursuant to Section 469.178 or in aid of a project pursuant to any other law, except revenue bonds issued pursuant to Chapter 474 prior to August 1, 1979, or (b) the EDA has acquired property within the Tax Increment District or (c) the EDA has constructed or caused to be constructed public improvements within the Tax Increment District. 2. The tax increment pledged to the payment of bonds and interest thereon may be discharged and the Tax Increment District may be terminated if sufficient funds have been irrevocably deposited in the debt service fund or other escrow account held in trust for all outstanding bonds to provide for the payment of the bonds at maturity or redemption date. 3. The EDA has determined that parcels constituting seventy percent (70%) of the area of the Tax Increment District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or other improvements and more than fifty percent (50%) of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance. A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than fifteen percent (15%)of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. Facts and analysis supporting these findings are set forth in Exhibit No. 5. These conditions qualify the district as a Redevelopment Tax Increment District pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subd. 10(a)(1). No tax increment shall in any event be paid to the EDA from the Tax Increment District after twenty-five (25) years from the date of the receipt of the first tax increment or after the goals of this TIF Plan have been satisfied, whichever comes first. Modification of this TIF Plan pursuant to Section 469.176, Subd. 4, of the Tax Increment Act shall not extend the durational limits of the provision. At least ninety percent (90%) of the tax increment derived from the Tax Increment District will be used for redevelopment-related costs in accordance with Section 469.176, Subd. 4(j). 4. If, after four (4) years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity value of the Tax Increment District pursuant to Section 469.177 of the TIF Act, no demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of property or other site preparation, including improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of an underground utility service, has been commenced on a parcel located within the Tax Increment District by the EDA or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel, and the original net tax capacity value of that parcel shall be excluded from the original net tax capacity value of the Tax Increment District. If the EDA or the owner of the parcel subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that parcel, including improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the EDA shall certify to the County Auditor that the activity has commenced, and the County Auditor shall certify the net tax capacity value thereof as most recently certified by the Commissioner of Revenue and add it to the original net tax capacity value of the Tax Increment District. For purposes of this subdivision, "parcel" means a tract or plat of land established as a single unit for purposes • of assessment. 5. Pursuant to Section 469.1763, Subd. 2 of the TIF Act, at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the revenue derived from tax increments paid by properties in the Tax Increment District will be expended on "Activities" in the Tax Increment District or to pay bonds, to the extent that the proceeds of the bonds were used to finance "Activities" in the Tax Increment District or to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. No more than twenty- five percent(25%) of the revenue derived from tax increment paid by properties in the Tax Increment District will be expended, through a development fund or otherwise, on "Activities" outside of the Tax Increment District but within the respective Project except to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. All administrative expenses are considered to be expended outside of the Tax Increment District. 6. Pursuant to Section 469.1763, Subd. 3 of the TIF Act, revenues derived from tax increments will be considered as expended within the Tax Increment District only if: (a) before or within five (5) years after certification of the Tax Increment District, the revenues are actually paid to a "Third Party" with respect to the "Activity"; (b) bonds, the proceeds of which must be used to finance the "Activity," are issued and sold to a "Third Party" before or within five years after certification, the revenues are spent to repay the bonds, and the proceeds of the bonds either are, on the date of issuance, reasonably expected to be spent before the end of the later of(i) the five- year period, or (ii) a reasonable temporary period within the meaning of the use of • that term under section 148(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code, or are deposited in a reasonably required reserve or replacement fund; fie (c) binding contracts with a "Third Party" are entered into for performance of the "Activity" before or within five years after certification of the Tax Increment District and the revenues are spent under the contractual obligation; or (d) costs with respect to the "Activity" are paid before or within five years after certification of the Tax Increment District and the revenues are spent to reimburse a party for payment of the costs, including interest on unreimbursed costs. For the purpose of this Subsection, bonds include subsequent refunding bonds if the original refunded bonds meet the requirements of clause (b) above. 7. Pursuant to Section 469.1763, Subd. 4 of the TIF Act, beginning with the sixth year following certification of the Tax Increment District, seventy-five percent (75%) of the revenues derived from tax increments paid by properties in the Tax Increment District that remain after permitted expenditures will be used only to pay outstanding bonds; contracts, as defined in clauses 6(c) and 6(d); or certain credit enhanced bonds as set forth in Section 469.1763, Subd. 4 of the TIF Act. When the outstanding bonds have been defeased and when sufficient money has been set aside to pay contractual obligations, the Tax Increment District will be decertified and the pledge of tax increment discharged. 8. Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.1771, provides that the State Auditor shall enforce the tax increment law. Increments expended on purposes that are not permitted or outside the permitted area of expenditure must be paid to the County Auditor, subject to some limitations. . 9. Applicable Definitions (a) "Activities" means acquisition of property, clearing of land, site preparation, soils correction, removal of hazardous waste or pollution, installation of utilities, construction of public or private improvements, and other similar activities, but only to the extend that tax increment revenues may be spent for such purpose under the law. (b) "Third Party" means an entity other than (1) the person receiving the benefit of assistance financed with tax increments, or (2) the City or EDA or other person substantially under the control of the City. E. Limitation on Administrative Expenses Pursuant to Section 469.176, Subd. 3, of the Tax Increment Finance (TIF) Act, no tax increment shall be used to pay any administrative expenses for the Tax Increment District which exceed ten percent (10%) of the total tax increment expenditures authorized by the tax increment financing plan or the total tax increment expenditures for the Tax Increment District, whichever is less. The EDA intends to retain the maximum allowable administrative reimbursement permitted by the TIF Act. F. Parcels for Acquisition 1. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the EDA only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: storm sewer improvements, provide land for needed public streets, utilities and facilities, carry out clearance and/or development to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this Plan. 2. The EDA may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this Tax Increment Financing Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. 3. The City currently owns a portion of the property within the Tax Increment District and the City or EDA may acquire any additional property within the Tax Increment District. G. Estimate of Costs Estimated costs associated with the Tax Increment District are subject to change. Costs associated with the project which are eligible for assistance through the tax increment financing program are estimated and generally described as Public Improvements including land acquisition, costs relating to construction of a social, recreational or conference facility, costs that will be incurred to correct existing site and building deficiencies, fees and contingencies. The preliminary budget is estimated as follows: Public Improvements $3,900,000 Administration/Contingecy $ 390,000 Total Project Costs $4,290,000 Administrative costs are not expected to exceed ten percent (10%) of the lesser of tax increment expenses authorized by the Tax Increment District and Plan or total tax increment expenditures. Administrative costs may include direct County reimbursements, reporting costs, city staff time, and out-of-pocket expenses. • There are no development activities related to this Tax Increment District Plan for which contracts have already been entered into. The City reasonably expects the improvement project to begin in June 1997 and be completed by December 31, 1997. See Exhibit No. 4 for further budget details. The EDA retains the authority to modify the budget detail as may be needed to accomplish the stated goals and objectives, including the right to construct a recreation facility. H. Use of Tax Increments Tax increments generated in the Tax Increment District will be paid by Ramsey County to the EDA for its Tax Increment Fund for said District. The EDA will use the tax increment funds in accordance with the provisions of the Tax Increment District Plan not to exceed the total estimated project costs and administrative expenses and subject to available tax increment revenues. The EDA retains the right to use tax increments as a source of revenue to pay for interest expenses relating to project costs. When all authorized expenses have been paid, or other arrangements for payment have been made, all further increments, if any, will be used pursuant to this Tax Increment District Plan, including repayment to the City of Mounds View for any financial participation in the current project. • I. Sources of Revenue for Public Costs Tax increment financing is one source of revenue for public costs. The EDA may also use all other available sources to finance project costs. J. Estimate of Tax Increment The estimate of tax increment and assumptions are set forth in the following sections of this Tax Increment District Plan: Sections K, L and M. K. I 'do . ► • . . . I . • Pursuant to Section 469.177, Subd. 1, of the Tax Increment Act, the Original Net Tax Capacity Value ("ONTC") for the Tax Increment District is estimated to be $19,708 on all taxable real property within the Tax Increment District. Pursuant to Section 469.177, Subd. 1 and 2 of the Tax Increment Act, the County Auditor shall certify in each year the amount by which the original net tax capacity value has increased or decreased as a result of a change in tax exempt property within the Tax Increment District, reduction or enlargement of the Tax Increment District or changes in connection with previously issued building permits. In any year in which the current net tax capacity value of the Tax Increment District declines below the "ONTC," no net tax capacity will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the City. The City intends to capture 100% of the tax increments that are generated for a period of not more than twenty-five (25) years beginning in 1999. L. ' • The current net tax capacity value is the same as the original net tax capacity value estimated in Subsection K. M. 11 . . 1 . I • • ► . . 1 . ' . • I • 11 • I Pursuant to Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2 and 4 of the Tax Increment Act, the estimated captured net tax capacity value and anticipated tax increment in the Tax Increment District follows: Future Estimated Market Value (1998/99) $1,580,000 Current Estimated Market Value (1996/97) $ 463,200 Estimated Captured Market Value (1998/99) $1,116,800 Future Estimated Tax Capacity (1998/99) $ 71,080 Current Estimated Tax Capacity (1996/97) $ 19,708 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (1998/99) $ 51,372 Current Tax Rate (1996/97) 136.338% Projected Tax Increment (1998/99) $ 70,040 The EDA expects to use 100% of the captured net tax capacity and the resulting increments, beginning in the 1999 collection year. The estimates used for projecting tax increment revenues assume that V.B. Digs will construct a new facility which provides space for a maximum of eight (8) volleyball courts. V.B. Digs has estimated that total construction costs to complete a facility designed to accommodate up to eight (8) volleyball courts could amount to$1,975,000. It is possible that fewer than eight(8) volleyball courts could be built. • Assuming that Estimated Market Value is calculated at eighty percent (80%) of the estimated construction costs, the Estimated Market Value of the completed facility is projected to be $1,580,000. The EDA acquired Parcel No. 08-30-23-24-0056 in 1996 from a private owner and later transferred ownership to the City. The original value of the proposed Tax Increment District reflects the most recently finalized value for the property that has been acquired by the City of Mounds View and for Parcels No. 08-30-23-24-0055 and No. 08-30-23-24-0054 as follows: Parcel Estimated Market Value Net Tax Capacity 0056 $425,000 $17,950 0055 $ 19,100 $ 879 0054 $ 19,100 $ 879 The original value may be subject to adjustment pursuant to the proposal for the EDA and/or the City to own a portion of the property and to lease a portion of the property to V.B. Digs and to various tax- exempt and taxable organizations. Without specific knowledge regarding the ultimate tenant mix and property tax status, precise estimates of adjustments to the original tax capacity are difficult to determine at this time. All valuations projected by the Tax Increment District are subject to change depending upon a variety of circumstances. Tax capacity projections assume that all leased or privately owned property will be valued as 111 Commercial-Industrial (3a) property with the first $100,000 of estimated market value assessed at a rate of 3.0% and value over $100,000 assessed at a rate of 4.6%. These assumptions could change resulting from any Legislative changes. N. Fiscal Disparities The City of Mounds View elects the method of tax increment computation pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 3, clause (a). Consequently, the Tax Increment District shall elect to spread the fiscal disparities contribution outside the Tax Increment District. The ability of the City of Mounds View to elect Option A currently allowed by Section 469.177, Subdivision 3, clause (a) may be changed by the Legislature. Should legislative action occur which might eliminate the election option, the amount of captured tax capacity within the Tax Increment District could be reduced by an amount up to forty percent(40%). O. . . i • n • i •• • _ • • • i • . . i • •• • I • • •s_ 1• The tax increment received with respect to the Tax Increment Financing District shall be segregated by the EDA in a special account or accounts on its official books and records. P. Duration of the District Pursuant to Section 469.176, Subd. 1, of the Tax Increment Act, the duration of the Tax Increment District will be no more than twenty-five (25) years after the date of receipt by the EDA of the first full tax increment or the point at which the Tax Increment District Plan has been satisfied. The projected date of receipt by the EDA of the first tax increment will be approximately July 15, 1999. Q. Taxing Jurisdictions It is anticipated that net captured value of the parcels included in the Tax Increment District will remain stable from year to year after project completion and that the impact of tax increment financing on the net tax capacity values of all taxing jurisdictions in which the Tax Increment District is located in whole or in part would also remain stable from year-to-year. Based on this assumption, it is anticipated that tax increments will be captured annually. The estimate is based on the qualifications identified in this report and does not include the possible tax increment derived from any other future development, tax capacity changes or inflation factors. Assuming a Tax Rate of 136.338% (1996/97) and that the total Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value of the Tax Increment District on January 2, 1998 is $51,372, the following projections have been prepared: 1996/97 Tax Rate 1996/97 Tax Capacity Ramsey County 44.226% $350,638,962 City of Mounds View 25.062% $ 7,475,697 I.S.D. No. 621 60.471% $ 73,609,989 Miscellaneous 6 579% Total Tax Rate 136.338% School District No. 621 comprised 44.354% of the 1996/97 tax capacity rate, while Ramsey County comprised 32.438%. The City of Mounds View made up 18.382% of the cumulative tax capacity • levy for the taxing jurisdictions affected by the Tax Increment District proposal and Miscellaneous taxing bodies a total of 4.826%. A tax capacity rate of 136.338% has been utilized in this Tax Increment District Plan. If the new taxes estimated within the Tax Increment District are captured for the duration of the District, taxes and values will experience no change until termination of the District. If the new taxes upon completion were not captured(assuming the project could be done without tax increment financing), taxes would be distributed as follows: Ramsey County $22,720 City of Mounds View $12,875 I.S.D. No. 621 $31,066 Miscellaneous $ 3,379 Total $70,040 The projected amount of captured tax capacity of$51,372 within the Tax Increment District is a small amount compared against the tax capacities of Ramsey County, I.S.D. No. 621 and the City of Mounds View. R. Annual Disclosure Requirements • The EDA is subject to reporting requirements specified in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subd. 5, 6 and 6a, and will comply with said requirements. S. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer Pursuant to Section 469.176, Subd. 5, of the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Act, no more than twenty-five percent(25%), by acreage, of the property to be acquired within the Project as set forth in the tax increment financing plan shall at any time be owned by the EDA as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to Section 469.178 of the TIF Act without the EDA having, prior to acquisition in excess of twenty-five percent (25%) of the acreage, concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides recourse should the development not be completed. T. Assessment Agreements The EDA is permitted to enter into a written assessment agreement in recordable form with any person regarding property within the Tax Increment District. U. Assumptions and Analysis Estimated Current Net Tax Capacity Value: $19,708 (Section K). First Increment: Approximately July 15, 1999. 4110 .n. -s • •. :. ►- .. ••. • -• $19,708 (Section K). Original Tax Rate• 136.338% (1996/97). Local Contribution: The City/EDA are expected to elect to make a Qualifying Local Contribution (5%) and fmance costs related to the development project described herein. Tax Increment. The projected tax increment has been calculated at approximately $70,040 (1998/99) assuming a tax capacity rate of 136.338% (Section M). Administration. Certain legal, fiscal and administrative expenses that are incurred relating to the Tax Increment District may be financed in conjunction with the Plan and Program. The EDA intends to be reimbursed with tax increments for total costs. V. Reasonable Expect tions/Rut -For Test As required by the Tax Increment Financing Act, in establishing the Tax Increment District the determination has been made that the anticipated development and improvements would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that therefore the use of tax increment financing is necessary and has been based upon City staff awareness of the feasibility of developing the subject site. The analysis and studies supporting the findings are contained in a memorandum on file with the City of Mounds View prepared by Community Partners, Inc. • The But-For Analysis is provided as Exhibit No. 3. The EDA believes that the increased market value of the Tax Increment District without the use of tax increment financing will be less than the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments. W. Building Permits Issued A building permit is expected to be issued in 1997 for construction activities within the Tax Increment District. X. ► s • . •• i s 'r '# ' . ii • , ns • n • t The EDA shall, after due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor, or its notice of Tax Increment District enlargement with a listing of all properties within the Tax Increment District or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen(18)months immediately preceding approval of the tax increment financing plan by the EDA pursuant to Section 469.175, Subdivision 3, of the TIF Act. The County Auditor shall increase the original net tax capacity value of the Tax Increment District by the net tax capacity value of improvements for which a building permit was issued. Y. Bonded Deht The EDA may issue bonds including the use of "pay-as-you-go" obligations in any form or authorize the use of other available funds on hand or borrowed funds to finance the proposed activities and • Project budget. The maximum amount of such obligations will be $4,290,000. Z. Futuren v .lopment The City of Mounds View and the EDA have evaluated several development scenarios for property within the Tax Increment District. It is possible that further public improvements and private investments may occur within the Tax Increment District pursuant to the goals and objectives established for the Mounds View Economic Development Project and this Tax Increment District. S EXHIBIT NO. 1 • City of Mounds View Economic Development Project Area Map 9a. • . �.-`sic - � � - . �' ✓ c�'�.�tse C�Ir c�I U -- 1▪ Ir_^C'_� a• o r c•�c 1 B t. a 1 n E cis. _ r r oc cel ▪ ram x� ?1_.°�� ME' 'ems.+. 1an�,sm, �C!-• - • '[-•'_ni1 ` fib =MG 71.MHIR _Icpii=_f3/1.!_wiIDI9 =: - .._ v _ ='1'i1- ,'sem- Mir,A. ,^a -mV� ^mac \ •••e r 1 �e..�cm m la_ . _ -. .` t.-.4-neat .I . iIIti i■ q�laic 7 : _- itk.O,.,� �= > • .• /• t 1tLC� mine mEt IM=muG •L",..1 rT A etterat I••.I;n!1: •1.1 y © NC.21.Me=IC Mg:'.ICG M.6 _��V t>11C[pl�ti:Umt[L'61�3', 4.1tla,.or.L c ai=r x ';wti,,� _ vv i� cu�sBai �a ice. ` 40 91w'�=, - M�G' u >��l €aa.a u �15;r_::::laultiq .. MEW 4,01 aap, �. =2;=,...' hoc a :15= • 0'9'9 Loh I - oaf s".� tms .� i . ,,,,...0%.,0" •Eur im ----W, wirisit-.:, • :r,,_L ,,, ,,______„ , _, __...., , • ?• a ," Iln1i:l. 71O�f,31 '�•t/I9.a!' %' 1 1 o =:LF--- .- Ntaiirs? ••1 . c;,rne rRri IF MEME 3=1 SI /-1) - My ME=a:.. '- .• " 11 C - - .1: � L - So.. 111.! r,iltadatattert: ....,.0..o ;„ „ ,,,,„ , rrl.. t'j;mi• ,.?-11:I'.iir, =h=em(3, n791fn111 S>Fstl�„�'r-' 4 r. r•/.nU:1-•-tact.'--' I" z'�C R3nR$1'.r ATF /� - t s z a' T =r 'til• - et+.roc., :. w • An= c-malt dt�roomC�1i •�'=�-- d s t.1 u• i t-- x U • • leaang V• _.2\ CITY OF II1UNDS • E W BASE MAP A..:... • w.. :995 I EXHIBIT NO. 2 Tax Increment District No. 4 Description and Map Parcel Number(s): #08-30-23-24-0056 (Bel Rae Ballroom) #08-30-23-24-0055 (Lot 18) #08-30-23-24-0054 (Lot 17) Legal Description: Parcel OSC Lots 19,20,21,22; That part of Lot 16, lying North of a line drawn between the Southeasterly corner of Lot 19 and the Southwesterly corner of Lot 4, except the East 66 feet of said Lot 16 in Block 5, Pinewood Terrace No. 2. Together with the benefits accruing to the owner of the above property under that certain Easement Agreement dated October 12, 1994, filed of record October 14, 1994, as Document No. 1072932. Parcel 0054 IIILot 17, Block 5, Pinewood Terrace No. 2. Parcel 0055 Lot 18, Block 5, Pinewood Terrace No. 2 Tax Increment District No. 4 Eg 4F-n � .o) 1•44 a 0" "1 ZJ ' . , W - ,ur t __ _ _ tT W�_.ti-. . .. •• C © xo if i LE (x1 �Q� gMI WI r„C ('L 1 4'o -ccamr- CITY OF io `. 0 -,...... I11OUNDSa NI At, 7. 4111 '"•�� � :No ....., Ct) ' Air . , t S• .1: r (y y0 . nil VIEW 5 - 4141tr 0., . 44,,`Ii&:,:. .. („, ''. ‘41 '' d41 4"ay . 3 20 4 T • (s./ . •- 9 . 4., EXHIBIT NO. 3 But-For Analysis Projected Annual Tax Increment $ 70,040 (See Section M) Projected Duration 25 year maximum term Projected Tax Increment Total $1,751,000 Present Value (9%/25 years) $ 203,060 Projected Market Value with TIF $1,580,000 Present Value of Tax Increment $ 203,060 Adjusted Market Value $1,376,940 Projected Market Value without TIF $ 800,000 The projected adjusted taxable market value of the property within the Tax Increment District with the aide of tax increment financing is$1,376,940 and without tax increment financing is $800,000 which is the present estimated value(purchase price) of Parcel No. 08-30-23-24-0056 (Bel Rae Ballroom). No new development • is assumed without tax increment financing assistance, therefore, no increase in market value is anticipated absent tax increment financing assistance. S • EXHIBIT NO. 4 Bud. •t Detail (Section G) Land Acquisition/Social, Recreational or Conference Facility Parcel No. 08-30-23-24-0056 Parcel No. 08-30-23-24-0055 Parcel No. 08-30-23-24-0054 Subtotal $2,419,369 Renovation/Site Improvements City Portion- Renovation $ 250,875 Sitework(wetlands) $ 50,000 Exterior Facade $ 75,000 Parking Area $ 50,000 Subtotal $ 425,875 I.S.D. No. 621 - Renovation $ 51,500 1111 Children's Home Society - Renovation $ 707,750 Subtotal $ 759,250 V.B. Digs - Exterior $ 25,000 V.B. Digs - Sitework $ 100,000 V.B. Digs - Parking $ 100,000 Subtotal $ 225,000 Design Contingency (5%) $ 70,506 Subtotal $1,480,631 Total Public Improvement Budget (Section G) $3,900,000 Source of Renovation/Site Improvements Estimates: "Project Cost Summary" of 2/3/97 i EXHIBIT NO. 5 (Insert "Building Evaluation Report") Item No. /1 .4 Staff Report No. 97-20e9 L' • Meeting Date: April 28, 1997 Type of Business: CB WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council From: Bruce Kessel Lynnette Morgan Item Title/Subject: Benchmark Service Providers Date of Report: April 24, 1997 Over the past several months, staff has provided information regarding benchmarking and compensation. The following report compiles information previously provided. Staff received proposals from two organizations, PDI (current being used) and HAY in conjunction with Labor Relations Associates, regarding benchmark values and compensation specific to Mounds View. The existing benchmark system has been in place since 1985, with compensation and point value amendments occurring in 1992 for Pay Equity adjustments and thereafter for position reclassifications and/or new hires. • PDI • Select employees who will complete the questionnaires. (Internal selection) • Set up a completion session to review the instructions for filling out the questionnaires. (Provided internally) • Have the employees fill out general section than go onto the tasks. (Based on 35 employees completing questionnaire, approx. 100 hours staff time) • Upon completion, supervisor should review questionnaires. (100 hours of review time) • Review for accuracy the General Section, Job Content Section, Write-in Sections, if added, and the percent job covered. PDI project is very time consuming and involves little communication support. It would be a benefit for the City, as well as the employees, if the organization provided one to one communication rather than completing this project via mail. The benefit of an external organization providing recommendations for position analysis is perceived less threatening than having management select the positions. Although management is the ultimate decision maker, external recommendations are conveyed with less negativity. PDI ESTIMATED TOTAL EXPENSE $2,095 (Does not include compensation proposal) S City of Mounds View Staff Report April 24, 1997 Page 2 HAY The HAY proposal would entail converting the job evaluation system from the PDI system to the HAY system and possibly revise the compensation system to be consistent with State and Federal law, general principles of equitable compensation, and the City's compensation plan goals. • Revising the current the Job Evaluation System used at Mounds View would include using job descriptions, Questionnaires (simple form), and input from management. A consultant from Labor Relations would work with management on reviewing current and possible benchmark changes and well as provide and an introductory session for all employees on the procedures and process of benchmark conversion. • Review and possibly revise Compensation System. ► Review salary relationship (wage and wage equivalents)between City employees and identify patterns of comparison which have contributed to existing compensation differentials. ► Develop preliminary recommendations for a City salary structure. Conduct statistical and other analyses to determine whether preliminary recommendations comply with the "equitable" and"reasonable" compensation relationship standards required by the Pay Equity Act. ► Present recommendations and guidelines to City officials. ► Revise recommendations as necessary to meet City officials' concerns. • Projected Timetable and Estimated Costs - Time frame Approx. 5 weeks. Update Job Evaluation Study $2,500 Develop Compensation System $850 TOTAL PROPOSAL 3,350 Research indicates HAY Evaluation System as the more "user friendly" system versus PDI. Labor Relations would work directly with management in the conversion as well as provide informational assistance to employees with questions regarding the nature of benchmark conversion. Due to the complexity of state and federal laws pertaining to comparable worth and pay equity,the City would benefit from using an organization that provides continual communication support. HAY is more defensible based on the benchmark being specific to the position and allows for variables to be incorporated within the specific position creating a"truer"benchmark value and offers a range of flexibility based on position responsibilities. Using Labor Relations Associates in conjunction with HAY, future amendments or modification will be less expensive because Mounds View is a subscriber City. Based on conversations from HAY and PDI, HAY and Labor Relations Associates is significantly more responsive to questions and concerns and has a more efficient response time. City of Mounds View Staff Report April 2, 1997 • Page 3 COMPENSATION The following provides an overview of issues which will need to be addressed in formulating a compensation policy. If the City chooses to use HAY services, a compensation plan will be developed specific to the goals and interests of the City. The PDI estimated proposal was $2,100 which includes only benchmarking. The HAY proposal excluding revision of the compensation system is $2,500, resulting in a$400 difference between the two providers. HAY proposal included an addition amount of$850 for the development of a compensation system resulting in the total proposal of$3,350. To implement a compensation plan, ultimately the first step should ensure benchmark values truly reflect position responsibilities. Therefore, review of benchmark values should occur prior to development of a compensation plan. In general, compensation is determined by incorporating the following three factors: a compensation plan, market salary data, and pay equity/comparable worth conformance. ► COMPENSATION 1. Existing policy: The minimum and maximum salary range are based on the average minimum and maximum salary range of Stanton 5. • 2. Alternative Options: a. Taxable Tax Capacity: Use those cities with similar taxable tax capacity to Mounds View. Those cities include: City Population Total Tax Capacity * Lino Lakes 13,097 7,825,611 Northfield 15,667 7,747,544 Albert Lea 18,207 7,619,537 Little Canada 9,337 7,610,821 Robbinsdale 14,206 7,426,723 Mounds View 12,561 7,335,733 North Oaks 3,6750 7,159,247 Medina 3,493 6,764,918 Fergus Falls 12,874 6,854,712 Cloquet 11,160 6,780,897 • North Mankato 11,340 6,621,071 City of Mounds View Staff Report April 24, 1997 Page 4 (*Payable 1996 Property Taxes,9/96 LMC) b. Use similar size metropolitan cities with populations between 10,000 and 20,000 and relevant market data. ► COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS 1. Existing policy provides COLA's on January 1. 2. Alternative option: COLA's coincide with anniversary date. ► PROGRESSION THROUGH 5 STEP SCHEDULE 1. Existing policy: Advancement from the initial Step 1 occurs six months after the employee's date of hire, or reclassification, and on the employee's anniversary date thereafter until the employee reaches Step 5. Advancement to each step occurs only after a performance evaluation rated satisfactory or better has been conducted by the employee's supervisor and approved by the Department Head, City Administrator and the City Council. 2. Alternative option: No step progression. New hires or reclassified positions begin salary at maximum range. ► MERIT PAY 1. Develop compensation range to include adjustments for merit pay. Factors • include determination of which employee classes (i.e., exempt-non exempt)to include and effects on bargaining units. Currently compensation is not linked to benchmark values. Salaries are based on Stanton information which for the majority of positions falls between Stanton 6 and Stanton 7 cities. • PAY EQUITY/COMPARABLE WORTH Background Summary: In 1984,the State Legislature passed into law the Pay Equity Act. The law required that all units of local government establish equitable compensation relationships. A primary consideration in negotiating, establishing,recommending, and approving compensation is comparable work value in relationship to other employees positions within the political subdivisions." Compensation for positions bear"reasonable relationships"to one another if the compensation for positions which require comparable skills, effort, responsibility, working conditions, and other relevant work-related criteria is comparable. Every political subdivision shall use a job evaluation system in order to determine the comparable work value of the work performed by each class of its employees. The system must be maintained and updated to account for new employee classes and any changes in factors affecting the comparable work value of existing classes. Subsequent to the enactment of the law, Mounds View, together with approximately 105 other cities, entered into an agreement with Control Data to develop a system of determine equitable . compensation relationship among position classes. The hierarch of the position values (or City of Mounds View Staff Report April 24, 1997 • Page 5 points) was a result of the 1985 study. Based on three things: positions values, compensation maximums and regression analysis, the first pay equity adjustments were made to Mounds View employees in 1987. In 1989, Control Data sold the program software for the study to Personnel Decisions, Inc. (PDI). 1990 Pay Equity Amendment: The Pay Equity Act was amended by the Legislature in 1990. The amendment significantly changed the manner and the degree which cities had previously and would, in the future, implement pay equity. The law clearly defined what had heretofore been a vague definition of equitable compensation relationships. The amendment clearly stated that the compensation pattern of female dominated classes cannot be consistently below the compensation pattern of male-dominated classes. 1992 Pay Equity Adjustments: The City of Mounds View did not make pay equity adjustments in 1990 nor did it make adjustments since the initial adjustments in 1987. In August of 1991,the hierarchy of position values was updated internally by conducting a Metro-wide position survey and"benchmarking"all positions. The hierarchy update established new point values for several positions - some position values remained consistent with previously established values. New Time Spent Profiles (TSP) were not conducted because of the pending update of PDI's compensation system scheduled for 1992. Several positions were found to be below their market comparisons (using the mean of the DCA Stanton Group 5 cities.) The positions received Pay Equity adjustments December 9, 1991. 1993 Pay Equity Compliance: In 1993, the City submitted to DOER the Pay Equity Implementation Report. Mounds View was found to be in compliance with Pay Equity. No adjustments were made. 1996 Pay Equity Compliance: The Pay Equity Implementation Report was submitted to DOER January 31, 1996. Mounds View reported an underpayment ratio of 84.6%upon final examination on December 31, 1995. Unfortunately, Mounds View did not meet certain requirements resulting in a non-conformance by DOER. To pass the statistical analysis test, a minimum requirement underpayment ratio of 80%, or if below 80%, a t-test that is not statistically significant. According to DOER,the underpayment ration is 78.6% and the t-test is 2.024, which is statistically significant. A score below score below 80% and a statistically significant t-test show that female classes are compensated consistently below male classes of comparable value. Mounds View has re-calculated the underpayment ratio and t-test score, based upon employees and the pay schedule as of 2-10-97, of which the t-test score indicated an insignificant result. The City has not been notified as to compliance results. 110 II FROM :HAY MGMT CONSLT 612 333 2009 1997,04-28 12:38 14588 P.15/30 t • Mr. Richard Salvati February 25, 1993 Page 2 Public Utility Commission consider increasing the salary range maximum of four females classes. These four female classes, their current salary range maximum, and the recommended salary range maximum that Hay's analyses . found was necessary to bring the Utility into compliance are shown below: .A .� .. .. .. i O J' 1.i:�• N,S•�4r yrJy.,,:'{ S :ln•i2vr? rr:,gri • .. .. ••no x. :cp;...r;. �,�.}yey}�$ ,.' �};� 9.r.. j r"� eya S o i3 vv :wx-d—%' - ,'';ci•-}�" ti-z-4:fng ':�iix23:1.r.. :v,'tt'i,{„•�is',''. ''�,''at"F4, is sd0 r 1 rx g;� '�3%'si's � r� •%rc:.�. :,eG' "";"-. ';Y� a r`'r's> �:�� 'As• „''w ,a.:,rr4. •,efi.. .sem''"', .s�,;;i . l .m'$,..�,• r war:, o .fi"""r '1V .3 .ix• .i'f. -, y, ;.. i r. �r•�?,>yd.[�- [ ;AN'..j-:-A %"-� `,' y,, ` f7 ,:,,.,[Y•�, ,1. �� .2 . b 15i.+•ai . :,.i.< 1;,..,_,: ,'4iQ....... ....... .-- ...obi Axa.' 4'??p:u obi s.�,x.:i :.�aM.,.�:..t.:!:sf•;...:.,. �igRH<ie r,•,s< �.,�.y. w. - ' -- a �:y,: r 'y �;r rrriV"S' ?,w5,,•�" �y ,,,1,.',.�1: $' ;r.: •- i•An., ''' ]5 . Y- f_ :%J 4'x;y} .-N�,"l• ..'-�`i� y�,:.i. '.'„i oZ`'&i'':,F i3}xp'�:j '��,,. .'"'l' xar � nH%i� '- ' ��,rw'fM �. .,§'�:w v{,S' :k• i6a s•, a sw,y n"w _ >n•.o-...J x{ ' d,4d • tYsGu',rsr rs h ,e. - ,o J.".+�' ar:.: rfroi7 7 '�.`.--•y.. t ... ` «1 �•:J!<'W`y�nr»'ahr+:.in r :'N�'�w.'y��/°'�,(py f �^' .�Y�st' r•m;:,y,�.•�.rn :s•x..p,.'•�,..��ua. <.,�bt,', i:'. ." •»Yesk;¢L'/w?�'rR'es Sq;4:.G,).:XSSfUf: .,1x',..!'x+,°�:+iw:. •ru7N::izsfv rrJ¢:Vha,•.;r.+¢,ii. 2 �''';u; ."i ...., ,...: :!1':,.••`.'•,.,'Y''.'4A'' ...... ix.•.a6 ,;r",'i''•' "',;• ' 'e:4.:w , ''•` :::.:<:%r.'.e":i l'4'"''1,::,:'4•"'.'''''':::;.:[:r•;,:,'��..',ir, Data Processing Assistant 110 $2,242 $2,283 Clerk 122 $2,175 $2,367 • Laboratory Technician 183 $2,511 S2.731 Account Clerk 177 $2,292 $2,687 • Please note that this change does not necessarily imply an immediate change to these employees pay. It does, however, imply an adjustment in the future maximum pay applicable to employees in these classes. As Hay noted in its final report, the four classes were carefully chosen so the jobs were unique to the Utility and had no clear counterparts in the City. This should help to minimize internal equity concerns between similar jobs in the City and the Utility. - Salary Administration f The City and the Utility have begun to address many critical salary policy issues, such as ending the long tradition of cost-of-living increases. Neither the City Council or the Public Utilities Commission has, however, as yet made the policy decisions necessary to put an administrative process in place to enable systematic management of their payroll costs. The remainder of this letter and the attached materials will hopefully facilitate this process. • Hay's final report (see pages 22 through 25) addresses salary administration policy questions before the Commission and Council. Hay's letter of November 4, 1992 (copy attached to this letter) addresses the policy alternatives preferred by City Management. On November 18, Hay had an TT _—ft_ ---- FROM :HAY MGMT CONSLT 612 333 2009 1997.04-28 12:39 #688 P.16/30 • Mr. Richard Salvati • February 25, 1993 . Page 3 opportunity to meet with Public Utility Commissioners Don Gregg and Bill O'Connor, to discuss these policy questions. Unfortunately, although the City invited two Council Members, they were unable to attend. After the meeting, the Commissioners in attendance suggested that they would like to see follow-up on two items. First, a checklist of the salary administration decisions the Commission and Council should attend to, and second, a checklist of the items the Council and Commission should monitor over time to ensure they are maintaining appropriate direction and control over the salary program. A short checklist of salary administration decisions the City Council and Public Utility Commission should address includes the following: 1. Should the City and Utility continue to use cost-of-living increases? Hay understands that the City and Utility have eliminated this practice. • 2. • What is the City's and the Utility's desired competitive position• • relative to the external pay market? In other words, how does the City wish to link its salary ranges to the external market? Hay characterized the external competitive market in its final report. 3. Should salaries for City and Utility employees be administered together or apart? Hay addresses this issue, too, in its final report. 4. How should individual pay progression be determined? For example, one alternative approach is seniority based salary progression, which typically utilizes a one step increase for every year of service.in the job. Another example is pay-for-performance. A final example is that the employees current position in the range could determine salary progression, with the salary midpoint designated as the salary target of intention. • As the Council and Commission decide on the design of a new salary administration system, they should carefully monitor the total cost of the pay program. This is particularly true for those administrative measures which can significantly impact the total cost. For example, if an employee's current pay (and current maximum) exceed the recommended maximum under a new salary range, how is this situation addressed? It is customary in this situation • Hup FROM :HAY MGMT CONSLT 512 333 2009 1997.04-28 12:39 #588 P.17/30 • Mr. Richard Salvati February 25, 1993 Page 4 to slow or freeze current salaries until recommended salary range maximums "catch up" through regular annual range increases. This approach frees resources for use in helping to offset necessary range maximum increases for other employees. On the other hand, an employer may decide to take other steps, such as: provide lump sum payouts in lieu of salary increases to those over maximum; set more aggressive, liberal salary range maximums; or take no special action (and leave them above maximum). The Council and Commission should thoughtfully review the implications and cost of each of these alternatives. Every year, the Council and Commission should monitor average salary increases, increases to salary range maximum, and the total cost of the pay program. However, the nature of the salary program design will largely determine what needs monitoring. Although the Council and the Commission have not yet decided on the final salary program design, Hay has worked 411 with City Management to identify the salary program it prefers. Hay outlined this approach in the November 4, 1992 letter. • The approach agreed to includes the administration of separate pay programs for the City and the Utility. Within the City and Utility, jobs were further divided into lower level supervisory, technical and clerical support jobs, and higher level management and professional jobs. Under this approach lower level City and Utility jobs have salary range maximums linked to specified external markets. Attached to this letter, Hay provides a salary range table for Utility Supervisory, Technical and Clerical Support jobs and another for City Clerical and Technical Support jobs. A step salary range is shown for each job's range. There are four steps in each range. The intention of these tables is to provide a guideline for action at the collective bargaining table. Hay's letter of November 4th addressed higher level management and professional City and Utility jobs. Under the approach favored by City Management, these jobs are administered using salary minimums, midpoints and maximums. The salary range midpoint would be a control point linked to specified external markets. "Attachment A" to the November 4th letter shows a chart indicating the determination of salary increases for individuals • under this salary program. The chart suggests salary increases based on position in the range. Those lower in the range receive greater increases than those higher in the range. If the Council and Commission choose to adopt the approaches preferred by City Management; they should consider monitoring the following: YT !r FROM :HAY MGMT CONSLT 612 333 2009 1997,04-28 12:40 #588 P.18/30 • Mr. Richard Salvati February 25, 1993 Page.5 1. How are employees whose current pay and salary maximum is above the recommended maximum handled? (See commentary above). Z. For Utility, Supervisory, Technical and Clerical Support positions and for City Clerical and Support positions, how effective are collective bargaining negotiations in moving the City towards its designated salary administration guidelines? 3. For management and professional jobs in the City and Utility, what is the overall compa-ratio (the average of the ratio of each employees current salary divided by their salary range midpoint)? 4. What is the average salary increase provided to management and professional City and Utility positions? • 5. What should the increase guideline be for employees whose current pay is low in the range? In the middle of the range? High in the • range? I hope this letter and the attached materials will be helpful in furthering the discussion of salary administration implementation within the City and Utility. Please let me know if you should need any further support as deliberations within the Public Utility Commission and the City Council begin. Sincerely, Qt‘to:4-1( Daniel P. Schleeter Associate Consultant DPS:dlg Enclosures cc: Thomas MacAulay Assistant City Manager Larry Nelson Personnel Officer • HayGroup ' FROM :HAY MGMT CONSLT S12 333 2009 • 1997,04-28 12:41 #S88 P.21/30 JO O 4.11% ( ,)_,_,_ O Qto n cr a? 'y clr o x a �. m 3:1• I c m 0, • 3l . --.2 ® I. 2 % E • r Z o CCI = ? =- �e o Z a o 4 9. � - CD - -� = COm CO - a,. z �r fl� 3 __ 411 ACD CD2 to r `D 3 Z 0 E: .., ° c� .- • 0.... —.. .- �' -n C'- =- i— to o ; Z- m CO.;• c rsa O 0 g o *CD m m a a_ ua • a ? � � n y mom. rn N ° -mo Tai o n y "Q N �' 0 N p O C1 -4 ra Zi . Z _ 0 .� m F D ° o ° m- 3 RI o = O a22 I • a 2 � 2ul H FROM :HAY MGMT CONSLT 612 333 2009 1997.04-28 12:41 #688 P.22/30 0311 'V (J) W 03Cna' 0a'C -a Pt» C7c) n c- D g ao � rro � 0mn � n� Q+ 2 � 2 � oo mli n • . a E -2 t • fp _ R .g. y2 - 41a A _ C COA A A 27 03 C. 0 R i 1 itIi I I II C.1 Q 4j Cal W Cg (O w c.,) A A d to ay 01 001 c to D O j N O W E CoilCg Chia) 5 .2 (724 CSI W3 C 5W3 V ® IS r- c a 3 O Xi C C 0 n c c, 11 .r -4 So (I) to $0 to 1,0o eco A ct ponnnnlanntlrgteEnt ; tri -0 " -4oan 'v -4VC3b1oiO 01�po Cop i 0 CJ' i it . c O 8IrttrrIngTVErtrt 0 -3 -3 j p� Qf $ g � p� 35. ih Sn :".1 "4 "4 "4 - SD . ". N . SO :4 SO SO N 0 + 1! 5j; O03 011• V g N N N - O t0 41 t�0 h1 "1 O i 1 � w as a $12PP ° ►Vc1: � _<oC1 L O � � � ag § CD $ $ . COa ; Er- 0 . M O fm' 1 II • ii � ° • M. ' FROM :HAY MGMT CONSLT 612 333 2009 1997,04-28 12:43 #588 P.29/30 • N rnN mv � -1 -i3 - Y mania a a a 31 O Aecr3 $ $ 3. _ m2 o g, 2 m e ea a r. m• e s : m 1 Ce N e 401. ep 7r a T e • -ice X 01 3 , mm 1 .4 0 m 2 0 m 9 0 z 0 , 3 0 : * m rna a . M t., I. m m m e m a - 4 e e 3 Z 1 > z e �. e 3 i m : i t G 1 gv S22mo e o - o m • s o ?: sr s • a oc ' o .4 e _1v S. > 3 3 3 2 3 N A Q — 0 o 0 g. 0 o � O0 O T r ± o w m .2i .1' . 1 — . -* s _ � a , e . v . . z. Qr. e e o ma - 1 di ;: •t om n H N y = y o m a m 3 • 'e 'e 2 2 2e tl • a e m s e • Y II ,e< • II • H II ' I Ns . .. . . . . . r _, - - r . — . - - .► N N N N N N N N N N I ,N ...1 co totommticoutuf°, wwuoieonoa: tomottoO •N: .NivIAuuII II r U H • X • 3 • .. . Oe i '1.17 Il da s N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N II m to m m 0 m 0 m O 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II .. — .4 :: 'v •: V .4 .4 :o 0 is ip . o► of o: m w 11 m pl e0 w • ., v N tD [rt a m CI V V •+ V V •4 V m ep a0 �o v V V V a m ip Aa m . v � O O m Q a W W N N N N N N N CD m m m m W W W N m II - n4 rij H 0 0 N N N N N N N N N ►.NI N �► N N Na N ►.t N N W 41 W G.t GI h1 N -4 + ® 0003 .A 01 a _ N N o es .J ' o gn m V .i a A'm a a a a o V V V N v -... ...4 I �a • m m o m V V — m m m to m N N m m m m O O O O — .. m a l N m m m m m f0 � m m .: v ., V V V V r V O O O O ao 1 . II cop N N N N N N m N N N N N 1N N N N N N N M N N N N N N N N A to •e N N N Na N t, 6Ife W a a a a A A ? ( aa A (fl ` A 4:1 U: R Fri ✓ maioV •, ONNja — . o Os A n m ... VVoOimWONNAAa .0doaAO .60MmmO 9' NmN0 ., .1WOO , , 6mOIId II II N 1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 1.f N N N N 9 N W a a . . . . . m m u: m m m m m m m m m m m o 0 o V V 1 N W 0 -► (.f V t:: (o (O C C m o e m m m V 10 (O a -. 141 VAA a to o m r m m N N N N N N N O O O O O A a a m N • O O N m o ul m N to m m m m m m m m m m m m O m m m m m Jo IN .. .• - apa.mm — -, o NNN II I.i N N y0 a N iv N �' OI V m v II • v CO m 0 m m g.„. . . m m m a tr W W II i i Q Item No. II L Staff Report No. 97-014V C. 411 Meeting Date: 4/28/97 Type of Business: CB WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council From: Lynnette Morga Item Title/Subject: Introduction of rdinance No. 601 Relating to Intoxicating Liquor Licenses, Amending Title 500, Chapter 502, Section 502.08 of the Mound View Municipal Code Date of Report: April 24, 1997 In preparation of the current year's license renewals, staff researched the existing Code requirement requiring a public hearing with mailed and published notice for intoxicating liquor license renewals. The existing Code and Administrative Policy 2.01, requires publication of the public hearing notice to be placed in the in the official newspaper 14 days in advance of the public hearing as well as mailing the public hearing notice to property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. This requirement appears to be costly and ineffective since in most instances the Council would have previously been informed of any such problems prior to the licensing renewal date. As such, City Attorney Long was contacted to draft an Ordinance to remove this requirement. Ordinance No. 97-601 changes the licensing requirements for intoxicating liquor license renewals by eliminating the official public hearing publication requirement. Renewals of existing licenses issued may be granted by the Council after a public hearing without the requirement of a prior published notice. Ordinance No. 97-601 will not require publication in the official newspaper, thus eliminating the public hearing mailing to property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. This proposed Ordinance change is consistent with State Statute and licensing requirements in surrounding cities. ORDINANCE NO. 97-601 • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSES, AMENDING TITLE 500, CHAPTER 502, SECTION 502.08 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW MUNICIPAL CODE THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 502.08 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is amended to read: License Hearing: No issuance of a new license or transfer or rcncwal of an existing license for the sale of intoxicating liquor on sale, off-sale, club, Sunday sales or on-sale wines shall be hereafter granted by the Council until a public hearing has been conducted by the Council after published notice in the official newspaper at least ten(10) days in advance of the hearing. Renewals of existing licenses issued under this Chapter may be granted by the Council after a public hearing without the requirement of a prior published notice. Section 2. This ordinance is effective thirty days after its publication. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this day of 1997. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this day of , 1997. ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk-Administrator Approved as to form: City Attorney • 11, ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY 2 .01 PAGE 2 2 . Publication and Mailing Time a. For all hearings/meetings, notice shall be established in the New Brighton Bulletin at least 10 days prior to the hearing. An "affidavit of Delivery of Public Hearing Notice for Publication in the New Brighton Bulletin" , copy attached, shall be completed and placed in the appropriate file. b. If the hearings/meetings are for an issue related to a specific piece of property, notices shall be mailed to all individuals (fee owner and otherwise) listed on the most recent copy of the Ramsey County property listing at least 14 days prior to the hearing/meeting for all parcels within 350 feet of the subject property plus one to City Hall. An "Affidavit of Mailing Notices to Public Hearing" , copy attached, shall be completed and placed in the appropriate file. In addition, if the issues is related to the Zoning Ordinance, the appropriate City notice sign(s) shall be placed on the property at least 14 days prior to the hearing. c . If the hearing/meeting is related to a project of the City or • a project resulting form a citizen's petition (e.g. , street improvements of streetlight replacement) those individuals listed on the Ramsey County property listing for parcels that would most likely be impacted by or benefit from the project plus one to City Hall must be mailed notice within 14 days of the hearing/meeting. As with 2 .b. above an "Affidavit of Mailing Notices of Public Hearing" shall be completed and placed in the appropriate file. d. If the hearing/meeting is not property or project related and no definable group of residents/property can be readily identified, no mailed notice will be required. 3 . Packet Information For all hearings/meetings the following information shall be submitted to the City Council in the meeting packet of which the item is scheduled. a. Copy of notice and Affidavit of Publication. b. If notice mailed, a copy of the Affidavit of mailing. c. Copies of all staff reports on the matter. d. A City Map showing the location of the project/property and • properties receiving a mailed notice. Date Amended 1984 Item No. _lc_ Staff Report No. �� 71 Ci Meeting Date: April 28, 1997 S Type of Business: C.B. WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB:Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Resolution 5110, Establishing A Municipal State Aid Street Date of Report: April 25, 1997 Spring Lake Road is scheduled for turnback from Ramsey County in 1997. In conjunction with the tumback,these roads are eligible for Municipal State Aid status. The following resolution will establish this designation. This is the same procedure that applied to County Road H2 when it was turned back in 1996. If Council has any questions concerning this resolution, please feel free to contact me. • Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 5110, Establishing A Municipal State Aid Street • RESOLUTION NO. 5110 • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREET WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mounds View request that the Street herein after described should be designated a Municipal State Aid Street under the provisions of Minnesota Law and; WHEREAS, the designation of these segments of roadway, MSAS 244 - Spring Lake Road from Co . Rd. H2 to Co. Rd. I (0 . 48 miles) , Co . Rd. I to 45 feet No. of Hillview Rd. (0 .30 miles) and STH 10 to Co . Rd. J (0 . 69 miles) are Ramsey County Road turnbacks and will interconnect adjoining MSA streets . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View that the road described as follows, to- wit : MSAS 244 - Spring Lake Road from Co. Rd. H2 to Co. Rd. I (0 .48 III miles) , Co. Rd. I to 45 feet No. of Hillview Rd. (0 .30 miles) and STH 10 to Co . Rd. J (0 . 69 miles) be, and hereby is established, located and designated a Municipal State Aid Street of said City subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk-Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for his consideration, and that upon his approval of the designation of said road or portion thereof, that the same be constructed, improved and maintained and known as Municipal State Aid Street Adopted this 28th day of April, 1997 . ATTEST: MAYOR (SEAL) CITY ADMINISTRATOR 111 Item No. II E Staff Report No. 97- .2073 C . • Meeting Date: April 28, 1997 Type of Business: CB WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda; CB:City Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor/ Council Members From: Cathy Bennett, Director of Economic Development Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Resolution No. 5111 Supporting Subsidized Housing Units in Mounds View as part of the Silver Lake Commons and Consideration of Resolution No. 5112 Supporting the Ramsey County's Allocation of Home Funds to MSP Real Estate for the Significant Rehabilitation of 40 Apartment Units Located at 2665 Highway 10 Date of Report: April 24, 1997 As discussed at the April 7, 1997 work session, MSP Real Estate (MSP) is interested • in the rehabilitation of Red Oak Apartments located at 2665 Highway 10 in conjunction with the development of 26 new affordable townhomes. The entire development is being referred to as Silver Lake Commons (SLC). There are two resolutions before you in relation to the SLC. The first resolution is to support the allocation of Ramsey County Home Funds for the Rehabilitation portion of SLC. MSP representatives and I met with Ramsey County this week to discuss the project and the following is a summary of our discussions. MSP requested in excess of $400,000 of assistance from the County for both the rehab of the existing buildings and the new affordable units. Since Mounds View's goals for the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act states no new affordable housing (see attached), Ramsey County is unable to allocate any funds for the new development portion of the SLC. However, they are very interested in supporting the rehab portion and are willing to set aside approximately $5,500 per unit or $220,000 to the SLC for a maximum of six months. If the project is not approved within six months, the funds will no longer be held for Mounds View. The Ramsey County Board will take action to dedicate the estimated $220,000 to Mounds View for the rehab on the SLC project the first week in May. Without the . City's support for the set aside of these funds, it is likely that the request will not be approved. City of Mounds View Staff Report April 24, 1997 Page 2 The second resolution deals with the City's support for Holman Units as part of the SLC. The Holman Decree provides an equity investment per unit into the project in return for setting aside units for Minneapolis Public Housing recipients. Three of the 10 units proposed would be set aside for existing Mounds View residents that receive rent subsidies. Residents of the remaining 7 units would come from Minneapolis Public Housing waiting list. Apparently, the applicants for this project undergo a thorough screening process to ensure no criminal record and a positive rent payment history. This is a fairly new program in the Metro Area. Minnetonka and Shakopee are a couple of Cities that have signed agreements for this funding source as part of new developments. It is a significant factor of MSP's budget and without these units the project's economic viability reduces. I have put in some contingencies into the resolution which would allow the City to support this funding only if the SLC project is approved for rezoning, development review and TIF financing. I have discussed with MSP the possibility of mixing up the new construction with more market rate rental units or even for sale units. MSP is willing to look at these options but is afraid that since the rehab is such a financial drain on the entire budget that without the additional assistance for new affordable units the project is not economically feasible. One option for the City to consider would be to provide • additional subsidy to the project to meet the desired goals of ownership and/or market rate units. MSP has provided me with some estimations regarding the additional assistance they may need to accommodate the City's goals for ownership and/or market rate units on the new portion of the project. (See attached letter from MSP). Clearly with this project there is a significant price to pay if the assistance associated with the Holman Units and Tax Credit Funds is lost. We may be able to review reducing the construction costs but this would take away from the quality of the rehab and new development. I have contacted both a commercial and a residental developer to ask their professional opinion regarding this site. I will present their responses regarding commercial use and for-sale townhomes for this location at the Council meeting. The Economic Development Commission reviewed the concept for this project and passed a resolution on a 6-0 vote as follows: General support for MSP Real Estate's concept proposal as it pertains to the rehabilitation of Red Oak Apartments and construction of 26 new townhomes. This support is limited to the concepts and land use but there needs to be • further evaluation with regards to the management company and financial City of Mounds View Staff Report April 24, 1997 410 Page 3 analysis. Therefore, not comfortable with a recommendation to support the use of tax increment financing at this time. The EDC requested that this item be brought back at the May meeting and directed staff to have get some background regarding the management company and the information analyzed by our tax increment consultant. Dave Maroney has taken his first look at the financial proforma of MSP and has generated a list of questions, clarifications and comments prior to further analysis. (See attached). I have forwarded this list to MSP and hope to arrange a meeting regarding the project with Dave Maroney to flush through the details next week. This project is by no means ready for a stamp of approval but I also do not believe that it is in the best interest of the City to close the door at this time. Improving our existing rental units is clearly a goal and the County is willing to set aside funds for the rehab. Further evaluation needs to be done regarding the appropriate use for the vacant land, what is marketable, MSP's financial structure and management abilities. The Council, after evaluation of all of these elements, may find that investing in excess of $2 million to buy the apartments, relocate its residents and clear the site for commercial development or to keep the apartments and invest in the development of for-sale townhomes may be a better alternative. Therefore, I would suggest approvals for the resolutions with contingencies that would allow us to move forward with the analysis needed to be comfortable in supporting or rejecting the SLC proposal. This would at least give us a maximum of 6 months to work through the complicated financing aspects and marketability for this project or another use. 01/q--kg1- )60-41.4\ Director of Ec nomic Development • - — - i.r. ..� I V - 4-1.r_ I1U . VVV I . V V - i RAMSEY COUNTY jL 'f`� 11, ADDITIONAL UNIT ESTIMATES BASED ON NEGOTIATED LCA GOALS AND REVISED BLUEPRINT GROWTH FORECASTS FOR 2010 w.....n�.<n.n.nw.....�. .Xn.•w.nw..wn.. xWbX.Y#%-WWz yY_ �. °w.. � ,.%. X %..M,n.n�.'-„•,,r$X. %.�.. Yn:w %•Yn.YW #nWt #% . >--------- 0= ! � s ' . ; .... J%Yx......n.. x. :.,.: �, ,,Vn.�,....,.....4...44A•14 t . sWX.%M%MWOY?ndVwwr% pn5.tw. �An #Wo% :...VX.T.,A SNX,N.,.## %. dd bUii00.gr ,..v.,4•%•%•:k ..K%#b% . W�aA..M•04090.....eTR !.•:,. ' � " NWx<r9sxte0tw % M9?A itlQ e��C .b Y... . Yi ' x.3.44$4,..41,•14.1.4....414.:444.41444.4., Mf' : ,V.... :44.4,.....:44,444.4.4....,44.4.0.4.0.4,44 :�...:..:.+ _ X � h N... I .Xw ..,.w.<. �.......Yn.n,..w.M,,.n.,.,n,,.:.,.*"..�“.,:.rn'e,:.:X.#d.x.WN.. #.,. •.,: :-- �en.,.•..nc_n..xe.- c1•S .sjittS:ariin'..x. 44.....4=,., / .xn>wX ; -�.'�.+n :w �, %V w^'•.+a�w .. M":.:�.,.Y•n.w00Of•�w w�.:LY .. .. tV � ' '.'s` w'e' �Sr2O:i.{ .""M.n„wn.n...,n. , Arden Hills 2,904 896 152 26 484 Falcon Heights 2,016 134 -0- -0- -0- -4 Lauderdale 1,166 34 -0- -0- -0- • Little Canada 3 902 I 098 -0- -0- 577 • Maplewood 11,496 3,504 682 -0- 770 \s, . . Mounds View 4,702 498 -0- -0- .0_ Nese Brighton 8,523 677 244 -0- 307 North Oaks _ 1,085 515 15 _ li No. • 7 2 o. St. Paul 4,447 453 -0- -0- -0- .oseville 13,562 2,238 783 392 1,09I 1 St. Paul 110,249 6,751 -0- -0- -0- • _ . ,oreview 82991 2,509477 200 1,260 _ IVa naffs Heights 3,924 2,276 340 110 1,126 White Bear Twp 3,205 1,595 160 62 991 White Bear Lk 8,902 1,300 -0- -0- -0. _70 Totals 190,360 24,478 2,853 797 1 6,608 f • • eeta+o4 4Yanary.doe • u-cu-1 � r KUIvI MI-' KGHL GJ I H 1 C l IVC.. 1:114 abbb P. 2 • w� _ 134% '1' ~�• er .. _;R,wc�Fr MSP• _ real estate services inc • April 24, 1997 • • Cathy Bennet City of Mounds View • 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 RE: Silver Lake Commons Dear Cathy: As you requested, we have looked at the cost of converting the townhomes to market rate rental. Although we would be able to increase our rents, and thus our 1' mortgage loan by about $800,000, we would also be eliminating the following funding sources: Holman Equity $600,000 Federal Home Loan Bank Grant $100,000 Investor Equity $1.100,000 Total Funding Loss • ($1,800,000) .Additional Proceeds $800,000 Gap • ($1.000,000) A market rate rental proposal is thus not feasible at this time. • Our proposal provides the City with the highest quality improvements at the lowest possible cost to the City. Our proposal is also consistent with the recommendations of your consultant, which indicated that residential is the highest and best use of this property. • Sincer,-y, / . Je`' . �;ett • iota • • U4/24,-J"( 11:46 CUMMUN i I Y Fi=lk i NE8 iNC. 4 16127843462 NO.677 H202 • SILVER LAKE COMMONS PROJECT Date: April 24, 1997 FROM: Dave Maroney SUBJECT: Review of Project Proposal(s) Materials Reviewed 1. Ramsey County CDBG Application dated April 14, 1997. 2. MSP Letter dated April 17, 1997. 3. Cityside Cooperative - Articles and Bylaws. 4. MHFA Tax Credit Applications dated March 13, 1997. 5. Combined sources and uses dated April 8, 1997. 6, Rehab Proposal dated March 13, 1997. 7. MSP Letter/Exhibits dated March 27, 1997. Questions, Clarifications and Comments 1. Provide further detail outlining the ownership interests of MSP Rea.E €, ¢e, Affor-iabie Suburban Housing, Inc., MSP Construction, Mounds View Fam5ly <'',pwF:: ;;`'Sed Partnership, and Danzeisen Properties relating specifically to the Silver Lake Commons • Project. 2. Budget a. Support for"Acquisition" price and allocation of value between"Rehab" and "New Construction"? • • b. Support for $200,000"Relocation"budget? Permanent versus temporary displacement? c. Clarification of assumptions for"Construction Interest." d. $8,000 is budgeted for"Market Study". Is the study completed - results available? e. Clarification of"Project Reserves". Operating, replacement, other? f. Clarify use of$60,000"Lease-up"budget. Marketing, concessions, other? g. Construction cost for 40 garages is included? h. Further verification available relating to"Rehab" cost projections? Source and method for estimates? i. Further detail/discussion required for TIF request. wi u iva v i i i r i-ii�i rVttCS ANL.it. 7 i b i a'r ti4.54bd • NO.877 P003 i • 3. Proforma a. Clarify"Reserve Draw" amount to"Development Budget". • b. Assumptions for"Reserve" interest earnings? Annual fund balanc c. Review"Real Estate Tax" payments for 1998 and 1999. Fire full year of property tax payment due in 2000? d. Provide "Coverage Ratios" and minimum requirements for " debt .fig. e. Define terms of"Deferred Fee" payment of$1305000 ,`a alatiolAip o proforma. •! f. Clarify lease-up schedule/assumptions for 199g: • • • -2- RESOLUTION NO. 5111 • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION SUPPORTING SUBSIDIZED HOUSING UNITS IN MOUNDS VIEW AS PART OF THE PROPOSED SILVER LAKE COMMONS WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View desires substantial rehabilitation of the 40-unit Red Oak Apartments located at 2665 Highway 10; and WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View is evaluating the benefits of quality new townhomes on the adjacent parcels as part of the project; and WHEREAS,the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority through the Holman Decree is willing to provide an equity investment to aid in the rehabilitation of Red Oak Apartments and construction of new townhomes; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Mounds View hereby supports the set aside of subsidized housing units through the Holman Decree for the proposed Silver Lake Commons with the following stipulations: 1. The Economic Development Authority approves the sale of land for the project. 2. The project is approved for rezoning as a Planed Unit Development. 3. The project meets the standards provided under the Mounds View Municipal Code. 4. The project receives approvals under the Development Review Process. NOW BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Mounds View hereby directs staff to begin negotiations regarding the Cooperative Agreement between the City of Mounds View and the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority with signature on the Agreement authorized upon gaining successful approvals as outlined above. Adopted by the City Council, in and for the City of Mounds View, Minnesota this 28th day of April, 1997. Duane McCarty, Mayor ATTEST: 111/ Chuck Whiting, Clerk-Administrator • RESOLUTION NO. 5112 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE RAMSEY COUNTY'S ALLOCATION OF HOME FUNDS TO MSP REAL ESTATE FOR THE SIGNIFICANT REHABILITATION OF 40 APARTMENT UNITS LOCATED AT 2665 HIGHWAY 10 WHEREAS,the City of Mounds View desires substantial rehabilitation of the 40-unit Red Oak Apartments located at 2665 Highway 10; and WHEREAS,part of MSP Real Estate's proposal includes the rehabilitation of these units for quality affordable housing; and WHEREAS,financial assistance is available in the form of Home Funds through Ramsey County for the subject project to significantly improve the interior and exterior livability and quality of the 40-unit apartments. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED,that the City of Mounds View hereby endorses the application to Ramsey County for Home Funds by MSP Real Estate to provide for a significant rehabilitation of 40-unit apartments located at 2665 Highway 10 in Mounds View. Adopted by the City Council, in and for the City of Mounds View, Minnesota this 28th day of April, 1997. Duane McCarty, Mayor ATTEST: Chuck Whiting, Clerk-Administrator A Item No. it l3 Staff Report No. q 7-,24 7q-e, 40 Meeting Date: April 28, 1997 Type of Business: CB WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council From: Jim Ericson,Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Opportunity for Hearing and Consideration of Resolution No. 5115, a Resolution Authorizing Abatement of Nuisances at 8217 Long Lake Road. Date of Report: April 25, 1997 Background: The property located at 8217 Long Lake Road, owned by Larry Wolfgram, is in violation of the Mounds View Municipal Code pertaining to nuisances and requires immediate attention. In the side and rear yard there are accumulations of debris and junk, car parts, construction materials, a woodpile and other assorted stockpiles. This property has been a constant source of resident complaints due to nuisance vehicles, late night activities and junk and debris. Photo • documentation will be presented for the Council's reference. Discussion: On April 17, 1997, responding to neighbors' complaints, Staff performed a site inspection of the property with the assistance of uniformed officers. The inspection revealed the following: • stacks of automobile tires(1) • discarded automobile batteries(2) • unmanaged woodpile(5) • snowmobile without a trailer(1) • pick-up truck in back yard(4) • accumulation of tire rims(1) • assorted junk piles(1) • hazardous materials stored outside(2) • pile of construction material(3) • hot tub on garage roof(1) • topper on shed roof(1) (1) Section 607.03, Subd. 3c: "The outside piling, storing or keeping of old machinery,junk, furniture, household furnishings or appliances or component parts thereof rusting metal inoperable/unusable equipment, or other debris visible on private or public property." (2) Section 607.03, Subd. 3n: "All explosives, inflammable liquids and other dangerous substances or materials stored or accumulated in any manner or in any amount other than provided by law or ordinance." • (3) Section 607.03, Subd. 3j: "Any construction materials, including piles of dirt, sand, and sod left on the property morethan sixty(60) days after construction has been completed or a certificate of occupancy has been issued, whichever occurred first." r City of Mounds View Staff Report Resolution No. 5115, Authorization to Abate 8217 Long Lake Road April 28, 19970 Page 2 (4) Section 607.06, Subd. 3c1: "Vehicles which are parked or stored outside shall be on an improved surface as defined in this Code." (5) Section 607.03, Subd. 3e: "The depositing of maintaining,permitting or failing to remove, garbage, trash, rubbish, bottles, cans or other refuse on any property within the City, including large quantities of organic materials, which accumulated by other than natural means, except properly maintained compost piles." Staff sent a letter to Mr. Wolfgram on April 18, 1997 requesting correction of the Nuisance Code violations by May 5, 1997. In this letter, Mr. Wolfgram was notified that staff would be appearing before the City Council on April 28, 1997 to request abatement of the nuisances after May 5, 1997 if he had not made the requested corrections himself. Mr. Wolfgram was also notified that he would be able to address the Council on his behalf in the April 18, 1997 letter and a subsequent letter sent out April 22, 1997. Both letters are attached for the Council's reference. The process for abating properties is addressed in Section 607.08, Subdivision 1. It states that if, upon the judgement of the enforcement official, nuisance conditions are being maintained or exist within the City, a notification shall be sent or delivered to the person(s) committing and maintaining such nuisances. The notification shall require the person(s)to correct the violations III within a reasonable period of time, not to exceed 30 days. If corrective actions are not taken within the specified period, the City Council may authorize abatement. The person(s) shall be notified at least ten days in advance of the Council meeting and be given an opportunity speak before the Council. The letter sent to Mr. Wolfgram on April 18, 1997 satisfies this requirement. Recommendation: Approve Resolution No. 5115, a resolution authorizing the abatement of nuisances at 8217 Long Lake Road. (diAlt4 Ericson, Planning Associate N:\DATA\USERS\JIME\SHARE\WOLFGRAM.RPT • •i r.1 RESOLUTION 5115 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ABATEMENT OF NUISANCE CODE VIOLATIONS AT 8217 LONG LAKE ROAD,MOUNDS VIEW,MINNESOTA, 55112. WHEREAS, Larry Wolfgram is the owner of property located at 8217 Long Lake Road, zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally described as follows: Lot 9, Block 3,Laport Meadows WHEREAS, Larry Wolfgram is responsible for maintaining Nuisance Code violations on above-said property that include, but are not limited to: • stacks of automobile tires (1) • discarded automobile batteries(2) • unmanaged woodpile(5) • snowmobile without a trailer(1) • pick-up truck in back yard (4) • accumulation of tire rims(1) • • assorted junk piles(1) pile of construction material (3) • hazardous materials stored outside(2) • • hot tub on garage roof(1) • topper on shed roof(1) WHEREAS, on April 17, 1997 staff inspected the property located at 8217 Long Lake Road to determine the nature and extent of the nuisances present on the property; and WHEREAS, in a letter to Larry Wolfgram dated April 18, 1997, staff requested that the nuisance violations on the property located at 8217 Long Lake Road be brought into compliance with the Nuisance Code by May 5, 1997 and notified Mr. Wolfgram that staff would be requesting authorization from City Council for abatement of nuisances on April 28, 1997; and WHEREAS, on April 22, 1997, staff again notified Mr. Wolfgram of the abatement hearing scheduled for April 28, 1997; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the nuisance code violations at 8217 Long Lake Road constitute public health and safety hazards which the City may abate and assess the costs of said abatement against the property pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.101; and WHEREAS, the City has complied with the notification guidelines for nuisance abatement as stated in Section 607.08, Subd. 1 of the Mounds View Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Larry Wolfgram, property owner of 8217 long Lake Road, will be personally liable to the City for the costs of such abatement, including administrative costs pursuant to Section 607.08, Subd. 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code; and Resolution No. 5106 Authorization to Abate 8217 Long Lake Road Apri128, 1997 Page 2 WHEREAS, if Larry Wolfgram fails to pay the cost of the abatement of nuisance code violations at 8217 Long Lake Road within 30 days after the date of the invoice, the City may certify the unpaid costs against the property pursuant to Section 607.08, Subd. 4 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 1. The City will abate the following nuisances after May 5, 1997: • stacks of automobile tires • discarded automobile batteries • unmanaged woodpile • snowmobile without a trailer • pick-up truck in back yard accumulation of tire rims • assorted junk piles • hazardous materials stored outside • pile of construction material • hot tub on garage roof • topper on shed roof 2. Larry Wolfgram shall be personally liable to the City for the costs of abatement, including administrative costs. 11111 3. Any unpaid portion of the abatement costs after 30 days of the date on the invoice may be certified as special assessments against the property pursuant to Section 607.08, Subd. 4 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. Adopted this 28th day of April, 1997. Duane McCarty, Mayor ATTEST: Charles S. Whiting, City Clerk/Administrator N:\DATA\USERSUIME\SHARE\WOLFGRAM.RES cuTY orF 111110irMOS • Phone: (612) 784-3055 Q E`W Fax: (612)784-3462 'Quite Simply the Best' • April 18, 1997 Larry Wolfgram . -- 8217 Long Lake Road . Mounds View,MN 55112 RE: Nuisance Code Violations in Rear Yard of 8217 Long Lake Road Dear Mr. Wolfgram: On April 17, 1997,I stopped out to your property with Mounds View's Community Service Officer to inspect your rear yard after receiving multiple complaints about garbage and debris accumulations. I documented several violations of the Mounds View Nuisance Code which will need to be corrected within two weeks. The violations I observed are as follows: • 1. Pick-up truck in the rear yard 2. Automotive batteries in the yard 3. Trailer full of construction debris in rear yard 4. Hot tub on roof of garage 5. Gas cans sitting out in yard 6. Trailer on north side of rear/side yard 7. General debris and junk accumulations 8. Junk snowmobile alongside garage I took photographs of these violations and will be appearing before the City Council on April 28, 1997 to request an authorization to abate your property if the necessary corrections are not made by May 5, 1997. You are encouraged to attend this meeting at the City Council and this letter shall serve as a notification of our intent to request such authorization. If the nuisances are corrected prior to April 28, 1997 and the property passes an inspection,I will not pursue the request to abate the property. If you have any questions about this process or if you would like me to come to your property to point out specific violations,please call me at 784-3055. Sincerely, d' ' • James Ericson Planning Associate cc: Pamela Sheldon,Community Development Director Int 2401 Highway 10 • Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 %e to""1C' 0°'0' Equal Opportunity Employer COTT OF :. ::..- ...-..�:A� OMbD8 Phone: (612)784-305. • g EW Fax: (612)784-3462 • S ° 'ejs • Partnets\`�Q • Apri122, 1997 Larry Wolfgram 8217 Long Lake Road Mounds View,MN 55112 RE: Nuisance Code Violations and Driveway Installation Dear Mr. Wolfgram: On April 18, 1997, I wrote you a letter detailing the Nuisance Code violations present on c t: property located at 8217 Long Lake Road. I mentioned that I would be appearing before the City Council on April 28, 1997 to gain approval to abate your property of all nuisances. If you wish t address the Council on this matter, you will need to be at this meeting. • It has also been noted that the property located at 8217 Long Lake Road does not have an improved driveway as required by Code. Staff has become aware that during times of heavy r&c or spring thaws, vehicles leaving your property track dirt and mud onto the street which is a violation of the Nuisance Code. Due to the number of complaints regarding this property and She persistence of nuisance code violations, the City will be enforcing the Municipal Code with regards to driveways. City Code states that every driveway surface shall be maintained and of material that will not erode due to surrounding conditions. Driveway surfaces that satisfy this requirement listed above include asphalt, concrete, cement, brick or gravel. Installation of a driveway will require you to obtain a building permit from the City. The fee for this permit is $15, plus $2.00 per 1,000 square feet or fraction thereof over 1,000 square feet. You will need to submit a site plan of the property showing the lot lines, location of the house, garage and proposed driveway surface. Those yard areas remaining after the driveway installation shall be landscaped with seed, sod or other planting materials. You will be required to have the driveway work completed by June 15, 1997. If the work is not completed by the date stated, you will be issued a misdemeanor court citation. Every day beyond June 15, 1997 that the driveway is not installed as required will constitute a separate offense, each punishable with a court citation. • tel 2401 Highway 10• Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 '� 'J •� n+ 100'.(=VOW POW Equal Opportunity Employer • • • Letter to Larry Wolfgram ' April 15, 1997 Page 2 If you have any questions about this, do not hesitate to call. I can be reached at 784-3055. Sincerely, CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW aa4,0,41 • James Ericson Planning Associate enclosures cc: Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director • • • - u-•,'*' OS./1 .--u-ruu 84648465 -----7- 8467 -- T':-.7i7 . •r ° ., c-` -c rm -`- w rtr , „..., s454 8455 _=.8 8485 w , - s PVD y / 8444 C' 8445 84-44 8444 co a 8453 -. 8464 8424 8433 8432 8441 8454 y '" _ 8444 -f-7----.: ' 8414 8425 8428 8429 -._ 8425 --8404 8415 8408 8415 8415 8408 � 8390 8405 8400 \ - _ 8395 8400 8400 8405 6% 8380 8384 8395 8381 8390 8395 8388 a 8370 8385 8370 8379 8380 8385 MI 8360 8375 8360 PF 8350 8355 8350 E 8375 8376 8375 8378 . 110 - r 8340 8345 8340 8371 8372 8365 8360 8330 8335 8330 8357 8340 8325 8325 8320 8321 8320 8315 8318 8323 •}8320 8315 8340 W ` 8310 8305 8310 p 8321 8300 8305 8330 a 8290 }8291 8290 z 8285 8290 8295 8310 1 8280 Z 8287 8280 n 8273 8280 0 8273 AR DAN `t?:? ;: 8270 v=i 8271 8270 i 8250 0 8267 ' 8300 PARK 8265 • 8260 8267 8260 Z ar„ 8250 8251 �� 8250 8255 8250 w 8255 8280 8240 M 8241 8242 "/ 2 Fri �1 .•:.:• F4, ug:" a n m N N �+ N N 8231 ,0 8232 N N n 1250 ��-'.•.' AVE 8247 1.........:• ,a ca O O N y toIF _04.._ co uo 0 N :23 r 8239 �� .. 6205 N N N N •/ N N '01111 Iiik-- 8225 8184 8193 8224 8212 EPA 8• S I : 8180 8185 8205 �`� 8160 f-- iii 6 8171 8200 N $:<5.0 ags m 111 8150 8165 8150 8145 ii..:r::fi:i............. .. 4M11111111, LAPO Zi140ri • a -4- 814-5 E Q d, 8140 `r N 0 d 0,s,S' 8140 8141 8135 8133 8130 8 81411 8113�R� '� 4••mu 8123 8120 81211 8111 E ��Bin v 181011 N V n ,O v v n O O . to n ,O N �•• t2rN N N N N N N N N N N N� 101 8101 N Q d• 6110 W SHERWOOD ROAD m 03 a o < ,o .a, ao a N y ' o an 8088 8075vt. NI- 8099 cn I ,on 8085 '� "� 8086 8085 I '� 8080 80851� P v I v!gags •.09 e I v N N N N N N N N N N N IN N N N I N N 8066 8071 8068 8071 8081 r• n 8072 8072 Q I o Qom, 8071 Q� 8071 8070 8071 8070 :p7 cPila / 8050 8055 8060 8065 8050 8060 q_/ 8042 8045 8052 8051 8044 8045 8046 8041 8046 8051 8044 GREENFIS 79 7945 8032 8033 8040 8035 8032 8031 8038 8035 I 8024 8027 I 8019779940444i> 79 8022 80198030 7941 79. 8018 8011 8000 8021 7937 79361 8006 8000 8001 8010 8011 8000 8005 8012 79. 79337932 7990 7981 7990 7989 7996 7993 7990 7977 7984 7989 7988 79291{797924 7® 28 79 7980 7969 7980 7979 7980 G 7985 7970 7925 1 7960 7961 7984 7975 7980 7971 7968 7970 7965 7969 - 792117920 w 79 7954 7959 7966 7950 7951 7954 791779.141.L. 7955 7955 7944 7953 7948 7914 Z 79 7940 7945 7946 7927 7940 H I LLV I EW . 7913 7910 79( 7930 7935 7930 7917 PARK 7945 7934 7931 7930 7909 7908 t7 791 ,a O1 ,n N 7901 a a a 7900 N I O I NN I N 7900 7901 N I N 7900 P '901 I_�n 1 on 7900 1 v �1 l v 7905 H PF N N N N N N 7901 N ROAD °� __11.11 I �I� I I I__._INI _1 _- I I I <2IrI___.1 L__1NI �I:-:• �7�1,... 7—i--1 N� ,-- or m �\..�— 4.,-1..,1 Zoning Map 8217 Long Lake Road N Owner: Larry Wolfgram _D , L 1‘61'' 145 University Avenue West, St. Paul, MN 55103-2044 L►ay„e of Mir,wsofa Cit Phone: (612) 281-1200 • (800) 925-1122 Cities ptinotiina sa.17,eca Fax: (612) 281.1299 • TDD (612) 281-1290 IN FOR N n yL April21, 1997 TO: Members of the TIF Task Force FROM: Andrea B. Atherton, IGR Representative RE: ARTICLE 13 OF HOUSE OMNIBUS TAX BILL Attached please find Article 13 of the House Omnibus Tax Bill. Look for a summary of this • information in the next issue of Cities Bulletin. • AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER T °.-1 C 1T I T1 AII.1 Jr. 7nc1N7-1 Li=.7f1 ,c T-3 \I ILl • • 'bus Tax Bili Apxi12A, 199'I f‘d2RlIATI Page 51 ection ONLY Priority for use revenue surpluses. Sets priorities for using forecast revenue . surpluses in November of odd-numbered years. These amounts will be used first to ensure$522 million is in the budget reserve account. The rest will be divided: One-half will be used to reduce the school property tax levy recognition percent to the 2 percent level. (The levy recognition percent is currently at 7 percent.) The other half will be used to put in the property tax reform account established in section 2. 2 Property tax reform account. Establishes a property tax reform account and appropriates$487 million to it on July 1, 1997. This account is used to pay for property tax reform in fiscal years 1998-2001. Investment earnings are credited to the account. 3 Budget reserve appropriation. Sets the budget reserve at$522 million on July 1, 1997. Article 13: Tax Increment Financing Overview . This article makes a number of changes in the tax increment financing (TIF) law. The changes generally tend to limit the ability of development authorities and municipalities to,collect and spend increments. The major changes include: 8. The but-for test is applied to new authorizations and approvals of additional spending of$50,000 or more in existing TIP districts- ► Increments that remain unspent when a TIF district is decertified must be returned to the city/town,county,and school district. • The ability to use increments to construct governmentally owned facilities is restricted to instances when it is part of and necessary to induce a private, taxable development. ▪ The bill allows small cities (populations of 5,000 or less more than 10 miles from a city with a population of 10,000 or more) to use economic development districts for small commercial developments (15,000 square feet or less). The bill limits the fiscal disparities law option that shifts the cost of the contribution to taxpayers in the city,county, and school district to redevelopment districts only. 8. In addition, the bill adopts an explicit definition of tax increments, clarifies the spending restrictions applicable to redevelopment districts,and makes a number of other more minor and clarifying changes. • Research Department Minnesota House of Representatives 600 State Office Striding 2'd S3I l I3 NW JO 31151d31WdOZ:Z0 L6 T2 add !13 '. fi \\(f • t,..,a e x,, y, a e S&c�II y 0r• Redevelopment and renewal and renovation distric kJqLiX development authorities to conduct an interior,physical inspection of properties before determining that they substandard for purposes of the blight tests. An interior inspection is not required if the municipality is denied access to the building and available evidence supports a conclusion that the building is substandard. Such evidence would include information from other inspections by building or housing inspectors, the police or fire departments, or exterior evidence of deterioration. Records of this alternative evidence and why an interior inspection was not done must be retained. Effective date: Requests for certification after June 1, 1997 2 Soils districts. Increase the SJsquare foot cost of cleanup qualifying criteria for soils condition districts to$4. Under present law,the cost of cleanup must either exceed the fair market value of the property or exceed$2 per square foot. Effective date: Requests for certification after June 1, 1997 3 Increment definition. Defines increment as the taxes paid by the captured tax capacity (i.e.,the increase in taxable value above the certified original amount). In addition, also • included in the definition are: proceeds from the sale or lease of property purchased with increments • repayment of loans or other advances made with increments investment earnings on increments. These rules are intended to ensure that increments do not lose their character as a result of purchases,loans,or investments. If the authority sells property purchased with increments, for example,the proceeds are subject to the spending restrictions that apply to increments. Proceeds from increment financed Ioans, purchases,or investments may only be used for qualifying purchases or redistributed to the city,county,and school district. Effective date: All districts subject to the 1979 TIF Act and intended to confirm the original intent of the law for the basic definition and investment earnings. Treating proceeds .. of sales or repayments of loans and advances made with increments is effective for purchases of property or loans or advances made after June 1, 1997. Thus, sales or repayments of property purchased or loans made before June 1 would not be affected. 4 Population definition. Defines population for purposes of the tax increment act. This is the most recently available population estimate from either the federal census, a special census,or state demographer or metropolitan council estimates. This population applies to the next calendar year after the estimate is obtained. Effective date: Requests for certification after June 1, 1997 I Research Department Minnesota House of Representatives 600 State Office Building C• J C7T I T`1 LII.I Jr, 7f1c1NTI LIJrA'7•Ira JC T7 1JJ1—J ibus tax Bill April 20. 1997 Page 53 NFORMATflJ Y• f PsP. . +J. •' I • 5 Small city. Defines a small city for purposes of the taxirictement act as a city with a population of 5,000 or less that is located more than 10 miles from a city with a population of 10,000 or more. Effective date: Requests for certification after June 1, 1997 6 Blight criteria records. Restates and clarifies that written records must be kept of how the blight criteria for redevelopment and renewal and renovation districts were met Effective date: Requests for certification after June 1, 1997 7 But-for test,spending in existing districts. Extends the but-for test to new spending authorized from existing districts. The but-for test requires the municipality(usually a city)to find that the proposed development or another equally valuable development would not occur without using tax increment financing. Under present law,the but-for test applies only when a new tax increment financing district is created. This section extends the but-for test to authorizations of new spending(by,e.g.,amending the TT plan, a development plan,or changing budgets) for an existing district,if it is estimated that the changes will permit$50,000 or more of increments to be spent. Qualified housing developments are not subject to this requirements. Spending that is made S under a previous binding commitment and spending of bond proceeds is not subject to this requirement. Effective date: Spending of increments finally approved after June 1, 1997 8 Pay-as-you-go financing rules. Imposes rules on districts where improvements and spending are financed internally by the developer and the authority reimburses the developer for its costs. This rules will require these"pay-as-you-go"agreements to be in writing. In addition, the developer may be reimbursed only after submitting written evidence that it has paid costs that qualify for reimbursement with tax increments. Finally, interest paid to the developer are Iimited to a reasonable rate,based on the authority's cost of borrowing. Effective date: Agreements entered into after June 1, 1997 9 Soils districts duration limit. Increases the duration limit for soils condition districts from 12 years after certification to 20 years after the receipt of the first increment. Effective date: Requests for certification after June 1, 1997 10 Unspent increments on decertification. Clarifies that unspent or unencumbered increments when a district is decertified must be returned to the city,county, and school district as excess increments. This does not apply to the portion of increments that may be "pooled"or spent outside of the district for post-1988 districts. Unencumbered increments are defined as increments that have not be designated for payment of already provided goods • and services or specific amounts under binding contracts. Research Department Minnesota House of Representatives Boo State Office Building 'd S3I LID NW JO 3-19ti37 WdT2:20 L6 T2 2idd HF Omnibus Tax Bill l NFORMATL1 !atcsign • 0 ILT Effective date: TIF'districts decertified after June 1, 1997 ° 11 Economic development districts. Allows use of increments from economic eomtc development districts for two types of retail projects. Present law restricts the use odevelopment districts to(1),manufacturing, (2) warehousing,(3) research and development. (4)telemarketing.(5) limited tourism facilities, and(6)correcting special bedrock soils conditions. Thus, retail or other commercial facilities,except those that part of a qualifying tourism facility,would not be eligible. The bill permits two types of retail or commercial facilities: Qualified border retail facilities that meet the following requirements: • is located in a small city within one mile of the state border • is outside the seven county Twin Cities metropolitan area • contains at least 25.000 square feet of retail space will otherwise locate in another state or country. Small cities commercial facilities permits assistance to a commercial facility of up to 15,000 square feet. These facilities must be"separately owned-" The definition of small • cities applies based on the criteria in the year the request for certification is made. Effective date: TIF districts decertified after June 1, 1997 12 Use for general government. Clarifies the meaning of"conducting the general business of the unit of government." Under present law,increments may not be used to construct a building used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of a unit of government. The bill clarifies that this includes any service or goods the governmental unit usually provides. Thus, it would include a public library, fire or police station.prison,school building.and so forth,even though those buildings do riot house administrative functions or are not places where the governmental unit holds business meetings. • Present law permits increments to be used for municipal parking ramps.parks,and social and recreational facilities as an exception to the prohibition on use for general government facilities. This authority has allowed cities to use TIF to build, for example,hockey rinks, community centers,and parks. The bill restricts this authority to instances where the improvements are part of a private development or redevelopment. To qualify,substantial taxable,private improvements must result from building the publiclyowned facility. The bill also adds wastewater treatment and water utility facilities to the types of public improvements that can qualify, if they are necessary to a substantial private development. Effective date: Spending of tax increments authorized or approved after June 1, 1997 in all districts,including pre-1979 districts S Research Department Minnesota House of Representatives 600 State Office Su S'd S3IIIJ NW JO 319d31 WdT2:20 L6, TZ Lldd bus Tax BillPage 55 INIEnps • { L 1.3 Spending restrictions for redevelopment districts. Clarifies the provision governing • spending of increments from redevelopment and renewal and renovation districts. The law requires increments from these districts to be spent for the purposes which allowed the district to be create. The language lists a number of specific qualifying costs. One view is that this list of qualifying costs is an exclusive list. Another view is that it is simply supplements the general standard. The bill clarifies that the list is exclusive and adds a number of qualifying costs to the list. These include: ► acquisition of railroad properties repair and rehabilitation of substandard buildings to eliminate unsafe or unhealthy conditions or prevent the spread of blight removal and remediation of hazardous substances. All costs must relate to redevelopment or development of the sites that contain substandard structures,hazardous waste cleanup, or development of railroad properties. Effective date: Post-October 4, 1989 districts and confirms the original intent of the law 14 Four year knock-down rule. Changes the four year knock-down rule to a three year rule. The knock down rule provides that if development or redevelopment of a parcel in a district does not occur within four years(three years under the en t)later occurs, the p �parcel il is recertified i�ape from the district. If development or redevelopment in (I original tax capacity in at its current value. The required activity can be satisfied by private development,by public acquisition,by installation of some types of public improvements on or for the parcel. The bill clarifies that these improvements must be specified in the TIF plan before they are undertaken or one-fifth of the cost must be paid with increment from the district. Effective date: Requests for certification after June 1, 1997 15 Indexing of original tax capacity. Modifies the computation of the indexing of original tax capacity for economic development districts. Under present law, original tax capacity is indexed based on the average annual increase in market value over the five years before certification. Each year original tax capacity is increased by this percentage increases. The bill provides that new construction,installation of utilities(sewer,water, and so forth), and platting during the five year period are to be subtracted in computing the average increase in market value. Effective date: Requests for certification after June 1, 1997 • —+� Minnesota House of Representatives 600 State Office Building Research Department 9'd S3I LID NW 30 3f19ti31 Wd22:z0 Z6 T2 add f�Otntlibus l az um N y 4 "`a dis arities. Eliminates "option (a)"for making i�is`t;a'di panties contribution for N` 16 Fisch p • all districts except redevelopment districts. Option(a)allows the cost of the fiscal disparities contribution for a TIF district to be shifted to other commercial and industrial properties in the city, county,and school district. The bill will require use of option(b), which requires the contribution the increment district to make the contribution. Effective date: Requests for certification after June 1, 1997 17 Prior planned improvements. Extends the prior planned improvement rule to other types of land use approvals. Under present law, if an application for a building permit was been made 18 months or less before the request for certification, the value of the building is included in original tax capacity. This section extends that practice to other forms of land use approvals that are required as a final approval to begin construction. Effective date: Requests for certification after June 1, 1997 18 Buffalo Lake TIF. Allows the city of Buffalo Lake through the end of 1998 to obtain the certification of an ethanol facility from the commissioner of agriculture. This certification is requiredto obtain an exemption from the state aid(LGAIHACA)offset for the tax increment financing district. The bill's extension will allow the district to be exempt for aids paid in 1998. .U a certification is not obtained by December 31, 1998,however,the district • will retroactively lose its state aid exemption. Effective date. Effective upon approval by the city council of Buffalo Lake 19 East Grand Forks. Allows the city of East Grand Forks to extend the duration of TIP district No.2 by up to 12 additional years, with the district terminating no later than 2012. During the extension period, the district would be subject to the state aid offset or to recomputation of the school district's aid,since no exemption is provided from the general law provisions. The extension would not affect the amount payments of state school aid. Effective date. Effective upon approval by the city,county,and school district 20 Coon Rapids. Allows the duration of three Coon Rapids TIF districts to be extended through December 31,2010. Special•rules apply to these extended districts: • The TIF plan may not be amended after final enactment to permit spending of increment on new activities. • Increments may only be spent to upgrade and improve county and state bridges and highways. During the extension period,the district would be subject to the state aid offset or to • recomputation of the school district's aid, since no exemption is provided from the general law provisions. The extension would not affect the amount payments of state school aid. • Research Department Minnesota House of Representatives 600 State Office Suildi 1 •J CTIT'1 LII I Jr, 7f'IC1LJ7 1 L I J77•711 J C T 7 11 JL.1 'bus Tax Bill April 20. 1' C fl, p Ta 5 Page 57 • LY Effective date. Effective upon local approval by the city,county, and school district. • 21 Gaylord. Permits the city of Gaylord to extend the duration of a tax increment district originally certified in 1978 to December 31,2008. During the extension period, the district would be subject to the state aid offset or to recomputation of the school district's aid, since no exemption is provided from the general law provisions. The extension would not affect the amount payments of state school aid. Effective date. Effective upon local approval by the city,county, and school district. 22 Brooklyn Center. Exempts tax increment financing district no. 3,which includes the Brookdale regional shopping center from the five-year rule until December 19,2004. This is a five year extension of the rule. The five year rules requires spending to be completed, bonds to be issued,or binding contracts to be entered within the five year period. Effective.date. Effective upon approval by the city council of Brooklyn Center. 23 Special TIP authorization. Authorizes the housing redevelopment authority for Douglas county or the economic development.authority for the city of Brandon to establish an economic development tax increment financing district for a tourism facility. This project will include: • a theme and amusement park • • recreational facilities • lodging facilities • retail facilities The bill exempts this TIF district from a number of rules under the general law, including: • This district qualifies as a tourism facility,even if Douglas county does not meet the general law test for tourism. • The 5 year spending requirement does not apply. This provision of general law requires increment to be spent within 5 years after the district is created. • The duration of the district is extended from 9 to 20 years. Effective date. Effective upon local approval by the city,county,and school district. 24 Minnetonka. Authorizes the city of Minnetonka to make expenditures for certain housing activities upon decertification of housing TIF district no. 1. It permits the city's economic development authority(EDA) to deposit the balance of revenues derived from tax increment from the district in the housing development account of the EDA. It permits the increments to be spent for housing activities in accordance with the TIP plan under certain conditions. • These are: • Research Department Minnesota House of Representatives 600 State Office Building 8d S3I1I3 NW JO 3119431 WdE2:ZB 2.61 T2 eldti HF Omnibus Tax Bill y g Section np, 11 • 1 to decertifyhousingTIF No. 1 as of December 31, 1997, and (2) identify in the plan the housing activities that will be assisted by the \' housing development account. This money may be spent for a variety of housing activities— • to rehabilitate, acquire. demolish or construct housing or other related public improvements • the housing need not be in a TIF district or project area • the housing can meet income and rent restrictions under livable communities,rather than the TIF act. (However, since this is a pre-1988 district,the applicable TIF restrictions are probably less restrictive than livable communities.) The tax increment to be spent for housing activities must be segregated in a separate housing development account of the EDA. The account may receive funds from other public and private sources 25 Columbia Heights,authority definition. Defines authority for purposes of Columbia Heights' use of housing replacement districts. This may be a housing and redevelopment authority or economic development authority,at the election of the city. • 26 Housing replacement districts. Allows the city of Columbia Heights to establish a housing replacement tax increment financing (TIF)district under the special law that now applies to Crystal.Duluth,Fridley, Minneapolis, Richfield, and St. Paul. This program allows the participating cities to capture existing tax base in TIF to redevelop vacant houses, substandard houses, and vacant sites. The purpose is to prepare sites for market rate housing. The city must pay 25 percent of the cost of the redevelopment. Columbia Heights would be allowed use of this authority for 50 parcels,equivalent to the limit for Crystal, Fridley,and Richfield. (The three first class cities are allowed 100 parcels.) Effective date. Effective upon local approval by the city council of Columbia Heights. 27 Minneapolis housing transition district;definitions. Defines terms: Authority is the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority or the Minneapolis Community Development Authority. Captured net tax capacity is defined similarly to the general tax increment financing law. City is the city of Minneapolis. Consent decree is the court ordered settlement agreement of the Hallman case. This was the case that contented that the operation of various public housing programs in Minneapolis violated the civil rights laws. County auditor is the Hennepin County auditor. • Research Department Minnesota House of Representatives Goo State Office Building 6'd S3IlIJ NW JO 31lE1:01 WdE2:20 L61 TE eldd "bus Tax Bill April 20, 1997 Page 59 I I fl ! ,. • Governing body is the Minneapolis city council. Housing transition district or district is the special law TIF district authorized by the bill. This district may consist of: (1)parcels that contained public housing projects demolished or required to be demolished by the consent decree in the Holtman case and(2) additional acreage not to exceed an amount equal to 10% of the area of the parcels. Nontaxable parcel means a parcel in a housing transition district that is exempt from property tax because it was publicly owned. Original net tax capacity deviates from the general TIF law, The definition provides that nontaxable parcels (see the previous definition) have a net tax capacity of zero. Under general law, the original net tax capacity of a TIF district includes the value of these parcels as most recently assessed. The special rules in the bill will increase captured tax capacity and tax increment. Public housing projects are generally exempt from property taxes and, thus, many of the properties in the districts will come under these rules. Parcel is a property tax parcel as established before the housing transition district is established. Preexisting district means a TIF district that includes a parcel in a housing transition district The bill contemplates that the housing transition district will overlay existing TIF districts. 28 Authorization. Authorizes the Minneapolis to establish a special housing transition TIF district. This district need not be contiguous. Once the district is certified,no new parcels may be added. Under general law,the area of a TIF can be increased for up to 5 years after the initial certification. Tax increment for this district will be calculated somewhat differently than under general law. The most important differences are those outlined in the definitions section— tax exempt parcels will have a zero original tax capacity. In addition,some minor adjustments to original tax capacity will not be made. The net impact of these special rules will be to provide significantly more increment than under the general law. When an existing TIF district and the housing transition district under the bill overlap,the bill provides that(1) tax exempt parcels are allocated to the housing transition district and(2)for taxable parcels, all the increment is allocated to the pre-existing district. The bill is silent on what occurs when the preexisting district is decertified. The implication is that the parcels return to the regular tax rolls and do not generate increment for the housing transition district. The section establishes rules for aTIF plan that generally follow those under the general law • with some differences. • General law TIF procedures generally apply. The but-for test does not apply to the • district,but otherwise the procedures used generally follow TIF law. Reyr Department Minnesota House of Representatives 600 State Office Building 0Z • S3IlI0 NW d0 3f191:J31 WdE2:20 1.6, Z2 ddtl MI sectio. 1 0NLy 29 Limitations. Establishes a duration limit for the district of 20 years. Under general law, the111 area of the district probably would qualify as a redevelopment district for which a 25 year } duration is permitted, The section establishes rules for the use of increments from the housing transition district. These rules are less restrictive than general law. For example,increments can be used to construct essentially any private improvements and to make grants and loans to private entities. General law strictly limits the ability to directly finance private improvements with increments—i.e., to limited types of rehabilitation or low income housing. However, increments from the special law district may only be spent for activities in the district The bill restricts administrative expenses to 15 percent. General Iaw restricts these to 10 percent of budgeted expenditures. To the extent the district is analogous to a housing district under general law, the housing is not required to be targeted to low income individuals as required by general law. To the extent the district is analogous to a redevelopment district under general law, the district is not required to use its increments only for blight correction as general law requires for these districts. 30 Application of general law. Exempts the housing transition district from the general TIP law,except to the extent it is made specifically applicable by other provisions of the bill. The district would be subject to the state aid reduction or local contribution requirement law. 31 Effective date. Effective upon local approval by Minneapolis. 32 Effective dates. See individual sections. Article 14: Intergovernmental Relations Overview • This article regulates the development,imposition,and management of state mandates on counties,cities,and towns. It creates a division of state and local mandates in the Department of Finance and requires the preparation of fiscal notes, which must accompany a bill that imposes a mandate on local governments. It requires explanations of why and how the mandates are to be imposed and descriptions of efforts to involve the local units in the creation or development of the mandate. It provides for certain options and reimbursement of costs for mandates to political subdivisions. The article makes minor changes in the local performance aid program and increases its funding by$5 million for 1998 and 1999. • Research Department Minnesota House of Representatives 600 State Office Building T r •a S3IlID NW JO 31191:131 WdtZ:Za L61 12 �1dd 771 ,_ a'". .ate • ./41 North Metro Mayors Association \(74/ .1-0% <100440 dr/0 Principles for State Land Use Impacts On Infrastructure, Schools And Environment NMMA Board of Directors Adopted on April 16, 1997 J The State of Minnesota should establish a policy on the compact, efficient, orderly, development and re-development of land that: 1) Contains new residential, industrial and commercial development in incorporated cities, and only where actually served by organized water and sewer service meeting PCA criteria. 2) Implements such containment developing incentive and disincentive policies and/or by requiring a minimum of 40+ acres per dwelling unit for development beyond incorporated cities. • 3) Minimizes mandates on local governments to engage expensive experts and processes. That is, the State either: • draws the lines or • sets the criteria for such cities as identified in #1 4) Recognizes that the State must establish, through actual substantive regulations, adopted in partnership with cities and other affected parties, how and under what circumstances development may occur. 5) Reviews and uses best practices found in Minnesota, other states and countries so as to accurately predict the impacts of regulations on development. This would be accomplished by a commission/task force studying the issue and reviewing past practices, available studies and information from all other pertinent resources. The intended purpose would be to identify predictable outcomes and true costs of development based on the implementation of a statewide comprehensive land use policy. 6) Development of vacant land should capture its true public costs for infrastructure needs, e.g., schools, highways, treatment plants through impact fees on development. • *Re-development refers not only to razing an existing structure, but also renovation and rehabilitation. Adopted by NMMA Board of Directors 4-16-97 U:\NMMA\LEG-GENL\LAND-USF\LANDUSE.DOC Last Update:4/18/97 North Metro Mayors Association INFORMATION Basic Tax Reform Principles ON LY 1111111 NMMA Board of Directors Adopted on April 16, 1997 The 1997 Legislature is in the process of considering various tax reform proposals. The North Metro Mayors Association recalls historical tax reform efforts and hopes to avoid some of the negative impacts experienced by local government: • The pre-1967 environment found local units of government sharing in the State's cigarette and liquor tax. • In 1967 this tax was modified to include a share of the sales tax. • In 1971 local governmental aids, fiscal disparities and levy limits became law. • In 1991 the Trust Fund was established and lasted just a couple of years. • Currently cities are receiving approximately 20 percent of all property taxes collected. Member cities are concerned that they will be used as the vehicle to raise the necessary funds to accomplish tax reform across the state. The North Metro Mayors Association sets forth herein several basic principles that it believes are essential in order to achieve a well balanced tax reform package this year: 1. State-wide education costs need to be taken off of the property tax payer. Accountability, however, needs to be designed and incorporated into any reform package. 2. The revenue streams of fiscal disparities and local government aids need to be maintained. This is particularly true for community like Robbinsdale, Crystal and Columbia Heights that depend on these sources of revenue for more than fifty percent of their respective general fund expenditures. These revenue streams should not be allowed to be diminished inadvertently as the result of property tax classification changes. 3. Tax Increment Financing as a redevelopment tool should be preserved. 4. Levy limitations have not worked in the past and should not be imposed now. 5. Even with tax reform, cities will still be faced with the most regressive and most unreliable source of funding (i.e., the property tax). This will be especially true for older cities with low, flat or slow grow tax base. 6. Cities should not be required to have referendums for raising revenue to meet general fund operating requirements. 7. Cities should not be mandated unless there are state funds made specifically available to implement such mandate(s). North Metro Mayors Association recognizes that education costs should be removed from the property tax and paid for out of general funds. The method used to achieve this objective should however, be structured in a way that allows local units of government to continue to deliver services that citizens want and desire in an accountable manner. The facts are clear, many cities throughout the state are property tax base poor. But for the fact of fiscal disparities (metro area) and local governmental aids (state wide), these cities would not be able to deliver services or stimulate economic development without dramatically increasing property taxes. The North Metro Mayors Association is unified in its support on these basic tax reform principles, and calls on its elected delegation to support this position. U:\NMMA\LEG-GENL\TAXREFRM\TAXPOLIC.DOC 4/18/97 INFORMATION • Association of 0 N LYS Metropolitan Municipalities April 7, 1997 TO: Mayors, Managers/Administrators FROM: Tom Egan, AMM President RE: NOMINATIONS FOR AMM OFFICERS AND BOARD DIRECTORS WANTED I. ANNUAL MEETING, THURSDAY EVENING, MAY 29, 1997: If you have not done so already, please mark your calendars now for Thursday evening, May 29 for the 1997 AMM Annual Meeting. The meeting will kick off with a 5:30 p.m. social hour, a dinner at 6:30 p.m. and the business meeting to follow at 7:30 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Minneapolis Sheraton • Metrodome Hotel in northeast Minneapolis. One of the major functions of the Annual Meeting will be to elect a President,Vice-President, and eight Board Directors. A detailed meeting notice and program agenda will be mailed in early May. II. NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICERS AND BOARD POSITIONS WANTED: As noted above,the offices of president, vice-president and eight board directors are up for election. Your input is needed in suggesting good candidates for vice-president and board directors. If you or if you know of a city official you would like to have considered for nomination, please forward the name and a brief resume to the AMM office, attention Vern Peterson no later than Monday,April 22. continued... S 14S University Avenue West Saint Pau(,Minton sEio3-2o44 012123S-4m fax:z81-n99 Q , a a ONL Members of the Nominating Committee: 40 Joan Campbell, Chair,Past President and Minneapolis Councilmember Other Nominating Committee members are: Bev Aplikowski, Councilmember, Arden Hills Frank Boyles, Administrator, Prior Lake Michael Ericson,Administrator, Watertown Tom Goodwin, Councilmember, Apple Valley Jerry Splinter, Manager, Coon Rapids Joy Tierney, Mayor, Plymouth Sherry Timmerman, Councilmember, Oakdale III. BOARD OF DIRECTORS DUTIES/RESPONSIBILITIES: The Board normally meets once a month on the second Thursday commencing at 7:00 p.m. The Board approves the annual budget and work program; establishes annual dues rate; establishes program and legislative policy priorities; appoints members of legislative policy committees; nominates the 10 city elected officials on the Transportation Advisory Board(TAB); appoints 8 city staff members to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and is responsible for the overall management and direction of AMM staff. • Due to the two-term board limitation,there will be some new Board Directors elected. Nominations are solicited for both elective and administrative city officials from throughout the entire metropolitan area and especially from cities under 10,000 population. IV. REMINDER: INNOVATIVE PROJECTS AND PEACEMAKER AWARDS We would like to remind you to send in your entries for the 1997 AMM Innovative City and Peacemaker Awards competition. Information packets were mailed 10 days ago. All entries must be postmarked no later the Friday, May 9. The winners will be honored at the Annual Meeting on May 29, 1997. If you have any questions, contact Cheryl at 215-4000. Attached is a listing of current boardmembers and officers. Please contact Vern Peterson in the AMM office (215-4000) should you want more information concerning these matters. DISTRIBUTION NOTE: This bulletin has been mailed to mayors and manager/administrators only. Please share this information with your councilmembers and other staff members as you see appropriate. Thank you. • INFORMATION ONLY . • Current AMM Officers/Boardmembers A. Boardmembers whose terms expire in May of 1997 • Officers: Tom Egan(1), President, Mayor, Eagan Jim Prosser, Vice-President, Manager, Richfield Joan Campbell (1), Past President, Councilmember, Minneapolis • Directors: Jack Denzer(2), Mayor, Cottage Grove Susan Hoyt(2).Administrator, Falcon Heights Bill Huepenbecker, Dir. of Intergovernmental Relations, St. Paul Nancy Jorgenson, Mayor, Fridley Ann Lenczewski, Councilmember, Bloomington Janice Rettman (3), Councilmember, St. Paul Pat Scott, Councilmember, Minneapolis Dorm Wish, Councilmember, Roseville (1) Upon election of a new president, the immediate past president remains on the Board and the • current past-president leaves the board. (2) Have completed two two-year terms and not eligible to be re-nominated as a Board Director. (3) Elected Ramsey County Commissioner-not eligible to be re-elected. B. Board Directors whose terms expire in May of 1998: Frank Boyles, Manager, Prior Lake Lynn Moratzka, Councilmember, Hastings Gerald Often, Councilmember,New Hope Mark Sather, Manager, White Bear Lake Terry Schneider, Councilmember, Minnetonka Charlotte Shover, Councilmember, Burnsville Bill Thompson, Councilmember, Coon Rapids John Weaver, Councilmember, Anoka • INFORMATION Pinewood E1em &N4WSchoo1 5500 Quincy St. • Mounds View, Mn. 55112 • Phone: 784-4006 • Fax: 636-6153 Community of Learners Growing Together Donna B. Nelson, Principal April 15,1997 Mounds View Police, I want to thank the Police Department and City of Mounds View for your commitment to the D.A.R.E. program. We have had three excellent D.A.R.E. officers at our school over the past few years. Tim Brennan, Tom Baumgart, and Bob Nelson have done a great job of establishing positive communication between the students and the police department. It is great to see the children have an opportunity to get to know them as real caring individuals behind the uniform. Each of the officers has gone beyond the classroom with his teaching. We see them at the Bike-A-Thon, school carnival, ice fishing contest, roller skating, bowling, Timberwolves basketball game, and many of the other community events. I look forward to having Officer Brennan accompany us to the Laurentian Environmental Center with this year's fifth graders. I'm sure the children are excited that he is coming with us as well. I hope you are able to see the benefits of the D.A.R.E. program within the community. Your officers have done a great job with the link between the department and the children! incerely, 5th G -ac Pinewood Elementary Equal Opportunity for Education and Employment