HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 1997/05/12 0'• „..„..„..,..„.....,....„.......i..„i....i. ..•.i
. .................
CITY OFMOUNDSVIEW
. .: :.CITY...COUNCIL
AGENDA •
MAY.:I2 X997
::::: ::: 7. 00.pm.
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 Secretamy's Table.
6:30 - 7:00 PM Reception in Lobby for Dorothy Peterson
30 Years of Service
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 28, 1997 - City Council Meeting
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
Comments:
•
6. ACCEPTANCE OF ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES:
•
None.
7. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Resolution No. 5120, Commendation to Dorothy Peterson
Proclaiming Irondale High School a Silver Medal State VICA Team
Proclamation of"National Public Works Week"
Announcement of Recognition Award to Jennifer Bergman from New Brighton Crime
Free Multi-Housing Program
8. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approve Resolution No. 5117, Setting Forth a Tentative Timetable for Preparing
and Adopting the 1998 Budget and Long Term Financial Plan. Staff Report No.
97-2093C
B. Approve Personnel Consultant Services with Leadership of the Twin Cities. Staff
Report No. 97-2094C
C. Approve Purchase of Waste-Oil Tank. Staff Report No. 97-2095C
D. Approve Just and Correct Claims Against City Funds.
•
E. LICENSES FOR APPROVAL:
General (Commercial) License- Expires 06/30/97
Spot's Inc.-New
Storage Engineering, Inc. -New
Sullivan Building Systems -New
Fence License - Expires 06/30/97
Gary's Fence Co. -New
Sewer/Water License - Expires 06/30/97
Western Excavating -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 Consideration of Resolution No. 5104, 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. 97-2096C (Presented by:Pam Sheldon, Director of
Community Development)
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
Comments:
7:10 Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 598, Approving a Rezoning from B-1 and R-2
Planned Unit Development (PUD), and on Resolution No. 5119 Approving a
General Concept Plan, to Allow Development of Commercial Uses on the O'Neil
Property, 2430 Highway 10. (Presented by:Pam Sheldon, Director of Community
Development)
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
•
Comments:
7:20 Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 601, Relating to Intoxicating Liquor Licenses,
Amending Title 500, Chapter 502, Subd. 502.8 of the Mounds View Municipal
Code. (Presented by: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator)
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
Comments:
11 . COUNCIL BUSINESS:
A. Consideration of Resolution No. 5119, Approving a General Concept Plan for the
O'Neil Property to Allow Development of Commercial Uses, 2430 Highway 10.
Staff Report No. 97-2097C (Presented by: Pam Sheldon, Director of Community
Development)
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
Comments:
•
B. Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 598, 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. 97-2098C
(Presented by: Pam Sheldon, Director of Community Development)
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
Comments:
C. Second Reading and Adoption of 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. 97-2100C (Presented by: Chuck Whiting,
City Administrator)
ROLL CALL VOTE
Mayor McCarty
Councilmember Trude
Councilmember Koopmeiners
Councilmember Stigney
Councilmember Quick
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D •
Comments:
D. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 600, Amending the
Assessment Policy. Staff Report No. 97-2101 C (Presented by:Mike Ulrich,
Director of Public Works)
ROLL CALL VOTE
Mayor McCarty
Councilmember Trude
Councilmember Koopmeiners
Councilmember Stigney
Councilmember Quick
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
Comments:
S
E. Consideration of Resolution No. 5118, Approving County Road Turnback
(Spring Lake Road). Staff Report No. 97-2101 C (Presented by:Mike Ulrich,
Director of Public Works)
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
Comments:
F. Consideration of Resolution No. 5121, Directing Staff to Proceed on Bel Rae
Construction Contract Specifications and Bid Letting of Spending Authorization.
Staff Report No. 97-2102C (Presented by: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator
and Bob Long, City Attorney)
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
Comments:
G. Approval of Resolution No. 5122, Children's Home Society Lease Agreement.
Staff Report No. 2103C (Presented by: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator and
Bob Long, City Attorney)
• COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
Comments:
H. Approval of Resolution No. 5123, Construction Manager Agreement for the Bel
Rae Project. Staff Report No. 2104C (Presented by:Chuck Whiting, City
Administrator and Bob Long, City Attorney)
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
Comments:
12. REPORTS:
1. Report of Councilmembers:
Trude:
Koopmeiners:
Stigney:
• Quick:
2. Report of Mayor McCarty: 1111
3. Report of Clerk Administrator:
4. Report of Staff:
5. Report of Attorney:
NEXT COUNCIL WORK SESSION: JUNE 2, 1997 6:00 PM
NEXT COUNCIL MEETING: MAY 27, 1997 7:00 PM
ADJOURNMENT:
•
•
Page 1 UNAPPROVED
• April28, 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 28, 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 28, 1997.
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 Cathy Bennett,EDA Director
30 Bruce Kessel,Finance Director
31 Pam Sheldon, Community Development Director
32 Jim Ericson,Planning Associate
33 Bob Long,City Attorney
34
35 ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
36
37 Mr. Whiting stated he would like to give a brief update on the Anoka County Airport status. He noted that he
38 has had discussions with Representative Evans regarding the city's frustrations with the Metropolitan Airport
39 Commission and their development of a Comprehensive Plan. The City provided input and Public Hearings
40 were to be held in February or March by MAC. Those hearings have not been held yet. Two weeks ago,the
41 Council met with a representative of MAC and since then the council has been checking to see what can be
42 done legislatively. Some legislation was proposed and was approved last week.
43
44 Mr.Bob Long provided details on the amendment which basically states that the Metropolitan Airports
45 Commission shall not expend any public funds for planning or construction of capital improvements at the
46 • Anoka/Blaine Airport that will in any way conflict with the July 28, 1986 court order. This is a house bill and
• 47 the senate version does not contain the language so when it goes to the conference committee,the goal will be
48 to keep the language in the house bill.
t
r e F_-.. n;ae`Page21J ' 9L V 1 ;1,
April 28, 1997 ,, K
Mounds View City Council
1 Mayor McCarty explained that the concern is that the Comprehensive Plan update for the airport(from the
2 city's view)is in conflict with the 1986 Court Order that included some protection for the City of Mounds
3 View. He noted that residents will be kept informed of the progress.
4
5 APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
6
7 April 14,1997-City Council Meeting:
8
9 MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Trude to Approve the Minutes of the April 14, 1997 City Council meeting as
10 presented.
11
12 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
13
14 ACCEPTANCE OF ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES:
15
16 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes-March 19,1997,Festival Committee Meeting Minutes-April
17 8,1997,Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes-November 21,1996,January 21,1997,
18 February 20,1997 and March 27,1997.
19
20 MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to accept the Advisory Commission Minutes as presented.
21 •
22 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
23
24 SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
25
26 Resolution No. 5109,Proclaiming May 6,1997 as "Arbor Day".
27
28 Mr. Whiting read Resolution 5109.
29
30 CONSENT AGENDA:
31
32 Mayor McCarty asked if there were any Council Members wishing to have any items removed from the
33 Consent Agenda. He requested that Items 8(B)and 8(C)be removed from the Consent Agenda.
34
35 MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Koopmeiners to approve the Consent Agenda,AS AMENDED.
36
37 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
38
39 Mayor McCarty explained that Items 8(B&C)were amendments to the Fire Protection Services Contract and
40 approving a Letter of Understanding regarding the Joint Powers Agreement. He wondered if action is actually
41 needed by the City Council on this issue.
42
43 Mr.Nyle Zikmund,Fire Chief,explained that this decision could be made by the Council,however he felt the
44 Council may want to approve the amendments it would bring the assets into the city's possession at the pro rata
45 share.
46
47 Mayor McCarty stated he is somewhat concerned about bringing MAC into the Fire Services Contracts in a
48 more direct way than they have been in the past. He would be willing to set the items before the Council aside
a r-[1 7 ': Y
Page 3
• April 28, 1997
Mounds View City Council
1 and allow Chief Zikmund to make the decision which he believes is well within the JPA and our current service
2 contract. He is hesitant to do anything with MAC until they come and talk to Mounds View about the
3 ramifications of their current Comprehensive Plan Update.
4
5 Attorney Long stated he would like to delay approval of those items until the next council meeting as well.
6 He believes there is some language in the Joint Powers Agreement as far as coverage for the airport.
7 Additionally,if the city is going to enter into a contract to receive a truck,they will likely need council
8 authorization.
9
10 Chief Zikmund stated his concern that council delays could result in delays in delivery of a new truck until next
11 June or July. A discussion followed. Mr.Long noted that the Council could pass a motion authorizing the
12 Mayor and City Administrator to execute the appropriate amendment language to the Joint Powers Agreement,
13 and the Letter of Understanding,subject to review.
14
15 MOTION/SECOND: McCarty/Trude to Authorize the Mayor and the City Administrator to execute the
16 appropriate amendment language to the Joint Powers Agreement and the Letter of Understanding,subject to
17 review.
18
19 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
20
21
• 22 RESIDENTS REQUESTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR:
23
24 Mayor McCarty noted that this is the period of time for residents to address the Council with comments or
25 concerns on items that are not on the Agenda.
26
27 Leona Lodmill,2349 Laport Drive,stated she had received a letter from the City of Mounds View in regard to
28 the conditions of her property: City staff took pictures of her backyard(which is surrounded by a privacy
29 fence)without her consent and she does not feel they have the right to do so. She feels she is being stalked.
30 She explained that many of the conditions do exist,including the brush pile,and the tires. The motor home is
31 also in the back yard,however she was told that she did not need to license it if it was parked there. They had
32 a fire on the property and they are attempting to clean things out as they are able,however both her and her
33 husband have health problems. She noted that the conditions are not visible to the neighbors as they are
34 protected by a privacy fence.
35
36 Mayor McCarty assured Ms.Lodmill that she was not being stalked. He explained that the City of Mounds
37 View has ordinances in Mounds View regarding Nuisance Codes and those ordinances are merely being
38 enforced under the law.
39
40 Attorney Long explained that under the City's Nuisance Code and under the State Statutes,there is authority for
41 cities to inspect and define public nuisances. It is not a constitutional issue for the city to be enforce it as long
42 as they follow the procedures set forth in the ordinance.
43
44 Mayor McCarty stated he would ask that an officer be sent out to meet with Ms. Lodmill to go through
45 the order to sort out what she feels are deficiencies in the order. After this is completed,the city will proceed
46 as necessary.
47
!+ , 9.
Page 4 ea a j u g
April 28, 1997
Mounds View City Council
1 Bill Werner,2765 Sherwood Road,asked about the status of the Bel Rae. He asked if a report has been
2 obtained from the architect as to the structural and environmental status of the building. He is concerned that
3 the architect has an interest in the building and will basically tell the council what he feels they want to hear.
4 He feels the city should obtain a detailed report including costs,etc. and that the city should hold them
5 accountable to those cost estimates.
6
7 Mayor McCarty explained that the costs are dependent upon market costs and therefore,very difficult to
8 predict. The architects can only estimate what they think the costs will be.
9
10 PUBLIC HEARINGS:
11
12 Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No.599,an Ordinance Approving a Rezoning from B-
13 2 to Planned Unit Development(PUD)for commercial uses for property located southeast of the
14 Highway 10/Silver Lake Road intersection(2704-2740 Highway 10 and 7801 Silver Lake Road).
15
16 Mayor McCarty opened the Public Hearing at 7:40 p.m.
17
18 Ms.Pam Sheldon,Community Development Director,provided a brief overview of the project. She noted
19 that the action before council would be for a rezoning. This would be the public hearing for the rezoning,and
20 if the council wished,they could approve the first reading of the ordinance. The second reading would take .
21 place at the next council meeting. Ms. Sheldon outlined the Planned Unit Development process that is
22 required. She noted that the application is at a general concept plan stage and that this step allows the
23 applicant to get a reading from the council and the community on whether there is agreement that this type of
24 development should go forward,in general terms,before the applicant spends a lot of investment in
25 engineering drawings and more detailed planning. This gives the community a chance to give input on the
26 types of uses and their approximate arrangement. She noted that she had outlined three different options for
27 the council to review. These included:
28
29 1) that the Council conduct the Public Hearing,close the hearing and proceed to introduce the Ordinance for a
30 first reading with an exhibit that would be attached to the ordinance that would have a detailed list of rules
31 about what will happen at the next stage;
32
33 2) that the hearing be conducted,and continue it at another time,asking the applicant to get information on the
34 wetland boundaries,the drainage design,whether the underground parking is feasible and do some additional
35 design work before the first reading of the ordinance(which could be held at the first council meeting in June);
36
37 3) that the council deny the request and tell the applicant that they can re-apply when they get the additional
38 information.
39
40 Ms. Sheldon proceeded to outline areas of the ordinance including Exhibit 1 which lays out the rules the
41 development would need to go by at the development stage and when it is actually constructed.
42
43 Mr. Jim Ericson,Planning Associate,went through the discussion topics related to the development including
44 the consistency with the Comprehensive Plan,the Highway 10-Area 9 Study,the land uses, the tax impact of
45 the project,the overall project design,access and on-site circulation,traffic study,the drainage plan,natural
46 features and open space,encroachment into the Wetland Buffer,drainage and utility easements,parking,trash
47 disposal, snow storage, Site Improvement Agreement,and the effect on abutting properties.
111,
48
ta I\
4 i n n n
k Li
Page 5
• April 28, 1997
Mounds View City Council
1 Thomas Budzynski, TJB Homes,2704 Highway 10,stated in 1987 he built his business and in the process,
2 had water brought to his property from Silver Lake Road. At that time,there were property owners between
3 himself and Silver Lake Road who were unhappy about having to pay for their share of the water. To avoid
4 the time involved in a Special Assessment Hearing,he assumed the cost himself,however he was told by the
5 City Administrator said that anytime anyone would hook up to that water line,the city would insure that he
6 would be reimbursed for the cost of putting the water line in. (He believes the cost was approximately$6,300
7 per property.) He wanted to make sure that the city was aware of the situation and wants to be sure that he is
8 reimbursed for that expense if the development proceeds as
9 proposed.
10
11 Mr. Whiting noted that this is not a standard way of completing a public improvement.
12
13 Mayor McCarty stated the council would receive his comments as a part of the Public Hearing and would have
14 staff investigate further.
15
16 George Winikky,2732-2740 Highway 10,stated in 1987 he talked with city staff about this very issue. He was
17 left with a compelling feeling that he would have to pay for the cost of the water line if he hooked up to it.
18
19 Mike Black,of Royal Oaks Realty,a representative of the development team was present and introduced all
20 parties involved in the development project. He stated they understand that in the council's consideration of
21 the PUD Concept Plan,the city is not locking into any specific detailed plan and noted that more detail will be
22 done at the development stage. I-Ie would like to request that the City Council consider the first option Ms.
23 Sheldon outlined. He stated they would work diligently on addressing the issues of concerns expressed by the
24 city to bring forth a project that the city would be proud of.
25
26 Mayor McCarty asked if they could respond to all of the city's concerns by May 18th if the council were to
27 adopt Option#1. Mr.Black stated he believed this could be done.
28
29 Dan Moon,6929 Pleasant View Drive,stated he is not sure that this plan would fit into the future plans for
30 Highway 10. He has some concern with the proposed gas station. He would much rather see a business park
31 development than a development whose occupants would provide only minimum wage jobs.
32
33 With no further comments,Mayor McCarty closed the Public Hearing at 8:26 p.m.
34
35 COUNCIL BUSINESS:
36
37 D. Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No.599,an Ordinance Approving a Rezoning from
38 B-2 to Planned Unit Development(PUD)for commercial uses for property located southeast of
39 Highway 10/Silver Lake Road intersection(2704-2740 Highway 10 and 7801 Silver Lake Road).
40
41 Council member Trude asked if a Wetland Delineation has been done on the property. Mr.Black noted that
42 two Wetland Delineation's have been done,the most recent was done in 1992. However a third delineation
43 could be done as a part of the development stage.
44
45 Council member Trude asked if they have looked at the 100 year water mark for the proposed underground
46 parking facility. Mr.Black stated this has been looked at in a very general way and that it would be looked at
• 47 more thoroughly at the development stage.
48
UNAPPBO'VLI
Page 6 •
April 28, 1997
Mounds View City Council
1 Mayor McCarty reminded residents that the Planned Unit Development is a cooperative effort and that the city
2 cannot demand anything,it is merely a negotiation process. He suggested that Options#1 and#2 be combined,
3 striking the first sentence in Option#2,and including the remainder of Option#2,thereby approving the first
4 reading of the ordinance and scheduling the second reading when every one is ready. He stated he would like
5 to formalize the"laundry list" and incorporate it under a second motion indicating that all of this is to be
6 supplied by the applicant by May 16, 1997.
7
8 Council member Stigney felt by approving the Resolution,the council would be approving the general concept
9 of the plan. He has some concerns in doing this.
10
11 Mr.Long noted that if the council is not satisfied with the developer's response to the issues by the second
12 reading,the council would have the discretion to not approve the ordinance. This would not lock the council
13 in to approving the project. It would only give indication that the council wants them to proceed to the second
14 stage.
15
16 Council member Stigney stated he would favor Option#3.
17
18 Council member Trude wondered if this was too intense of a development for the site to avoid run-off parking.
19 Ms. Sheldon noted that after the additional information is obtained,the layout may need to be adjusted
20 downward. The Council could note that they would like to see a revised site layout that reflects this
•
21 information and adjustment to the density if needed as insurance.
22
23 Council member Trude asked if the State Highway Department would give three access points. Ms. Sheldon
24 stated she talked with Bill Keen who saw the proposed plan as an improvement to the existing situation. Ms.
25 Trude stated she would like to keep a very close eye on the traffic flow for the development because she feels
26 this is a very important issue.
27
28 MOTION/SECOND: McCarty/Koopmeiners to Approve the Introduction of Ordinance No. 599,an
29 Ordinance Approving a Rezoning from B-2 to Planned Unit Development(PUD)for commercial uses for
30 property located southeast of the Highway 10/Silver Lake Road intersection.
31
32 ROLL CALL VOTE:
33
34 Mayor McCarty aye
35 Council member Trude aye
3 6 Council member Koopmeiners aye
37 Council member Stigney nay
38 Council member Quick nay
39
40 Motion Carried(3-2)
41
42 MOTION/SECOND: McCarty/Trude that the requirements of Options#1 and#2 be combined for further
43 study and that these be accomplished before the second reading,that a traffic study be conducted and that
44 review of the applicant's submittal be completed by a design consultant.
45
46 Council member Stigney stated he feels perhaps the city is overlooking the U of M Study on the Highway 10
1111
47 Corridor. He feels that the city should wait to see what they recommend before proceeding with the project.
48 He has concerns about another car wash/gas station/fast food right across the street from another.
Page 7
• April 28, 1997
Mounds View City Council
1 Mayor McCarty stated he has a copies of the Section 9 Study,the Comprehensive Plan and the Highway 10
2 study. These are the city's dreams,however,his intentions as well as the others in the city,in terms of what
3 they want the community to be,must be weighted with the full knowledge of their constitutional rights in the
4 hands of property owners. The city cannot tell property owners what they are going to put on their property,
5 and they can only negotiate through the PUD process.
6
7 MOTION by Stigney to amend the previous motion that the results of the Highway 10 U of MN Corridor Study
8 be addressed prior to the second reading of Ordinance No. 599. MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF SECOND.
9
10 Joanne Meyers,Silver Lake Wood Townhomes,stated she had concerns with traffic problems which may occur
11 with those who are attempting to make a left hand turn off of Highway 10 to the gas station during rush hour
12 traffic. She also is concerned about the wetlands. She felt a lot of drainage off the area would affect the
13 wetland. She wondered if zoning change could change the type of traffic in the area.
14
15 Dan Moon,6929 Pleasant View Drive,asked why Senior Citizen housing was being proposed when there is a
16 large senior complex being constructed on Highway 10 in Spring Lake Park. Mayor McCarty noted that there
17 is a high demand for that type of housing in the area.
18
19 John Adair of Faegre&Benson,stated he is somewhat concerned about the 120 day limitation. He feels the
20 city should proceed with a second reading and count on the Exhibit 1 as addressing all of the concerns which
21 must be satisfied before the development stage is approved.
22
23 Mayor McCarty stated noted that the Ordinance cannot even be enforced until 60 days have passed under the
24 Charter requirements. He views the motion as a double check to see that those concerns are indeed
25 addressed. He also is concerned about the 120 day time limit.
26
27 Attorney Long noted that what the Council is being asked to do is an alternative method of considering
28 rezoning.
29
30 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
31
32 PUBLIC HEARINGS-continued:
33
34 First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance No.600,to Consider Amending the Assessment Policy.
35
36 Mayor McCarty opened the Public Hearing at 9:15 p.m.
37
38 Mike Ulrich,Public Works Director,explained that at the April 7, 1997 City Council Work Session,several
39 revisions were recommended to the assessment policy. He noted that the primary revisions are for the storm
40 sewer assessment and one revision to the assessment for corner industrial and commercial property. He noted
41 that copies of the excerpts of the assessment policy were included in the agenda packets. He proceeded to go
42 through the changes.
43
44 Gregg Lien,Midway Industrial Supply,stated they would be dramatically affected by the Ordinance as it now
45 stands,as they have frontage on Mustang. They do not rely on traffic coming off Mustang,therefore
46 the frontage would be of no benefit to them. He urged the Council to consider the new amended ordinance.
47
48 Mayor McCarty closed the Public Hearing at 9:24 p.m.
iPtk nOnnl pr-D
F % Lr`J ii
Page 8
April 28, 1997
Mounds View City Council
1 MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Quick to approve the Introduction of Ordinance 600,to Consider Amending the
2 Assessment Policy.
3
4 ROLL CALL VOTE:
5
6 Mayor McCarty aye
7 Council member Stigney aye
8 Council member Quick aye
9 Council member Koopmeiners aye
10 Council member Trude aye
11
12 Motion Carried(5-0)
13
14 Continuation of Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution No.5114,Regarding Modifications of
15 the Development Plan for the Mounds View Economic Development Project and a Tax Increment
16 Financing Plan for Tax Increment District No.4.
17
18 Mayor McCarty opened the Public Hearing at 9:25 p.m.
19
20 Mr. Whiting noted that this was a continuation of the Public Hearing held on April 14, 1997 regarding the Bel
21 Rae TIF District No.4. He introduced Dave Maroney of Community Partners,Inc.who was present to •
22 review the plan with the Council. He went through the five exhibits in the TIF plan. He noted that there is
23 nothing in the document that restricts the term of the district if it is created. This is a proposed redevelopment
24 district and the duration cannot exceed 25 years.
25
26 Attorney Long noted that Resolution No. 5114 approves the TIF plan for District No.4.
27
28 Mayor McCarty closed the Public Hearing at 9:45 p.m.
29
30 MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Koopmeiners to Approve Resolution No. 5114,Approving Modification of the
31 Project Plan for the Mounds View Economic Development Project and Approving the Tax Increment
32 Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No.4.
33
34 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
35
36 COUNCIL BUSINESS:
37
38 E. Consideration of Resolution No.5111,Supporting Subsidized Housing Units in Mounds View as
39 part of the Proposed Silver Lake Commons Development.
40
41 F. Consideration of Resolution No.5112 Supporting the Ramsey County's Allocation of Home Funds
42 to MSP Real Estate for the Significant Rehabilitation of 40 Apartment Units located at 2665 Highway
43 10.
44
45 Ms.Bennett,EDA Director,briefly reviewed the proposed Silver Lake Commons project. She noted that
46 Resolution 5111 would support the setting aside of subsidized housing units through the Holman Decree for
47 the proposed Silver Lake Commons. Under this funding,three units would be set aide for existing Mounds
48 View residents who receive rent subsidies. The remaining seven units would be made available to applicants
PP9olf
Page 9
•
April 28, 1997
Mounds View City Council
1 from the Minneapolis Public Housing waiting list. The second resolution would be in support of the Ramsey
2 County Home Funds for the rehabilitation portion of this project. If this resolution is not approved,the funds
3 would not be set aside for Mounds View.
4
5 Ms.Bennett explained that she has discussed other options with MSP in regard to the rental units,however
6 there is concern that it would affect the financial feasibility of the project. She has also contacted both a
7 commercial and residential developer to obtain their opinion of the site. The residential developer felt a
8 housing development would work on the site. The Commercial developer,however was concerned about the
9 condition of the existing apartment as well as concerns about access off of Highway 10 or Eastwood.
10
11 Ms.Bennett noted that the Economic Development Commission reviewed the concept for this project and
12 passed a resolution on a 6-0 vote as follows:
13
14 "General support for MSP Real Estate's concept proposal as it pertains to the rehabilitation of Red Oak
15 Apartments and construction of 26 new townhomes. This support is limited to the concepts and land use but
16 there needs to be further evaluation with regards to the management company and financial analysis.
17 Therefore,not comfortable with a recommendation to support the use of tax increment financing at this time".
18
19 She noted that the EDC requested that this item be brought back at the May meeting and directed the staff to
20 get some background regarding the management company and the information analyzed by our tax increment
• 21 consultant.
22
23 Ms.Bennett reminded the Council that these resolutions would allow the applicants to enter the annual funding
24 cycle at the public agencies.
25
26 Ms.Bennett noted an amendment to Resolution No. 5111 and 5112. The final paragraph in Resolution 5111
27 should be changed to read, "NOW BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that between the City of Mounds
28 View,the Mounds View Economic Development Authority and the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority
29 " The final paragraph in Resolution No. 5112 should be changed to read,"NOW THEREFORE BE IT
30 RESOLVED,that the City of Mounds View,and the Mounds View Economic Development Authority
31 hereby endorse. . . . ".
32
33 Milo Pinkerton,President of MSP Real Estate explained that the present condition of the apartment complex on
34 the site is one of considerable deferred maintenance,numerous police calls,physical deterioration of the
35 parking lot,etc. The land next to the apartment site has been For Sale for a number of years and he feels part
36 of the problem in selling the land is the poor access to the site. He feels their proposal is of the quality that the
37 neighbors will want in that area. They have obtained resident input in the area and have taken their comments
38 into consideration.
39
40 Peter Bister,of PBDB Architects in Minneapolis presented a diagram of the proposed project. He provided
41 information in regard to the improvements to the existing building as well as descriptions of the proposed
42 townhomes. He also noted changes that have been made to the parking areas and more landscaping added. A
43 one-half acre play area was also added which borders Eastwood Road and will serve both the apartment
44 buildings and the proposed townhomes.
45
46 Jeff Hugget of MSP Real Estate discussed the input they had received from residents in the area. He noted that
• 47 many were initially opposed to the proposal,but after obtaining further information,they were in favor of the
AD
PP 0 v E
Page 10 •
April 28, 1997
Mounds View City Council
1 added improvements. He provided information in regard to the proposed monthly rents for the units,noting
2 that they would range from$509/month for a one bedroom unit to$720/month for a four bedroom unit.
3
4 Lori DanZezan,President of DanZezan Properties,was present to provide information in regard to
5 management of the property.
6
7 Marie Donahue,2622 Lake Court Drive,stated she is aware that managers and owners of rental units often
8 don't have any rights when it comes to rental selections,etc. She wondered how Ms.DanZezan would be able
9 to overcome this.
10
11 Ms.DanZezan explained that she has a detailed screening process that she goes through and feels that it
12 provides the information necessary in making decisions in the selection process.
13
14 Council member Stigney asked if the triangular single family property would require rezoning as well.
15
16 Mr.Pinkerton stated they would propose that the R-1 zoning on that property would be included in the PUD.
17 They are planning to keep the single family home there.
18
19 Council member Trude asked how many residents they anticipate in the entire development. She wondered
20 how this may impact the schools. •
21
22 Mr.Pinkerton stated he thinks a majority of the units will be filled by Mounds View residents as there are no
23 other rental townhomes in Mounds View.
24
25 Arnold Winters,7831 Sunnyside Road stated his property abuts the proposed development on two sides. He
26 would like to see the property improved and is in favor of the proposed development.
27
28 Mike Coon,7851 Eastwood Road,stated he does not think residents across the street will want to look out to
29 the two-story townhomes. Additionally,he heard that the developers plan to use the single family home as a
30 rental office. This would increase the traffic in the area and affect the property values in the area as well as
31 child safety.
32
33 Mr.Pinkerton explained that the house will not be a rental office. There would be no access onto Eastwood,
34 therefore he cannot anticipate a traffic increase there.
35
36 Mike Strauss,7830 Eastwood Rd.,stated he is opposed to tripling the number of people on the block by
37 building high density housing there. Additionally,he wondered why the city couldn't force the landlord of the
38 property to make improvements.
39
40 Attorney Long explained that in order to force a landlord to make improvements,they would need to determine
41 that the property failed to meet housing code. He noted that approving the resolutions would only preserve
42 options and would allow the city to go forward. They do not obligate the city in any way.
43
44 Council member Trude stated she does not like the process of proceeding any further without community input.
45 Mayor McCarty stated this does not tie the city into proceeding if they later determine that it is not in the best
46 interests of the community.
47
UNA0 • OF--11
Page 11
• April 28, 1997
Mounds View City Council
1 MOTION/SECOND: McCarty/Quick to Approve Resolution No. 5111,Supporting Subsidized Housing Units
2 in Mounds View as part of the Proposed Silver Lake Commons Development.
3
4 VOTE: 3 ayes 2 nays(Stigney/Trude) Motion Carried
5
6 MOTION/SECOND: McCarty/Quick to approve Resolution No. 5112,Supporting the Ramsey County's
7 Allocation of Home Funds to MSP Real Estate for the Significant Rehabilitation of 40 Apartment Units
8 Located at 2665 Highway 10.
9
10 VOTE: 3 ayes 2 nays(Stigney/Trude) Motion Carried
11
12 Council member Trude again stated she did not approve of the process and also is opposed to placing a large
13 number of families on a heavily traveled road.
14
15 A. Discussion Regarding Employee Position Benchmark Service Providers.
16
17 MOTION by Stigney to continue using PDI as it is less expensive and will achieve the same results.
18
19 MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF SECOND.
20
21 MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to convert to the HAY job evaluation system.
22
23 Council member Trude stated she had talked with staff in regard to the cost issue and feels that when one
24 considers the staff time in preparing the PDI,it ends up costing more. Council member Stigney stated this is
25 contrary to what he has heard. The basis of cost is$35/person under PDI,versus$175/person under HAY. If
26 the city wants Labor Relations to come in to alleviate spending staff time,they can do so.
27
28 VOTE: 4 ayes 1 nay(Stigney) Motion Carried
29
30 B. Introduction of Ordinance No.601,Amending Chapter 502,Subd.502.08 of the Mounds View
31 Municipal Code relating to Intoxicating Liquor License Hearing requirements.
32
33 Mr.Whiting explained that this is an amendment which would eliminate the hearing requirements for license
34 renewal since there is ample opportunity have heard of problems prior to licensing renewal.
35
36 MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to Approve the Introduction of Ordinance No.601,Amending
37 Chapter 502,Subd. 502.08 of the Mounds View Municipal Code relating to Intoxicating Liquor License
38 Hearing requirements,and to waive the reading.
39
40 ROLL CALL VOTE:
41
42 Mayor McCarty aye
43 Council member Koopmeiners aye
44 Council member Quick aye
45 Council member Stigney aye
46 Council member Trude aye
. 47
48 Motion Carried(5-0)
•
Vrtil
Page 12 •
April 28, 1997
Mounds View City Council
1 C. Consideration of Resolution 5110,Establishing a Municipal State Aid Street.
2
3 Mike Ulrich explained that in conjunction with the Ramsey County Turnback Program,all turnback roads are
4 eligible for state aid status. Spring Lake Road is scheduled to be turned back in 1997 and Resolution 5110 will
5 establish this designation.
6
7 MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Trude to Approve Resolution NO.5110,Establishing a Municipal State Aid
8 Street.
9
10 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
11
12 G. Opportunity for Hearing and Consideration of Resolution No.5115,a Resolution Authorizing
13 Abatement of Nuisances at 8217 Long Lake Road.
14
15 Mr.Ericson explained that this property is in violation of the Mounds view Municipal Code pertaining to
16 nuisances. He noted the violations and presented photographs depicting such.
17
18 MOTION/SECOND: McCarty/Koopmeiners to Approve Resolution No. 5115,a Resolution Authorizing
19 Abatement of Nuisances at 8217 Long Lake Road.
20
•
21 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
22
23 H. Consider motion approving a settlement agreement with TR Systems,LLC for the purchase of
24 accounting software and authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to enter into said agreement for
25 and on behalf of the City.
26
27 I. Consider motion approving a contract with Tauges Redpath to conduct the annual audit for the
28 year ended December 31, 1996.
29
30 Mr. Whiting explained that these are related to the discussion the City Council had at their recent work session
31 regarding the possibility of pending litigation.
32
33 Mr.Long explained that the motion in Item H will approve or authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to
34 enter into a settlement agreement. The city would be refunded a portion and a portion would be retained by
35 them to cover their costs of time and material. This is an acceptable arrangement to them. The second motion
36 would be to go out and finish off the 1996 audit with the firm. The second motion is therefore contingent
37 upon the first.
38
39 MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Quick to Approve the Settlement Agreement with TR Systems.
40
41 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
42
43 MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Trude to approve a contract with Tauges Redpath to conduct the annual audit for
44 the year ended December 31, 1996.
45
46 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried •
47
48 REPORTS:
fyimp . on% 117 n
'0 id 11
v_.
CS L
• Page 13
April28, 1997
Mounds View City Council
1 Report of Council members:
2
3 Trude: No report.
4
5 Koopmeiners: No report.
6
7 Stigney: No report.
8
9 Quick: No report.
10
11 Report of Mayor McCarty: Mayor McCarty stated he had a conversation with Diane Kline who is working
12 on Flood Relief activities and donations. She knows of someone who has a truck going to North Dakota every
13 day and they are need of cleaning supplies,personal care items,etc. If any residents wish to contribute items
14 and are unable to get them to the drop off point,they can bring them to City Hall.
15
16 He also read a letter that the city received from a teacher at Pinewood Elementary who extended their
17 appreciation of DARE officers Tim Brennen,Tom Baumgart and Bob Nelson.
18
19 Mayor McCarty noted that he has had responses from citizens on the coverage of the warning siren system in
• 20 the Northeast part of the city. He asked if staff would check into this.
21
22 Report of Clerk Administrator: Mr. Whiting stated he has had meetings with the Children's Home Society
23 about their use of the Bel Rae building. The city will need to proceed with specifics on the design criteria
24 prior to reaching an agreement with them. He is talking with them about establishing an escrow account. He
25 also will be meeting with the Community Education Department this week. He noted that an agreement was
26 signed by the architect with some minor amendments.
27
28 Report of Staff: No report.
29
30 Report of Attorney: No report.
31
32 Mayor McCarty noted that the next Council Work Session will be held on May 5, 1997 at 6:00 p.m. The next
33 Council Meeting is on May 12, 1997 at 7:00 p.m.
34
35 Mayor McCarty adjourned the meeting at 11:35 p.m.
36
37 Respectfully submitted,
38
39 Tamara D. Saefke
40 Recording Secretary
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
i
•
Page 1
•
April 14, 1997
Mounds View City Council
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
April 14, 1997
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Hwy. 10,Mounds View,MN 55112
**********************************************************************************
CALL TO ORDER
The Mounds View City Council was called to order by Mayor McCarty at 7:00 p.m.on April 14, 1997.
• PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor McCarty,Council members Trude,
Quick,Koopmeiners and Stigney
ALSO PRESENT: Chuck Whiting,Clerk Administrator
Pam Sheldon, Community Development Director
Jim Ericson,Planning Associate
Bob Long,City Attorney
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
Mr.Whiting asked that two items be added to the Agenda under Council Business,(G)Entering into an
Exclusive Negotiations Agreement with VB Digs and(H)Request to Conduct a Bel Rae Building Assessment
with Architect Agreement.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
March 24, 1997-City Council Meeting:
Council member Stigney noted a change to Page 8,Line 2. He asked that it be changed to read". . .has school
gyms that are not being fully used right now."
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Koopmeiners to Approve the Minutes of the March 24, 1997 City Council
•
meeting AS AMENDED.
in, 0
Page 2 •
April 14, 1997
Mounds View City Council
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
ACCEPTANCE OF ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES:
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes-March 5,1997:
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Koopmeiners to accept the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 5,
1997 as submitted.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Mr. Whiting gave a brief summary of the Bel Rae election held on April 5, 1997. He noted that the results
were 1,388 in favor of the community center,with 811 opposed. The city spent approximately$9,000 for the
election,with an estimated 30%turnout with the mail election. He thanked the staff and election judges who
worked so hard to bring the issue to a successful conclusion. Mayor McCarty extended his appreciation on
behalf of the council as well.
CONSENT AGENDA:
•
Mr. Whiting read the Consent Agenda as follows:
A. Approve Salary Increase for City Administrator,Chuck Whiting.
B. Approve Step Adjustment for Public Works Director,Mike Ulrich.
C. Approve Just and Correct Claims Against City Funds.
D. Consider Resolution No. 5108 Authorizing the Acquisition of Property by Proceedings in Eminent Domain.
E. Set a Public Hearing for 7:10 p.m.,Monday,April 28, 1997 to Consider Ordinance No.600,Amending
Chapter 202 of the Municipal Code,Public Improvements.
F. Set a Public Hearing for 7:05 p.m.,Monday,April 28, 1997 on Ordinance No. 599,an Ordinance
Approving Rezoning from B-2 to Planned Unity Development(PUD)for commercial uses,and approving a
general concept plan for property located southeast of the Highway 10/Silver Lake Road intersection
(2704-2740 Highway 10 and 7801 Silver Lake Road).
G. Acceptance of Planning Commission By-Laws.
H. Approval of Bid Award for Two Utility Trucks.
I. Amendment of Joint Powers Agreement for Construction and Operation of Fire Training Site.
J. LICENSES FOR APPROVAL:
1111
Asphalt License-Expires 6/30/97
p , R
EDt
P
ge 3
•
April a14, 1997
Mounds View City Council
Minnesota Rodeways Co.-Renewal
Window Installation-Expires 6/30/97
Donnelly Windows,Inc.-New
Sheet rock-Expires 6/30/97
Gene Anderson Drywall-New
General Contracting(Commercial)-Expires 6/30/97
Flannery Construction-New
HVAC-Expires 6/30/97
Schwartz Construction Co.,Inc. -New
Horwitz,Inc. -Renewal
Therapeutic Massage Enterprise License
Appearance Plus-New
Council member Koopmeiners asked that Item 8(G)be removed from the Consent Agenda. Council member
• Trude asked that Item 8(J)be removed from the Consent Agenda.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Trude to approve the Consent Agenda AS AMENDED.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Discussion:
Council member Koopmeiners stated he had questions in regard the practice of having the City Council refer
applications for filling vacancies in or appointing members to the Planning Commission for recommendations
from the Commission. He noted that the Planning Commission is the only commission that has this particular
procedure and wondered why this was so. He feels this should be exclusively at the discretion of the City
Council.
Mayor McCarty stated he would prefer to just send the By Laws back to the Planning Commission for re-work
with the City Council's objections rather than to approve them in an amended form.
Ms.Trude noted that this is only a recommendation and that the City Council has the option of accepting or
rejecting the recommendations.
Ms. Sheldon noted that the recommendations are not binding. This type of procedure has worked well in the
past as the Planning Commission is very familiar with their responsibilities as a commission. She noted that
any vacancy would be treated in the same way,whether it be for a partial term or a full term.
Mayor McCarty noted that he believes the Planning Commission wants the same thing as the Council-their
active involvement in helping the Council select Planning Commission members. He felt perhaps the
1111 language could reflect this in a different way.
Page 4p D
r
April 14, 1997 rti PniVED
Mounds View City Council
Attorney Long noted that similar language is in the Municipal Code,and therefore if changes are made in the
By Laws,an Ordinance change may be required as well.
It was the general consensus of the Council that this item be set aside until a future date.
Council member Trude stated she had requested that Item 8(J)be removed for further clarification. She
asked if this was for an Adult Use type of facility.
Attorney Long noted that this request is for a Therapeutic Massage Enterprise License and not the same as an
Adult Use type of facility. In order for someone to conduct therapy,two licenses are required,one for the
license for the business and one for the individual therapist showing that they have taken the required number
of training hours.
Council member Trude noted that she had not been provided information to substantiate this and she would like
to table approval of this license until staff can provide a more comprehensive report.
MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Koopmeiners to table Item 8(J)of the Consent Agenda until the next regular City
Council meeting and request that staff provide the Council with a checklist of what the requirements are and .
that they have been met.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
RESIDENTS REOUESTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR:
Mayor McCarty noted that this is the period of time for residents to address the Council with comments or
concerns on items that are not on the Agenda.
There were no questions or comments from the floor.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Public Hearing to Introduce Ordinance 597,Adopting the 1996 Long Term Financial Plan.
Mayor McCarty opened the Public Hearing at 7:20 p.m. He asked if any residents wished to address the
council on the issue of the 1996 Long Term Financial Plan. With no questions or comments,he closed the
Public Hearing at 7:21 p.m.
COUNCIL BUSINESS:
F) Approval of Ordinance No.597,Adopting the 1996 Long Term Financial Plan.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Trude to approve Ordinance No. 597,Adopting the 1996 Long Term Financial
Plan and to Waive the reading.
ROLL CALL VOTE: i
Mayor McCarty aye
Council member Trude aye
Page 5 APPROVED
• April 14, 1997
Mounds View City Council
Council member Koopmeiners aye
Council member Stigney aye
Council member Quick aye
Motion Carried(5-0)
PUBLIC HEARINGS-continued:
Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution No.5105,A Resolution Approving a Conditional Use
Permit for Minor Auto Repair for Spots Quick Lube,2975 Highway 10.
Mayor McCarty opened the Public Hearing at 7:22 p.m.
Mr.Jim Ericson,Planning Associate explained that an application was submitted to the city for a conditional
use permit to allow for minor auto repair at 2975 Highway 10. This would allow for the operation of a quick
lube facility with services to include fluid exchange,wiper replacement,headlight replacement and other
similar work. The applicant has indicated his intent to redevelop the site to high aesthetic standards.
Mr.Ericson noted that as proposed,the building does meet the setback requirements. They are providing an
adequate number of parking spaces and they are proposing to completely redo the access and parking areas,
• eliminating the accesses from Highway 10 and providing a single access along Spring Lake Road.
Additional information was provided in regard to the proposed lighting,signage,drainage,etc.for the proposed
facility.
Attorney Long suggested that an Item 11 be added to Page 7 of Resolution 5105 to read as follows:
11. Prior to the issuance of building permits,the applicant shall execute a Development Contract in
compliance with Section 1006.06,Subd.4 of the Mounds View Municipal Code.
Council member Stigney noted that in reviewing the site plan he noted that the south side of the property
facing Highway 10 is landscaped to the west side of the parking lot,however there is no landscaping East to
Spring Lake Road. He thinks some shrubbery in that area would provide a more aesthetically pleasing view
from Highway 10.
Ron Ostrander,representing the applicant,noted that this is the only area on the site where snow can be plowed
during the Winter months and therefore he does not think they would survive in that location.
Council member Trude stated she is concerned that anything there will obstruct visibility.
Mayor McCarty stated would suggest that the Council deal with the application as presented and direct staff to
work with the applicant over the upcoming weeks and see if something can be worked out for that area. He
noted that Mr.Ericson could bring any recommendations back to the Council at a later date.
Mayor McCarty closed the Public Hearing at 7:35 p.m.
MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Koopmeiners to approve Resolution 5105,A resolution Approving a Conditional
Use Permit for Minor Auto Repair for Spots Quick Lube,2795 Highway 10,AS AMENDED to include Item
11 on Page 7.
Page 6 g '� •
April 14, 1997
Mounds View City Council
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Public Hearing 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,Subd.3.
Mayor McCarty opened the Public Hearing at 7:37 p.m.
Mr. Whiting noted that he did not receive the plan until just prior to the Council meeting. Therefore,he would
like to request that the City Council extend the Public Hearing to the April 28, 1997 City Council meeting.
He noted a few areas that he wanted the Council to make note of when reviewing the plan.
Mayor McCarty noted that this concerns the Tax Increment Financing District that will include the new
community center.
David Jahnke,8428 Eastwood Road,asked for a clarification on the TIF district.
MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Stigney to continue the Public Hearing on April 28, 1997.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
411/
Mayor McCarty closed the Public Hearing at 7:52 p.m.
10 (A) Opportunity for Hearing and Consideration of Resolution No.5106,A Resolution Authorizing
Abatement of Nuisances at 2349 Laport Drive.
Mr.Ericson,Planning Associate,provided photos of the property at 2349 Laport Drive. He noted that staff
tried repeatedly to work with this property owner to clean up the property. In July of 1995 the City issued a
court citation to them regarding the nuisances. Present staff has been in contact with the property owner since
September 30, 1996 in regard to the situation. Mr.Ericson noted that on April 9, 1997,an inspection was
made of the property and revealed a number of nuisances code violations.
Mayor McCarty wondered if the vehicles on the property were insured,operable and licensed. Mr.Ericson
stated last time he checked,the Winnebago did not have a current license.
Ms. Trude commented that many of the nuisance code violations constituted health and safety hazards as well.
MOTION/SECOND: McCarty/Koopmeiners to Approve Resolution No. 5106,A Resolution Authorizing
Abatement of Nuisances at 2349 Laport Drive.
Cam Obert,8315 Greenwood Drive,noted that code violations could be found on every street in Mounds view.
The city has numerous files on properties which are in violation,some inches thick. He feels the constant staff
turnover in the city has resulted in difficult follow-up to complaints. Complaints need to be followed up on and
unfortunately,staff does not have time to address them. Something needs to be done.
David Jahnke,8428 Eastwood Road,noted that what one considers"junk"may not be viewed as such by the .
owner.
r r r Cir
! ' :,•y'
• Page 7
April 14, 1997
Mounds View City Council
VOTE on Motion:
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
COUNCIL BUSINESS:
A. Presentation and Discussion of the Metropolitan Airports Commission(MAC)Response to City
Concerns regarding MAC's Draft Long Term Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Whiting explained that on November 25, 1996 the City Council sent a letter to the Metropolitan Airports
Commission outlining objections to the proposed draft Long Term Comprehensive Plan. He asked that Mr.
Mark Ryan of the MAC update the Council on the hearings that were proposed/held at that time in regard to
this plan.
Mark Ryan explained that a draft of the document has been submitted to the Advisory Committee and they have
recommended that MAC move ahead with Public Hearings on the plan itself. He noted that several urgent
items on the Metropolitan Airport Commissions agenda have prevented them from proceeding with the Pubic
Hearings. They are anticipating holding the Public Hearing on the Long Term Plan in July 1997. Prior to
that,the document must be brought to the full commission for their review and approval. He noted that they
will be sure to notify staff and council of the hearing,which they will likely hold in the north metro area.
• Mayor McCarty asked if the city could be represented when the committee meets to go over the plan.
Mr.Ryan responded,yes. He noted that the meeting would possibly be scheduled for June 3, 1997 and held at
the International Airport. A letter of confirmation will be sent to Mounds View.
Attorney Long asked if there would be some formal feedback of the November 25, 1997 letter prior to the
committee meeting in June.
Mr.Ryan stated he did not believe so,and that the letter would be accepted as comments for the public record.
Mayor McCarty wondered if it would be better to both the City and MAC to settle some of the court-ordered
stipulations prior to the Public Hearing rather than going through the Public Hearing process and then coming
back and re-working all that at a later date. That way,everyone involved in the hearing would start from a
document that has at much viability as possible and not something that might be set aside under a later action.
Mr.Ryan stated he would like to refer this question back to his legal staff.
It was agreed by both Mr.Ryan and the City Council that a meeting should be scheduled with Mounds View
staff,including Mr.Long,and MAC staff/legal advisor to discuss these issues.
Mr.Ryan noted that due to the St.Paul Airport being underwater,several aircraft have been diverted to the
Anoka Airport. •
Mr.Whiting noted that he had received a complaint from a resident that there are pilots Nvho have moved their
aircraft to the Anoka Airport after being told they could no longer use the Crystal Airport. He wondered if this
• was accurate information.
D ID
2
0JU..Pa1e8 '
d
April 14, 1997 •
Mounds View City Council
Mr.Ryan responded that he is aware of one individual where this applies.
Attorney Long stated he was told that after the new tower was in place,the city would be able to get more
accurate aircraft counts. He asked if this information was available.
Mr.Ryan stated he would try to get as current information as possible for Mounds View.
Mayor McCarty stated he would like to get statistics from the past six months as the tower opened in October
and he assumes information should be available over that period of time.
B. Second reading and action on Ordinance No.594,An Ordinance Amending Chapter 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.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to approve the second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 594
and to waive the reading.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Mayor McCarty aye
Council member Trude aye •
Council member Koopmeiners aye
Council member Stigney aye
Council member Quick aye
Motion Carried(5-0)
C. Second reading and action on Ordinance No.595,An Ordinance adding day care centers and
group nurseries as a conditional use in the B-1,13-2,B-3,B-4 and I-1 zoning districts.
MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Koopmeiners to approve the second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 595,
and to waive the reading.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Mayor McCarty aye
Council member Trude aye
Council member Koopmeiners aye
Council member Stigney aye
Council member Quick aye
Motion Carried(5-0)
D. Consideration of Approval of HAY Consultants to Convert to the HAY Job Evaluation System and
to Review and Revise the Compensation System for the City of Mounds View.
Mr. Whiting stated he would prefer to defer this item until the next City Council meeting to allow him •
additional time to address questions the council may have in regard to this issue.
pPLOnlir
Page 10
• April 14, 1997
Mounds View City Council
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
H. Request to Conduct Bel Rae Building Assessment.
Mr.Whiting explained that this would allow the architect to go ahead and evaluate the structural integrity of the
Bel Rae. These services would be completed for$2,820.
MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Stigney to authorize staff and Mayor McCarty to spend funds out of appropriate
funds to for the architectural assessment of the Bel Rae building.
Mayor McCarty noted he would like to see that an air quality analysis is part of the overall assessment.
It was noted that this may increase the cost of the architectural assessment if it is not included in General
Building Quality.
MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Stigney to amend their motion to INCLUDE an air quality analysis as part of the
architectural assessment of the Bel Rae building.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
• REPORTS:
Report of Council members:
Trude: Ms.Trude reported that Mr. Stigney and herself met with Mr. Whiting to review the conceptual
layout of the building.
Mr.Whiting provided a brief update and noted that the city is still reviewing the proposal that the voters saw at
the Voter Information Meeting with gymnasium options.
Koopmeiners: No report.
Sti gney: Mr. Stigney noted that he had a copy of the St.Anthony Community Center floor plan and cost
breakdown and he would encourage council members to review it and tour the facility.
Quick: No report.
Report of Mayor McCarty: No report.
Report of Clerk Administrator: No report.
Report of Staff: No report.
Report of Attorney: No report.
Mayor McCarty noted that the next Council Work Session will be held on May 5, 1997 at 6:00 p.m. The next
Council Meeting is on April 28, 1997 at 7:00 p.m.
SMOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Stigney to adjourn the meeting at 9:07 p.m.
•
42 ! PHOVED
Page 11 •
April 14, 1997
Mounds View City Council
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
j ,toia pectfully submitte ip�
j1� (. /�Tamara D.Saefke
Recording Secretary
•
•
•
• RESOLUTION NO. 5120
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION TO DOROTHY PETERSON FOR
30 YEARS OF SERVICE
WITH THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
WHEREAS, Dorothy Peterson began her employment with the City of Mounds View on
May 10, 1967 and concluded on May 16, 1997; and
WHEREAS, as a long time resident of Mounds View,Dorothy was more than a valuable
employee, she was significant in helping to maintain the human touch with the citizens; and
WHEREAS, as utility billing procedures changed through the years with advancing
technology and new software,Dorothy was able to maintain proficient billing operations; and
WHEREAS, Dorothy's long history in the community and her broad knowledge of
Mounds View operations will greatly be missed by the entire City staff and Council.
NOW,THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby recognize
the quality of Dorothy's work in all that she has done for the City. Dorothy has been an
excellent employee and a valuable asset to the City of Mounds View. THANK YOU for your
dedication and commitment.
Presented this 12th day of May, 1997
ATTEST:
Mayor McCarty
Council member Koopmeiners Council member Quick
Council member Trude Council member Stigney
•
Charles S. Whiting, Clerk-Administrator
(SEAL)
•
• CITY OF MOIIXIIS VIEW
Office of the Mayor
PIcoocLAu ATlo1
Volunteer to the City
Edward Letendre
WHEREAS, Edward Letendre has been the driving force behind making the Colonial
Village Mobile Home Park a better place to live; and •
WHEREAS, Edward Letendre's leadership has enhanced the safety of the park, by
bringing the City, the Police department and the residents together for better understanding
and trust; and
WHEREAS, Edward Letendre spearheaded the Fare For All Program, which provides
food for residents at a small charge and is geared toward community service requiring
participants to do community service hours; and
WHEREAS, Edward Letendre has brought various members of the community
together to make up the necessary committee, kept track of hours of community service
and encouraged all participants; and
WHEREAS, Edward Letendre has been involved with the Bel Rae Ballroom in making
sure it has been available for the children of the community and has organized parents for
supervision of activities; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mounds
View, on behalf of various City commission's, employees and residents of the City of
Mounds View, express their appreciation to Edward Letendre for his dedicated and devoted
services to the City of Mounds View.
Presented this 12th day of May, 1997.
Duane W. McCarty, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL: Charles S. Whiting, City Administrator
OF MOUNDS VIEW
Office of the Mayor
PROCLAMATION
Volieiteer to the City
Patricia Michna
WHEREAS, Patricia Michna has been a long time supporter of several of the women's
shelters in Ramsey County; and
WHEREAS, Patricia Michna volunteer's her work through her church and has been an
active supporter and tireless worker at the City's annual Festival in the park; and
WHEREAS, Patricia Michna volunteered her time to coaching softball through the
City's Park and Recreation department; and
WHEREAS, Patricia Michna is on the Fare for All program and is the treasurer for the
program; and
WHEREAS, Patricia Michna goes the extra mile and should be recognized for her
contribution to the community; and
• NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mounds
View, on behalf of various City commission's, employees and residents of the City of
Mounds View, express their appreciation to Patricia Michna for her dedicated and devoted
services to the City of Mounds View and Ramsey County.
Presented this 12th day of May, 1997.
Duane W. McCarty, Mayor
ATTEST:
•
SEAL: Charles S. Whiting, City Administrator
•
•
171'1 OF iiIIIIIXIIS VIEW
Office of the Mayor
I'IgIICLAAMMATIIIN
_ IltlIHIIaLE HIGH SCHOOL
SILVER MEDAL TEAM AT STATE VICA CONFERENCE
WHEREAS, nine hundred students from high schools and technical colleges across
the state competed inleadership and occupational skill contests the weekend of April 4-6,
1997, and
WHEREAS, the students, all members of the Vocational Industrial Clubs of America
(V.I.C.A.),competed in the Minnesota VICA Skill Conference; a state level competition for
vocational students in trade, industrial technicaland health occupations; and
• WHEREAS, VICA is_ a nationwide partnership of business andvocational industry,
students and instructors; and
WHEREAS, its goalsare to motivate students, teach leadership skills, assist teachers
in producing quality workers to business and industry; and
WHEREAS, a panel of over two hundred leaders served on technical committees to
IIV prepare and administer the hands on competitions and were present to judge events;and
•
` _ WHEREAS, the Irondale students placed second in the state for team competition in
"Opening and Closing Business Ceremonies"; and -
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View would like to congratulate Irondale students:
Angie Bainville, Nick Gullickson, Erik Nelson, Eric Norton,Krissy Rees, April Thomas and
Travis Walker, in a very special way for being "Silver Medal Winners.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Duane McCarty, Mayor for the City of Mounds View,do
hereby proclaim Irondale students a "Silver Medal VICA Team." •
Presented this 12th day of May, 1997.
Duane W. McCarty, Mayor
ATTEST:
SEAL: Charles S. Whiting, City Administrator
1 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:
55361 through 55459 in the amount of$ 144,429.84
54949 through 54980 in the amount of$ 171,603.01
through in the amount of$
111 through in the amount of$
TOTAL AMOUNT OF CLAIMS PRESENTED $316,032.85
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 05/13/97 by the vote ayes nayes
Mayor
Clerk-Administrator
PAGE 1 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER
AP-C10-01 MOUNDS VIEW
VENDOR CHECK CXECK INVOICE INVOICE
a
VENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT
LIAN, LISA 55361 05/13/97 05/13/97 27.00
VENDOR TOTAL 27 .00
75101 JOHNSON, CURT 55362 05/13y97 05/13y97 35.00
VENDOR TOTAL 35.00
/5102 LEE, STEPHANIE 55363 05/13y97 05/13/97 25.00
VENDOR TOTAL 25.00
75103 NAYLOR, JENNY 55361 05y13/97 05/13/97 28.00
VENDOR TOTAL 28.00
75104 SWEEI , BECKY 55365 05/13/97 05/13y97 25.00
VENDOR TOTAL 25.00
75105 WALBON, CAROL 55366 05/13y97 05/13/97 27.00
VLNDOR TOTAL 27.00
75106 WYATT, CALYSTA 55367 05/13/97 05/13/97 27 .00
VENDOR TOTAL 27.00
/5107 KENNEDY , SUSAN 55368 05/13/97 05y13/97 28.00
VENDOR TOTAL 28.00
7 BAUER WELDING 55369 05/13y97 05/13y97 624.95
��� VENDOR TOTAL 624.95
75109 LARSEN, JERRY 55370 05/13/9/ 05/13y97 5.00
VENDOR TOTAL 5.00
75110 MYERS, MICHELLE 55371 05/13/97 O5/13y97 25.00
VENDOR TOTAL 25.00
75111 NICKEL , JEAN 55372 05/13y97 05y13/97 192.00
VENDOR TOTAL 192.00
A0299 AT&T WIRELESS SERVICE* 55373 05y13/97 04/18/97 5.03
55373 05/13/97 154108� 03/22/97 88.72
VENDOR TOTAL 93.75
A2700 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR 55374 05/13/97 04/20y97 86.55
55374 05/13y97 01/20/97 155.72
VENDOR TOTAL 242.27
A88 AMA/PADGETT-THOMPSON 55375 05/13/97 05/13y97 145.00
VENDOR TOTAL 145.00
A5123 A;-,[RICAN OFFICE PRODU* 55376 05/13/9/ 308135 04/18/97 82.01
55376 0�/13/97 308049 04/18/9/ 107.66
•
55376 05/13/97 308178 04/18/97 96.32
��
PAGE 2 ACCOUNTS PAYABLCHECK REGISTER
APC10-01 MOUNDS VIEW
VENDOR CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE •
NO VENDOR NAME DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT
I 9
A5260 ANCHOR PAPER CO. 55377 05/13/97 100999501 04/24/97 1065.00
VENDOR TOTAL 1065.00
A6970 AF }EN HILLS PARKS & R* 55378 05/13/97 04/29/97 40.70
VENDOR TOTAL
A7491 ASSOCIATES COMMERCIAL* 55379 05/13y97 05/13/97 1693.82
VENOOR TOTAL 1693.82
A8505 AUTOM�TIC GARASE DOOR* 55380 0�/13/97 0063647- IN 04/18y97 477.31
VENDOR TOTAL 477.31
B?005 BEISSWENGER'S 55381 05/13/9/ 267322 O4/21/97 6.91
55381 05/13/97 202908 12/12y96 5.08
55381 05/13/97 263669 O4y16y97 14. 15
VENDOR TOTAL 26. 14
B2025 BENNETT , CAT�Y 55382 05y13/97 05/13/97 76.59
VENDOR TOTAL 76.59
B2050 BEST BUY CO. , INC. 55383 05y13y97 0�/05/v/ 86.20
VENDOR TOTAL 86.20
B���� ETTENDRR K
QRF ROHEN05/13/
O* 55384 97 04/24/97 450.O0
^�:(3111:-.,' B
�� VENDOR TOTAL 450.00
B3200 BOB'S PERSONAL COFFEE* 55385 05/13/97 99212 04y28y97 25.99
VENDOR TOTAL 25.99
B6820 BRENNAN, TIM 55386 O5/13/97 05/01y97 21 .85
V+*DOR TOTAL 21 .85
B7020 BROCK WHITE COMPANY , * 55387 05/13/97 94265101 04/?4/97 82. 11
VENDOR TOTAL 82. 11
B7180 BUMPER TO BUMPER 55388 05/13/97 D55118 04/24/97 15.86
55388 05/13/97 D55231 04/25/9/
55388 05/13y97 D54494 04/17/97 4.94
55388 05/13/97 D54493 04/17/97 50. 17
VENDOR TOTAL 66.28
C2090 CENTRAL STORES 55389 05/13/97 729044 04y22/97 3.96
VENDOR TOTAL 3.96
C2091 CENTURY FENCE COMPANY 55390 05/13/97 9380-C 04/22/97 420.00
VENDOR TOTAL 420.00
C5845 COMPUTOSERVICE, INC. 05/13/97 54.00
111
PAGE 3 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER
AP�C10- 1 MOUNDS VIEW
VENDOR CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE :
NO VENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT
VENDOR TOTAL 51 .00
C6000 COPY SALES , INC. 55392 05/13/97 13113A 1 04/21 /97 45.60
55392 05/13/97 054076 1 04/30/97 136.47
VENDOR TOTAL 182.07
C6010 CORPORATE EXPRESS 55393 05/13/97 13860230 04/29/97 184.29
VENDOR TOTAL 184.29
C7000 CROSS NURSERIES, INC 55394 05y 219 04/11/97 670.42
V�NDO� TOTAL 670.42
D0700 D�VIES WATER EQUIPMEN* 5539� 05/13/97 826�2 0�/28y9� 5.0�
55395 05/13/97 82431 04y22/9/ 42.09
VENDOR TOTAL 47. 16
D1925 DEHN OIL COMPANY 55396 05y13/97 4316 04y24/97 4550.00
VENDOR TOTAL 455O.00
E4975 EN POINTE TECHNOLOGIE* 55397 05y13/97 383875 04/10/9/ 118.24
55397 05/13/97 385094 O4/14/97 78.83
55397 05/13/97 389359 04y22/97 57. 16
VENDOR TOTAL 254 .23
E EVERGREEN LAND SERVIC* 55398 0�/13y97 6936 04/18/9/ 303.50
110
F3596 FINANCE DEPARTMENT - * 55399 05/13/97 05/13/97 ?5.00
VENDOR TOTAL 25.00
F5200 P. E . FOOSHE' CO. 554O0 05/13/97 O4/17/97 60O.00
VENDOR TOTAL 6O0.00
F6895 FRIENDLY CHEVROLET GE* 55401 05/13/97 105295 04/29/97 18.74
VENDOR TOTAL 18.74
G6755 W W GRAINGER INC 55402 05/13/97 497-994060-0 04/17/97 132.88
VENDOR TOTAL 132.88
H0575 HANGGI , WILLIAM 55403 05/13y97 05y13/97 70.00
VENDOR TOTAL 7O.00
H7000 HYDRAULIC SPECIALTY C* 55404 05y13/97 18845 04/23/97 24.35
VENDOR TOTAL 24.35
I1000 ICMA MEMBERSHIP RENEW* 55405 05/13/97 192860 05/13y9/ 295.73
VENDOR TOTAL 295.73
I5800 IRONDALE HIGH SCHOOL 55406 05y13/97 04/17/97 450.00
VENDOR TOTAL 450.00
����
��
PAGE 4 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER
AP�C1O-01 MQUNDS VIEW
VENDOR CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE '
a
VENDOR NAME NUMBER NMBR DATE AMOUNT
J0020 J . BROWN & ASSOCIATES 55407 05/13/97 970403 04/23/97 300.00
VENDOR TO / AL 300 .00
1035 KERR TRANSPORTATIQN S* 55408 05/13/9/ 9 I54 04/15/97 118.56
VENDOR TOTAL 118.56
L0245 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES %* 55409 05y13y97 04/23/97 170.03
VENDOR TOTAL 170.03
L0254 LEAGUE Oh MN CITIES I* 55410 05/13/9/ 05/13/97 947.98
V+NDOR TOTAL 947.98
L1870 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA C* 55411 05/13/97 3991 04/29/97 145.00
VENDOR TOTAL 145.00
M0265 M R SIGN 55412 05/13/97 82486 04/24/97 523.67
VENDOR TOTAL 523.67
M0300 M R P A 55413 05/13/97 O5/13/97 50.00
VENDOR TOTAL 50.00
M0330 MAC QUEEN EQUIPMENT I* 55414 05y13/97 29/05471 04/24/97 125.32
VENDOR TOTAL 125.32
MAINTENANCE ENGINEERI* 55415 05/13/97 1659015 04/21y97 56.96
VENDOR TOTAi 56.96
M0750 MASYS CORPORATION 55416 05/13y97 7239 05/01y97 623.69
VENDOR TOTAL 623.69
M1001 MCI 55417 05y13y97 04/16/97 115.46
VENDOR TOTAL 115.46
M2170 METRO. COUNCIL ENVIRO* 55418 05/13/97 51320697 05/01/97 60132.00
VENDOR TOTAL 60132.00
M3422 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY 55419 05/13/97 32491 04/28y97 59.25
VENDOR TOTAL 59.25
M3442 MIDWEST ASPHAL ! CORPO* 55420 05y13y97 25265MB 04y29/97 159.83
VENDOR TOTAL 159.83
M3875 MINN CHIEFS OF POLICE* 55421 05/13/97 693 0�/30/97 28.63
VENDOR TOTAL 28.63
M3920 MINNESOTA CONAY 55422 05/13/97 5M3504 2961 04/29/97 15.60
55422 05/13y97 5M3504 2959 04/29/9/ 55.65
5�422 05/13/97 5M3504 2962 04/29/97 260.02
55422 05/13y9/ 5M3504 2963 04y29/97 28.65
•
PAGE 5 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER
\P�C10-01 MOUNDS VIEW
VENDOR CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE
NO VENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT
4����� VENDOR TOTAL 359'92
M5600 MONOTRADE COMPANIES 55423 05/13/97 47048 04/30y97 3279.75
VENDOR TOTAL 3779.75
M6000 MOUNDS VIEW CITY OF 55424 05/13/97 05/13y97 1110.21
VLNDOR TOTAL 1110.21
N0050 N E P CORPORATION 55426 05y13y97 0235�O 03/28y97 �5.70
VENDOR TOTAL 45.70
N2180 NEW BRIGHTON/MOUNDS V* 55427 05/13/97 1085 04/17/97 250.00
V�NDOR T�TAL 25O.00
N3535 NORTH METRO MnYORS AS* 55428 05y13/97 950206 05y01 /97 50.72
VENDOR TOTAL 50.72
N4200 NORTHERN STATES POWER* 55429 05/13/97 05/13/9/ 2385.81
55429 05/13/97 05y13/9/ 4482.67
VENDOR TOTAL. 6868.48
N4220 NORTHWEST YOUTH & FAM* 55432 05y13y97 05/13/97 3579.75
V�NDOR TOTAL 3579.75
O OFFICEMAX CREDIT P| AN 5543 05/13y97 05/05/9/ 17 .53
41� VENDOR TOTAL 17.53
��
O7550 ORKIN EXTERMINATING C* 55434 05/13y7 10364176 05y06/97 41 .54
VENDOR TOTAL 41 .54
P0588 PARK �U1-0 BODY 55435 05/13/97 04/29/97 558.71
VENDOR TOTAL 558.71
P5915 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE, * 55436 05/13y9/ 110449 04/30/97 34.98
VENDOR TOTAL 34.98
P6875 PRINTMASTER PRINTING 55437 05/13/9/ 24331 04/30/97 641 .39
5543/ 05/13/9/ 24308 04/22/97 128. 97
VENDOR TOTAL 770.36
R0560 RAMACHER, TlMOTHY 55438 05/13/97 05/13/97 82.71
Vt:NDOR TOTAL 82.71
R0860 R�MSEY COUNTY TREASUR* 55439 05/13y97 05/13y97 15652.29
VENDOR TOTAL 15652.29
R0865 RAMSEY COUNTY 55440 05/13y9/ D01397 42100 04y22/97 15339.75
55440 05/13/97 K02634 40504 03/19/97 328.32
VENDOR TOTAL 15668.07
PAGE 6 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK REGISTER
AP�C10-01 MOUNDS VIEW
VENDOR CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE
ND VENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT
R5111 ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTc2,* 55441 05/13/97 74583 04/24/97 27. 15
VENDOR TOTAL 27. 15
S0500 ST. CROIX RECREATION * 55442 05/13/97 10291 04/29y97 1112.91
VENDOR TOTAL 1112.91
S0675 ST . PAUL , CITY OF 55443 05/13/97 047769 04/14/97 Sc::: .00
55443 05/13/97 047690 04/09/97 70.92
55443 05/13y97 047667 04/09/97 1808.37
VENDOR TOTAL 1959.29
S0950 DONALD SALVERDA & ASS* 55444 05/13y97 0-6551 04/22y97 2210.08
55444 05/13/97 G-6549 04/22/97 1985. 19
VENDOR TOTAL 4195.57
E1100 SARAH'S DANCE 5544� 05/13y9/ 05/13y97 280 . 00
VENDOR TOTAL 280.00
S2060 SERCO LABS 55446 0�/13/9/ 51552 04y30/9/ 77.00
VENDOR TOTAL 77.00
S3300 SHRED- IT 55447 05/13/97 8204 04/30/97 45. 00
VENDOR TOTAL 45.00
S SNYDER'S DRUG STORES,* 55448 0�/13/97 12/12/ 6 8.43
�� 55448 05y13/97 0/29/96 3.47
�
�� 55448 05/13/9/ 12y05/96 22.50
55448 0�/13/97 11 /18/96 2 .33
55448 05/13/97 50�4-00O036 C�/30/97 53. 11
55448 05/l3/97 10/21/96 5.85
VENDOR TDTAL 95.69
S6161 SPORTIME 04/28/97 106. 17
VENDOR TOTAL 106. 17
87350 STRAIT STUFF 55450 05/13/97 56219 04/16/97 6871 .85
VENDOR TOTA| 6871 .85
87400 STREICHER'S PROF. POL* 55452 05/13/97 IN.85261 . 1 04/30/97 85.30
VENDOR TOTAL 85.30
T7100 T. W. TRYBUS & ASSOCI* 55453 0�/13/97 97115-414 04/25/97 175.00
VENDOR TOTAL 175.00
U04O0 U S WEST 55454 05/13/97 05/13y97 75.62
VENDOR TOTAL 75.62
U28O0 ULTRA RIBBONS , INC 55455 0'0/13/97 158473 04/21 /97 165 .90
VENDOR TOTAL 165.90
����
��
PAGE 7 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECK RESISTER
AP.7C10-01 MOUNCS VIEW
VENDOR CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE
ND ENDOR NAME NUM8ER DA-IF INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE* 55456 05/13/97 740083282 04/30/97 208.88
55456 05y13y97 740082317 04/23y9/ 141 . 10
VENDOR TOTAL 349.98
W0449 WAI CONTINUJM 55458 05/13/97 4475 04/16/97 1879.87
VENDOR TOTAL 1879.87
W0700 WASTE MANAGEMEN | - BL* 55459 05/13/97 899-872465 04/25/97 766. 16
VENDOR | OTAL �66. 16
GRAND TOTAL 144429.84
I
PAGE 1 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PRE-PAID CHECK REGIS
AP�C10-O2 MOUNDS VIEW
VENDO� CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE
ND VENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE nMOUNT
�
P0� ��N� P E I P 54949 04/24y97 04/24y97 13088. 17
VENDOR TOTAL 13088. 17
W1919 WESTERN BANK 54950 04/24/97 04/24y97 3373.30
�4950 O�/24/97 04/24/97 917.59
54950 04y23y97 04/23/97 61181 . 10
5�950 04/24/97 04/24y97 25962.31
VENDOR TOTAL 91434.30
I0082 ICMA RETIRFMEN | TRUST* 5i951 04/23/97 04/23/97 122.37
VENDOR TOTAL 122.37
P7900 PUB EMPLOYEES RETIREM* 54952 04/23y97 04/23/97 75.00
VENDOR TOTAL 75.00
P0050 P E I P 54953 04y24/97 04/24/97 320.07
VENDOR TOTAL 320.07
A00O8 AARP �4954 04/23/97 04/23/97 176.O0
VENDOR TOTAL 176.00
22240 PINSKE, JERRY 54955 04/23/97 04/23/9/ 30.00
VENDOR TOTAL 30.00
PUB EMPLOYEES RETIREM* 04y23/97 04/23/97 5666. 19
IIP
VENDOR TOTAL 5666. 19
B6919 STATF CAPITOL CREDIi * 54959 04y28/97 04/28/97 10325.62
VENDOR TOTAL 10325.62
K1O00 KENNEDY & GRAVEN 54960 04/28/97 0�/28/97 1500.00
VENDOR TOTAL 1500 .00
73208 MILLER, GARY 54961 04/28y97 04/28/97 37493.91
VENDOR TOTAL 37493.91
M6000 MOUNDS VIEW, CITY OF 54962 04/28/97 04/28/97 281 .50
VENDOR TOTAL 281 .50
U0300 U S POSTMASTER 54963 04/28/97 04/28/97 9�0.00
VLNDOR TOTAL 940.00
08208 MORGAN, LYNNETTL 54964 04/28/97 04/28/97 559.50
VENDOR TOTAL 559.50
54311 DEPAR ( MEN1 - * 54965 04/28/97 04y28/97 306.�0
54966 04/28/97 04/28/97 245.00
VENDOR TOTAL 551 .50
R0865 RAMSFY COUNTY 5496/ 04/28/97 04/28/97 166.65
PAGE 2 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE PRE-PAID CHECK REGIS
AP�C10-{)2 MOUNDS VIEW
VENDOR CHECK CHECK INVOICE INVOICE
NO VENDOR NAME NUMBER DATE INVOICE NMBR DATE AMOUNT
• 54968 04/28/97 04/28/97 322.96
VENDOR TOTAL 489.61
N0010N A C C E D 54969 04/29/97 04/29/97 40.00
VENDOR TOTAL 40.00
M3411 MICRON ELECTRONICS, I* 54970 04/30/97 04/30/97 157.62
VENDOR TOTAL 157.62
E4838 ELGIN SWEEPFR COMPANY 54971 04/30/97 04/30/97 50.00
VENDOR TOTAL 50.00
K1991 KESSEL, BRUCE 54972 04/30y97 04/30/97 305.�0
VENDOR T�TAL 305.50
H5969 HUBER, RON 54973 04/30/97 04/30/97 383.50
VENDOR TOTAL 383.50
03185 OFFICE DEPO ) , INC. 54974 05y02y97 05/02/97 119.33
VENDOR TOTAL 119.33
75113 BORG, DOUGLAS 54975 05/02197 05/02/97 129.82
VENDOR TOTAL 129.82
KENNEDY & GRAVEN 54976 05/02/97 05/02/97 591 / .08
��� VENDOR TOTAL 5917.08
D5200 DONATELLF'S SUPPER CL* 54977 05/02/97 05y02/97 46.53
V�NDOR TOTAL 46.53
AO950 �DVANCE WIRELESS COMM* 5497Q 05/02/9/ 05/02y97 992.2�
V�NDOR TOTAL 997.25
7�112 BANK UNITED 54979 05/O6/9� 05/O6y9/ 295.23
VENOOR TOTAL 295.23
M3983 MINNESOT� DARE 54980 05/O6/9/ 05/06y97 46.26
VENDOR TOTAL 46.26
81001 SAM'S CLUB 5q956 04/23/97 ��/23/97 66. 15
VENDOR TOTAL 66. 15
GRAND TOTAL 171603.01
Item No. 7
Staff Report No. '—
Meeting Date: May 12, 1997
Type of Business: Proclamation
• 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: Proclamation of "National Public Works Week"
Date of Report: May 7, 1997
In 1964 President John F. Kennedy proclaimed National Public Works Week as an annual
reminder of the many ways public Works contributes to our quality of life. For many years,
public works professionals across North America have applauded and shared the
accomplishments of those in their profession During this week-long celebration,professionals
take part in events and activities that increase public awareness of and appreciation for the public
works profession.
Staff requests the Mayor read and adopt the accompanying proclamation, proclaiming May 18
through May 24, 1997 as National Public Works Week in the City of Mounds View. During this
week residents may visit the Public Works Facility. This is also the time in which tours of the
municipal buildings are given to the Pinewood Elementary students.
•
Staff will also continue the open house on May 31, 1997,the day in which the Annual Clean Up
Day is held. Residents are encouraged to tour the facility, view various pieces of equipment, visit
with operators, and enjoy refreshments. The Public Works staff take pride in their service to the
community, and is proud to provide assistance and education to the citizens of Mounds View
regarding the role we play in their daily living.
K-7
Mi ael Ulrich, Director of Public Works
•
•
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS,public works services provided in our community are an integral part of our citizens'
everyday lives; and
WHEREAS,the support of an understanding and informed citizenry is vital to the efficient operation
of public works systems and programs such as water, sewers, streets and highways,public buildings,
and solid waste collection; and
WHEREAS, the health, safety, and comfort of this community greatly depends on these facilities
and services; and
WHEREAS, the quality and effectiveness of these facilities, as well as their planning, design, and
construction is vitally dependent upon the efforts and skill of public works officials; and
WHEREAS, the efficiency of the qualified and dedicated personnel who staff public works
departments is materially influenced by the people's attitude and understanding of the importance
of the work they perform,
•
NOW,THEREFORE, I,Duane McCarty, Mayor of the City of Mounds View, do hereby proclaim
the week of May 18 through May 24, 1997 as
"NATIONAL PUBLIC WORKS WEEK"
in The City of Mounds View, and I call upon all citizens and civic organizations to acquaint
themselves with the issues involved in providing our public works and to recognize the contributions
which public works officials make every day to our health, safety, comfort, and quality of life:
Given under my hand and Seal of the City of Mounds View, this 12th day of May, 1997.
(SEAL)
Duane McCarty, Mayor
•
97- 93 C.-
• Resolution No. 5117
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
County of Ramsey
State of Minnesota
A resolution setting forth a tentative timetable for preparing and adopting the 1998 budget
and long term financial plan.
WHEREAS, the City's Charter and Code, as well as State Statutes set forth various
requirements for considering and adopting the City's budget; and
WHEREAS, Section 7.04 of the City Charter requires the City Clerk-Administrator to submit to
the Council a budget calendar to be established by resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of Mounds View,
Minnesota that the following budget and long term financial plan calendar is hereby adopted:
May 12 City Council adopts budget calendar.
By June 16 Departments submit proposed 1998 budget& LTFP to Finance.
June 16 -,July 11 Finance Dept. and City Administrator review budgets & LTFP.
July 14 - August 1 Dept. heads review budgets <FP.
• August 4 - Sept 5 Council review of budget and LTFP:
August 4th work session
August 11th 4:30 to 6:30 p.m.
August 18th special work session
September 2 work session
September 8 Council adopts preliminary budget and maximum levy.
Sept 8 - Oct 3 Additional Council meetings as needed.
October 17 City distributes budget newsletter.
October 27 Council holds informational meeting on the 1997 budget& LTFP.
November 29 to Truth in taxation hearing and adoption of 1998 budget,tax levy and
December 20 LTFP (dates dependent upon County& School District selected
dates).
Adopted this 12th day of May, 1997.
Duane McCarty, Mayor
ATTEST:
• Charles Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No. 532>
Staff Report No. 9?-
• Meeting Date: 5-12-97
Type of Business: CA
WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing;
CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mayor and City C ncil
From: Lynnette Morga /�'`
Item Title/Subject: Approve Personnel Consultant Services with Leadership of the Twin
Cities
Date of Report: May 8, 1997
As discussed at the May 5, 1997 worksession, several organizational changes have occurred over
the past 2 years which has put a strain on employee communication,responsibilities, moral and
productivity among and between all parties.
As a result of the above situation,three consultants were conducted regarding possible remedies.
Out of the three consultants, it was determined that James Arnott of Twin City Leadership would
best meet the needs of the City both financially as well as conceptually. References highly
recommend his service and indicated his work was positively received by all levels of staff. His
services have been utilized by several public section organizations including Ramsey County and
the Cities of Minneapolis and New Brighton.
Staff is recommending Leadership of the Twin Cities to provide personnel services at a cost of
$4,700.
•
Item No. •
Staff Report No. '1 ii c.
Meeting Date: May 12, 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: Purchase of Waste Oil Tank
Date of Report: May 7, 1997
Discussed at the May Council Work session was the purchase of a new waste oil tank. The new
tank would provide the fuel capacity required to heat the Public Works Facility for the winter
season. Staff recommended funding the purchase by three contingency funds, Water Wastewater
and General fund. The requested amount is $11,200.00. Removal of the 500 gallon underground
tank would also be performed in this project.
Staff is recommending that$3,733.00 be transferred from the three previously mentioned
contingency funds to capital accounts within those budgets.
If Council has any questions regarding this report, please feel free to call me.
Mic ael Ulrich, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: Council approve the purchase of a new waste oil tank and the removal
of the existing 500 gallon underground tank. The project would be funded by the transfer of
$3,733.00 from Wastewater Contingency Acc't No. 730-4123-910 to Wastewater Acc't No. 730-
4123:•703 Equipment and Infrastructure Maintenance, $3,733.00 from Water Contingency Acc't
No. 700-4123-910 to Water Acc't No.700-4123-703 Equipment and Infrastructure Maintenance,
$3,733.00 from General Contingency Acc't No. 100-4700-910 to Fleet Services Acc't No. 100-
4460-703 Buildings and Grounds
Item No. 10 (1.05)
Staff Report No.97 (9096 C
Meeting Date: 5/12/97
Type of Business: Public Hearing
WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing;
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: Public hearing and consideration of Resolution No. 5104 adopting a
comprehensive plan amendment from Medium Density Residential to
Mixed Use PUD for Commercial Uses on the O'Neil property, 2430
Highway 10, and including revisions to the map and text for Planning
District 1; Planning Case No. 471-97
Date of Report: May 9, 1997
Summary:
The applicant, Anthony Properties Management, Inc., is requesting approval for an amendment to
the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan for the O'Neil Property. The O'Neil property is located at
2430 Highway 10, and is bounded by Highway 10, Long Lake Road, and County Road H2. It
includes approximately 24 acres. The amendment as requested would change the Comp Plan
designation on the O'Neil property from medium density residential (3-6 units per acre)to mixed
• use PUD, which would allow commercial and office development. The applicant is also
proposing, in a separate application, to rezone the O'Neil property to allow development of a 16-
screen movie theater and three 11,000 square foot office buildings. The rezoning application is
inconsistent with the current Comp Plan designation, but would be consistent with the proposed
designation.
Staff is recommending that if the designation is changed, it be divided into two types:
• an area approximately 150 feet deep along County Road H2 which would be designated as
Mixed Use PUD-lower intensity, defined as allowing duplex and multi-family housing up
to 8 units per acre and offices
• the remainder of the property which would be designated as Mixed Use PUD-higher
intensity, defined as allowing commercial uses and multi-family housing up to 20 units per
acre
The Mounds View Comprehensive Plan divides the City into 12 planning districts. The O'Neil
property is located in District 1. Staff is recommending that changes be made to the text for
District 1, the planning district in which the O'Neil property is located, as part of this Comp Plan
amendment.
Discussion
. The question before the City Council is whether the Comprehensive Plan, which is intended to
guide future development of the City, should be amended to change the expectations for the
O'Neil property from residential to commercial uses. In particular, the applicant is seeking to
develop entertainment-type commercial use (movie theaters) and offices. The current designation
'
City of Mounds View Staff Report
May 9, 1997
Page 2 •
on the property(medium density residential)was established in 1979 with adoption of the latest
version of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Since 1979, several efforts were undertaken to update
the Comprehensive Plan. These are noted in Attachment 1. In summary, since 1979,
consideration has been given to retaining the medium density residential designation, and to
changing it to highway commercial, mixed use low and medium density residential, office park,
corporate headquarters office or townhomes. The current designation is 18 years old. It is also
inconsistent with the current zoning. According to Minnesota State law, zoning takes precedence
over comprehensive plan designations. Unless the zoning is changed from commercial to
residential, the most likely use of 17 acres of this property is commercial.
The property is situated between an existing single family residential neighborhood and Highway
10, which carries approximately 40,000 trips per day. Highway 10 is the only commercial
corridor in Mounds View. Other than scattered neighborhood businesses, all commercial
properties are along this roadway. The O'Neil property is the largest undeveloped piece of land
in single ownership on Highway 10. It is a significant property, and offers a range of
opportunities for the community.
The current Comprehensive Plan indicates that it should be developed as medium density
residential, which the plan indicates is 3-6 units per acre. This density range is equivalent to single
family homes. There are several issues related to this designation. •
1. Need to Buffer: The current designation provides an important buffer between the
existing single family residential neighborhood to the south and the Highway 10 corridor,
by extending the same type of development onto this parcel. It appears the intent was to
tie the O'Neil parcel to the existing residential area. Under this approach, it is to be
expected that the development would be oriented away from the highway. It is staff's
view that the reason there has been"debate" about the designation on the O'Neil property
since 1979 is that it is sitting between the highway corridor and a single family
neighborhood. There have been shifts back and forth between using the highway and
using the adjacent neighborhood as the key to the future use of the parcel.
The recommended proposal for the Comp Plan designation would restrict the area
abutting County Road H2 to low intensity uses to preserve a buffer for the adjacent
neighborhood.
2. Inconsistency between Comp Plan and Zoning: As is noted above, the Comp Plan
designation for approximately 17 acres of the O'Neil property is inconsistent with the
zoning in terms of use (residential versus commercial). The proposed amendment would
bring consistency between the Comp Plan and the zoning.
3. Suitability for Single Family Residential: There is some question whether it is appropriate
to put single family residential adjacent to Highway 10. If a single family residential •
development were built, it is likely that it would be"walled off" from the highway tocreate
a liveable environment. The result would be blank face or dead spot in the middle of the
"community center" district and along the highway.
City of Mounds View Staff Report
May 9, 1997
Page 3
• 4. Value as Commercial Property: The O'Neil parcel is prime commercial property with its
frontage along the Highway 10, given the premium placed on visibility by high volumes of
traffic by commercial uses, and the availability of access from an arterial highway and the
I-35 corridor. The market for neighborhood or community retail commercial is weak, as
evidenced by the vacancies in the Mounds View Square Shopping Center and Silver View
Plaza and as reported in a recent market study by Towle Real Estate for the Highway 10
corridor in Mounds View. This application indicates that there is market interest in the
property for specialty commercial development.
5. Effect on City's Tax Base:
■ If the property were developed as single family residential, it would cost the City
more in services than it will generate in revenue. If it were developed as
commercial it would generate more revenue than it will cost in services.
• When looking at the overall picture, the City has a very limited amount of land in
commercial zoning or commercial uses (3.9% in 1990), and an extensive amount
of land in single family residential (45.1% in 1990). One possible goal of land use
planning is to balance the types of land uses to create a sustainable economy and a
reasonable level of taxes for services. Commercial uses pay more property taxes
than does single family residential development. Commercial uses which attract
• customers from a wider area than the City's boundaries import dollars, and may
create additional spending at other Mounds View businesses such as restaurants.
They may prompt additional commercial development which also adds to the tax
base.
The Comprehensive Plan does not address entertainment uses as a category of
commercial uses. Entertainment uses have the potential for creating additional
spending, more so than neighborhood or community retail businesses.
■ If this property is used for single family residential development, there is no other
property in terms of location and size that could be switched from residential to
commercial to compensate. There will be a net loss in commercial land in the City,
which creates consequences for the overall tax base for financing city services.
The 1979 Comprehensive Plan includes policies encouraging development of the City's
tax base.
6. Compatibility of Uses;Protection of Residential Neighborhoods: The placement of
different uses adjacent to one another may cause impacts and incompatibilities.
Commercial uses are often seen as creating compatibility problems for adjacent residential
neighborhoods. Creating two Comp Plan designations on this property, which would limit
• the area along County Road H2 to low intensity uses, addresses the issue of compatibility
of land uses.
•
City of Mounds View Staff Report
May 9, 1997
Page 4
•
Staff feels that the change in designation from medium density residential to mixed use PUD
presents a number of economic benefits to the community, and is a better use of this property than
its current designation or its current zoning as long as potential impacts on the adjacent
residential neighborhood are addressed and mitigated. As is noted earlier, creating two Comp
Plan designations on this property, which would limit the area along County Road H2 to low
intensity uses, is intended to addresses the issue of compatibility of land uses. In addition, using a
designation which indicates that a Planned Unit Development process is to be used, also allows
compatibility and project design to be addressed in a much more effective way.
Process for Amendment:
The City's Municipal Code does not include criteria for the review of comprehensive plan
amendments. Staff is suggesting that the City Council use the general land use goals and policies,
contained on pages 55-56 of the Comprehensive Plan, as a guide to whether the change from
medium density residential to mixed use PUD still fits within the broad parameters of what the
City views as desirable. Suggested findings relative to these goals and policies are noted under
the fifth WHEREAS clause on page 2 of Resolution No. 5104 (see attached). Staff is also
suggesting that a finding be made whether this proposed change creates greater consistency
between the City's Comprehensive Plan designation and the zoning designation on this property
(see the WHEREAS clause on page 3 of Resolution 5104).
A revised map for District 1 is included as Exhibit 1 to the resolution; the revised text is included
•
as Exhibit 2 to the resolution. The existing text for District 1 is included as Attachment 2 to this
report.
The Comprehensive Plan is one of the fundamental policy documents used by cities to envision
their desired future. The comprehensive plan is a series of choices, and these choices have social,
economic and environmental consequences. In the area of land use, the plan is often used to
balance between community desires and the market place, which for the most part initiates,
finances and constructs development of homes, businesses, entertainment and leisure uses. Cities
can shape the character of their communities if they translate the vision in the comprehensive plan
into development regulations, which then molds what happens in the marketplace. The
marketplace, however, keeps moving and continues to bring ideas to communities which may not
have been anticipated by the plan or which differ from the plan. Plans need to be revisited, and
updated to keep pace as circumstances change or as opportunities arise. This request is coming
from the marketplace and presents opportunities and consequences. The City Council, after
hearing testimony from citizens, the applicant and staff, must judge whether this change in the
Comprehensive Plan designation for the O'Neil property works for Mounds View.
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission by a vote of 6-0, and the staff recommend approval of Resolution No.
5104 adopting a comprehensive plan amendment from Medium Density Residential to Mixed Use
PUD for Commercial Uses for the O'Neil Property, 2430 Highway 10, and revisions to the text
for Planning District 1, and shown in Exhibits 1 and 2 of the Resolution.
•
City of Mounds View Staff Report
May 9, 1997
Page 5
• Attachment 1
History of Efforts to Update the
Mounds View Comprehensive Plan
The 1979 Comprehensive Plan(approved by the City Council on July 26, 1982) divided the City
into 12 planning districts, and included a map showing proposed land use for each district. The
O'Neil property is located in District 1. The 1979 map shows this property proposed for medium
density residential development.
From this point, a series of efforts were undertaken to update the Comprehensive Plan and gain
consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and zoning, which are described in below. We have
included this history to give the Planning Commission an indication of the thinking which has
occurred about District 1 and the O'Neil property.
• 1983: A series of Planning Commission discussions were held on lots where the zoning
and comprehensive plan designations were in conflict, in particular along Highway 10. It
is not known how the situation on the O'Neil property was viewed.
■ 1986-1989: The Comprehensive Plan Update '88 was prepared and a series of joint City
Council and Planning Commission meetings were held on this document. The copies on
• file do not have district maps with land use. The differences between comprehensive plan
designations and zoning designations is discussed as an issue, and the list of properties in
this situation includes the O'Neil property. There is a discussion of the problems
associated with down zoning properties. The 1988 Update includes a Trunk Highway 10
Corridor Plan which places the O'Neil property in the"Community Center District".
Revised text for District 1 was prepared in 1989, which said much less than the earlier
description. Not adopted.
■ 1990: A Comprehensive Plan Update '90 was prepared and transmitted to the City
Council and Planning Commission on July 13, 1990. The O'Neil property was shown for
highway commercial and medium density residential with the dividing line being more-or-
less the dividing line between the two zoning districts on the property. Not adopted.
• 1991: New maps were prepared for the districts, showing the O'Neil property as"Mixed
Use -LD/MD" for the O'Neil property, or low density and medium density residential.
(See Attachment 5.) The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 318-91
recommending to the City Council adoption of the plan dated August 1991. This plan
included the following guideline:
"The existing City government offices,community parks and recreational areas
should serve as the area to be identified as City Center,the focal point of the
community. This component of the City would also be a suitable location for
• additional office park facilities,should the market support such expansion."
City of Mounds View Staff Report
May 9, 1997
Page 6 .
Not adopted.
■ 1993-1994: Mounds View Focus 2000 Implementation Plan, prepared in September
1994, included the following goal:
Create a redevelopment plan for Highway 10 as a community oriented boulevard.
The 1994 Action Steps included:
Create a Highway 10 Redevelopment Task Force or related task force under the Economic
Development Authority to develop a long range strategic plan for the redevelopment of
Highway 10.
Complete an inventory of properties along Highway 10,noting zoning,use,activity,and
property condition.
Evaluate long and short term uses and recommend changes.
■ 1994-1995: The Highway 10 Redevelopment Plan prepared by a task force with
representatives from the Economic Development Commission, Planning Commission and
Parks and Recreation Commission, and forwarded to City Council. The task force
recommended that the O'Neil property be developed as light commercial use such as a •
corporate headquarter/office campus setting or townhomes.
In summary, the designation in the adopted Comprehensive Plan for the O'Neil property is
medium density residential. This designation is 18 years old. Since 1979, consideration has been
given to retaining the medium density residential designation, and to changing it to highway
commercial, mixed use low and medium density residential, office park, corporate headquarters
office, or townhomes. The issue ranked as most important in the 1988 Comprehensive Plan
Update, based on a series of Planning Commission workshops, was:
"The function of Trunk Highway 10 needs to be determined e.g.,strip commercial corridor,
community commercial district,highway service district,subregional commercial center,or
residential district."
Suffice it to say, the future development of the Highway 10 corridor including the O'Neil
property, has been under discussion for an extended time.
•
City of Mounds View Staff Report
• May 9, 1997
Page 7
•
Attachment 2
Existing Wording for Text for District 1
Mounds View Comprehensive Plan
District 1, generally referred to as City Center, currently encompasses the Civic Center, the
Mounds View square Shopping Center, several isolated commercial uses, high density residential
development and a vast amount of yet undeveloped land. Mounds View is somewhat unique in
that approximately one-quarter of its land area remains undeveloped, a significant proportion of
this land lies within the central core of the community, offering Mounds View the valuable
opportunity of creating a strong, vital, identifying community focal point, which can potentially
serve to integrate and better relate the two sections of the City fragmented by Highway 10. In
order to serve this function, District 1 should contain a mix of commercial, public, low, medium
and high density residential and open space uses. To help ensure that future development is
consistent with community goals, the remaining undeveloped land should be developed on a
stage, planned unit basis. Development of the are defined by Silver Lake Road, Highway 10 and
County Road H-2 should respect the existing natural amenities (vegetative cover) and low land
(swamp) areas. Development should also include provisions for dedication of land to a
pedestrian/bicycle trail system which can tie the various elements of the Center together and
provide connection to a community-wide system of trails. Vehicular circulation should be
• developed according to a ring road concept to keep major traffic flow on the periphery of the City
Center. Access to Highway 10 should be limited and concentrated. Relative to general use
patterns, commercial and medium density residential development should be located in proximity
to Highway 10, with a decrease in intensity of use occurring outward from the highway toward
the lower density residential neighborhoods to the south and west. The service station to the
north of Highway 10 and east of Long Lake Road should be considered for park land to restore
peripheral continuity to the present Civic Center site. The presently vacant parcel between
Greenfield Avenue and Jackson Street should be developed as high density residential. As part of
the development of this parcel, adequate open space and landscaping should be an integral part of
the development scheme.
While some commercial development can and should occur south of Highway 10, the major
commercial focus should be the existing shopping center. The primary focus of public use should
be the Civic Center, with a secondary focus provided by Silver View Park located south of old
Highway 10, east of Silver Lake Road.
The mixed PUD and medium density PUD properties are constrained with attractive natural
features and access limitations to old Highway 10, yet generally undisturbed relative to existing
development patterns. The PUD approach was utilized in attempting to resolve land use and
circulation questions. The conceptual circulation system as indicated on page 96, does provide
additional access to old Highway 10, though is generally designed to funnel traffic to major streets
and does not permit any direct land access to Highway 10 characteristics of strip commercial.
• This design is intended to permit Highway 10 to function like a"main street" without the inherent
congestion and traffic circulation conflicts. Land uses proposed for these areas include
commercial adjacent to Highway 10 and county road intersections and generally low to medium
City of Mounds View Staff Report
May 9, 1997
Page 8 •
density residential in the central area. Silver View Park is the predominant land use comprising
nearly 35 acres, of which 12 acres are lake. Silver View park is proposed to be a community
park, including both recreational and open space amenities. Given its size and location, this
feature should aid greatly in the task of providing identity and focus to the City Center area.
Finally, an area of nearly 20 acres located in the far southwestern corner of the district and cut off
by Silver View Park, is proposed to be developed as single family residential. This seems entirely
appropriate in that it is adjacent to other low density neighborhoods and is entirely buffered from
higher density/intensity uses by the park.
N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\DE VCASES\471-97\471-97.CC 1
•
RESOLUTION NO. 5104
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
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; AND INCLUDING REVISIONS TO THE MAP
AND TEXT FOR DISTRICT 1; PLANNING CASE NO. 471-97.
WHEREAS, Anthony Properties Management has applied for a comprehensive plan
amendment which would change the designation on the O'Neil Property from medium density
residential (3-6 units per acre) to mixed use commercial; and,
WHEREAS, the O'Neil property is described as follows:
Part lying southwesterly of centerline of STH No. 10 of southwest 1/4 of
northwest 1/4 (subject to roads, highway and easements) in Section 08,
Township 30, Range 23.
WHEREAS, Section 401.09 of the Mounds View Municipal Code states that the City has
. adopted the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Mounds View, dated 1979, as its plan for future
development and growth within the City; and,
WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Mounds View adopted the 1979 Comprehensive
Plan in 1982 by Resolution No. 1467; and,
WHEREAS, the 1979 Comprehensive Plan places the O'Neil Property in District 1 and
designates this property for medium density residential development; and,
WHEREAS,there have been four efforts to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan since 1979,
and the Highway 10 Redevelopment Study was prepared and considered by the City Council in 1995;
and,
WHEREAS, as part of these efforts, consideration has been given to various land uses for the
O'Neil property, including: highway commercial, mixed use low and medium density residential,
office park, corporate headquarters office, or townhomes; and,
WHEREAS, the existing Comprehensive Plan designation is 18 years old; and,
WHEREAS, District 1 is referred to as City (Village) Center, and the description in the
Comprehensive Plan for this district states that this area offers the community a valuable opportunity
of creating a strong, vital, identifying community focal point. It also states that commercial and
medium density residential development should be located in proximity to Highway 10, with a
decrease in intensity of use occurring outward from the highway toward the lower density residential
neighborhoods to the south and west; and,
City Council Resolution No. 5104
May 12, 1997
Page 2
WHEREAS, both the Comprehensive Plan and the current zoning on this property indicate
a need to provide buffering between land uses on the O'Neil property and the adjacent single family
residential neighborhood; and,
WHEREAS,the current zoning envisions approximately seven acres in duplex residential use
(R-2)in a strip along the southern edge of this property, and seventeen acres of commercial uses(B-
1) bordering Highway 10; and,
WHEREAS, Minnesota State Law gives precedence to zoning where there is a conflict
between a zoning designation and a comprehensive plan designation; and,
WHEREAS,the O'Neil property is one of the most significant parcels remaining available for
development in the Highway 10 corridor and in Mounds View, and presents the possibility of adding
to the City's tax base; and,
WHEREAS,the City Council makes the following findings that the proposed amendment is
consistent with the general land use goals and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan as
follows:
Goal 1. Develop a cohesive land use pattern which ensures compatibility and functional relationships
among activities and uses.
The change from medium density residential to mixed use PUD, allowing both commercial
and residential uses, will allow for flexibility in the City (Village) Center area. The
accompanying description of the types of land uses to be allowed requires that commercial
be included in the mixture and directs development toward destination-oriented commercial,
rather than local convenience commercial. This mixture will create a lively, vital activity
center at the heart of the community and brings a new, beneficial element to the land use mix
in Mounds View. The proposed amendment places this commercial activity center on
Highway 10,which is the major travel corridor through Mounds View, and across the street
from City Hall and the Mounds View Community Center, which will reinforce the City
(Village) Center idea. The land use description requires adequate buffering between this
property and the residential neighborhood to the south be provided by limiting the intensity
of uses in the area 150 feet from County Road H2, and by requiring a 50 foot buffer of
landscaping or tree cover if this area is used for commercial uses.
Goal 2. Maintain and,where necessary,upgrade land uses and environmental quality.
The policy under this goal directs attention to protecting integrated use districts (residential
neighborhoods, commercial centers, industrial parks) from penetration by through traffic.
The revisions to the text for District 1 indicate that, if commercial uses are developed in the •
area within 150 feet of County Road H2, that access to County Road H2 be restricted to
protect the neighborhood south of County Road H2 from through traffic. The substantial
City Council Resolution No. 5104
• May 12, 1997
Page 3
wetland on this property shall be preserved. The change from medium density residential to
mixed use PUD allowing both commercial and residential uses creates more possibilities for
reinforcing the idea of creating a vibrant City(Village) Center.
Goal 3. Preserve and protect property values.
The requirement that uses within 150 feet of County Road H2 be limited to lower intensity
uses, that a 50-foot buffer be provided if commercial uses are developed in this area, and that
the wetland be preserved will help preserve and protect the property values of surrounding
residential neighborhoods.
Goal 4. Ensure community development is compatible with features of the natural environment and is
accommodated without destroying desirable environmental features and natural amenities.
This comprehensive plan amendment includes a requirement that the substantial wetland on
the property be preserved from development, and that consideration shall be given to
preserving the tree cover on this parcel outside of development areas wherever possible.
Goal 5. Prevent development which is not accompanied by a sufficient level of supportive services and
facilities (utilities,parking, access,etc.)
The property is located on Highway 10,the major thoroughfare in Mounds View, and is also
bordered by Long Lake Road and County Road H2, both of which are collector streets.
Adequate opportunities for access are available. Water, sewer, storm sewer, gas and electric
lines are in place in the surrounding streets. Comments from the Mounds View Police
Department and the Blaine/Spring Lake Park/Mounds View Fire Department regarding need
for service would depend on specific land uses proposed and would be obtained at the time
of development review. Parking requirements also depend on the specific land uses proposed
and would be checked during development review.
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that the comprehensive plan amendment will
remove an inconsistency between the comprehensive plan designation and the zoning designation on
this property.
NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council does hereby
approve an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to designate the O'Neil property as Mixed Use
PUD (Commercial and Residential Uses) with a requirement that development be limited to lower
intensity uses in the area within 150 feet of County Road H2 as noted in Exhibit 1, attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference. Revisions to the text describing District 1 shall be made
as shown in Exhibit 2, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Uses suitable in the
lower intensity area are offices, single family detached homes, patio homes or duplex residential units
not exceeding 6 units to the acre, and parking and landscaping. Development in this area shall be
designed to provide a buffer of at least 50 feet in landscaping or tree coverage, and to restrict access
City Council Resolution No. 5104
May 12, 1997
Page 4
to County Road H2, if this area is used for commercial development to protect the single family
residential neighborhood south of County Road H2. Development on the O'Neil property shall
include commercial uses, and these uses shall be destination oriented, rather than local convenience
commercial uses since an adequate supply of such commercial uses have been developed in Mounds
View. The substantial wetland on this property shall be preserved from development, and
consideration shall be given to preserving the tree cover on this parcel outside of development areas
wherever possible.
Adopted this 12th day of May, 1997
Duane McCarty, Mayor
ATTEST:
Charles S. Whiting
City Clerk-Administrator
(SEAL)
N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\DEVCASES\471-97\CCRES.CP
• City Council Resolution No. 5104
May 12, 1997
Page 5
EXHIBIT 1
THIS MAP WILL BE DELIVERED TO YOU THIS WEEKEND
S
City Council Resolution No. 5104 i
May 12, 1997
Page 6
EXHIBIT 2
District 1 is intended to become the Village Center, or focal point for the community. It is envisioned
to be a strong, vital activity center in the heart of the community, where a complimentary,
coordinated mixture of uses will create a feeling of identity and enjoyment for residents and visitors.
It will provide places to live, work, shop and enjoy leisure-time pursuits. The creation of the Village
Center will build on existing uses which include the Mounds View City Hall and Community Center,
two community shopping centers, Mounds View Square and Silver View Plaza, the Silver Lake
Pointe and Wildwood Manor senior apartment developments,the single family homes and townhomes
in Silver Lake Woods, several large apartment developments including Scotland Green, Woodlawn
Terrace, Timberland Ridge, Greenfield Estates, Landmark Estates, The Sands, and Mounds View
Estates, individual retail businesses and restaurants along Highway 10, and neighborhood businesses
like Tom Thumb.
This district includes some significant natural resources and open space areas. Silver View Park, on
of the City's largest parks, is within walking distance from many areas of this district. It includes an
attractive lake with walking paths, athletic fields, and picnic and playground facilities. There are three
large wetlands, one located southeast of Silver View Road and Highway 10, one south of Highway
10 between Long Lake Road and County Road H2, and one next to the Mounds View Community 111/
Center. Two of these are State-protected, and all three are protected by local regulations. They will
remain important assets in the environmental quality of this district, and an appropriate setting around
each wetland needs to be preserved. The undeveloped land in this district is often wooded with
mature trees, and effort needs to be given to preserving as much of the forested character and natural
feel of these areas as is possible by how development is designed on these parcels.
Highway 10 presents a challenge to the creation of the Village Center, in that it cuts diagonally across
this district and the remainder of the community, and is used as a major route to move traffic through
the region. It carries a high volume of traffic during commute times, and the timing of the traffic
lights favors the highway rather than local traffic and pedestrians seeking to cross the highway at the
intersections. The Village Center offers the possibility of creating a meeting ground between the two
halves of the community, which will overcome the division created by the highway. It is the desire
of the community that Highway 10 become a boulevard that is rooted in Mounds View, and makes
the community visible rather ignoring or being oblivious to the community.
Vehicular circulation should be developed according to a ring road concept to keep major traffic flow
on the periphery of the Village Center. Access to Highway 10 should be limited and concentrated.
Relative to general use patterns, commercial and medium density residential development should be
located in proximity to Highway 10, with a decrease in intensity of use occurring outward from the
highway toward the lower density residential neighborhoods to the south and west. Development
should also include provisions for dedication of land to a pedestrian/bicycle trail system which can
tie the various elements of the Center together and provide connection to a community -wide system
of trails.
FAY
1•
City Council Resolution No. 5104
• May 12, 1997
Page 7
There are opportunities to enhance and further reinforce the opportunity to create a Village Center
in Mounds View through how vacant land in this district is developed, and through incorporating
design elements along Highway 10. There are two significant vacant areas which deserve mention.
Both of them are on Highway 10 and offer an opportunity to strengthen the City's economic base by
taking advantage of the strong desire in the business marketplace to located on a major thoroughfare.
• The first is bordered by Highway 10, Long Lake Road and County Road H2. This parcel
needs to be developed in a manner which maintains an open face to the Highway 10, and
creates a destination activity and meeting ground across from the Civic Center, so there is a
concentration of activity on both sides of the highway. Possibilities include entertainment
uses, restaurants, and unique shops. These uses could be combined with offices or higher
density residential to create a"village center" feeling. This parcel also presents a challenge
since it abuts a single family residential neighborhood on the south side. Care must be
exercised in providing an adequate buffer between the active uses located on this parcel and
this neighborhood, so the quality of life and peaceful enjoyment of their homes is not
disrupted. How the development is oriented, the location of access points, and the circulation
system to serve this parcel are critical to achieving this goal.
The district map shows two designations for this area. Both of them are for mixed use PUD
allowing a combination of residential and commercial uses, with the area approximately 150
feet deep along County Road H2 restricted to lower intensity uses. Lower intensity uses
would include duplex and townhouse-style, multi-family housing up to 8 units per acre and
office uses. If the lower intensity area is developed for non-residential uses, access to County
Road H2 shall be restricted and a buffer area of at least 50 feet shall be created which shall
be in landscaping or native tree cover.
• The second parcel is bounded by Highway 10, Silver Lake Road, the St. Paul Waterworks
ROW and existing businesses. A land use study and market analysis for this area has been
completed, and they included suggestions on the types of land uses which would be suitable
for these parcels. These uses included senior citizen housing, offices, restaurants, and high
impulse, convenience-type businesses. Attention needs to be given to how to create an
integrated, coordinated development which related to surrounding uses, makes connections
to the trail systems in Silver View Park and along Mounds View Drive, and uses the wetland
as an asset. It is important to avoid development which creates a row of independent
highway-oriented businesses along Highway 10 oblivious of their surroundings. This parcel
is at the point where the commercial development widens along Highway 10, as one enters
the City from the north. It needs to be treated as a gateway area.
To help ensure that future development is consistent with community goals, the remaining
undeveloped land should be developed on a staged, planned unit basis. The current state of the
S Village Center is somewhat fragmented. It is most important that this area become a more
coordinated, cohesive focal point for the community through the types of land uses developed, how
developments are designed, and the implementation of design features which will establish an overall
r
City Council Resolution No. 5104
May 12, 1997
Page 8
character. The community's goal for this area is that it will be a destination and significant place,
which draws people and brings them enjoyment. Land uses need to be coordinated and
interconnected, tied together by a landscaping and design theme along Highway 10 and system of
walkways and trails. The types of land uses must create activity that is an asset to those living and
working in the community, to visitors, and to the residents in the immediate neighborhoods within
this District 1.
N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\DEVCASES\471-97\CCRES.CP
•
111
ITEM NO. 7: 10, 11A & 11B
Staff Report No. 97-2097
• INTER
OFFICEMEMO
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director •
Subject: Materials for O'Neil Project
Date: May 9, 1997
Attached you will find the staff report on the general concept plan and rezoning ordinance for the
O'Neil property. The proposal is for development of the property with a 16-screen movie theater,
three 11,000 square foot office buildings, and 2 restaurant sites.
Resolution No. 5119, Ordinance No. 598, and the PUD stipulations will be delivered to you over
the weekend.
11111
S
Item No.1 :10 , I 1 A t P,,
Staff Report No._• 11°11011
Meeting Date: 5/12/97
Type of Business: Public Hearing
WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing;
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:
• Consideration of Resolution No.5119 approving a general concept plan for the O'Neil
property to allow development of commercial uses,2430 Highway 10; Planning Case No.
471-97
• Introduction and first reading of Ordinance 598 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; Planning Case No.471-97
Date of Report: May 9, 1997
Summary:
The applicant, Anthony Properties Management, Inc., is requesting approval of a rezoning from B-1
and R-2 to Planned Unit Development(PUD)(Mixed Use)to allow development of a 16-screen movie
theater,three 11,000 square foot office buildings, and two restaurant sites on the O'Neil property. The 111/
theater would be operated by Carmike Cinemas. The property is located at 2430 Highway 10 and is
bounded by Highway 10, Long Lake Road, and County Road H2. (See Attachment 2: Vicinity Map)
It includes approximately 24 acres. In addition, the applicant is requesting approval of a general
concept plan, which is the first of three steps in using PUD zoning. Action on the rezoning ordinance
and on the general concept plan must be preceded by a public hearing.
The general concept plan is shown in the enclosed blueprint drawing and in Attachment 3. The plan
shows the general location for the theater building and the three office buildings. The restaurants are
proposed for Parcels A and B. A detailed layout for the restaurants would be provided on the
development stage plan.
The Mounds View Zoning Code includes a Planned Unit Development(PUD) district. Planned Unit
Development Zoning was created to provide greater flexibility in the combinations of uses allowed on a
development site, and greater control over development design, landscaping and signage,protection of
natural features and preservation of open space. It allows for the creation of a customized set of
development regulations for a particular proposal. It specifies the allowed uses and densities, setbacks
and height limits, development requirements and may specify phasing of development, requirements to
provide improvements, and what other approvals are needed before construction begins. The
dimensional requirements may vary from the requirements in standard zoning districts (like B-1 or R-
1), and the list of permitted uses may be narrower. Planned unit developments are always tied to a site
plan which shows the general layout of the development, and which can be used to show required
buffers, landscaping, screening and open space. More detailed plans may be required at subsequent
steps. Once a planned unit development is approved,the project must proceed according to the
approved plan. Any substantive changes must go through an amendment process similar to the original
approval(i.e. Planning Commission and City Council review and public hearings).
City of Mounds View Staff Report
May 9, 1997
Page 2
Steps Used in Planned Unit Development Zoning
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)
e Development Plan (see Section 1120.04 Subd. 3) PC,CC (PH-yes)
■ Final Plan (see Section 1120.04 Subd. 4) Administrative
This application is at the general concept plan stage. The purpose is for the applicant to submit a plan
to the City showing the applicant's basic intent and the general nature of the entire 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 immediately significant elements which the City shall review and for
which a decision shall be rendered:
• overall maximum PUD density range
• general location of major streets and pedestrianways
• general location and extent of public and common open space
s general location of residential and nonresidential land uses with approximate type and intensities of
development
• staging and time schedule for development
■ other special criteria for development
Discussion:
The discussion section of this report is divided into two main parts:
#1: evaluation of the rezoning request
#2 analysis of the general concept plan
The Mounds View Zoning Code includes five criteria to be considered in evaluating a rezoning request.
These are discussed in Section#1 below. In addition, two neighborhood meetings were held prior to
the filing of this application. Residents attending these meetings raised a number of issues which they
felt were important to be researched and addressed. These are discussed in Section#2.
#1: Evaluation of Rezoning Request
Comprehensive Plan
(1)Relationship to Municipal Comprehensive Plan
The proposal is inconsistent with the current Comprehensive Plan designation on this site.
Section 1120.02 Subd. 2 on Planned Unit Developments requires that a proposed PUD be
consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. If the proposed amendment to the Comp
Plan is approved,the proposal would be consistent. The Comprehensive Plan amendment is
discussed in a separate report. It is staff's view that the proposed designation is more
appropriate for this site, if it is the City's desire to develop the commercial potential of the
11111 Highway 10 corridor and add to its tax base, and that adequate measures have been taken to
provide the necessary buffer to the adjacent single family neighborhood.
City of Mounds View Staff Report
May 9, 1997
Page 3
Surrounding Area
(2) The geographical area involved.
(3) Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed.
(4) The character of the surrounding area.
The O'Neil property is bounded by collector and arterial roadways, including a major highway
corridor. There is a existing single family residential neighborhood on the south, across County
Road H2, which runs from this roadway to County Road H. On the west side, across Long
Lake Road, is a residential neighborhood comprised of three multiple family developments:
Silver Lake Woods, Scotland Green, and Wildwood Manor. Both Scotland Green and
Wildwood Manor are three-story apartment developments; Silver Lake Woods is a lower
intensity,townhome development. The existing wetland provides a buffer between the main
development area on the O'Neil property and the residential neighborhood to the west. City
Hall and the park surrounding it are located across the 225 foot Highway 10 right-of-way.
Donatelle's Restaurant, which is located east of the O'Neil property, is the only development
which actually shares a common property line. (Mr. Donatelle has indicated to staff that he
supports this project.) Immediately to the southeast is a cluster of businesses including Roberts
Off 10, Donut Connection, Oasis Market and a car wash.
The surrounding area is a mixture of single family residential, multiple family residential,
business and civic uses. The O'Neil property is sitting between two very different
environments, i.e. the single family neighborhood on the south, and the highway corridor on the
north where commercial development has concentrated in Mounds View. 111111
At both of the neighborhood meetings, there was considerable discussion about whether this
project would cause property values to go down in the residential area south of the O'Neil
property. The developer has offered to purchase any home along the County H2 frontage
shared by the O'Neil property for 10%over the appraised value, as an indication of his
conviction that the proposed project will not have a detrimental effect on property values.
The applicant has taken several steps to isolate the theater from the neighborhood, and in effect,
the potential buyers will be looking at a buffer area and at one-story office buildings and a
screening fence. The main part of the parking lot is 160 feet away from the south property line;
the theater building is 240 feet away. The potential buyers may give more attention to the
businesses at the Highway 10-County Road H2 intersection than the theater, because these
businesses take access from the road going through the neighborhood and are far more visible
to people coming and going from the neighborhood.
3. Long Term Viability; Market Demand; Suitability of Location
(5) The demonstrated need for such use.
The applicant has provided a market summary as part of their application along with a map
showing the location of theaters relative to the O'Neil property(see Attachment 4). The theater
industry uses a five mile radius as the area to be served by a theater complex. The market
summary for the Carmike Theaters shows that there are no theaters within a three mile radius
and one theater complex within five miles (Northtown). They do not consider this theater as
competing with the proposed project because it is older and has only four screens. They have
not included Springbrook on the map because it is a discount theater and serves a different
market One of the theaters approved in Coon Rapids is just inside the five mile radius;the
City of Mounds View Staff Report
May 9, 1997
Page 4
1111
other is in the seven mile radius. The 14-screen theater in White Bear Township is not on the
map because it is outside the seven mile radius. The map shows that Mounds View is in the
center of a substantial area that is not served by movie theaters, with more population growth
occurring to the north, northeast and northwest.
A question has been raised whether 16 screens are needed. Recent articles have indicated that
these"big box"theaters are the new trend, and smaller theaters will no longer be built. Also
the"big box"theaters may cause the smaller ones to close because they will not no longer be
competitive. It is interesting to note that on the map showing existing theaters,they are
clustered in twos where the total screens for both theaters is the same as the big box theater.
This trend may represent consolidation of who owns the screens and not a new level of how
many are clustered together.
A question was also raised whether the theater portion was consistent or inconsistent with the
Feasibility/Highest and Best Use Analysis prepared by Towle Real Estate as part of the
Highway 10-Area 9 Study, which was commissioned by the City. We have received a letter
from Rodger L. Skare, MAI, who prepared the Towle Report clarifying that they see one multi-
screen movie complex as feasible in the Mounds View-Northtown area. There is no active
proposal for a multi-screen theater at Northtown at this time.
Residents in the adjacent neighborhood have expressed concerns over what will happen if the
theater fails and the building is left vacant. A condition has been included in the PUD
. stipulations that the theater site must be cleared if the building is left vacant for 24 months, and
that the property must be maintained during the interim period. A article regarding Carmike
Cinema, Inc. which appeared in Bottom Line magazine indicates high earnings and healthy
growth for this company.
#2: Analysis of General Concept Plan
The three reports prepared for the Planning Commission contained detailed discussions of issues raised
by residents in the discussion of this project. What follows is a summary of this information.
• Wetland and Wetland Buffer
The site contains a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR)protected wetland of
approximately 8.5 acres. A wetland delineation study was done in September, 1996. No construction
work is proposed in the wetland. Comments received from DNR state that if no work is done in the
wetland,the proposed development will conform to this agency's requirements. A permit from Rice
Creek Watershed District will be required. The proposal shows the necessary water quality ponds used
to filter runoff before it enters the wetland. Wayne Jacobson, a wetland expert in the City Engineer's
Office, has stated that the higher water levels in the wetland will improve its ecology, with the
exceptionof floral diversity and integrity. Higher water elevations will tend to support more cattail
growth and less reed canary grass and willow edge, until this type of vegetation is re-established along
the new water edge.
The City of Mounds View has an adopted a wetland zoning district which establishes a 100-foot buffer
S
area abutting identified wetlands. Grading and construction in the buffer area requires approval of a
wetland alteration permit. These permits may be granted as long as certain criteria were met, drainage
controlled and the adjacent wetland was protected from degradation. The applicant is proposing to
build a portion of the theater building and both detention ponds in the wetland buffer. Detention ponds
Planning Commission
Case No.471-97: O'Neil Property
March 28, 1997
Page 5
are typically placed in the buffer area since they need to be close to the wetland. They usually
revegetate so they continue to provide a"natural"buffer for the wetland. Encroachment of buildings
into buffer areas creates less problems than parking lots because the runoff is cleaner. Staff regards the
encroachment of the theater building into the buffer as workable if the area between the building and
the wetland is left natural, so the vegetation will continue to provide a filtering and screening effect. A
portion of the restaurant development on Parcels A&B may be in the buffer, although the amount will
not be known until we have a specific layout with the development stage plan.
■ Drainage
The proposed drainage system is consistent with the City's local water management plan, and will
provide the necessary water quality filtering before runoff enters the wetland. Increased flows into the
wetland will increase water surface elevations by 0.2 feet in a 10 year storm, and 0.3 feet in a 100 year
storm. The increased water elevation will not have a negative impact on adjacent structures or roads;
the water will remain on the site. The City Engineer recommends that the existing 15" pipe from the
wetland into the Long Lake Road storm sewer remain as is, since enlarging it would cause capacity
problems downstream and there is enough room to store water in the wetland. There should not be any
impacts to existing groundwater table, and little change in the current recharge potential of the area.
An engineered drainage design would be submitted at the development plan stage.
Residents south of the O'Neil property have expressed concerns that this development will increase
existing problems with flooding in their backyards. The City Engineer reviewed this situation and
responded that the localized flooding south of County Road H2 is not affected by the O'Neil property,
even with development. Also, according to Al Sunderman, a groundwater specialist in the City
Engineer's Office,there should not be any impacts to the existing groundwater table in the area. It is the
City Engineer's view that flooding in the neighborhood is being caused by upstream drainage from the
north side of Highway 10 overloading the existing storm drain system in the neighborhood. The size of
the storm drains needs to be upgraded or a parallel line installed so water is diverted before it reaches
the storm drain in County Road H2.
• Soils
The soils on the O'Neil property are classified as having moderate limitations, in the area proposed for
development, and severe limitations where the wetland is located. According to the plan, "most
development can occur without complex erosion or slope problems"in this category. Staff
recommends that soil testing be done at the development plan stage only if determined necessary by the
City Engineer.
• Vegetation &Landscaping
The applicant is proposing to retain the existing tree coverage outside of the developed area of the site.
Staff is recommending a condition that the trees 10" in diameter or larger be inventoried at the
development plan stage, and that they be preserved wherever possible. Protection of the tree coverage
intended for preservation during construction would be a condition of approval. In the buffer area along
County Road H2, the applicant is willing to either retain the oak woodland, supplement this area with
additional tree plantings, or substitute berming and manicured landscaping, as the community desires.
A decision on the type of treatment would be made at the development plan stage. The landscape plan •
for the development portion of the site would also be submitted at the development plan stage.
Planning Commission
Case No. 471-97: O'Neil Property
ink March 28, 1997
Page 6
• Traffic
A traffic report(dated March 12, 1997), revisions to this report (dated April 17, 1997) and a
supplement(dated May 2, 1997) were prepared by SRF Consulting Group. (The April 17 and May 2
reports are included as Attachments 5 and 6) The March 12 and April 17 reports estimated the number
of daily trips which would be produced by the theater and the offices,the number of peak hour trips
during the PM peak for the street system, and the number of trips during the PM peak hour for the
theater. The peak hour for the theater is 8:30-9:30 PM. In the April 17 report,the trips were
distributed on the street system using the regional model, after questions were raised with the original
trip distribution. The original distribution was based on existing traffic patterns on surrounding streets.
Using the regional model increases the amount of traffic coming from&going to the south and west of
the site(using Long Lake Road and County Road H2) and decreases the amount of traffic using
Highway 10. It reflects the possible influence of Hwy 694 and travel on local streets from the
neighborhoods to the south and west. The first two reports showed that the number of trips added to
the surrounding street system would not change the level of service(LOS) for the Highway 10/Long
Lake Road, and the Highway 10/County Road H2 intersections. The current level of service is "B". It
would change the LOS for the Long Lake Road/County Road H2 intersection from"B"to "C"which
represents a one second delay per vehicle. The number of U-turns on Highway 10 at Long Lake Road,
Edgewood and County Road H2 was estimated. The length of the queues is not expected to exceed the
length of the turn bays. The LOS at the Highway 10/Edgewood intersection at the peak hour is at"F"
and remains at"F", reflecting the fact it is an uncontrolled intersection and motorists experience long
delays trying to cross.
• The April 17 report also includes estimates of traffic generated by five other land use scenarios:
• Existing Zoning(35 duplexes; 132,000 square feet of retail commercial)
• Existing Comp Plan Designation(54 single family residences)
• Townhomes (96 units)
• Apartments (195 units)
• Offices only(197,700 square feet)
With respect to daily volumes and peak hour volumes,the current zoning (B-1 and R-2) and office
development would result in higher numbers of trips than the theater proposal.. The three residential
scenarios would produce lower daily volumes and lower peak hour volumes than the theater proposal.
The multiple family residential scenarios (townhomes and apartments) would add the most trips to
County Road H2, however, since it is expected that access would be allowed if residential development
occurred on the O'Neil property.
The May 2 report was done to estimate the traffic impact of the two restaurant sites, since these sites
were not included in the original analysis. The restaurants add 184 trips during the peak hour for the
road system. The LOS for the Highway 10/Long Lake, Long Lake Road/County Road H2 and the
Highway 10/Edgewood intersections remain the same("B", "C" and "F"respectively). The LOS for
the County Road H2/Highway 10 intersection would change from"B"to "C". This change represents a
two second delay per vehicle. The intersection would continue to operate at an acceptable LOS.
■ Access
MnDOT is limiting access to Highway 10 to one right in-right out drive entrance midway between Long
Lake Road and County Road H2. They are unwilling to grant a full movement, signalized intersection
at this time. Access to the theater, office buildings, and restaurant site on Parcel B would be through
Planning Commission
Case No. 471-97: O'Neil Property
March 28, 1997
Page 7
this access point. The Planning Commission, Community Development staff and the Police
Department recommend that further discussions be held with MnDOT to determine if Edgewood could
be re-aligned, a signalized intersection created, and the current uncontrolled crossing at Edgewood be
closed. Access to the restaurant site on Parcel A would be from Long Lake Road.
• Parking
The following parking ratios are proposed for this project:
Off-Street Parking
Land Use Regulations Proposed PUD #Required
16-screen theater 1 space per 4 seats 1 space per 4 seats 662 spaces
offices 3 spaces+ 1 space per 175 sq.ft. 1 space per 250 sq.ft. GFA 0(1)
restaurants 1 space/40 square feet or lspace/ 1 space/100 sq.ft. GFA or 1 space/ N/A(2)
3 seats,whichever is more;+ 1 space/ 3 seats,whichever is more
80 square feet of kitchen
(1) The approval of this PUD includes approval of joint use of the parking area by the theater and the office buildings because of
offsetting hours. No additional parking spaces are required for the office use as long as at least 260 spaces are built for the theater
use,and a cross-access and parking easement is recorded for the theater parking area to allow unobstructed access by the office
use prior to issuance of building permits for either the theater or the office buildings. If the office buildings are constructed in
advance of the theater use,parking at a ratio of 1 space per 250 square feet shall be provided.
(2) To be determined at time of development plan approval based on square footage shown in restaurant uses;restaurant
uses shall be self-sufficient and shall not require use of theater parking.
Off-Street Parking Requirements published by the American Planning Association lists two examples
of ratios for theaters: 1 space per four seats (Bellevue,WA), and 1 space per five seats (Ames,IA).
Mounds View's ratio matches the more conservative ratio. The theater complex is proposed to have
2,648 seats, which would require 662 parking spaces. The applicant has noted on the plan that there
are 700 parking spaces provided or 38 more than the requirement. Actual parking provided will be
confirmed at the development plan stage. Parking for handicapped customers must be provided as
required by the State Building Code. A survey of restaurant parking requirements in 21 communities
showed the most common requirement is 1 space/3 seats where seats are used, and 1 space/100 square
feet where square footage is used. The PUD District allows a ratio different than the City's standard
requirement to be set through the PUD stipulations.
s Market Demand; Long Term Viability of Use
Theaters: The market demand for theaters is discussed on page 4 of this report.
Office Buildings: The applicant has provided a listing of office buildings in the 10,000-15,000 square
foot size located in northeast and northwest sectors of the Twin Cities marketplace, with the amount of
square footage they contain and the amount vacant. The report includes the following communities:
Anoka, Blaine, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Columbia Heights, Coon Rapids, Crystal, Elk River,
Fridley, Golden Valley, White Bear Lake, Maple Grove,New Hope, Osseo, Plymouth, Robbinsdale, 1111
Rogers, Spring Lake Park, Arden Hills, Circle Pines, Gem Lake,Lauderdale, Little Canada,
Maplewood,New Brighton, Oakdale, Roseville, Shoreview, and St. Anthony. The total square footage
for this area is 1,461,273 sq.ft. The total available is 85,147 sq.ft. or a vacancy rate of 5%. Out of 121
buildings, 107 have no space available.
Planning Commission
Case No. 471-97: O'Neil Property
March 28, 1997
Page 8
The Towle Report indicates low rise office and/or medical/professional buildings that would be
oriented for either a single tenant or multiple tenants are feasible uses in the Highway 10 corridor. The
need for professional and medical services is great given the growing concentration of senior housing in
the Highway 10 corridor, and the aging population in general.
Restaurants: The restaurants are proposed to be sit down,family-style or specialty restaurants missing
from this market. They are not proposed to be fast food restaurants, bars or taverns.
• Economic Benefits
Property Taxes: Approximately$66,000 dollars in property taxes are being paid annually on the
O'Neil property, based on a market value for the land at$1.1 million. The estimated value of the
property with development of the proposed project is $11 million, which would generate$691,000 in
property taxes. The City's share of the property taxes would be$113,000 annually.
Employment: It is estimated that the development will generate approximately 77 full time and 52 part
time new jobs for the community.
Multiplier Effect: As noted in the last staff report, hotel and entertainment uses have one of the highest
multiplier effects, i.e. the ability of one business to generate additional economic activity that creates
more jobs and brings customers to other businesses. The applicant has provided an article which
discusses the economic impact multi-screen movie theaters have made in other communities(see
• attached).
• Public Safety
Police: The Mounds View Police Department has indicated that since there will be more people and
cars on the site with development,there will be more police calls because of criminal activity.
Accidents,theft, vandalism and disorderly conduct are examples of the type of incidents which may
occur. Because of the buffers provided around the development, the Police Chief would expect these
problems to be confined to the site and he does not expect the surrounding area to be adversely
affected.
Staff checked with three other police departments which either deal with existing multi-screen theaters
or have reviewed proposed theater developments. The two departments dealing with existing theaters
noted the typical problems are thefts from automobiles, some children and teenagers congregating, and
some underage consumption of alcohol in the parking lot. They did not feel these were serious
problems.
Fire:The Fire Marshall has reviewed the plan for this development and has responded that it does not
present any concerns. The entrance design and fire hydrant locations would be reviewed at the
development plan stage. The Fire Marshall is aware that MnDOT is restricting access to one point
midway between Long Lake Road and County Road H2. He noted that it would be helpful if there was
an emergency access drive at the south end of the site near Donatelle's. MnDOT would have to give
permission for this access point.
Planning Commission
Case No.471-97: O'Neil Property
March 28, 1997
Page 9
■ Schools
A concern was raised by residents that the theater proposal would result in an increase in truancy. Staff
interviewed the principals of Irondale High School, Edgewood Middle School, and Pinewood and
Sunnyside Elementary Schools. The general consensus was that the principals did not see the
theater complex as creating any appreciable problems for them. They did not expect the theaters
to add to truancy, i.e. if a child decides to be truant, they will do so whether there is a theater or
not. There may be an occasional child who makes the mistake of going to the theater. Donna
Nelson, principal at Pinewood, suggested that developing a cooperative working relationship with
the theater management could address this problem. Ms. Nelson noted that having the theater
building available as an emergency shelter should the school need to be evacuated in severe
weather would be helpful. Penny Howard, principal at Edgewood, noted that the theater might
give children a constructive place to go, outside of school hours.
■ Additions to Infrastructure
The PUD stipulations include requirements for the construction of acceleration and deceleration lanes
on Highway 10, as required by MnDOT, a sidewalk along Highway 10 from Long Lake Road to
County Road H2, and a walkway around the north end of the wetland to connect to the
sidewalk/trailway along Mounds View Drive.
■ Dimensional Requirements
The proposal meets or exceeds the typical dimensional requirements for commercial and office
development, and the site size and frontage requirements for commercial PUDs.
Required Provided
Building Setbacks'
Office Buildings
Front 30 feet 235'min; 795'max
Side 10 feet; 30'if abutting street; 100'to Donatelle's
20'if abutting residential 470'to Long Lake Rd
Rear 20 feet; 30 if abutting residential 50 feet
Theater
Front 30 feet 34 feet
Side 10 feet; 30'if abutting street; 620'to Donatelle's
30'if abutting residential 430'to Long Lake Rd
Rear 30 feet;40'if abutting residential 235 feet
Parking Lot Setbacks'
Front 30 feet 30 feet
Side 5 feet 10'to Donatelle's
350'to Long Lake Rd
Rear 5 feet 50 feet
'The setbacks for the office use are from the B-2 district which is the zoning district where such uses ,
first appear as permitted uses. The setbacks for the theater are from the B-4 district which is the zoning
district where such use first appears as permitted.
Planning Commission
Case No. 471-97: O'Neil Property
March 28, 1997
11111 Page 10
Required Provided
Building Height 3 stories;no dimension given 42'for theater
(estimated 52 feet based on R-1 district 28'to roofline for offices
limit of 2.5 stories or 45 feet)
Minimum Project Size 5 acres 23.99 acres
Minimum Street Frontage 200 feet 1690 feet
Minimum Property Width 200 feet 1280 feet
• Landscaping, Screening& Surfacing
The proposal exceeds the requirements in Section 1120.03, Subd. 2 of the Zoning Code.
• Comparison with Existing Zoning
The existing zoning on the site is B-1 (neighborhood business) for 17 acres and R-2 (single family and
duplex residential)for seven acres. The B-1 district would allow the following uses:
Permitted
- barber shops
- beauty parlors
- convenience grocery stores
- laundromat, self-service washing and drying
Conditional
- governmental and public utility buildings
- professional and commercial offices
- commercial planned unit development as regulated by Chapter 1120
- solar energy and wind generator systems
Staff does not regard the development of 17 acres in neighborhood businesses as practical or
marketable. There is just too much land in this parcel to be absorbed by the limited range of businesses
listed as permitted. The most likely use of this property, if it were to remain in this district, is offices.
The proposal includes this use, so in this aspect, changing the zoning from B-1 to PUD is not a change.
The obvious difference is having an entertainment use as opposed to a retail use, and replacing the
potential for duplexes under the R-2 residential district with the office buildings in the proposal. The
development of office buildings with no access to County Road H2 is a quieter use than duplexes
fronting onto County Road H2 would be. The offices will be probably be closed on weekends and
evenings. There will be no driveways onto County Road H2 and no neighbors in closeby yards.
e PUD Stipulations
Staff has prepared stipulations to be adopted with the general concept plan which state all of the
development requirements which would apply to this property, what further approvals are needed from
agencies such as Rice Creek Watershed District, Department of Natural Resources, and the Minnesota
Department of Transportation, and plans and studies which must be submitted at later steps in the
process. The stipulations also list the types and densities of uses allowed. The PUD zoning designation
does not confer general permission to develop commercial uses. It allows development according to a
specific plan and detailed list of stipulations. If, at some point in the future,the landowner wanted to
pursue a different development idea, they would have to obtain approval for a general concept plan,
development stage plan and final plan which illustrated this idea. The general concept plan and
development stage plan are subject to public hearings.
Planning Commission
Case No.471-97: O'Neil Property
March 28, 1997
Page 11 1111
Conclusions:
The community must decide what its goals are for this property and how it fits into the bigger picture.
One consistent theme in the adopted Comprehensive Plan and in all the subsequent versions is that the
O'Neil property is very significant and it is located in what the community regards at its City Center.
The desire in 1979 was for this area to become a strong, vital, identifying community focal point, with a
mixture of commercial, public, low, medium and high density residential and open space uses (p. 172).
The 1979 Comp Plan also included a Community Development Concept and land use
recommendations (see Appendix 4). The concept is described as "the basic idea behind the plan." It
then discusses two topics
■ The importance of the O'Neil property and the need to create a compact, functional center
incorporating retail commercial activity, the civic center and medium and higher density
residential development, and
■ The importance of providing protection to the quality of life in residential neighborhoods.
There, in a nutshell, are the two main issues raised by this application. Staff is supportive of the request
from Anthony properties for amending the Comprehensive Plan and rezoning the property to allow
development of the theaters and office buildings because we believe it:
• Is designed in a manner which provides protection and buffering for the surrounding residential
neighborhoods
a Preserves the wetland and leaves the undeveloped portions of the site in their natural, wooded •
state.
■ Will create a draw or attraction to the Mounds View City Center for the community, and
neighboring communities; provides a"meeting ground"type business; will bring vitality
■ Will bring customers to existing Mounds View businesses; will provide employment
■ Adds uses which are missing from the City's land use mix
■ Preserves the commercial land base
• Strengthens the City's tax base and generates revenue
■ Will not create traffic or drainage impacts; has infrastructure available.
■ Takes advantage of an opportunity being presented by the marketplace, but establishes planned
unit development controls which will assure neighborhood and community interests are
protected.
•
Staff does not regard that portion of the O'Neil property having Highway 10 frontage as suitable for
single family development. Efforts to make it a liveable environment will create a"blank wall"in the
City Center.
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission, by a vote of 5-0, and the staff recommend approval of the general concept
plan(Resolution 5119) and for rezoning from B-1 and R-2 to Planned Unit Development(PUD)
(Ordinance 598),to allow development of a 16-screen theater,three 11,000 square foot office
buildings, and 2 restaurant sites on the O'Neil property, subject to the PUD stipulations.
N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\DEVCASES1471-97\471-97.CC2
S
�t . .-_ .._ _ .
1 r_F CO 1 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTINtENT
I - e ...
..„
_ DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
Tom;^Yy'. 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View NLN 55112
°,e).�si- t°�,Q, • - 612-784-305;
612-784-3462 -F.�:s_
' - Please Type or Print Information!-Complete Both Sides of This Form _ _ -
Applicant Information
Name of Applicant ANTHONY PROPERTIES MANAGEMENT , INC.Telechone 972-991-4484
Az:dress ___. ..._.... .. _ 12770 COLT ROAD, STE . 1170 ____Fac 972-991-4494
DALLAS, TEXAS 75251
PropertyIntPP
st in (check appropriate box) - - --
o - Owner of Property
• ❑ ' • Contract for Decd Own= ...._... . . . ----. . .. - '_.... . .- _ ------- __
4 Lr...sce,Operator,Mama•
o Agncat to Purchase
❑ • Other•(explain)
1 Applicants must provide evidence of interest in property at the time of application,and if you are not the owner of `
property,you must provide a letter of permission from the owner giving content to the filing of this application. Th•:
property owner must sign this application for it to be aczpted. --• i ': - .- • -- - -_ _ _ :.
0 Property Description/Proposal nvl 47 0 '1 ct ;;�`�'J 1.-,11' i 0 :
Address or Gcn=aLLccation Hr/vY . 10 AT COUNTY ROAD H-2 AND LONG LAKE ROAD
• L.sgalDescription * SEE PAGE 2
Property Idearificat;an#(PIN#) n R n 91.)1 n n n.1
#of Amies - ; a r
CarrZoning - _-,r o--)
•
1 Prr-r-lt Use Type of Application
'=i Undeveloped/Vacant =iZ Comprehensive Plan Amc-dmr^r 5200
o Single Family Dwelling ❑ - Rezoning 5200/ac;ruin S200 max s,: Q.;
j ❑ Duplex(Two Family Dwelling 0 Major Subdivision 5250 5250 drposit*
o Multi-family Dwellings 0 _ Minor Subdivision 5150
❑ Businc-cs/Commccial Establishmrt 4 Planned Unit DevOrpn;.^t(PUD) 5350
a Industrial Establishment . b PUD Amrdmct S150
a Otho(explain) a Conditional Use Permit R-1,R-2 75;all other-s .z..:.:.
c Vat ancc R-1,R-2 S75;all other
0 Code Appeal S75
❑ Develop Rcvicv/Site Flan 5100/ac;min 5100 max S�C.:i
C Wetland Alteration Pe:mit S50+deposit'
❑ Wetland Buil Permit 7
❑ Fioodplain Pr--mit5200
O O the
le
'see Municipal Code for explanation of deposits
Please complete the reverse side of this application.
ft ATTACHMENT 1
Y. . uiiol
uiai . .::i.0 r.i..•+. d1 3
1 164 461: . . c.:111" OF 11V . . _ ..- 16005/00" -
.City of Mounds View,MN .
Development Application Pace'
..
Property Classification ',( Abstract a Tor
1 -i -
DescripdacafProposal TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 24 ACRES FROM 3-1 AND R-2 TO
a DT,ANNRD TINTT DFV7T:OPMENT ALLOWING FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A MULTI-SCREEN
mum mmP' AND oe'T.aTFD DaRT.cTNn., nF='Tc7. B TTT1DTNC-S AND OTHER COMMERCIAL
•
JT;
BY MY(OUR)SIGNATURE ON TIflS APPLICATION,I HM9 Y DECLARE T'rHAT,TO TI- BEST OF MY
..-I iOWLGE,T E INFORMATION PROVIDED IS TIWE AND ACC•• -
JiC-kSignature of Applicant \ /
1 Name of Applicant(typd/printed) ANTHONY PROPS MANAGEMENT, INC.
R. JAY .,NTHONY, PRESIDENT
Si of Pro Owner /--- / ) ��f /� /���
�c pay
Name of R.opcty Owner(typd/prbatcd) LOrTT SF n 'NEIL
i * ALL THAT PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF Al
SECTION 8 , TOWNSHIP 30', RANGE 23 LYING SOUTHWESTERLY OF STATE TRUNK
HIGHWAY NO . 10 , - SUBJECT TO LONG _LAKE ROAD AND COUNTY ROAD H-2, RA.�MS r J
COUNTY, MINNESOTA. . - .._ .. . . . .......... .
•
1
3Y*XK1i,„,,,, ****K****i,,,,.t*********4**#*****7LJ{1/*lt******.******* **1.* *******
IFOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Date of Submittal .;2 -/o - 9 7
Date of Acceptance Assigned to:
•
1 • Planning Case No. ,-/-7/ - 9 60-day Limit 120-day limit
Fees Paid Account# Chec. # f lac:-r.�
�o
Application '2, 60 �'v --.3o L 9 3S3
77 • Park Dedication: _
De-posits:
Other. 411/
1 : Total:
C:%0FFIMWPWINIWPI CC3WDMLNIFORMS\DEYAPP rOR 1/91
I .
I
I
•
• lcZ: r h LL n• of J~ ,.•".t.rr--,-'• I lF.� I
x:' SCSt:.1S^ aut,R• _ 1 y,. F,If cr 1 crZ a I 8,.„.
,.„. ' ... ` i-
..„---7-. d c-c::i:1 a:.sc " z- I�I �I�I� ecr I °.rt E:cr, cc:::
.77E-7-7—,,,"I °°rI nrl 99u rc9LiJ� - r s 9cz .. cr.;l •°tei 1
r��ri t 9 t:
raZI CL^I .c^ICZ. r^1_ ninlo' ,",!7'i r ',^,. - /.. I h
-C c9::1
:a..lac^ c-grnat.^, car:1 a mi ... •.'t i I..,^ „I^i^I�,;,r�l�. etz I ry s It^I
t4 •u tar: 99uI cc • sir. s�'^g. Sig' '_fal �,�: k. g d u::. All
.cr..' 1
:•,..:7 •aC l cazl i �"RIRIRIA' RiRrRl�l�.^I:.$ ' I :9::!C„ Ht� I R
lua17 .. ...sr: i l I- i C` 4
�2 ,rkIiI�I�I^I^I^ �j 3
oc:1 ' `i091_-•.r a ^ tcaz:l v.. 1
771 ' ..IS,I.CISf coc x e ts'^ �I �t3ilst^PIiI r r .-�..
S .V.w $ S _ mai I ilir^Ii1"I i1i�il iia ^I..i I."i n ��
cin r
�i iRI RI$Isl i1 al^IRM.ISI.^, u,rl •I aixlIR!� 2t� 1 I "I f l i l �`
I XI RIgI IRI^�II�I l'.2'1;,,11,'�C "I"I-:74/ .1z4- S'r"i, itFir.,r.
.v.�� �� oa+�rla y^
1 - I " j Ccc-�.s it Rl Rl al" a' »,C
Til$ 4 i!�! I i!"l�/z!� . a� j„jt :iz 5i.
IL9f-°,/�� II a�� 4.y ",�I z' o
^ mumLQ n • �i E _ W-.
1 1 1� • .".la a y
o� Zc. . 1L°r 0^1I^Iigiil.-I�IgIfIeW17:7ii1IR n I
1•
� " r I , m -,I! " �i 1_ 2
c1.•.I-I.`.I.•.I I ' I.x I'. O 'Ertl i_MI I Al
�Nbd a
L 9t. •� I Y,{9Lrf I,c,L ..:',',..,"c,'-.S '
U17 Z Jn .i " :t, hlhtl - RR,R R. id:;'2 :' : 't � z
. : .223 tt9CrL Shiv9S.L1Sh. t IttrL t'I�I -I SI wI n� V 49.1 19.t•t ca. c9,tl clro,tl ^ i el::I:
I^I
041,1-4!81 I$I.^.1.^^.I^I EI 99,E -1,1 9...0 �O 99,E 1 �' L9rCLC.rC 16TC1 C.L 169.E R nl r^-nl NI
Ri- rI Ih•.5' ><I
•
����I� •I• .. .. - ...="11.....,,,. .4
^ •�
acre cn:P-'I Isc,:j •.crticvt a' :„:.r 1•Int=!^!„ 4, .
9, i ' l aI,I�I�il;Iri",.,r�1S - - - _ pial
.J nIn'i^I^IRIw ^�^I^IN IN .. tei•
dtA /, rZR ,� ,,, i
"lo n1 %i C,RI.. M1, _ 2f nIII�I^I�I ni rl rl1ol..r al ! ii i',-
_
1 ^Ie I^I^I I I :,,,,,.. b..- ,&
. , „,: /M1I _ � nl •1cL rK:`�` iii;iiiii ozc11laia ▪ �j tIR .�I SII$�hhl ISI IIff S raR'lll ,hr �S �I^IFI. ;� —1 R: F1h13in =1= - I
"In "I.^. nI wI n .. );k' c .c. Oc9L OSSZI ICRI "'°' a a '.
LCR (VOL 1C9Z cc: KSiI SCC •--t-^
l I - . b0.Z , UCR aSc: 9CS:I6ttZ .iiXI
•"•1:41:-:31;4P. I.^.I.^.l.^.I... - K C° m 99t 9R • L9c:ICKZIr" ' ..t«rn:x!.
OC6wiifJ t/1 t9Ci :.*~ O1 NC c.,,..= - p�y�Y'' YI^
^I^I�I.o. :2.
I^I I$ nR •
CnL. g9L101Yr"•h3+�`WLS -•L{cL)92 u:Rix:xr:l:
RIR ^� eDR 19L 609L' 1•' Ti,
I>�� C[R KDL z ao9,l ' °L:�tl GJ9LIa092 Ii R1 5:xi k
9tt�9zl I'—'�
^I _ L1R • MILice iLC1921 L192r19t ' R £ y ^ _!'
I m tX9L °�c 141911 •19LE1u,�?_2.: 192K '19,1 /RI I I I RIR,R • ,
wI 4.''
' 119E avLl � ,. ., Igio n���i
Ae
•'i�I .. I I$I^I+I :I� y w t992 112.- .""' (.R9L11 h - ., R �i"^ 8r o • ^loi-
L72 " RI RI Ri RaZ9 i31I c
t(qL 919E .y= �SZ9L ••",tr,,t: ^gni n1 rl :
u COOK1Sfi •� i:1•^• #(qyL 9L 9H2 I • aa9i 7n. r9L9LKZ 9L1 '" •i�•
�I^I^I9,I X _ x w '15‘' .1'c.L. •i . t. L29�16Z9L • LltLl:I b‘...,', 1,;—„,GL ^: - �I_r - �.~a~
.•I nI..I b r �`ot � 1..« t• MC
4 OL9L 'H91 �y1. 'L tL'iLl3 "ia lalR in.IRIRI:.io ,g,1;ti;ti� ...3.
d, ttu,,,..!,1 ate+:. I Ri.41
I n laet /1L. ^°L P9L L9L1 19Y9Cunr, Fn t:L:9L1EBRIOUThillialiT S'
nl of of:&'''
t(rlt aCL.al. " C F"�Lel 9.94/- "Sc I'°9LIjt•HLt H2:=2HC:I HLI _�.� _.
_;- ;(: Y.5 1•.'.'=
' ^�t g MIL
.ai c.wL' e. ;,L9: Mgt�� R19LL-1"r' LP-WZ—ir9t!St9L1 o i 1_:o, 01r.. $. _i':C.
-r.i.RS i:te1 ttttkltF, w �` a..rl taut: [r+t r6,+z "1^1�IRIR R1R r"1 wAl:{...... Q:kl:
i e. / • tZ�9aa1 I ,trill:.
�"2 aIi ., ',.' '::,1:9,d'5,1.-7,4,1.7-: 1 81818 F..' '.',1":-
1`:£
I e '� n latz i �Izl� 5:�; - - a RIs _.S t" • , _. ..
t mt o 1o;nl., .. .., ., "r it.".I it it,.�i lRiIR1R 'IR ..�t .`i:s .y R'.{is
�' 2 PliKti!
, .. ^ _I _j^13I• �r''Iz x::1�i^1 ^I^ 'III g1=1 =1018 ra, 4•g,
1 41 RI..I:t
•
m ...
'�� a � Y •L '.0.4 Nt "rL.J
l a - - - " ;l al i df t •. .
tl�r�_ `j _. -. a ��9aLlcttl r[Ic 1'� �rtLl I g R'�r I r- ;I R - �I°ita?I i 5:.:;RI
m ` tl^- -l. -• - .n1 nL- °uatc �yscL �CWN ,�f•�� i• : :. ▪ -• �.�i _ "jN ... R - -
J 4 °� 'Tl..>.-1 ✓1 rat... ++ ' N :t1:s:..:.):i:..r.
• Vicinity/Zoning Map
471-97: O'Neil Property
Attachment 2
I .
IN N,. NN .•
•
SICENALK TO
•
PROPOSE
N.PEDESTRIAN ERICC•E
i \
1 \ •
•
I \
I N
I 1
I PARCEL A \% N / //
I • /
• ..\
I
•
.•' •..
• I ••.
< /\
....•• •
•
• //
/
/
•
/ • /Y/
• Cz.
I • 4_,
-- -I-- -:- - _.•_-, ----''-'-- • ‘• •• -.- \ s."'
•
1 _ -'_.1--1' --- ---'''- The cP• " •.• ;• - ••• •-•\ ••
•
"FULL SERVICE:
I N
- Z:ACEE-.5. . . . .
I •
•.
"c(
1 r
. •'• .
Li 1
- LL.1HI6ri P_,i-r
, ; ti :
<C ' I ,..P"
APF.FLOx.EL...mi. Erqs : -.SZ:i.v.-••- •A••,44;
J
___1 -I "1- AT BOTTOM ' ' ' •
Fr 'Ifs N':..:0'',:*:•'-ie-I:: ; — ---- .- . .•. \
I
I . ... ... .. .. ... .. .
.' • ' ' f f•-j'-'")''''•`<•:''?,-,41,tc, ''''jr: s , . \•••
.,1 :. .. ,• ..-• !. . • 1?.••=>:,,Z;•:',,p:,••'..,_,,,,•••••••,,,,,,•• . .N\
Z 4 ; . ... -",',. .,X,.!-):.,.W.F.'ao:,--0,./re--,•.:L. • \
i 0 ,I .s. , . s . .-..,,..-.. .",,,;KfA-.&-•We.:3• 0 •
- .
I "'—• .. ;-.4._,L.1-1,'.5 _ f-:•-\4:K•=.5,1,„'41r,
.......,,,..,;0":..,.;,,,......,,,,...i ) •
..
i I • ,'' . : f.VSCREENV'e
' •;• — - •• " - • i .4‘,e,.:kfirE-K,szE.R-4f.?
'I, --. ' .. : , eziRFAGF.
IIVIATeR PLCY1 : 1---„,D ...
• "RIGHT IN
. -L 1fi-, i.iPW.Act'''t0,77,- ) 1-1 .. .. -
• • .. 1 RIC-i-IT CUT"
As•,,,..,4%. ....c.Si-ft,,,,,,..,,A.I
• •C.f4.‘ ^' : .,. ., , .fl
/ • N, ACCESS
. ,,,Rp . Tr:;?..C.n':t 1‘4.1.i U - .
- ob et ' 'I,-,I.,.0:', '' '''' 2.-L.‘
• . I.,,..-ya, , •.
; - _ --, -fl CI • M f \
.•q04
. ,
‹. c ,
( N,,
I (.:-1----------- - - - f..:c
nn an
n n
(.. 0 . 03pbw
,:_I
\
I ••• . ........., : L- -4 .
•-• ex.44't."6.1,4.6 7.-i. ,- e .;,0 .1,44111k A ' i I r
!fl Li...... ... ....._,.
... ..
• ......7C5-67. ... 7.. r' ••• • •
J- , -.. _ _i -kr • . 1
,.• ..__ •• •-.,,cc FFs_.4ce•-,;v., , r.__,H
'-'`.,_./•--k., 1 : P
. ..•
--
--
I C --\ C 'N c
COUNTY ROAD H-2
I
.1 il r. ii. I., SI TE FLAN Attachment 3
II
'11 1111h 1i
'1 .t I ..:GALE: I" = "200' i
•
I GARMIKE 16 MOUNDS VIE , MN Z
ANTHONY PROPERTIES
Real
HLM ARGHITEGTSINC. state Development&investment
, I
FE___ 12770 Coit Road,Suite 1170
1 JOE, NO. c16047
Dallas,Texas 75251
02-05-q7
(972) 991-4484 • Fax(972) 991-4494
• APR,18-97 FRI 14: 19 SRF FAX NO, 4752429 P. 02
• SRFCONSULTING GROUP , INC .
Transportation■ Civil •StructuraI •Environmental ■Planning•Traffic•Landscape Architecture •Parking
SRF No. 0972600
MEMORANDUM
TO: Pam Sheldon
City of Mounds View
FROM: Charleen Zimmer, AICP
Nancy Heuer, PE
DATE: April 14, 1997
Revised April 17, 1997
S SUBJECT: O'NEIL PROPERTY TRAFFIC STUDY ADDENDUM
INTRODUCTION
A draft of a traffic study for the proposed development of a 16 screcn movie theater and
three 11,000 square foot office buildings on the O'Neil property in Mounds View was
completed on March 12, 1997, The proposed project and the results of the traffic analysis
were discussed at a Planning Commission meeting on March 19, 1997. At the conclusion
of the meeting the Planning Commission requested additional information and
clarification of some parts of the analysis. The purpose of this memorandum is to
provide additional information on the following issues:
• Information on the operation of the access to/from TH 10.
• Comparison of the trip-generating characteristics of potential alternative uses of the
site.
• Information on movie scheduling and its relationship to traffic flow during periods of
peak movie attendance.
111
• Refinement of the assignment of site-generated trips to the street system.
Y
• Review of safety issues related to U-turns on TH 10.
Attachment 5
One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150, Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443
Telephone (612) 475-0010 • Fax (612) 475-2429
__� ,�,1
`_ =~�� ' `.- /
IN
u��
APR-18-97 FRI 14:20 SRF FAX NO, 4752429 P. 03
Pam Sheldon -2 - April 14, 1997
•
TH 10 ACCESS
The proposed project would have unsignalized right-in and right-out access to and from
TH 10, although the developer is planning to pursue discussions with Mn/DOT to allow
full access to and from TH 10. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT)
has required the developer to provide a right turn lane for vehicles entering the property
and will probably require an acceleration lane for vehicles exiting the property. This will
minimize interference with through traffic on TH 10 by vehicles turning at the new
driveway. The right turn lane would need to be designed with adequate length to provide
minimum deceleration distance and to accommodate queues that may develop as vehicles
enter the site. It will also be important that the site be designed to quickly move vehicles
into the site. This can be accomplished by providing an area for vehicles to move out of
the traffic flow while dropping off and picking up passengers,
TRIP GENERATION
The O'Neil property is currently zoned for a mix of residential and retail uses, but the
• comprehensive plan indicates single-family residential development on the property. The
city of Mounds View identified five alternative land use scenarios for the site based on
these plans and other potential uses. Since each land use type generates trips at different
rates, each scenario would generate a different number of total trips, Table 1 provides a
summary of the land use assumptions, trip generation estimates and probable access
associated with each of the scenarios.
Based on the assumptions shown, the current zoning plan would result in the highest
number of daily and peak hour trips generated by the site. The single-family residential
or townhome development would result in the least number of trips of any of the
scenarios. The number of trips generated by the other scenarios, including the proposed
development fall in the middle.
Information was requested on the scheduling of movies and its relationship to traffic
flow. Typically, theaters schedule five shows per day on each screen between noon and
10:30 p.m. The 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. showings and the 9:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.
showings usually have the highest attendance, Available information on movie theater
trip generation and parking characteristics indicates that although the total daily
attendance is greatest on a Saturday or Sunday, the peak hourly trip generation is similar
on either a Friday night, Saturday or Sunday.
S
APR-18-97 FRI 14:20 SRF FAX NO, 4752429 P. 04 ,
. S
co)C/3 0 O O p O
fp
N E N
--- 5 -.-.
U ,9 P. 0�lU � U ►lU ►� F
t''', VD In 00 01V0tr) ON VD le) kr) c> c 00 O1 fV .-a
P-1 N - h N trl C:1 ►r7 47 * ' N� r11 m - cc N
O
AAt 'd' g ^ N 1 0 N '0 (-I c'1 o0i — to Vl 0
I) F, 0 N N eF to v kr) .-4 p0/ 0 �n N. re) < 0 o
r Fr, 0
G
N. Qin N. ►r, N '7 C\ en to 10 n moi' — N C\
N O 10 1O V� 10 r+ eT c cn. N. 0 t0 1:0-
M
...-c `n --1 N N N N x
41
o
ci)
rzVC QLla c-_) Q C' co - N4xx �m in co Q cn c-
Lei aa
t` o
N D ,-i 00 VG v
N c:
L
Z Ti E7 cu 0 .�. cid « 0
p cn S c9 2 E E o g g o 0 0
(r) 10 . o do 0 O 0 0 A
IX g R. :. Q Q t
as v cn cc w
CI. c4 a4 nnc HH Q<' 0 HO V
0 b o
U a' 'La)
0 p to to a O
U C O
W .
Z C 6 o
m p, rA
t.
n.r• Li CiD
0 0
Q2 0 0 P.. o 0 •
F- F•- U E-+ Q U a • •
APR-18-97 FRI 1421 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 P. 05
•Pam Sheldon - 4 - April 14, 1997
•
The analysis completed mpleted for the March 12, 1997 memorandum was based on the pcak hour
of the adjacent street, which is the critical time period for evaluating the ability of the
street system to accommodate the expected traffic levels. Additional information was
requested on the number of trips that would be generated by the movie theater during the
peak hour of the generator (i.e., the theater). Although data was available from the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) for estimating trip generation for the peak
hour of the adjacent street, the ITE data for the peak hour of the generator was extremely
variable. In order to develop a better estimate for the peak hour of the generator, a traffic
count was conducted for an existing movie theater complex in the Twin Cities that is
similar to the Carmike Theater being proposed.
Counts were taken at an existing 2,300 scat movie theater on a Friday night between
8:30 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. This time period was selected to include both the vehicles
exiting from movies that had started in the 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. slot and the vehicles
entering for movies that would be starting in the 8:30 to 10:00 p.m. time slot. Friday
night was selected because poor weather was expected on the Saturday of the weekend
that the counts were taken.
The counts described above resulted in a trip generation rate of 0.15 trips per seat for the
peak hour of the generator (8:30 - 9:30 p.m.). Using this trip rate to estimate trips for the
proposed 2,648-seat movie theater resulted in a peak trip generation of 397 trips per hour.
It has been assumed that the trips generated by the office buildings during the peak hour
of the movie theater trip generation would be negligible.
TRIP ASSIGNMENT
The assignment of site-generated trips to the street system was originally based on the
distribution of existing traffic volumes on the streets. This is typically the method used
for small traffic studies. Comments made at the PIanning Commission meeting indicated
that the assumed direction of approach was not consistent with travel patterns observed
by residents in the area. Consequently a more detailed analysis, usually used for more
complex traffic studies, was used to refine the assumed direction of approach. For this
analysis, the Metropolitan Council's regional travel forecasting model was used to assign
site generated trips to the street system. The resulting direction of approach, shown in
Figure 1, indicates that more of the site generated trips would be destined to the south and
southwest on County Road bI-2 and Long Lake Road them assumed previously.
Figure 2 shows the number of site-generated trips that would be added to Long Lake
Road and County Road H-2 by the proposed project on a daily basis (theater and office),
during the peak hour of the adjacent street (theater and office trips), and during the 8:30 -
. 9:30 p.m. peak hour of the generator (theater only, office trips would be negligible). The
proposed development would result in increases of between eight and eleven percent over
APR-18-97 FRI 14:22 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 P. 06 . •
I1 HILLVIEW 11D. / '
'+ HILLVIEW RD.
/ 0
0
tr
. w 1 ---0 ��---- . _ ........._..
C, ROAD I -��r`a� _
o(j. .
CI i
/1/2 , •\ 0 6
f 8 F:
/Mos % 3 /o R U
42' . 0 ./ Z
5
0
~ 3%
7.-- .
3% %
c--114 1
COUNTY RD.H•2 ' CI
® •
5°I°,� 0
N10
Z
pO o 30%
0,op1.E . . DR. -
8 /O �O
3%*
< \
z
0
WOO DCREST R. MOUNDS VIEW
0
0 69TH AVE. N.E.
O
x W. J 0
DIRECTION OF APPROACH ASSUMED FOR ANALYSIS FOR THE
MARCH 12, 1997 MEMORANDUM
Coxsut?iNc GROUP, INC.SRF
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW FIGURE
DIRECTION OF APPROACH
1 I
APR-18-97 FRI 14: 22 SRF FAX NO, 4752429 P. 07
, al D
I4
CAJONM 5 N
w
=
- 0 ,
• O_
V W
7 Z Q
• tli
a a 2
F
ra .'
�
Q
0 o °
O• 0 CC i-"
_ = O 0L1.1
I-
�. W
Q in
W
izt 1G
Wlata! w u r Fes.. Q
;4- 2a » O }6
xH it�C II > tox . k o W R-
n• ❑ }
O a Ii
}
W
0 EDGEWOOD DRIVE • K.V.
' 0 O
~ I... CL
U J
❑ w
W z
1- O
r-, - C Q
CCW
u cr N Z
W
0
W
F-
V)
ao Qo N
T
NV••• CV
0 O N
LONG LAKE RD. N
V
z
c a
N
0
0
PC
tD0
• i
N C7 u U
X 0
p h
CC `'
a
N O
0
O V O
L) z
z
APR-18-97 FRI 14: 23 SRF FAX NO, 4752429 P. 08
Pam Sheldon -7- April 14, 1997
i
existing daily traffic volumes on County Road H-2 and between seven and sixteen
percent on Long Lake Road. The street traffic volumes are higher than the site generated
trips due to U-turns which involve two short trips, one in each direction.
CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Intersection capacity analysis was reevaluated based on the adjusted traffic volumes
during the p.m. peak hour of the street. This was considered appropriate since, if
intersection capacity is adequate to handle these traffic volumes, it would also be
adequate during other times of the day.
Because the estimate of trip generation during the peak hour of the street has not been
changed, and because all site access is still proposed to be to and from TH 10,
redistribution of trips would not result in a change in the expected levels of service at the
TH 10 and Long Lake Road intersection or the TH 10 and County Road H-2 intersection.
The Long Lake Road and County Road H-2 intersection, however, would experience
higher traffic volumes than analyzed previously. This intersection is currently operating
at level of service LOS 13 during the p.m. peak hour. Under the proposed condition, it is
expected to operate at LOS C or better. This is an acceptable level of operation and, in •
this case, represents an increase of only one second per vehicle in average intersection
delay.
ISSUES RELATED TO U-TURNS
•
Because the development would only have right-in and right-out access to TH 10 there is
expected to be an increase in the number of U-turns on TH 10 at the intersections of Long
Lake Road, County Road 11-2 and Edgewood Drive (see Figure 2). The existing design
of TH 10, with left turn lanes and a median, will allow passenger cars and vans, the
predominant vehicles generated by the development, to make U-turns. Small trucks will
be able to make a U-turn, but the movement is somewhat tight. U-turns would be very
difficult for large trucks.
State and county traffic engineers were contacted to determine if U-turns are typically
considered a safety problem on arterial roadways. There is no known research or
documentation to indicate that U-turns at signalized intersections with protected left turn
phases would create a safety concern. One potential conflict with these U-turns is with
vehicles on the left making right turns on red. If this conflict becomes a safety problem it
may be necessary to restrict right turns on red on the appropriate approaches.
MAY-'9-97 FRI 13: 08 SRF FAX N0, 4752429 P. 02
CONSULTING GROUP
• P , INC .
sff
Transportation•Civil •Structural ■Environmental ■Planning g ■
Traffic ■Landscape Architecture■Parking
SRF No. 0972600
MEMORANDUM
TO: Pam Sheldon
Director of Community Development
City of Mounds View
FROM: Charleen A.Zimmer, AICP
Nancy Heuer, P.E.
DATE: May 2, 1997
SUBJECT: O'NEIL PROPERTY TRAFFIC STUDY
(FOR ADDITIONAL RESTAURANTS)
• INTRODUCTION
Anthony Properties is proposing the addition of two - 7,500 square foot high turnover
restaurants on Outlot A and Outlot B of the O'Neil Property_ The entire proposed
development would include a movie theater, three office buildings and two restaurants.
One restaurant will use the right in / right out access on Highway 10 and the other will
have full access on Long Lake Road. Applebee's is an example of the type of restaurants
being proposed.
TRIP GENERATION AND ASSIGNMENT
A trip generation estimate was prepared for the proposed restaurant development based
on trip generation rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation, Fifth Edition, 1991. The ITE trip generation rate for the restaurants was
based on the total square footage of the buildings. A five percent trip reduction was
assumed for the restaurant trips to account for multi-purpose trips being made between
the movie theater and restaurants, The estimated trips generated by the proposed
development are shown in Table 1.
The trips generated by the proposed development then were assigned to the adjacent
street system using the same distribution as found in the April 17, 1997 Traffic Study
Addendum which is based on the regional distribution of population and employment and
existing travel patterns in the area(See Figure 1).
Attachment 6
One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150, Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443
Telephone (612) 475-0010 ■ Fax (612) 475-2429
APR-18-97 FRI I4:.23 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 P. 09
Pam Sheldon - 8 - April 14, 1997
U-turns are also expected to be made at the unsignalized intersection of TH 10 and
F,dgewood Drive, At this intersection, uncontrolled conflicts would exist with on-coming
traffic from TH 10 and vehicles entering TH 10 from Edgewood Drive, If these conflicts
become a safety problem, Mn/DOT could elect to post the intersection for no U-turns or
the median could be closed, This would force the U-turns on to the County Road H-2
intersection, but is not expected to create a capacity problem at the County Road 1-1-2
intersection.
CONCLUSIONS
The O'Neil property is zoned for a mix of residential and retail development. The
comprehensive plan indicates single-family residential use of the site. These two land use
scenarios represent the extremes of potential uses of the site in terms of the number of
trips that would be generated, The proposed development would be expected to generate
less than half the number of trips that would be generated by the land use defined in the
zoning plan, but more than four times the number of trips that would be generated by the
land use indicated in the comprehensive plan.
The proposed office buildings are expected to generate the most traffic during the typical
a.m. and p.m. peak hour that is experienced on the adjacent streets. The major generator, .
the movie theater, is expected to generate the highest number of trips later in the evenings
and on weekends. Most of the site-generated trips would be served by TH 10. Other
streets are also expected to serve site-generated trips, in particular Long Lake Road and
County Road H-2, which are both classified as collector streets. These streets could
experience increases of between seven and sixteen percent in daily traffic volumes,
The existing street system is adequate to accommodate the trips that would be generated
by the proposed project. The developer would be required by Mn/DOT to provide
improvements at the proposed site driveway to facilitate movement into and out of the
site and to minimize interference with TH 10 traffic.
The proposed development is expected to result in an increase in the number of U-turns
made at intersections on TH 10, U-turns made at the signalized intersections are not
expected to cause a safety problem. It is possible that U-turns made at the unsignalized
intersection of TH 10 and Edgewood Drive would create a safety problem. If this occurs,
the intersection could either be posted for no U-turns or the break in the median could be
closed by Mn/DOT.
NH:bba
410
MAY- 9-97 FRI 13:09 SRF FAX NO, 4752429 P. 03
LQ
iiir-
i . k U .�
cc LL..
�' �,
I- o CI; ft S V '
W Q o ' I
Q
d (54 '„ C 7
z = � .4- '' A LU
LU
CO
F-
o 'ft fes , , H
0 0 '' 5 _ V
Ci)
o z a rcn
�-
Y Y y F- ,00 O J in c °p Lt3
aaz � .� ,� � c � W
>^ W W Q W , ,r) `,
`t Cl. a Zti
I- ?
00anz. j0d
H u ,► n II N o NLtd
p
X 5C ~ t4 > 1...... U
Q
0<3cc
n Q HH
N 0
EDGEWOOD DRIVE u- w
-.____________________. "7 .......O (- 4
O
r-
O w
Ni LLi 0- }- 0
r O
a� v Lr
u � cV W
Z
LL!
CI11.1o
�. �, Cr)
vtt
7-
0 o N
LONG LAKE RD_
CV ,
Cil
b
N z
t.... .— .. T
4 p
0
° kJ 4. to V
O A.z
cv
z x
. or.
Q a
} p
z 2 g
0
0 V
0
O
MAY- 9-97 FRI 13:09 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 P. 04 :
11110
TABLE 1
ESTIMATED TRIP GENERATION
Evening Peak Hour Evening Peak Hour Trips
Land Use Type Size TripRate
`hips In Tries Out Total
Movie Theater 2,648 scats 0.06 102
Office 33 KSF 68 159
Restaurants 2.5 14 68 82
15 KSF 12.92 102
82 184
Total
218 207_ 425
Note: KSF indicates thousand square feet.
INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The evaluation of the ability of the existing street system to accommodate the additional
restaurant development included an operational analysis of the following intersections (See
Table 2):
• Highway 10 and Long Lake Road
• Highway 10 and Edgewood Drive
• Highway 10 and County Road H-2 •
• Long Lake Road and County Road H-2
TABLE 2
INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Evening Peak Hour Level of Service
Proposed Proposed
O'Neil O'Neil
Existing Development Development
Location
(Theater and (Including
Office Only) Restaurants)
Highway 10/Long Lake Road 8 (a) B t°) B (a)
Highway 10/County Road H-2(b) B (a) B (a) (a)
Highway 10/Edgewood Drive F(c) B CO F
(c)
Long Lake Road/County Road H-2 B
C
(All-way stop) B C
(a) Minor street approaches at Level of Service E/F.
4111(b) Assumes eastbound approach lanes as driven: one left/through lane and one right turn lane.
(c) Unsignallzed.
• MOUNDS VIEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 97-EDC 18
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNT( OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 16-SC. EEN MOVIE THEATER
AND OFFICE BUILDINGS FOR SECTION 7 OF THE PROPOSED I-?I " ''= '
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, PER THE MOUNDS VIEW MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 40a.09, SECTION
I , THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (EDC) SHALL CONFER WITH A.Ni'. /DVI
AUTHORITY ON ALL MATTERS CONCERNING THE INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY, AND
WHEREAS, PER THE MOUNDS VIEW MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 4c.m.•.•
6, THE EDC SHALL RECOMMEND ZONING CHANGES AND DEVELOPMENT OF AREA SUITABLE FOR
INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT TO THE PLANNINQ C ,.s; ;SIGN,
AND
WHEREAS, THE ECC HAS REVIEWED THE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES AND
DISADVANTAGES OF LOCATING A I 6-SCREEN MOVIE THEATER AND THREE OFFICE BUILDINGS THAT
• IS PROPOSED FOR THE VACANT LAND LOCATED IN SECTION 7 OF THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY I 0
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND
WHEREAS, THE EDC FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED USE WOULD INCREASE THE
COMMERCIAL TAX BASE OF THE CITY BY APPROXIMATELY $ I 00,000; ADD NEW FULL
. PART TIME JOBS AND CREATE A LARGE MULTIPLIER EFFECT BY BRINGING NEW CUSTOMERS TO THE
AREA, AND
WHEREAS, THE EDC VIEWS THIS DEVELOPMENT AS BENEFICIAL TO THE OVERALL
ECONOMIC LIVELIHOOD OF THE COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES ALONG HIGHWAY I 0 AND WILL IMPROVE
THE CHARACTER AND VISION OF THE CORRIDOR; AND
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION HEREBY SUPPORTS THE DEVELOPMENT OF A I 6-SCREEN MOVIE THEATER AND
OFFICE BUILDINGS FOR SECTION 7 OF THE PROPOSED HIGHWAY I 0 REDEVELOPMENT PLAN.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE ECONOMIC:
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION RECOMMENDS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THE APPROVAL OF A
ZONING CHANGE FOR THE PROJECT.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT EVEN FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT THE Cm' SUPPORT WORKING TOWARDS APPFICvAL
FCR A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION FOR THE PROJECT BUT NOT MAKE THE ZONING CHANGE
fa
CONTINGENT UPON RECEIVING APPROVALS FROM THE MINNESOTA CEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE STOP UGHT.
Attachment 7
MAY- 9-97 FRI 13: 10 SRF FAX NO. 4752429 P. 05
CONCLUSIONS •
As shown in Table 2, the Level of Service (LOS) for the intersections of Highway
10/Long Lake Road and Highway 10/Edgewood Drive does not change with the addition
of the proposed restaurants. The current intersection of Highway I0/Edgewood Drive is
operating far above capacity and, therefore, cannot be measured by the Capacity Analysis
Software.
The intersections of Highway 10/County Road H-2 and Long Lake Road/County Road
H-2 drop from LOS B to LOS C with the proposed restaurants. However, the delay per
vehicle only increases by two seconds and these intersections would continue to operate at
an acceptable LOS.
•
•
•
• J
SUMMARY OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING
• REGARDING DEVELOPMENT OF
O'NEIL PROPERTY
December 12, 1996, 7:00 PM
Mounds View City Hall
The purpose of this neighborhood meeting was to bring together the residents that surround the O'Neil property
and the people who propose to develop the site. The O'Neil property is 24 acres in size and is bounded by
Highway 10, Long Lake Road and County Road H2. It is covered by dense,mature tree stands and includes a
sizeable wetland along the west side. Donatelle's Supper Club is located next to the southeast corner of the site.
At the meeting, the developers presented their initial plan for the site. The plan included a sixteen screen movie
theater and three one-story office buildings, with the possibility of one or two restaurants at a later date. The
theater operator would be Carmike, which is reported to be the largest operator of movie theaters in the country.
In this initial plan, the theater was shown located on the south side of the property, with the back of the theater
building facing County Road H2. A 50-foot buffer area between the theater and County Road H2 was proposed,
where the existing vegetation would be retained. The three office buildings were positioned in the center of the
property just east of the wetland which runs along the west side. The development would not encroach into the
wetland area.
The residents in attendance raised the following issues, questions and concerns:
• Is there enough market for 16 screens? What is the economic viability of the project?
• Amount of traffic which would be added to County Road H2; having driveways from the development
• onto County Road H2 was considered a problem
• Condition of County Road H2—its width and poor pavement conditions. Who would be responsible for
improvements and any assessments?
• Impact on water table and drainage; possible flooding of neighboring properties
• Possibility of decreased property values
• Possibility of increased crime
• Possibility of commotion and noise from traffic coming and going to theaters
• Theater was located too close to County Road H2; should be located closer to Highway 10
• What does the Comprehensive Plan show for this area?
To proceed with this project,the developers will need to obtain approval from City Council for a change in the
zoning district on this property. The current zoning is B-1, neighborhood business, and R-2, single family and
duplex residential, which do not allow for theaters. The City Council would make the decision whether to change
the zoning after receiving a recommendation from the Planning Commission and holding a public hearing.
Consideration must be given to:
• relationship to the Comprehensive Plan
• geographical area involved
• whether the use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed
• character of the surrounding area
• demonstrated need for the use
Changes in zoning require a 4/5 affirmative vote by the City Council.
The developers have made revisions to the plan in an effort to address the concerns expressed at the first
! neighborhood meeting. The next neighborhood meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, January 15, 1997 at 7:00
PM at the Mounds View City Hall, 2401 Highway 10. If you have questions about the meeting, or wish to add
your name to the interest list, please contact Pam Sheldon, Community Development Director, at the City of
Mounds View, 784-3055.
NAD ATA IL'S ERai'AMS\SHAREIONEIL 1.SUM
•
ADOPTED BY THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW THIS •
27TH DAY OF MARCH, 1997.
ATTEST:
• CHAIR
(SEAL) LC(. C ; ,&iu �--
DIRECTOjF •F ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
•
SUMMARY OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING
REGARDING DEVELOPMENT OF
O'NEIL PROPERTY
January 15, 1997, 7:00 PM
Bel Rae - Community Center
This was the second neighborhood meeting held on a development plan for the O'Neil property. (The
first meeting was held on December 12, 1996.) The O'Neil property is 24 acres in size and is bounded
by Highway 10, Long Lake Road and County Road H2. There is a sizeable wetland along the west side
of the property. The main purpose of the meeting was for the developer to present a revised plan and
explain how it addressed the citizen concerns voiced at the first meeting. The developer, Anthony
Properties, was represented by Jay Anthony, Wendell Smith of W.R. Smith& Assoc, and John Pope of
Pope Associates.
The revised proposal shows a 16-screen movie theater and two one-story office buildings containing
approximately 12,000 square feet each. A copy of the plan is included with this summary. The movie
theater building has been moved from its original location against County Road H2 to approximately
halfway between County Road H2 and Highway 10 on the east side of the wetland. The building does
not encroach into the wetland. The office buildings have now been placed along the south edge of the
property, along County Road H2. There is a 75 foot buffer between the edge of the pavement on
County Road H2 and the office buildings. The developer intends to leave the existing trees in this
• buffer area. They are also proposing to build a fence along the south side in between the office
buildings and to the edges of the development, to screen the development from view from County Road
H2. The revisions made by the developer were intended to orient the development toward Highway 10
and provide a buffer for the residential neighborhood to the south.
The developer has obtained approval from the Minnesota Department of Transportation(MnDOT)to
have a driveway onto Highway 10 approximately halfway between Long Lake Road and County Road
H2. At this time, the entrance would be right-in, right-out, meaning there would be no break in the
median on Highway 10. One of the two driveways onto County Road H2 was eliminated, and the
remaining driveway was moved to the east end of the property. The developer thought it would be
possible to eliminate the driveway on County Road H2, if he could obtain approval from MnDOT for a
median break and full intersection on Highway 10.
Approximately 150 people were in attendance at the meeting. There was general recognition that at
some point in the future the property would be developed. Most of the people who spoke were
opposed to this project. Two people who spoke indicated that they were favorable. The concerns and
objections raised by the residents included:
• proposal was not consistent with the City's comprehensive plan
• proposal did not fit with the residents' view that Mounds View is a bedroom community
• possible negative impact on the wetland and the water table
• suitability of the soils for development
• amount of water runoff which would occur, and whether storm drains were adequate
IP • amount of traffic and traffic congestion on Highway 10, County Road H2 and Long Lake Road
and at intersections; project would add to existing problems
• anticipated problems with cut-through traffic; speeding through the neighborhood
•
• whether improvements would be needed on County Road H2 and who would pay for them
• whether parking would be adequate; where would overflow parking go
• possible negative effect of increased traffic on children's safety, since there are no sidewalks in
neighborhood
• anticipated increase in crime, trash and noise in neighborhood
• whether the project cause an increase in police and fire services, and how much this would cost?
• effect on property taxes and property values; concern that property taxes would go up and
• property values down
• feeling that there were already enough movie theaters in area
• concern that the theaters would fail and leave an empty building
• concern that the development would cause other commercial business to be developed in the
neighborhood
• concern about the type of employees and customers which would be attracted by the
development
• feeling that the location was not suitable; too close to a residential neighborhood
The points noted in favor of the project were that it would provide jobs, and entertainment and
employment for young people in the community, perhaps within walking distance to their homes. It
would add to the City's tax base and may result in property taxes going down, since the City would
receive more revenue. There was a request for more information on the costs and benefits of the
project.
Notices will be sent to property owners within 350 feet of the project site, and to anyone who has either
signed in at a meeting or added their name to the interest list, when meetings before the Planning
Commission and City Council are scheduled. No meetings have been scheduled at this time. If you •
want more information about the neighborhood meeting or future meetings, or if you want to add your
name to the interest list, please call the Mounds View Community Development Department at 784-
3055.
Prepared on January 17, 1997.
C:\OFFICE\WP WIN\WPDOCS\D EVCAS ES\470-96\ONEIL2.SUM
• Lynne Thomason
5301 Edgewood Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
March 19, 1997
•
Pam Sheldon
Community Development Department
City of Mounds View
2401 Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
Dear Ms. Sheldon:
I will be attending the Planning Commission meeting on March 19, 1997 to express my total opposition
to any proposed rezoning of the O'Neil property to accommodate 16-screen movie theater and three
office buildings. I wished also to write this letter in case I didn't get a chance at this meeting to voice my
concerns.
Living at the corner of County Road H-2 and Edgewood Drive, I will be one on the residents most
adversely affected by this development. At present time the noise from ever increasing traffic in this area
is already reaching the intolerable range. This development belongs elsewhere, not in at residential area
already too impacted by present noise pollution. This development also would remove the last aesthetic
view the residents of Edgewood Drive have. Presently we look eastward over a noisy and visually
unattractive Robert's nightclub to see an equally unattractive Fina station and looking to the northeast we
can see a congested noisy Highway 10 and Donatally's incinerator and dumpsters. The woods at the
north are the only thing in the neighborhood that is not an eye or ear sore and now someone wants to
concrete over that too? I am also in agreement with the other residents in their concern over increasing
crime rates and lower property values as these certainly will occur.
Therefore in closing please listen to the people, place more value on us than potential tax revenue and do
not allow this development to proceed.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration.
Sincerely, �--
ynne Thomason
cc: City Council Members
Mayor McCarthy
JAN-15-1997 14:49 FBNA 612 973 6623 P.02/02
Lynne Thomason
•
5301 Edgewood Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
(612) 780-6068
January 15, 1997
Pam Sheldon
City of Mounds View
Dear Ms. Sheldon:
I am writing in response to notification of the proposed development of the O'Neil
Property located adjacent to Hwy 10, Long Lake Road and County Road H2.
I reside at 5301 Edgewood Drive (corner ofEdgewood and County Road H2) and would
be directly affected by the impact of this development. I am strongly opposed to any such
development, My reasons are; This development would increase already increasing levels
40
of traffic and noise in our residential area (the noise and traffic levels in our neighborhood
have already substantially increased in the last two years). The development would
increase crime levels in the neighborhood and the unacceptable destruction of one of the
few remaining woods and wetland areas in our city.
I am asking that this proposal not be allowed to be considered as it would be detrimental
to the welfare and safety of our neighborhood.
Sincerely,
L nne Thomason
(612) 780-5068
•
TOTAL P.02
March, 0, 1997
Edward and Laurie Trettel •
740 I Park View Drive
Mads View MN 55112
Duane McCarty, Mayor
City of Mounds View
2400 Highway 10
Mounds View MN 55112
I
Dear Mayor McCarty:
We wanted to write you regarding our concerns with the development of the O'Neil property, particularly rezoning the
parcel from B-1 R-2 to a mixed use PUD designation.
Before that, we'd like to say that we've found you to be a fair and open minded mayor, and we support your
conservative fiscal policies for the city. We support your position to researching the future of the Bel-Rae acquisitoin,
as well as your stand on the footbridge over Highway 10. We hope that this responsible way of thinking will carry over
with regard to the use of the O'Neil property.
After attending the most recent Planning Commission Meeting last night it is our impression that the building of a 16-
screen movie theater would most certainly financially benefit the developer. However, it's very questionable whether
it would have any benefit to Mounds View as a community when other more compatible use (B-1, R-2) could be made
of the land. Many of us envision a time when Highway 10 will become "Old Highway 10" and we will have a main
street in Mounds View. A theater drawing patrons from a 5-7 mile radius does not facilitate this long term goal.
Bur ing a theater of this size ar
'6�0� parking l p ng spaces) in our little town does little to serve the citizenry. Rather, Mounds
View would simply be saddled with a number of problems -- traffic congestion, crime, diminished property values, and
other safety issues. While we might be providing a service to movie patrons within a 5-7 mile radius, is this what we
want to do as a community ? Does Mounds View really want to be the custodian of a 16-screen movie theater '?
We trust that you will continue in guiding the city in the prudent and responsible path that you have charted in your
administration thus far.
e�gards,
. al
Edward L. Trettel
.aurie J. Trettel
•
APK-02-97 WED 04: 10 PM BURNET REALTY FAX NO, 6126369499 _ P. 01 5 W cl ./t.) -. „
PA/74;n (0m A,5s ; (PAte
.,/eASz Ace, f/reSe 6oil cQRN5 IN 01 ;- w eN yob 40
C' e leeis or✓�.tN ie CAA
A / X4°/eC-1i r
yo i.A
!) �/ ase , Ade A Cpr- ;c - ( eie ONil
Rm,,,4(: ., ic 5 , � ,
/160 wti /
-, ZAtsel .
�Cc� R @ iS r / 3 ok /0070 -�� /f ? Wj,eee w I(
ar✓ 1-Ac �hca�e2 lae�,.� yz �.� !1/ �y ��
- t -Ck.�.� 7 11 vi 61'4 3 s w, 1-"j LA)kei s; 4e24.4. kc
-��G -�QA �-1-cC C�yv,
t:,); ' 1 Cons(.0Lee) Carrie. ?
Loc, 42. R�kC.�ty�
P.) why PAse C. s PIA: 14-a-1 n5 y /K % 1204 G/wliJ $ (h-a1vFAK
eC7cy
l
-.7- 3) 1,5 -i- e se ge. 1 r 5 he tss ei6 (e. Ito 3 e.4- -f(,,;s ee--ironeci s . '
A„ 6A< t' -f° -tie 60," LAK. ;4 ?
� mo/d J
y11 Is fie�e s�r�
L� ce a-r .p,471--74,,a3 ) / .y/ J / r/ 1
' A i 4 S v.-f- i n %N 11 ! itee(e� e o (....3e. h A o e. 1/1 4t�•t cry'
5) 4)714.
rr SU.cesS Rafe. d `l 1-IA•i -11-4€Rrid' ,e,
ff� II •
, e--?O►1i�`Y c?r� f�eS Cieve`ap�Cst�.
1- 0 An u,C fru-4. A T `"P'e'' ) hRf fke deozfo '�e Pu-f s `p A.
�Z k[5c) 'eDu'ee��e� w i (I �yoe �iAeda -r; ({ 4'�e`�
L'Rn E D7t;ce ,D15. 50 -14c�_
�GST�� � SAS k. rr\ as Lovckn ;�{of ,
Av G mcee v .r 5e-TT r c�r+fo 3Cr v
b t��� �,,d AS(,e � d
W4- A'6'.-- ma^ _ , ,, ei. 3 c eeiLalt & l�Kte.c.
7, Cin ��rSG v' �f(�� r /
ccr4 c5 Lj-I'' t. — ' ta'14. Pc-ice.1
t a 'f _tail� �ea�l(o��e � nof CIfrrC cd-yt420 ( pee,SvYtSI
Eecia ii,..„:„.[6nce e. ov-2 Gcrnnl„n r4'� 50 i T s Nol •4
'tom a,`` rr i C 1 r� i"-- ., c r+'1 �°!s1 A- t
�� VFW T pe�� SeC ok �eAfZ .� N'
kilt k a vt , �e (1 do W ivrf S
A rAv
a
!k� 03-et-
-T f ��G ati -14e.. d afkie. C1e•7efopee ickf e
5.( .1 ceee.6 , •
ERNI ,nAAL A
W— Gag 551 q
•
OIN TER
MEMO
OF F ICE
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Pamela Sheldon
Subject: Materials for O'Neil Property Item
Date: May 11, 1997
Enclosed you will find the remainder of the materials for items on your agenda related to the
O'Neil Property. These include:
• Exhibit 1 to Resolution No. 5104, the resolution adopting a comprehensive plan
amendment from medium density residential to mixed use PUD for commercial uses on
the O'Neil property. Exhibit 1 shows how the map for District.1 would appear in the
Comprehensive Plan.
A copy of the new map and of the existing map is included. If City Council approves
• Resolution No. 5104,we would have the art work done to add the natural features to the
new map as is shown in the existing map.
• Resolution No. 5119, which would adopt the general concept plan showing a 16-screen
movie theater, three 11,000 square foot office buildings, and two restaurant sites.
• Ordinance No. 598, which would approve the change in the zoning from R-2 and B-1 to
Planned Unit Development (PUD)for commercial development.
Also enclosed are two letters received from citizens, and a memo to the file with comments
received from Ed Donatelle. Finally, there is a copy of a news article on the theater project from
the Pioneer Press.
Order of Business
The O'Neil project involves three items:
• Comprehensive Plan Amendment
• Action on the General Concept Plan(required for PUD zoning)
• Action on the Rezoning Request from R-2 and B-1 to PUD
Staff has consulted with the City Attorney on how the order the various actions associated with
• the O'Neil project. He has advised the following:
Mayor and City Council •
Page 2
May 11, 1997
Comprehensive Plan Amendment:
We have advertised the comprehensive plan amendment as a public hearing item, although there
are no specific procedures for handling such amendments in the Code. City Council should hold
the public hearing and take action on the comp plan amendment(Resolution No. 5104)before
taking action on the general concept plan and rezoning.
General Concept Plan:
The general concept plan is subject to a public hearing. Mr. Long has suggested that City Council
hold the hearing and take action on the general concept plan(Resolution No. 5119)to determine
if the uses and site layout are acceptable before taking action on the rezoning request.
Rezoning:
The rezoning request is subject to a public hearing. If the general concept plan is acceptable, the
City Council could proceed to hold the hearing on the rezoning request, introduce and have first
reading of Ordinance No. 598 at this meeting. Second reading would occur on May 27.
Staff would suggest that the City Council hold a combined hearing on the comp plan
amendment, the general concept plan and the rezoning, subject to the advice of the City
Attorney. •
N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\DEVCASES\471-97\CCMEM0.2
•
•
City Council Resolution No. 5104
May 12, 1997
Page 5
EXHIBIT 1
\ ' I ( I l DISTRICT 1
NL_____J 41l6V1EI'M 1.�1 4M0 I ARK i� 1 I tl V V—
i0 \ / I C CAKW000 OR
\/,„
J
y ��
Y ( z. C
:2 S _ L'4-)L?
z
21
MU—PUD a `"
0 \NI
\i x.0,:m::` G -, C /HC I' !< Si -
' : L r.
c rt - o r
t: :i:K:iii:ii:::iiiii5.:i:Aiiii:::i. 4 -v., ..ii.V2iiMC t [
J
1 ego,sc, Il
h TER
Va.
y J
.. ..............--.....,,,,,.. ... . . ..., Nr1 •;48C7T
III 5.
l �i HD 1111 arU—PUD (L! V' 1
.....�- =
i.
--to 1 z j 2-... 7-
i iz
ave O
l sn JSA I I ...II _l I
PROPOSED LAND USE
LD Low Density Residential
MD Medium Density Residential
MD/MHP Medium Density-Manufactured Home Park
HD High Density Residential
NC Neighborhood Commercial
HC Highway Commercial
IND Industrial
MU-PUD Mixed Use PUD (Planned Unit Development)
MU-PUD (LI) Mixed Use PUD (Lower Intensity)
MU-PUD (HI) Mixed Use PUD (Higher Intensity)
S School
C Church
P Park/public facility
NATURAL FEATURES*
❑ Floodplain/DesignatedWetland
III 0 Steep Slopes
❑ Tree Massing
*Approximate locations-subject to detailed review at time of proposed development.
uistr Iul t
"J(II I I W
12 I) �^IIHILLVIEW IL II II ROAD II I� ��
/11 N 0 di
GAKw000 1
cr
• t~/1 N, N C
44 .J0 o, .//
Z' Z [
3 a z
X
W 0 Q U -
COUNTY
W O 2 O CC
3 Wm ROAD ink ® r
HCIn
N R�
Mixed __'''.7: H i
Use \ __ � .. A.i. DR.
•
it _ . L
. PUD .� .
Civic - .j MD
mkt ,`� . ,. ,
•
: T.i ,� Center
•
_ .) ,, 6
_BRONSON .
• '74)- L D di ' IF
'1 0 0
,FicEIN0 CT
• 1 , • . ,..
TI II II ® S 1 I C II HC I ‘...„. �,
proposed land use natural features*
__ Flood plain/metro area
L D Low density residential designated wetlands
M D Medium density residential al Steep slopes
M D/T Medium density - trailer park VII Tree massing
H D High density residential *Approximate locations - subject to
detailed review at time of proposed
NC Neighborhood commercial development
HC Highway commercial
III IND Industrial N4‘9 QIP
S School 01G
C Church
171
P Park/public facility
:F
• RESOLUTION NO. 5119
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR COMMERCIAL
DEVELOPMENT ON THE O'NEIL PROPERTY, 2430 HIGHWAY 10; PLANNING
CASE NO. 471-97.
WHEREAS, Anthony Properties Management, Inc. and Louise O'Neil have applied for
approval of a general concept plan for the development of a 16-screen movie theater, three
11,000 square foot office buildings, and two restaurant sites on property bounded by Highway 10,
Long Lake Road, and County Road H2, and described as follows:
Part lying southwesterly of centerline of STH No. 10 of southwest 1/4 of
northwest 1/4 (subject to roads, highway and easements) in Section 08,
Township 30, Range 23.
WHEREAS, the applicants have submitted a general concept plan prepared by HLM
• Architects and dated 2/7/97 which shows the general location of uses and buildings, walkways,
parking areas, access points, access drives, buffer areas, and open space areas to be left
undeveloped; and,
WHEREAS, the PUD stipulations attached to the general concept plan specify the
maximum densities, minimum setbacks and maximum building heights to be allowed, and special
criteria applicable to the development to this PUD; 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 2/7/97
4. Traffic Study prepared by SRF Consulting,dated 4/17/97
5. Traffic Study(for Restaurant Sites)prepared by SRF Consulting,dated 5/2/97
6. Preliminary Drainage Calculations
7. Available Utility Connections for Water, Sewer and Storm Sewer
8. Market Summary
9. Summaries of Neighborhood Meetings(12/12/96, 1/15/97)
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.
• 503-97; and,
. 1
City Council Resolution No. 5119 •
May 12, 1997
Page 2
WHEREAS, the proposed general concept plan is consistent with the Mounds View
Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of the Mounds View PUD Zoning District; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council does
hereby approve the general concept plan for the O'Neil Property prepared by HLM Architects
and dated 2/7/97, subject to the stipulations contained in Exhibit 1, and to the requirement that
approval be obtained for a development stage plan and final plan as provided in Section 1120.04
Subd. 3 and Subd. 4 of the Mounds View Municipal Code.
ADOPTED this 12th day of May, 1997.
Duane McCarty, Mayor
ATTEST:
•
Charles S. Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator
(SEAL)
N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\DEVCASES\471-97\471 CP.RES
110
ts, ON
Z II
r: tn
•
_ ZZ 0 (0oCU c .24 ' S O`n ° y ° y € Q Wp I ocp C w
s-
"C' P. aoEy £ z UW
° O
c`o � � ,Q c 0
a) cov0i
O. •c usa> � � o1 �
(11
p ;n O •% O� ti :II co co ca ca N N
L • y cp U U U U U U U 0
h (0 D i C 0 ` CU ca Mat Mai cv ,Q.1 Z
a) NO NN i N,co ci, ,o 0 � - 000MtnolcoapO p•, —+ O
CD M <v 0io" PUH • • it ya1 �
'•Q x N 2 L •y 1 C h Z. 0 3 _y ✓S
c EE as 0EZyoa�i 8 qWO
co L a 'c ' 4, , c .0 z Q p H
a a1 aT
ils" Ili ° � � 01e. 4 U
a)0 � � � � � •E a3zo�0 3
W as a) N c c .O L y a 9. +' a) U
C 3 t. a. of m i •p z aT ° ivy 0 a) = O
'E 0 U (n cm L " a, z z, co C C 0 D
a 0 cn c = z ..o y alp cava ° a) a) � c.� MQmv ._ W
E-� � N < = a) -6ccu i 0) L. txa) zac0o ° m = ala) a) a) a) a� -• -
Ww = Ecva1a1 —zc " m a1 UU ` Las
H
c\i c�i 2Oaccce `• a1 �. ° a1 =CD vi FL- 000aa5E°-
0 w
O . j Er is, "tl `.'17,-,)ti•L�, ! i ��' .: , .? •n O a
%�:..:i.. y,;'�::iS.ls: f:'-'-'"'----1c{. �r °` ' .�'^ ,tet'k t%g « 0
co co
c'13 t14H79i1•Ji'1 x O r�>r / Gs�,•14....L,34'
.•f� —7:•:=:.....---.--'4.----,::t' 1..«0.it 0 ..-.
• > -
"-` ..r., q. r --@4a Ab9 . ..4.-_,..q.„../-_ „. ',3d1e8^.i1-.....�..Jrta.L. r a)
i :�i 1 ...«w^ J�.;^ns-••--•-^-y--war-..
If ; / 3, 1 ,....-‘,..h.1..:__i a (Q
44
a ; , `
\ \ \; \\• \ _� _ NH 7SY 1 ii! • „ \\ s % ,..'', \ ',\' ! f------.'%*•;t--Y.:.; a)f
1 !..-5 l:i:i-a-4V, /
i -!! a
if - >'e•-/Os�f/\ \N.\ \\' 1\.\\\\\` ,\\`:`',\\\` \.\\ w.'�eilk li Y s.4Yiiv:,# "".' N
31s.
• (ft 427 ."-4'.N., 4 cs -'71i , l'i T'
c \-0...-1,.4
�•'• °t H.
0 �' 00
C i . 4 a1. :#,w" ,,, cv c a O
�_ •../.:` 2 .\''''?
`'• 7',It•CS h, ., o cal;�: r� �,' ° iF -J ~ Z O CW�J
`-" 0O 0 Na
co 0 4 CO of c0i CO O 0 j 15 a)
a 0 co co y y coy0 .� n
'02 ":1: d 0
c 0 `j vi p 0 16 CO ` Gni a ,p O c- 0 76 a Cr
0ztm Zti € .... M ...CO c ,y 0 R � Z W a 48 L> .c y o pz
c a) � � a) m o "'"•16- ; � c E 4 y 4 ° � c °c Z
0) 0 N -o 0 Q Cly y y O i O y 0 y C O p w 0
•S. O O '0 0 s, co E 0 tz E 1 O O 01 •Q L O y cs �.
.Q 0 0 O 0 0 U ,C o q� 0of O v al ° � Oh w N ,C v]
O O C O co U ..- co O 0. s10 ° .0 O y 0 y y N c y y
N co a) co00
7 a (o 0 �O c L Q D) y y 0 c L La 0 V
O a u) a) O 0 - 'Q • 0 o ,c 0 o U Q. w 3 •s, �O]
.8 � 0 V � g� 0 8 y
O w L O U 0 0 0 0 0 0 ` W O C y j c? O CLO co •0
ON y Q c0 Z Q O cVII Q c h U a •;�O Cj y +� c y y' s i V fs.
A � °) � o 4yoE35 � CI 0c) b, aaac� ccoco apz
co 0 ; 0 N U O ,Q o O p L S a O y a _ O
.w .e .° y 0, E o c `(° ? a) 48 0 o c 0 0)� o •0 ,° ami F" ta
Q. O C ° Q + y U
j .0 ' 11 ' .. C1. 04) 0. GOi O N Q 0 p 0 -5 O 0 o cp) co 43 0.1
O Q. O o c .:
' Cs C I_ fu c•-••• O\
O C J 0 O i. a) 0 a > • a) -O o\ .-�
. E = a rn °- .. co Ta ° ' E 0)-0 •- ° ai °- O 'L N _n. O Z
Ejcisa) .Sto mit Ro'- 0 C °"00' o 2.' c9g .atu Z
00_ 0 -- .-. 00 X a N w , > •a) 0 0 R CLO.. 0 l = a) o IF; U
LL)
O
= W0500- " O C ` 3 C O al C •
w O 0 +� 0 -C N U
C -C j •N Ta 0 ° 0 ° E fQ L a N Q' O U N a) `-
y 0 'cp N O> C a ` L CO '- L_ 0 N N O 0 13 w O 0 0 w ( O
oc � a"= a- v) 00) ,-,>, 0_ Accu - . C3a
fQ �► ccoo � � Cc ° O °) •� coa c — oai
•Da, -CN °) o ( °. ca) "•' U � >,-' w
en iu a w .c 0 (71-- o)•E a c `O IL- c- a ° > •E ami a) co cn cCT3 m w a � z
C C L U) co cn 0 a) w L O> 0 0 L 0 o a. 3 w. E w c O ° O
0 _
U co C C a0- a c �, •: >, U C L a) 0) a m O 0 O O O -° 0 a a) ~
,� • ° > o cu N E 0 •c v) ° a3v c m `mom > � � m � !
t' ° -D ii _ � v a i L O d w — a) ° a) a) 0 o � a) (1)
No Ns c - - ° a °cD 46 cin (U0 3 cu E vH c°� o a�) -t3 cu l" aa)) a) vi- Q W O
L U) a) L n. 4.. .a t3) O U) .2 L ,C O C w O r1.- '0 cn
aacoLcoa) = - as0 > toC U) 03c U Lov) cuE
C a E ° �'— L O R o UL t ooh N a) a) m O H
o ° 0 0 cct 0 .� N C N > •• ° 0 cn O ° Fa O N U
coco ° cN3 — = 'a
c L ° ° � O N � Q >, H Rw t .. X C ca) sY .: aoi .� W
O L L ° >,_ Til _ .E +. O w N ' O O w O O U) Q ° U L cu U - C
V "_' ,,_ .2 = c O> 7 — p 0 't7 4- U) Z, O co a) N U N O O ° 'O O 0_ Q
2 3c ° :' RI .-' a moo oQas ) C .. Ln �u ccn00
° E '3 m 0 ° > ca -Ewcu •a ° Q
E-y N 0 a) c v_c a) cII 2' c.,Za 47,—.... 0 (-2 W a ° 0 — c 7,,- 2, ° L N co o
�, a) O C t6 a) X L U -
Z C C 0 ° 0 0 O > O N a. C ° as >, .0 0
o a) ., - C N C U) U) vi co O p C tp ° O C U1 0 �, U O
(� C V ° U) t3 U)as a) 0 0 L 'Q QJ `- to a) C •«- •- "O a) o 0 " ' a)
}' p OCN ••,• 3 c00 (4 :L. W ° m ° °' � ° � c°ic � 0 0v°') ° ° C x
.-a tII L C y C L C .O Q 0 0 L •U " Q
.0 O c a) U > U N L 4. O b to > ca 0 Ua) as c O 0- Q E�
wj • 3U 82 v° al) aE r: Z ac) C a pi c 3 U c°) c`u aQE. cu.. � -
0 Q Q
O
ZQ a) CD .N � � � a
w C C U) LU Q) C c c — a"
�.,- O f� O -0 cu 0C ° co .c O — ° a) �3
- O w O L
°-tC To '5 h-- ° v vo o esc`uv) 0QN
a o a) a) E c— 2 043 Eos rn � "�'-
Ocuco
a) _ ai al— � ° xfQ ° _c0) c oa ° a) ›. a
co ..c 0 �`� a) ° ° a) mo C co- w o •c ccu Qc ° a) -2 '~ o
ci0 c '••- � . L3 � ° cco ° cz
w s a) 3 cp co c m a) o a) or 't m ° 'v c a
ND E ao toNa ° ) ° t)13 a) c o c c o cLuE-' E �
Oau- 5 Eti �c a) ,_ a) ca c c rno ° . co cU °' v' c ° ° >
�- _ca) vc L0
C 0 OL o ' N 0 — o N •C ° .N v) 'a C u) 4... Q � a) Q °'
a) a. «- D UN. 0) 0. N R 0 a) c 0 Q o ° � C 0 cu .co
C) E 2 al 3 a `° s ac) u) a) a >°, E � °o 0- c0 Q > co E :a > L -- � o Z
a) o00C
o N — w. J A Z c .. E � ° 0 ., � E CD a) v t4 n..c O o 0 L 0 cu °
I- > Z oco = N v°i C 'v o 0 3 ° ID —° p CD
c � cw as > � Q= om a � a
C cml0 m -OCO ° •° CU > o o '0C >+v C ° 3• Q E � ..0 0CT) CI ° U
O «) = y L t3 ° Q L O C .0 C ° = L y •aj a) ° �. a) a 0 W
a a � L -°a cu — cu m a)00) ca° fit 0) co c a) a0U �� m a) o � v' w
4- O a) �0 O a) L C fQ p 15 O 0 E- .0 N = C 4- O C -0 E O L C >, Elf °O Q
C C C ° C 4 C C O a) Ti to a) O N C O 0 > i" U .Q. o1 O .c 0 o � 0 Q
0 O cu C a) ° - > c -0 a) 3 ° m U a� ° U U 0)-5U 0 ° c,,)
U 01-10--7710043 E c v' 0 •- o Y v) > c w o ° •C .c � ° 0 o o c v O
0 Fa N a C a i'=• C a. O a) 0 =U 0 N C y c0II O "- •C O co L O U 0.......z CU .c N Q
c• a) � O Ccn c 0w > •N o ° 0 '°" a) vice 0 � o 0 3 � CD C �
H ! fla) COV a) CN • o> o- ° o c � >, ti cnq m iii a cu.: 0 0 0 0 0 -0 c a) a O
U. 0 N U O °- as ` 0 O O tU 0 •0 O C C 'C 13 2 2 - ° •C a , -• m
a.0- c) 0 � c aa) c 071 m m asa CO 0 o c - 0 c c E a o ° a.ul woCW7
CO ■ Qv) CtO (UO ■ avvLi � > 0 V ■ U.. o0 �u � c000..N � a� n ONa
rn ..
cQ � o ai ai c r. —
o (1":19e' ° .� a E m •c m a) 0 o, _,
M O) a. E ) a §' M .c •N cII = - Cp .--. ,r1
No m ao E o m = mca >, T o p 0 .ca- >+ m `- 0 •
'tn v' a1) = ° m 0 Q-m .0.Sw ... .ao m � 3 o m - a cC E m pz
cac) a�;ioa>i - Esaci = oac) c >, ; cc`a ai 'cai0 -, - z n zz
cv Q >.vo ' 1-- m m ° .. E N m o a� c = 03 .2 w- e 0 ,-60ccw0
E = ., .S • rL. L C m co >+ m U +' N to m m ° '-'
L o mks C •0 , E t_ , = �- ° 00 c o rn >tat cu cs " °- v
-a m y ,mw E � N C4-' := 0 .-E � _ — > 0 r ,� co .ov n c°v o C 11
00
E a> 5 ° N i- o a� mA ow. E 0� ° _ c , .0 -(2, m 2 >, 2 = E
E c a° o m -- ani ai » u°i c _Cw � -o ..c` ,_c o o 0 N a c o r�
m M.-C m a C ca C ) O -0 c N m C - Z m v cu ,U cW o > ' O
� 'a o °- as a� c ,c ca cn m t m ,-- c v .S Q. a°) a,_(17
i ° c a) a, a c a � z
CU a) 20 a O
rnm't m m o o ,° m - E a°) � 3.w m ,-- c
c om vY N a .° m � t' a
acUL- mol � .couc0m ° '4- -Ral fl-t� moami •c03 R � �,
.0 m cQ C O — , > 0 w uJ m O r uJ I- m m U
C '0 V c0
a1 m Sat ca aomm m ° > -mv > C - - aY >' o o wi " 0 m C)
001:1Z ° N 3 N ° •tn 0 EP ° Ov m 0 ) mi ›..,-, 00
ate) a) a) C a" - 00 -0) � . a) L� w0
r' NP o cvo 0L a) •S " n mU a� Et m ` C. 0 -00W ..c01- ,-C,
C '> o C a) m .3 (U m Ea. 0 O c 3 m o o p .S m -075.= --, 6 :13 F1
3 cv o 12 3 co = E ' sL coo c ma coa 6 3 av°� ( .as -0m a0 O ...)
_ a U L m m o3 as vg -- 7) " v
t o as 3 >,L m L .- m w m n C tr c -v .... to
0c0 (2 = a z_= aaci aEi i ° a) ow ` cv ami .0Z _ c C m w. as ow- 0
_ a= c= (ni o c•a)° Ew o as -o o . ,° m0 0 ,- `= 0) c o E -0 >
C u) u1 c0 w p a 0 m > 3- as m L L L_ m O L m m w c0. 0 _ 0 .c a'C m as
Z m '� m > o ..- - o � '� c ami y �' �' m -aL cy- m ca ° C o. ao v'
0 co C .. . ,- O O to �' c E > `� C V ° 0 w .� a U (U `' •�
w as (*)0 0a) 3 >.v ,_ o0E0 - Nas ° cv " c c c me 0
m C . L , E C0 ,c a3 c t4 ai as N w w w o H E - c0 m •a m o w E
a c c� EHm0a- 3 mmtoto 0 an1ai m0Em .S _ asc w
[� Q m .. N m m m c m to as = cc C o m to 'c .c m '� = E ° E cQ .•- o >
> x
r d •5- cram . " > mw = , ort . .� .coa? 3 aiaEas `° a) -05o H
aw .0 �- O m +. c0 3 m o m L aa) 13 O m as 0 e- L m a c o C C ° a
w Q aa,2V tnr- as 0 Cw, aV OO .0 E E ..- 1- 0a1-04(5 O osao ._ as
ow Q •
aH >
w 04
z 0) L O a,
O 3 v' m ,.•- :v o c0 w 8 L v' aci o a
Z .n ami c 52 � c o L m � N C cZ 5va�>i C m
_ _ N C _
° ° a3 u) II «• 45 °
,.a L.: 45 as= Move m — C0 LC Lm • 0 "-
i +- bQa X0oTJm Ua m .c -13 -13c0 mav
m ` c - n. O L- O = m Z m H c ° m m m c �' ° C f- O
L m U m L L L X m
0m a� N0 ma � tn �iEvim ° E — F- am m
LL V O C a) v O C ° " 'a 1- = m .c - m o aJ " O C U
m > O 'a C c c0 > m m a O m : C C V O O (U u' C to
C m p t0 oma m m € c0 E > as > -C p m m as
V c0 ' U mN w w 0 a mmm 0 ao U c m
m • L.. 0).>- E C I.- .r, tn � Ego c .5V c m °- m m S E
UU) ....„ 000 _ , 00O C — 00 - =
C c p _ C O C p p aJ :_
>, a) -a U cu w C 'C 0 O c m m >.'cap O O E L
m .c m 4- 004- c C 'a) ,„'- co) C O w m E as .c .- U 0 O m m .°) m
� o a) m ' '- .S o_. NU ° a� .tn� � Z a� E � mu;
Uca C > = - 41) 1(i)- CC mLcm mo ° mcmpcmm ca 5 = z
m m 3 > — a°? •3 'C vi 'CC c� w as 0L_ ca 0 -OM co ° .S L C w
a 0w to c '- 0 0 c 0 m 0 ° c0t C c •-' o m 0.C .c c > 0 v' U
c c) 0 > c C ° L mm a
mi... 'cob ..c0 ='° o ( c �aaascu0 - - -o2 -� omouate- _c' c O
vim
a a ° . f- >. a w O) um' t(U
2 0 a ui va) ° ° c .a m .n Q .° -Q w
mm ootoE ` = o cm n 'Cvim ° ° ' to3asecaa- �. m w
'. o ` aomyo ac = w c- m . ,3- 1- 000 - 00c- .c3 ,- • mm . cam c w
aNas .CcIIZHo ccv o acim L. c ,° 0m0c as 8o A
u) 0 >. R U) O O >' - 12 c (U 0 d) -c Q = as m O V -0 13 ,C m C N o '
080 ° c a2 vc) " 6 `° '° f ,.C-, c 0 " '> N 'n 7 Uc U p) m ° c '45R
° _o
fn C U L 0 — o0 m O € c m R m �.- c yC 03 /-= 7130) ai N m ,-. 4) 0
m c > w ,
m 2 ,° acv o m ,° m ,e m E .. o •oL � U) y c � > aa) a'w 3 cv0
Ca '3 to m o •L m aam C to ` m O C � .. m tII ` 0 �, m m o a- os-
-C —
C O a p = Q ,C L a m Q -p O ` c0 L o0
t- asm c � oECU c;n :,. c LmafQ) ° � as c . a? ,_ C ° Ca tnc0 Q 1.,
`-° c m m � as m a, m _ 0 0 m m` ° y � L corn > ,aJ u) o .ca o mc a00
OL oem — c 2 E 2 c 3 `� > m ooQ w m 20
_ u) 0 c Q.,0 +� 7 — O O N a 3 .-«-- " .-• • O> u' O m O u' C u) -II 00 C ail""
, o0 0 tnL m v) cva 0 c 0 m cg c c as -p am m 0630 — w o w
m .cV U' `o m Q am) of < n OLm. ac`ca m (Uo0 - 0. (U (' QU s ZM <C
o .. 0 p � I- 3 ONa
U) Om - ETU'
N C\
O m - V •C >, O O JO O L -
_ 1% -"E' 73 .-.
._.
M m000 ‘_ "5 H N - U O O y V
m O O w .r L C C ‘0.5
E _ 2 ,7)
N L OL >, >, C O
• O to d 3 .�= ca N O N O ° w v-. o (a O z
L E w C N O - N ,F :a..7 a V �► .a N V L O �_ to O O z Z
Tri O O N .0.
N ° `= w: L O (6 W C 0_�O c o O) C O C r%j
O 0 ..-. X c 0 > .L -t t- O 17: E (40.. 0 -0 ,«, = :4> O '(v .cs _x U0
LL O O
w O aI.-. aco 0 w o f O C C C C ._ (v v)
v) •.•. p),C U O (6 )
". - c w O c O-.- co o i T) C O C O U O U E N
°� 3 � s oJs o -. m a°Ci ow y o 3r 4- EE -
. aC) � Oz
0 ..
cca c O Us co _I- (UCU Ur � os o .� m N N --°° O ac p. -, c)
ms -mm .cU i-- -c0 1Q co . 3t �
U L c'� c __ c ° N o U O N N N 00 > 4) ..., ,, ...pQ.� v C x
.c _c = c ..xULmo ams ° E3 u. 30u) 3 ° amioa Qw0
co ° cc - ,- E c c aoi 3 ° o .g mawv c N o .- w-. .co -
0 0 E ' O c 0 55 -g c 0s n O O o - •c 3 .n a) o a) 0
QUi 7c - „„) . -„ , >, ac, .. (U oF' o ° x a�uv o ,� U
� c o ° s -J - rn `L° ,0 .,.. „.. .v ._ a0 E ca•0 __ LU' U .. cV o C
O ° Lcoa oSVO � s0o aoO � � ao " N -'c `� c � o w
r.. a0V -c c7) L � � c) u) o° co ca ° ° m 3 2 = c.) N o " '� j
E O c O 3 c V (1) ,„ 2 'ai
(�"/) N -Q .L+ L '>
0 3 O cfl a 0 t C N C W O O N a) O ... U _ U) (U U c p C')
o tLn a N U O T C L ta 0 C U O c o cc -5 = E CI
> V N c.0-co w �° 0 - _J 0 >,0 7 E .c 0 O N - 'w c p a = u
F" V c� c aE o 0 oV •o4- ? m >,-° -c O ao c4- > E -co >, 'i >' o L O
Z o N L 0 O V �= c .0.. O j C O v E = 00E -g = ,- 92 -0 O .c O
›. a' .. L J v _ N -a .«: c) L _ c R ,- "E . i N U -0 ,_ = 0 >= wow ~ v iti °r O u O x
W M .0 ...' U O O L X . q t O O 1fj L
w - I- a M (C .C .0 (0 O (v , H -co V U) .- I- ... a 0 (U « ,_ C)V ,- H(15110-
6 00 0.
a Q C
O
40 ,-,
W a) c -•- a
o 73 C cm " �- L o fa cII a
- oui me n3 c E - motZ10O o,c ."' a 0 O v � w d
(Q .-' O tLQ a 0 L N N Cl) a Z CU >. 2 N Q _Z O
p o a 17 ,....... 0 - 0 Z U) " 0 -cm - 0 ^= G 0 -5 0 a b- o p V
a � Ec � cl- oa) a� o Ooc _w �: a)'•- o 0 ,. � c c
OL N l0II C D (II U) '- O 0 15'c I) O 2 E .c O N w L E E •- LL!
0 U 0 E O o C c (0 a C .� O ,c) E O--am - • o Q mo N
cQ cc 'Ti; 0 o 5 o a) 2 E •,i aai °) 0 0a au a.
c o (u a9- 0)t = (nce -Z o O a7n -- cs N � Cl) � cn o c o
15 2 o) w � L aa'c ,oc o o-Q y C >,--15 ~ rn oV � U .(n >,
o f 'Q ° O C O J O C tLL. w U C C 7 0 C NE
tII LOn > 0 0 a.c o 0 co1'2 ° 1V ma) L (v Lo > ° o c�Lv ° m a�'i QcQ
U) �, >. o-N 3 > 3 ,Q J w 0x - a R 0 - m ,- ;5o
°) .' e C c CD Ez
"
QL .•. C c O 0 0 U) _ > t .0 V V O' a 4,..7 O O (II d) O W
Uw U NV c � '� U UY = C O 'er � V 0 .. O N a) Q a)
0 0 0 0 o c . a3 L c •., V) CO .c 0).0 a
> = 0 v2 R = aQ 0 (7of ami ›, , o 'c 7 �) Em › ... - c ..-ai O
0 E o = -....
U) V E U' V >, .U_i-.6.1 c= V oZ Q- a°i .c . w ao o w
O -c 0 a4_
L .� 'Q o ,� w tQ N U) +-' J E O L >+• 00 -.F.C >, = O (Q y.. V 0... w
0 4' v p a +.. .c CU m C c L r V C) O O C O E C O L I Q
V U .-. O N = V ' U) "' O w C U - 0.� L L,7 ::) , : : :
Z U O "' v) O E~
. N C R 2 N O1 E O ' ' 0) O N = w O O ms-, - - = = -
,- o. 8 N
o a � 'N 3 a�°i 0 3 t o m C qac =
2t 46 ,50- ,- ..1 n o Qo
c m ova. ol5 ax) m Ns •c (n a� (o (� N E N c c� E o CD E cm
W "
II >, L ! C)fQ . ` U) V = "" E C a r V O Z O co a O> -t (L)
c r c .
d N o c21- = .0)V . Za
a 0 V a C C E O L 0. 0o .00 .., 3 w x z.
0 c Q coi V ,� o (v ca :Q o > c N CU O W (ts U) (a a ('� O
0 C C CU U) a) V a ° •L xv'
0 .....
. O 015e0 - - = O O N - N C V C a U O c w C7
I- 3w '- H- vJH cow O Lts E os N E o = 3 zed
3 H o o L a.. ._ ._ o a 0 111 ■ ■ 0 c-v a
L.
m L. m 0 C c t-- ,
2 L C .c 0 L m 0 a al O N �'-
m p - o a .a 3 L m m v)
o c" cO c ci) a) o -- L CII coo r m oo t~ W a) `r d
0 0 a a) o to >:.-c w. a)•n :.. L
7
2 a m y mt O c c c aZi me v c° aci °'cn ZZ
.. m L �_ to 2 - 000 N C C. S O a) 3 rn N w .° m e W O
ct>aONm2N C °7 " NZ ° 30 °m .N Na � � a0X QH
� Lw o 7, .0...., o .0 .0 3 0 0 y > . E glr, 3 c a) a) U �
- o 'er m v m - -°a c a"Q •cV o � >, c) ° N o a>iw � O
p L ... N O L N c� Tel
•C •C O V = c O O C CO m 0 _. (LII .. c`a Z Lij
vl
R = L C E N O a) m > ('"2"13 ." )- E c : ) E U " O c -
Lco3 = •— ma) c _o0 2 N - ° cXmm �ac3 ° < 0
Emma-co
c -c-ti ETH — m � • tam o ° N Q-L O O C a � Z
w N U ° O >, N R N L N C C N C'= U N U >, O a O
cQ o � m aNi 0 = L0 N o 3 to CO — m 3 cvH � t u) = U 3 ; �
a U) ca = 2 N -a a H -0 2 C u) isas U• .0 0 0 N U Q W C U
i i .. N U C 0" C m m .0 N f p N = N U 0 C >
L O N C C taw L a) ca L w O L ca r- tc6 O > O 0_•3 W O
U 0 C ca L to O N .) to C 4-• ca O Q-L O L L U
c o c m o 4_2L ,.. •- - mem caw ° 3 " .. �mo„ � mow- -- N y,
a) m0 m >, m c. � � iii la a) c s � ° a� a) � 2 � c o E cmi 0 H
- U as L "' w m - w a -a O N C w N N 2 L c E O H E (U C,
c)L = 0 •• C•- .t Ns a) L a) � ai a) N U U O E U U - 0 L- -Cp .CL W
N a) C C L O Cr) N .v L + w C 2 al 0).1C 2 d iQ �. `- N C = .'., '-"
'Q a - o >, C_ �, to N a) 4 L C -a 2
5 p Y°tII 5 11)"m ° a_ca 72 a)w N ° O` C C C a•— a) ;C N a t6 O Q C A
.c w a) _c •• U :a E a) a C ca U .r ca > -a N aL O - O
N aa) ,,- . 4,-7.,
H --alL „„c = amw. a)) 3c — •- 0 (ac`aca) = c Na) ocLcaHC > a 0
as
(10
N w w 'o mL_ 7 U (..) .0 .- •- 0 = > o tII U) La
c 0 0-"4 ClI ca H N a O W
N
>_, G. L m • •� c .� la a) « N m Ow N U) C V aOJ taa fli Ex
•� a)._ iii O •a X N N L tT m Q ca
a4 O L .(C 2 co a m vm) U L o m op L N ca 0 1:3 C Q C) L O O ,_ 2 = ca N M
wa ■ I- ato2L -aato ■ HULtomv ■ H = E ° c.) a H •L _10_� to6_.0
W A
A
W
aH )24
>• •
W a)
Z A L m com a) ct)
O W c U N .0 a) C m c L C) L
d )
>, ° — 3 N o O N .. N N Q N
O (a O a) N L ' a'N N t. 3 a) L C '
C N Oa) p U) to LQ+ - c cap "' N > . •j . U)> mOCin lai N ca O L N o 2 N E L
.O O
C m Lam 2 •aH o m a) _ 'N a ca
•
O O ca m 0) U o ' m
a) Q)N U -a ) L U
a) N N UaC- C V O � .0 .- p
)
R 3 O " N EUc a3�
C ° N � ONC U) C)tea) - _ to m .CO) _ a c- p LNIIL _ UOT co
`ncYma a
i v ° -ata N 30Easc Ma ca C
vca � OORmmc U) coENvcm >, EU) coca Z
L a).0 C.0 E 0 .a C C. N L C. C Q a) p L E m D a) > W
;� ill o a? too > al m 6 EU0 r_> > aa) 2 a
m � c C c ca E C a m c m >
C tat O a > V O L C 2 c m QS
O ,� a 0
� oaci -6amali( N5 �ill a) (3; > a) 2 � a) (Ua oc`a a`) EE ° w
- vino- o ° u) 0 . oa�) H � �03 v) a) ° o " N A
m U CO L. N E •c c w .0 13 C ca o 4' c § m O U) C •n •'N Ca. ca yLO cm H
c >, to `Q O � = as ca O mCti o 3 TO 5 .— _0 ca -a U .c 0
C Ca) O - N U N C N p ° a co) CO E r3 to 75 C o• A O
mOH � �� �) ma ov_) Q,� to '� aNi -ac z �.
�; o > o o c m >, I.- U)= .02cca E al o � . E a) oo III
E1 .2g2.. 07.2� � 0 22:222-62 °. 028em0 a _ oCD c C
ca 2
aio
tu Camim L (1) o ° � :a TA C) 0N a°) - a) •cNN ` o -0 a w
o ,c v ". a 2 aEi •c 3 0) N aa`) rn3 o .0 c a) Q o — L W O W
N m fl.O L C •C 0 L. .c to C m tit O O E p c6 oL C- > 00 U L ca al 0 Z ei Q
2. E ti) Q H to a.- o 3 E COV — I— a s as ca .0 d a O r < N 0 O N a
• V C ° p ~
•a a) 0-J 0 C a) �.- O N U a) 'C v,
> C a c C o ., ° C as V a) c ° n ° d O
II a) L 13
c a•y ,0 0-7 - ° N O C c > i_ Q ° t ° O z
Ocn •5c �c � � _0_ in w as 'c n — � ocnE zz
° wag ° oma o0-113 o` N .° 0 c cou) c°,) Oc WO
o "- � 0-Nc cv > '~ a my � 0 '«. iv c0 a) ° NZ' `.40
° N3o13o ° O a) VwCwa) t- -0 L al Q
.c —u) 70 ` ° . . >.= Qcm UC '50 - uc03 _ U0-
y O I.- co' d) ..°- y 0-w RI E L N Q.0 M o w .To 0- o ° r - 0 �
_ tn _ 013 L.
c >, E C V = ° II a ° O` y V 13 0-i ° 'a ° +% i s
a) c C a O v0-) a) > E• 0 rn O °
E ami 0-v O a13i ° c Q y �v ns y •• ° c0 0 0 0. °- W c a°) 3c QO
" cv � � v a as U) :c .cin al Ca mw ° ° Q0- w c 'c- axi ° Z a"� � p
� `n..>_ L°, ,E ca o v .0 3 c c. EUrw c Q -o-) -a > ami F" W
a) ° -c ca ,� .. ?- s °a. . o ca _ >. O ° .. -a ° v a) ° a) 1- W CI:) U
".tx .cO C C ° '� ° L.•= 7) 0-F..- -0 W .r. O O .0 0 -C w H O LE E O N
o0.5 ,, O00-7c• > 0VCVs 0) 0-ia0i a oc � °-"_ �' w0
a a) .0 � •5 c cn a) in o o 43 'aa cV N ay U) 2 - c >4CV A U
c >+
'v U) ,. 0w ami 0 0 5 c vi a > c c � > 3 o .- o H
cn ° ° c1- ` 2 Awa) •- m n. ° oc) a) o ".. oa) a(U • a O —4
A ,� 3 C o O 0 o a) c L w k- .II a � E C 0-.0 Q L c d V
° -� o ° ° tn0 =11 c ° � € 0 c0-) - u) Eaz �� � °'� w
E d a >. ) 3 13 = (5 O O 0 8 ° c N N L ° 5 c 6D -5 N Z ca z ....�
° > •C > >•, m0 :15 .0 t' 0 a ° N N w O t- c c Z
U) c aav E.C .c '0 00- c a) ax) rnn amici 0 c 3 °Z .c c a13i W c "o4". 0 0c A
off fl - > o 'ENcvoc>OZ QoE >• 030 co i22 0
° - - ..• 0- ` 0 a) 0 H .a aa) o
c a ° .- w L .y C o co a ° 2 ' 13 OL 0 co C c ° 0 w 0 N a c ..:
E a Ew cn � Ti....- E O 0- 0 ,,,c -0 O o. a) co p ac v > a) c
� a o � ° � '` ..- co a.. U ° l0 CD -0 E x
F., 0 L V a ° L E ci a) .3 w .- ° "2 cis 8 a,- a a) E a a) 0-7 ° 0- C CL RI -ci 0 E-.
� W e= .- c`QOco) 0wco ° wa- as '= as0 .c scU � -cas00. E � 01
0"
aW > c ■ Qa.Eas0usc.f. � ama) L •■ f- acaco < •■ Ha) 3ca ° A
Awe "1 ras
A
lipcEt
,�H
0
W � v v Y ° a
ZA c 0 y avec > 0 � a ' weocT d
0W ° U) � ° ca)V0 'Q �cfV ° 03 C �° O ° = 3c
N O 7 rn N ° -- C .Q N a) = w N E ° 0 U a) 00
:c a) c v L_ c y as v 'O 3 'a O v N -Y a) c a) C U
a a' °-1 C ° 13 N •03 :— ° a) ° w ° O C a'V O C 0 ° `' J W 0 .. to >.
13L . O 0 N y ° c +•
E "C Nw 0 .0- ° — cTu `o .cv a) 0 v) co ,„:-5 C UL C c >+v rnN
.. O
.0 0-7 C a 0 0 0 'n.L a 0 E c V. U C a) L v- J 0-1 N 0-o c al
... 0 - v_) ° L C N co U ` C 0 c 3 O 0 to rx
—
° 0 E ° C ° — — di� '0 , ° o ° C cca o E � R y 'cv
E = w 0 CL ° .«. TO O v Y o c- C V (•) • • a) Q a) ° co O 2 it.....
c
it L ° O > t.. n O CO N a l`6 3 R N CO V c O 0 0 C C tri.o c ... H
.c 3 N 0 a) ° O cA e v -a O a3) V o R .� '°a 3 N ° L• G H N O
rn °
� > > > .0 X -C ° W = o N c°aL as > -E. 0.- 3 0-) 2 2w0
Z
OE .° a) aro .. o >. ceca0) v ° -e C ()al 3 ( Yg F"
n▪ -a ° — c 3 E c 0-E) 0 E °c 0-°i ° CO c. ° oc CO > 3 0 '> 13 =° w
cn0 w0 ° 00 o .. �, c m ° 013owv — >,'«- ,- ora °
U) 0 vcoE .E' t. o- ° 3 � ° -1c ° 13 niasvct- LI a
2 ° ,o c a� = C0 >.v° c N � a>) c , , .°c 0 3 E ca 0, cn c 0
al -� t- ° _00c' ac 0t- >•v00 w ` c ° a.cOv) W
r0- o0 .co 0-wy c 3 c N E ' c a3i cOv y c o 6.° ms co ao -Ea IX
� — w
o ) ° c 11). -c l4 ° L 'Z ° a ° a) O a) >. a) a > 0) a) H CH A
> -c f. E a) > Z 0-) 13 c . .r 3
cJ v 0 0 0` c a= c- � ° -°a c C ° 3 ° ~ a c ° r.,
0-_) 0) .... E0 .4.,4- •— 2 'H a) a' o ° 2 ° •Ei- V 221:25 rnE E cZ
cnc ° oa) 0 0 ° 00oo ccIoo -04) ' c cN 'v) 0-6.do Ao
-o 0_ ; = ° a € c 0 o 0 0)`- 0 3 c 0_ ' 7, � , ° W
acv0 - > C
vU) ° > 0caa) rnvva).ccv .'' Oat ° ccr3as ° � °tn > o � � �
• .- c ..., >,t et L r- >.c L ?5 O ° 0- a) >. o ° .. c O�
.. r- o
c ' oav ".. coL5 .° L dy oHL c : 3 ° 0 0 0-13 .0 a) E Q w
w •N a s•- •E C o w 0-3 0) 0-i 0- 6 a_) ° in a) v 0_w O o ° s co a 0
um o cQ aVi ° co co > d '- 2 o mf- 20 0)> ° o = 0--c C E aai ,..7
° acv) a c«- caoU) .! C as— Ornmc t- - 0-p ° caa) a W
° w o cc `a .II c0i ° 0- E a) ca o ° u0 c c - > 0 ° v) C ac EA W eC7
H 0 H O C C 0O H 0 0 'cow 7 N H •0 .e 0 0 0) fn H H w 0 co — U w 0
L. C V
o 0 C v ZN Qo I � ,n
N3 .c a° 'C o � o Q. ' Or) Oz
O 0 >. 0 >. C a) ro t
O >.�' N = N ' M N c >...-. Z Z •
N ami 0 .0 y Z17 E � Z a 8 y � =w0
ro as
c o y O ccC � ~ ° c`o a) J0 d5
O Q.cc N O N 3 0 O O N C O L U a
ami tt c m '5 G . OU CC oVw
�,•• 00 V 0 r.. c Cl) C ro N P4
C 11 CV0 +. 0 O OZ 0 - CO -C
U Z e- " c
c 2 °= ° 03 = � o a) O) a � 0
0
En co`l c °�N I- c > V � 2 13 ZN .- wma
0 0 CO c o
s tea) � c w 0V Ow o,' aa)) C - O >
c 171 I- ° -0 •a7 - c -I °o c oC 0 Z co a,
O C s 2 .4 w 0 U O V y O V z Q w 0
0 V o y o 0
c g N 'v c 0
O `' ca -C d 0 C O 0 O
vo, U Eca.w3o o O = Lam- ° �- a, O E�
0o co W � ay � D Cl)
v 0 0) o = E
o I M• TV :32E1.60 0L) .. � Q ,c r .9- ;v c o U
.. O cw J
0 •E .. o, a) > cO 1- o U) ° ..Ery co •v
y0 cotoc0o >., w UO 320 yc >
n2 EC c Q-0-0 al c ZI- ' �;Q : co os v)
o 3 0 0 •_ Q >' Z V ?' m ac2a �
Q. 0 O E > ' � V N L11 +± J : 0 O J L O L
N > O •y -c m c 2 co iII 1- co C Q 2 .. o i r,•, p
Zy E O` 0- V .E +M+ J - O Q NI- 0 O - O Z 3 N
w.. 0 C Q 0 ° 0 c < >, a) CL r 0 > vasal
0 N O W
d E V +� 0 Cf C �= 0 a � 0 j C w
`� Q' OL ° •- a) �O c 0 N Cod C 0 O to ai C O F"
Oa Q. .' n 0 ›.,
W w w N Q Qa. . 0 0) 0 N Y a 0 2 D o.-.F.. 0 C .c co
fxA >O•
azo 0
w a o ° V >, >. c
Ow a) c X23 t o CU Z - a, o c o
Z 0 3 o n CO v o V o �
aEi c E as .f. e-w - P. cca 3 y H c71. co ca � .. � � � cco 0 0 .0
a coo o 0.sZ `~ C > c >% coi c � ° .�' 3 0. >
.N au) E-vrQ •�O rzf. 4) en o o cl= °c a � aoi Q voice aoi -°n
_ _ y E 00 V w
0 0 � . G pC O O L C - M - 0 0 0
O.
c0 0 E � � L O N
o0 0 .0 0 O >. >.c ° N O CV C C a) C N 0 co` -a cozy =
tet •.- v, .c >, 0 ca o o > � as_ � E >. o •- -a v o y ow:
>' al
O -0 ..E E -c -c C C 'D tII O w .0 - Z"` C c 0 = ro'>. .° w 0 C.
3 Qaco cc) o �Ci = co E .c cu) cV ac) � o -In y ocw fl. c v a) C
v, E co �.. o oV. �c � ° = .>_ La o - oo Eli
Q- I.- .c
2rna, oma= EEO ° oo = cro w � 'c > Ca on 0 ..- o E-(
6003 - -C I- 00_ •0 0 0 C ns
C .. C �O O o L 0 C C > C O E C :a+ 3 y •0 < .c O OE O OL
O 0 0 0 C N N "° L.
0 a) Q..a ' a) 'u) ca v, .Q a) N y c a) •� t1 a
oLire f ' er O c o � w inrtn ` o E a= bi of E o c °o E a 0
c U 0_ m .... _ c >. o E € o - � = a
ac) o0 .. vi c00 C o c o 0 0 F. u) VI o W
EO woo cr ° 003 > n �' Q- •+� 1. c = v °' -c Vsp L. w
c. a) oo a3) >. a. v, y cm ,�� = C o
w c C a3iv .: � � � a 0
- a) o >.N 3 `o E0 = ,§04 Et a, 2 a) c t m os_ c roc c c D - -v
o > 3 ro• C " 0 C W .0 "Ou.. C 0"7 c 3 o•_-2.....0
y C d N ° E U) �0
C ° Q.2 �5�Q- E c >. 0 0 01:1 0 y r 0 - o C a) U l! - - " "•' N W O
O 0 - = U w 0 al 0 w xi > .c OV 0 E c C = C to N c >,O .0 �"'
E o f o y a) -Li: 2-.2 E o o is ° ~ ca 0:g E c Vp .,.. Cys > Q 41)
O O. V) c E Cr 0 0 0 a) Nasi a) o 0) = 4) -04- 0Zcy 0 a) 0 ¢ o�
oQ... 000 •- Q o. to 0_ A` i_ 0 Ov,� vECo 30C a w
as y coc 0 0 Y 05 E CD l0 0 C 0 O y V c ., o O E E O E f0 a U` O
W 00 E G 0 c 0 E O ` - 0 C .0 •EC p, c ami �, v, c_ rn.c E 0 O� y V C' �1 ,==' 00
CF) .0+ t �� 0 D. Q. LL V � = a 1...
alt. 0 _ y � r U > > Z Z OM C7
•C • 0 0 d RI t E N .c V>.L O E . r L ,�- M - c " co a) a) 0 N - et
■ a o 0 0 V v) o .. Q. cr 1- L (a CI a) 0 .. 1- O (NQ _ O 3 Q.'V 0 in v) v) 0 c4 a
N s O'
, tea) t
• CO L •. I ,--i
L at,.
�'
't C5
U );U
a 0 °
N c > .c w 0
• a) co d o < 5
EUS `° oa
U � s C70
� g o_ Zw)
Ja O
-a a •! c aOZ
a) 0 c ° a ^, O
a _3 ~ a
(� ° cav
w
U
3 v � c 2 c�
*6O
O W E o` � Z ?
Cl) 2 ,, 3
Lli ..- co a) vi
Z § N a)gH A>
z •_ A
Z u 0 •o ~ 3 Q O
co 2
O a`�i w-, aai w
.,,,, a F-. Z o E o H
04 O H 0 L w w a
awl CO 0 I- ov) ( ce A
OA
at E" O
04a
A CO c d
-
O Zwz - °co
o a
,-.1 N ami .•- H
a H are ° •. •c
•.c a) -v c .0
p°
> c E
a) O 0L •a
E a,t-- co LLJ Q
Q I L-
t co m 0N -L
o Z 3 E �.
a)
d O ao c
w 0=ca L °
a) � — a >, o
rn ° � c coca o wc ° rn
° ° °v) a) c>' O2- >
co al Z
a
5
a.
-E5
va ". Narco � ca
0
H O) O w cO U w O
o "' 2 w
co - N Scana) a
3 co . c . C
a w
co _ co A
F - >- a)
Z ° pNEa) 0 0 H
.r
(/) Cl) E •
To' . O-
Z < 2 Z` 0O) > o "-" O
Z •c f 0 )n a a
• -.
�--
w
LL. ED°
O ° a) o
UZCa> D
V! 0a) OV �` caQ
il
o\
aa0O
W a) co 0. U) .a � o"
.c c co W Z wQ la0z
M) 0co0r) ce Na( 0 I— o _ Oa Q O
Li4
• ORDINANCE NO. 598
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
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,AND AMENDING THE CITY'S OFFICIAL ZONING
MAP.
THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS:
SECTION 1.
Whereas, Anthony Properties Management, Inc. and Louise O'Neil have applied for a
rezoning from B-1 and R-2 to Planned Unit Development (PUD) for property bounded by
Highway 10, Long Lake Road, and County Road H2, and described as follows:
Part lying southwesterly of centerline of STH No. 10 of southwest 1/4 of
northwest 1/4 (subject to roads, highway and easements) in Section 08,
• Township 30, Range 23.
WHEREAS, the proposed uses include a 16-screen movie theater, three 11,000 square
foot office buildings, and two restaurant sites; 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 2/7/97
4. Traffic Study prepared by SRF Consulting,dated 4/17/97
5. Traffic Study(for Restaurant Sites)prepared by SRF Consulting,dated 5/2/97
6. Preliminary Drainage Calculations
7. Available Utility Connections for Water,Sewer and Storm Sewer
8. Market Summary
9. Summaries of Neighborhood Meetings(12/12/96, 1/15/97)
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.
503-97; 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) as follows:
(1) Ownership: The application for approval of this rezoning has been filed by Louise •
O'Neil, owner of the property.
(2) Comprehensive Plan Consistency: The comprehensive plan designation on this
property is a combination of lower and higher intensity, mixed use which includes
both commercial and residential uses. The proposal is consistent with this
designation.
(3) Common Open Space
(5) Staging of Common Open Space
The proposal will include preservation of an 8.5 acre wetland, a 50 foot buffer area
along the County Road H2 frontage, and a substantial portion of the wetland
buffer area. The PUD stipulations, adopted with the general concept plan include
requirements for the protection of open space (forested) areas during construction,
and the staging of the buffer area along County Road H2.
(4) Operating and Maintenance Requirements: Not applicable at this time. The PUD
stipulations, adopted with the general concept plan, require the execution of
maintenance agreements, and cross access and parking easements for each of the
development parcels prior to approval of the final plan, if the property is to be
subdivided. Maintenance responsibilities are assigned to the property owner
otherwise. •
(6) Density: The allowable densities are stated in the PUD stipulations, adopted with
the general concept plan.
(7) Utilities: A requirement has been included in the PUD stipulations that all utilities
be installed underground.
(8) Utility Connections: Requirements for shut-off valves and service manholes will be
established at the time of development stage plan review.
(9) Roadways: No private roadways are proposed in this development.
(10) Landscaping: The PUD stipulations require that a detailed landscaping plan be
submitted at the time of development stage plan review. The stipulations also
include a requirement that trees 10" or more in diameter be inventoried and
preserved whereever possible in parking lot islands, and in setback and buffer
areas.
(11) Public Services: The proposed project will be served by City water and sewer
system. There are trunk lines for water, sewer and storm sewer in the abutting
streets. The PUD stipulations include a requirement that fire hydrants be installed
as directed by the Fire Department. S
• Ordinance No. 598
May 27, 1997
Page 3
(12) Building Height: The permitted building heights are stated in the PUD stipulations.
(13) Refuse: The PUD stipulations require a plan for the location of trash dumpster and
for trash service be submitted at the time of development stage plan review.
(14) Site Improvement Agreement: The PUD stipulations require that a site
improvement agreement be signed by the property owner and developer prior to
approval of the final plan. The agreement shall include a requirement that all on-
site and off-site improvements be installed according to a schedule acceptable to
the City Council, and be guaranteed through an escrow account, letter of credit or
surety bond.
WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council finds that this proposal meets the special
requirements and standards for commercial PUDs (Section 1120.03, Subd. 2) as follows:
Required Provided
Minimum Project Size 5 acres 23.99 acres
Minimum Street Frontage 200 feet 1690 feet
• Minimum Property Width 200 feet 1280 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 and access drives.
(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 City Engineer has reviewed the applicant's preliminary calculations for the amount of
runoff expected and the sizing of the NURP ponds needed to provide water quality
treatment before the runoff enters the wetland, and found them acceptable. The proposed
locations for the NURP ponds are also acceptable, subject to detailed grading plans to be
prepared as part of the development stage plan.
The proposed drainage system is consistent with the City's local water management plan, and
will provide the necessary water quality filtering before runoff enters the wetland. Increased
flows into the wetland will increase water surface elevations by 0.2 feet in a 10 year storm, and
0.3 feet in a 100 year storm. The increased water elevation will not have a negative impact on
adjacent structures or roads;the water will remain on the site. The City Engineer recommends
• that the existing 15"pipe from the wetland into the Long Lake Road storm sewer remain as is,
since enlarging it would cause capacity problems downstream and there is enough room to
Ordinance No. 598 •
May 27, 1997
Page 4
store water in the wetland. There should not be any impacts to existing groundwater table, and
little change in the current recharge potential of the area.
An engineered drainage design will be submitted at the development plan stage.
Residents south of the O'Neil property have expressed concerns that this development will
increase existing problems with flooding in their backyards. The City Engineer reviewed this
situation and responded that the localized flooding south of County Road H2 is not affected by
the O'Neil property, even with development. Also, according to Al Sunderman, a groundwater
specialist in the City Engineer's Office,there should not be any impacts to the existing
groundwater table in the area. It is the City Engineer's view that flooding in the neighborhood is
being caused by upstream drainage from the north side of Highway 10 overloading the existing
storm drain system in the neighborhood.
(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.
•
WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council has adopted Resolution solution No. 5119, approving
a general concept plan to allow development of commercial uses on the O'Neil property and
including PUD stipulations which shall be met.
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 (Commercial Uses), subject to the requirements for approval of a general
concept plan, development stage plan and final plan as 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 •
• -
• Ordinance No. 598
May 27, 1997
Page 5
ATTEST:
Charles S. Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Robert Long, City Attorney
NADATA\USERSTAMS\SHARE\DE VCAS ES\471-97\ONEIL.ORD
(Untitled)
8 Dec 1996
• Dear Ms . SHELDON
I will be unable to attend the meeting on Thursday, 12 Dec 19
96 -
regarding possible rezoning of the O'NEIL property, however I do h A vE
IWO
some thoughts regarding any development plans.
I am opposed to rezoning the R-2 portion of the property. I
feel
that should remain R-2 to act as a "transition zone" between the
remaining portion of the O'NEIL property and the established commuovrry
along the south side of H-2 .
I strongly feel that existing B-1 portion be developed with a a'
4
around the swamp that borders Long Lake Road rather than any filliM7
40
or draining it. It acts as wick for the surrounding community and
is part of the Rice Creek Watershed.
If that swamp is altered to the extent that the city of Mound
sview
is required to install a city-wide storm sewer system, the cost of
IIIthat
project should be the responsibility of the developer and NOT the
remainder of the community.
Thank you for your time with this matter.
5
Si�ncerel
eO-ie-/-
BERT . STAUNER
2454 o Rd H-2
Moundsview, MN 55112
•
Page 1
7
January 15, 1997
Pam Sheldon
Community Development Director
City of Mounds View
2401 Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
Ms. Sheldon:
We are writing to express our concern about the proposed plan to build a 16-screen movie theatre
on land bordering Hwy. 10, Cty. Rd. H2, and Long Lake Road.
After residing in a very busy section of Minneapolis for 17 years we made the decision 3 1/2 years
ago to move to Mounds View because we wanted our two daughters to live in an area that had both
good schools and safe, uncrowded neighborhoods. We believed we made the right decision.
However, the thought of the City of Mounds View approving this plan makes us wonder if we
really did make the correct choice. The congestion, noise, traffic, and late night activity that this
development would add to an area so close to residences would surely change a quiet, pleasant area •
of our community into a very busy, unpleasant place to live. The area would become as congested
as the region surrounding the Northtown shopping mall. The flow of traffic on Hwy. 10 is
already at its maximum level—we can't imagine adding to it!!
We are against this development plan and we strongly recommend denying any zone changes to
develop this land for this purpose. Does every piece of land need a building? Shouldn't there be
open spaces to view? We purchased a home in Mounds View believing we were going to be living
in a residential area. We don't want commercial businesses taking over!
Sincerely,
2.t-E;/1/4.W YinCIOACI6
Pat &Gregg Anderson
2612 Ridge Lane
Mounds View
• IN TER
MEMO
OF F ICE
To: File: 471-97 O'Neil Property
From: Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Director
Subject: Conversation with Ed Donatelle
Date: March 14, 1997
On Thursday, March 13, 1997, I had a telephone conversation with Ed Donatelle regarding the
proposed 16-screen movie theater and office development on the O'Neil property. Mr. Donatelle
wanted to state his support for the project. He felt that the project would bring people into the
community, and other businesses in Mounds View would benefit by getting more visibility and
possibly customers. He felt that Mounds View is somewhat of an island right now, in terms of
attracting customers. People do not have a reason to come to Mounds View. Businesses have to
spend a lot of money on advertising. The theaters would create a draw and ripple effects.
• In particular, the project would help his restaurant because it may be possible to share parking,
which he very much needs. He does not have a problem with more restaurants being developed
(one of the possible uses of the out parcels on the O'Neil property.) He believes it will create
more activity and interest in coming to Mounds View.
Mr. Donatelle lives in the neighborhood behind the Donut Connection. He did not think the
theaters would have a detrimental impact on the neighborhood. They would not be like a bar;
they would not be serving alcohol.
N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\DEVCASES\471-97\DONATELL.MEM
•
Item No. /o0:ZoPix) /1 C
Staff Report No. 97-Jog 6
Meeting Date: 5-7-97
• Type of Business: PH, CB
WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing;
CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mayor and City Co ncil
From: Lynnette Morgan
Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and Adoption of Ordinance No. 601 Relating to
Intoxicating Liquor Licenses, Amending Title 500, Chapter 502,
Section 502.08 of the Mound View Municipal Code
Date of Report: May 7, 1997
Ordinance No. 97-601 changes the licensing requirements for intoxicating liquor license
renewals and temporary licenses by eliminating the official public hearing publication
requirement. Renewals of existing licenses issued under Chapter 502 and the issuance of
temporary intoxicating special event and banquet licences as defined in Section 502.06
subdivision 6 and 7 of this Chapter 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.
Recommendation: Motion to waive reading and adopt Ordinance No. 601.
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 and the
issuance of temporary intoxicating special event and banquet licenses as defined in
Section 502.03 subdivision 6 and 7 of 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 28th day of April , 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
4111
Item No. l I D
Staff Report No. 97-,,Vg4�
Meeting Date: May 12, 1997
• 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: Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 600 Amending chapter
202, section 202.09 of the Mounds View Municipal Code entitled"Public
Improvements"
Date of Report: May 7, 1997
The introduction and first reading of the proposed revisions to chapter 202, section 202.09 of the
Mounds View Municipal Code entitled "Public Improvements" (ie. the Assessment Policy)
occurred at the April 28, 1997 Council Meeting. Minor wording changes were submitted by the
City Attorney, none of which changed the intent of any of the revisions.
Presented for Council's consideration and second reading is Ordinance No. 600 Amending
chapter 202, section 202.09 of the Mounds View Municipal Code entitled"Public
Improvements". Should Council approve the amendments, the policy will be published in the
local newspaper and will take effect thirty (30) days after the adoption.
•
If Council has any questions or concerns regarding any of the revisions to the policy, please feel
free to call me.
Mic ael Ulrich, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION: Council waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 600
Amending chapter 202, section 202.09 of the Mounds View Municipal Code entitled "Public
Improvements"
•
ORDINANCE NO. 600111
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 202 , SECTION 202 . 09 OF THE
MOUNDS VIEW MUNICIPAL CODE VIEW ENTITLED "PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS"
The City of Mounds View ordains :
SECTION I Chapter 202 . 09 , Subd 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code is amended to read:
Subd. 2 Improvement Type and Apportionment of Cost :
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
('A) . 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 cost recovery.
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. 410
d. Sealcoating. Sealcoating, patching and cracksealing
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 streetreconstruction 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 all
properties within a district deemed to be benefitted from
111 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 cost of
0- . -
These drainage districts have trunk lines, which are
large diameter pipes that transport large volumes of
water from one or more drainage districts . Property
within drainage districts that would receive benefit from
a trunk storm sewer, would be assessed a unit amount of
($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 lots that exceed 1/3 acre would be
assessed based on the number of acres , multiplied by the
unit cost ($1, 200 . 00 per acre) . Commercial / Industrial
property would be assessed based on the number of acres
that are determined to benefit from the trunk line
multiplied by the unit cost ($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 Surface Water
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 . • - ' . -
• . - .. - - ., -- - . . . . • - - .
•
•
.- . - -. . . ..
• - - .. - - . -. . -- . .♦ - - - -
.- . ..- ,,.. . •- - -. . • .
-
• - , • .- - IMO.- -
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.
Section II . Chapter 202 . 09 Subd 3 of the Mounds View Municipal
Code is amended to Read:
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 411
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 determining
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
dimensions of a parcel abutting an improvement (ie. ,
street, sewer, water, etc . ) will generally not be
construed as the frontage utilized to calculate the
110
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
Flag Lots
Double Frontage Lots
411
,
•
(1) Standard Lots. In this instance, the adjusted front footage for rectangular
lots will be the actual front footage of the lot. The frontage measured shall
be the lot width at the front lot line.
M A I H AVE. Adj. Front Footage
SO' 90' EXAMPLES
Lot A-50'
A 13 Lot B-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.
MAIN AVE
• / so• 7 v Adj. Front Footage
EXAMPLES
A F Lot A-90 - 110 = 100'
2
Lot B-70 - 80 = 75'
Ito' • ao' 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.
/cc •� \ 1 / Adj. Front Footage
•
EXAMPLES
150, A 8 \\ (✓ /- Lot A-100 :40 = 70'
2
i \ ;' Lot B-401: 130 = 85'
\6.7 2
• J— ,,to• L. 12C _.1 __ ___ _ __\I \
Lot C-120: 0 = 60'
2
(4) Cul-de-Sac Lots. adjusted The 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
I\/1 AIN C I R C L E_ -------, --.--- EXAMPLES
..... ,' LotA- 75'
\ ,?f ,- Lot B-110'
Lot C- 80'
Al• -
•
(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.
�!�Q-; \\ Adj. Front Footage
EXAMPLES
Lot A- 70'
i i o \ Lot B- 90'
1i Lot C-150'
rci i /
•
(6) Irregularly Shaped Lots. In many cases, unplatted parcels that are legally
described by a metes and 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
eri 115' ����� 1.� EXAMPLES
- - Lot A-115'
Lot B-140'
A d J Lot C-125'
(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 not
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'
Side 2 = 125'
C7 .
12s-' 1 I 2)
A. I N AI/ E.
•
•
(b) General Commercial Zoned Corner Lots. •• : : : - - - -
-: - -- The adjusted front footage shall be the
entire frontage measured along the setback line comprising the building
envelope of the side of the lot immediately abutting the improvement.
Adj. Front Footage
/ EXAMPLES
/:v4: Lot A-280' 155'
_ —....._.._ .__...___-- Lot B-398' 300'
.i
a
15.5" _ t"IA I 1\i 300 A ';E.
8. 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'
MiN 11,1 AVE. UJ.
Lot B-90'
30 1 0 (-
170
f •
9. Double_ Frontage Lots. If a parcel, other than a corner lot, comprises
frontage on two streets and is eligible for subdivision, then an adjusted
front footage assessment will be cararged along each street. For double
frontage lots lacking the necessary depth for Sibdivision, only a single
adjusted front footage will be computed. The frontage with driveway
access to front of house, shall be assessed.
•
Adj. f=ront f=ootage
,til A IN A'✓ E. Itis/\ I N A`/E:..._. EXAMPLES
110� - 80' Lot A-220'
n Lot B- 00'
`0 LJ
t, n
r /
h o/
•
i
The ultimate objective of these procedures is to arrive III
at a fair and equitable distribution of cost whereby
consideration is given to lot size and parcels are
comparably assessed.
SECTION III . 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
•
Item No. ! e
Staff Report No. 9i-
Meeting ,
Type
Date:of BusMayiness:12C.B1997.
• 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. 5118 Approving County Road
Turnback (Spring Lake Road)
Date of Report: May 7, 1997
Pursuant to the 1991 Minnesota Legislative action that enabled the restructuring of the State's
highway system, Ramsey County is transferring authority of Spring Lake Road to the City of
Mounds View. This segment of roadway not longer serves a function of a County Trunk
Highway. The City of Mounds View requested that this segment be turned over to the City in
1997. Included in the turnback program is the reimbursement of funds from the County for the
reconstruction of the driving lanes. This amount$580,000.00, will be refunded to the City of
Mounds View after documentation of a contract for reconstruction and paid invoices have been
received by Ramsey County. Also included in the program, is the City's capability to add the
additional turnback mileage to the current Minnesota State Aid System (MSAS). This action has
• already taken place.
The resolution before Council tonight, accepts the jurisdictional transfer and acknowledges
Ramsey County's contribution of funds for the reconstruction of the road. Reconstruction of
Mounds View's segments of Spring Lake Road will occur in 1998.
If Council has any questions or concerns regarding this report, please feel free to call me.
Mic ael Ulrich, Director of Public Works
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No. 5118 accepting the jurisdictional transfer of Ramsey County Road,
Spring Lake Road.
•
Page 2 •
Resolution No. 5118
Approving County Road Turnback(Spring Lake Road)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Mounds View concurs
with the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners revoking the "County Road" status of Spring
Lake Road from County Road H2 to Hillview Road and from Trunk Highway 10 to the North
County Line, and transferring jurisdiction over the roadway to the City of Mounds View,
effective the first day of the second month after the Ramsey County Office of Budgeting and
Accounting has encumbered the funds necessary to fund the reconstruction project, and after the
County is in receipt of an adopted resolution from the City of Mounds View concurring with the
County revoking the "County Road" status of Spring Lake Road from County Road H2 to
Hillview Road and from Trunk Highway 10 to the North County Line.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County will pay to the City as just
compensation for the jurisdictional transfer of Spring Lake Road from County Road H2 to
Hillview Road and from Trunk Highway 10 to the North County Line, an estimated cost of
$580,000 from Capital Improvement Funds for Ramsey County Roadway Consolidation as •
calculated from the County Road Reconstruction Cost Participation Policy, Resolution No. 9-
1272, and adjusted by Pavement Management System [(90-Condition Rating) ± Condition
Rating] x 1993 Condition Rating ).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Ramsey County will reimburse the City of
Mounds View an estimated $580,000 upon presentation of billings from the construction
contractor for the reconstruction of Spring Lake Road.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that the Mounds View
Engineer is authorized within the limits of this resolution to take actions necessary to have the
identified jurisdiction change executed.
Adopted this 12th day of May, 1997.
ATTEST:
MAYOR
(SEAL) •
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
• RESOLUTION NO. 5118
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE COUNTY ROAD TURNBACK (SPRING LAKE ROAD)
WHEREAS, the 1991 Minnesota Legislature established a Ramsey County Local
Government Services Study Commission to "report on the advantages and disadvantages of
sharing, cooperating, restructuring, or consolidating..." activities in areas of public service
including public works; and
WHEREAS, the consolidation plan provides for reclassification of roadways and
corresponding changes in jurisdiction including the transfer of local and State Aid roadways
between the County and municipalities; and
WHEREAS, Spring Lake Road (County Road 125) from County Road H2 to
Hillview Road and from Trunk Highway 10 to the North County Line, located in the City of
Mounds View, is presently under the jurisdiction of Ramsey County as a County Road; and
WHEREAS, this roadway has been determined to serve a local function only; and
WHEREAS, revocation of"County Road" status may be accomplished by
resolution of the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
§163.11; and
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View has concurred that the jurisdiction should
be changed from Ramsey County to the City of Mounds View; and
WHEREAS, the consolidation plan stipulates that Ramsey County shall improve
the roadways to acceptable levels prior to transferring jurisdiction over roadway segments from
Ramsey County to municipalities, and the Ramsey County Capital Improvement Program
provides funding for these improvements; and
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View desires to reconstruct Spring Lake Road
from County Road H2 to Hillview Road and from Trunk Highway 10 to the North County Line
at an estimated cost of$1,460,000 and fund the reconstruction projects with Municipal State Aid
Street sources, and an estimated $580,000 from Capital Improvement Funds for Ramsey County
Roadway Consolidation.
•
INFORMATION
. I= Department of Public Health
Division of Solid Waste ONLY
IIIIImiik
• • Zack Hansen,Manager
1670 Beam Avenue,Suite B Tel:612-773-4444
RAMSEY COUNTY, Maplewood,MN 55109-1129 Fax:612-773-4454
May 1, 1997
Ms . Mary Saarion
Parks Director
City of Mounds View
2401 Highway 10 •
Mounds View, MN 55112
Dear Mary:
The City Council, when we met with them at their workshop in March,
requested that we provide a description of our operations at the yard
waste site on Long Lake Road. Since then we have been working with
the County Public Works Department to refine the design for the
improvements to that site, including shifting to a south to north
drive-through approach. Here is a summary of our operations . We hav:
more detailed operations plans, which we can make available upon
recuest . `
1 . Site Dates and Hours
411 In general, the site is open in the spring, summer and fall, for .:3 .
hours per week, five days per week. For 1997 :
* March 31 through November 30, 1997, weather permitting.
* Saturday, 9-5; Sunday, 11-5 .
* Monday, Wednesday, and Friday: 3/31-5/31 : 11-7; 6/1-9/29 :
noon-8 ; 10/1-11/30 : 10-6 .
* Closed Tuesday, Thursdays, July 4, Labor Day.
2 . Types of Waste Accepted
* Only soft-bodied plant material is accepted, including leaves,
grass clippings, weeds, and garden waste .
* Brush and other woody waste are not accepted. We provide
customers with information about disposal for these waste types .
3 . Site Users
* Ramsey County residents can bring in their own yard waste and
take finished compost and wood chips . It is not cost-effective
to screen out non-Ramsey residents, so some Anoka County citizens
use the site. We strongly discourage this .
* Lawn services, waste haulers, and other commercial operations are
not allowed to use the sites .
4 . Site Monitor
* A County-employed site monitor is on duty during all hours the
site is open.
411
Minnesota's First Home Rule County
printea on retvctea met with a minimum of 10%oost consumer content
INFORMATION
Letter to Mary Saarion fl \J
May 1, 1997 � 111
Page Two
* The monitor opens and closes the locked gates, directs traffic,
• ensures that only acceptable yard waste materials are deposited,
ensures that residents take their containers or bags back with
them, counts the number of users of the site, and performs
related duties .
* The monitor has a cellular phone for communication with other
Division of Solid Waste staff and for emergencies . John
Springman or other designated staff are available to the monitor
by telephone or pager whenever the sites are open, including
evenings and weekends .
* Lighting will be added as part of the site improvements , T°
lights will only be on when needed, which is generally in the
fall when daylight hours are getting shorter. The lights will -
have a manual switch box that is locked. The site monitor will
have a key and will control the lights .
5 . Traffic and Dust Control
* Currently ingress and egress to the site are from a two-lane road
at the south edge of Ardan Park. Traffic enters the site through
the east gate 'and exits through the west gate .
* When the site improvements are made later this year, ter- f : ,:_ will
continue to enter at the south edge of the .park, and then will
leave through a gate on the north side of the site that lads to i
a new exit to be constructed on Long Lake Road.
* The Division of Solid Waste mitigates dust by directing the
County' s dust control vendor to apply dust suppressant materials
on a regular basis .
* The site improvements will include paving the entrance and exit
of the site and improving the site surface with recycled asphalt,
millings . These improvements should help reduce or eliminate
dust .
6 . Composting and Hauling of Yard Waste
* Some leaves are- composted on-site. The Division of Solid Waste
directs its contractor, currently A-1 Walsh, to pile these leaves
into windrows and to turn them periodically when wind conditions
are favorable. Turning helps to aerate the pile, which creates
conditions for faster composting while reducing the potential for
odor generation.
* Because the site is small, A-1 Walsh hauls out a significant
volume of leaves, which exceed the composting capacity of the
site, to the County' s- composting site in White Bear To reship.
* During June-September, when the yard waste received is
predominantly grass clippings, all yard waste is hauled out by
A-1 Walsh twice per week (currently Mondays and Thursdays) to a
private vendor for landspreading or composting.
* Finished compost is made available for residents to take; free of • -
charge . The Division of Solid Waste also provides some compost
to non-profit agencies, including municipalities .
INFORMATION
Letter to Mary Saarion ONLY
May 1, 1997
Page Three
7 . Illegal Dumping
* Should any dumping of yard waste or other materials occur outside
the gate or fence, the site monitor is responsible for cleaning
up these materials or for contacting other County staff.
* In some cases the County' s contracted transportation and
maintenance vendor, A-1 Walsh, cleans up illegally dumped
materials if found when this firm is scheduled to perform other
operations at the site.
* The County Community Corrections Department also periodically
picks up litter and maintains the site .
8 . Other Operational Issues
* Any complaints about site operations should be directed to John
Springman or his designee, using the Division of Solid Waste' s
main number, 773-4444 . Residents can also report a complaint to
the site monitor, who will relay it to John.
* The Division provides and maintains several signs for the site.
* The Division provides wood chips, when available, at its sites
for free pickup and use by residents (we have had difficulty
obtaining good quality chips this past year) .
* Master Gardeners are available at several scheduled times at the
site to answer lawn and garden question and to distribute
i411 nformation from the Minnesota Extension Service on lawn care and
backyard composting.
We hope this summary of our operating procedures is helpful . As
always, if you have any questions or comments, please contact us .
(John Springman at 773-4448 is the primary contact for site operation
issues, and Michael Reed at 773-4443 is his backup. Norm Schiferl is
the contact for solid waste policy and permitting issues related to
this and other sites . )
Sincerel ,
Yoh-41
Springman Norm Schiferl
(Environmental Health Specialist Program Analyst
enc .
cc : Zack Hansen, Division Manager
Michael Reed, Environmental Health Specialist
a