The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packets - 1977/08/04I IIIIIIIIIIIIOCiTYVFMOUNDSIViEVVMBSMMMMam•: • G Items Discussed Per Consensus 1. Discussion of Preliminary 1998 General Fund Budgets. Staff Report No. 97-2170WS (Presented by: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator and Bruce Kessel, Finance Director) 2. Discussion of Police Quarterly Report. (Presented by: Tim Ramacher, Chief of Police) • 3. Discussion on Traffic Speeds. (Presented by: Tim Ramacher, Chief of Police) 4. Discussion on Prosecution Services and Costs Reviewal. (Presented by: Tim Ramacher, Chief of Police) 5. Discussion of Fire Department Quarterly Report. (Presented by:Nyle Zikmuna Fire Chief) 6. Discussion of Public Works Department Quarterly Report. Staff Report No. 97-2171 WS (Presented by:Mike Ulrich, Public Works Director) 7. Discussion of Economic Development Quarterly Report. Staff Report No. 97- 2172WS (Presented by: Cathy Bennett, Director of Economic Development) • 8. Discussion on Personnel Report from Tim Arnott, Consultant with the Leadership of the Twin Cities. Staff Report No. 97-2173 WS (Presented by: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator) 9. Discussion of Proposed Management Contract for the Golf Course Manager. (Presented by:Bruce Kessel, Finance Director) 10. Discussion on Community Center Project Update and Discussion of Options. Staff Report No. 97-2174WS (Presented by: Cathy Bennett, Director of Economic Development) • 11. Discussion Regarding the Proposals for 8263 Spring Lake Road. Staff Report No. 97-2175WS (Presented by:Jennifer Bergman,Community Development) 12. Discussion of Estimated Cost to Purchase Single Family Rental Homes Under the Housing Replacement Program. Staff Report No. 97-2176WS (Presented by:Jennifer Bergman,Community Development) 13. Discussion on Ordinance No. 602 revising the Wetland Zoning District. Staff Report No. 97- 2177WS (Presented by:Pam Sheldon, Director of Community Development) • 14. Discussion of Request for TIF Funding to develop a specific housing strategy as part of the Comprehensive Plan Update and to meet the • Metropolitan Council's deadline for updating the City's Housing Action Plan. Staff Report No. 97-2178WS (Presented by:Pam Sheldon/Jennifer Bergman, Community Development) 15. Discussion on Developer's Request for Exclusive Negotiations Agreement Regarding City Owned Properties at Bel Rae and City Hall Park Sites. Staff Report No. 97-2170WS (Presented by: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator) 16. Discussion on Reviewing the Community Development Director Hiring Process. Staff Report No. 97-2170WS (Presented by: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator) • 17. Discussion on City Policy Regarding Step Adjustments and Employment Separation. Staff Report No. 97-2170WS (Presented by: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator) 18. Review of Golf Course Mediation. Staff Report No. 97-2170WS (Presented by: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator) • /U4's , 1, $, /5/ /IP/ (7, y• Rep(Y +. No. 97— <.7I7O L5 August 1, 1997 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Chuck Whiting, City Administrator Re: August 4, 1997 City Council Meeting I am writing this during the mediation session on the golf course. We are waiting for the judge to return after our first go around this morning. Anyway,here's what is on the agenda for Monday evening 1998 General Fund Budget: We will begin our budget discussions Monday evening with an overview of the initial budget projections for 1998. The expediture figures are based on first run department head estimates with nothing as of yet revised,nor with much discussion about revenue constraints. I have asked the department heads to put down what they feel they need at this time, and to prioritize their capital expenses. Some have not done this to date,and will need to in the next week or so(or risk me doing it for them). Bruce and I discussed how best to present an overall picture of the budget, and Council members will note the first few pages with the graphs and budget summaries. Our approach has been to first, isolate the most sensitive sources of revenues, being the tax levy and the franchise fee. The franchise fee expires at the end . of this year,so a Council action would be needed to extend. Franchise fee revenues for 1998 therefore are$0 for this point in the budget. As for the tax levy, for this point in the budget,it has been left at the 1997 levy amount Late Thursday I received our maximum allowable levy notice from the Department of Revenue, which will allow the City to increase the levy approximately$90,000 if desired. With the absense of the franchise fee an no increase in the levy,we currently have a funding gap of around$390,000. Closing this gap will be the main effort of the coming weeks. Options that will exist are the normal ones. Increase taxes,decrease expenses and services,seek efficiencies, and dip into reserves. The long term impacts of those choices are policy decisions for the City to make,so we have attempted to put some of that into perspective with long term projections based on some assumptions listed on the initial page of the budget packet you received this past Monday evening(please bring that to the meeting August 4). The figures given on Monday reflect no franchise fee and moderate tax increases over the next 10 years with other expense and revenue assumptions made. The critical factor to keep in mind from the big picture standpoint is to level out the equity fund balance (essentially the City's reserves) over the long run. While it looks dramatic now, reaching zero in a few years,it would be very healthy for the Council to give some consideration to the ramification of the Ievel of these funds. Roughly, the City has attempted to maintain at least six months worth of equity for cash flow purposes,but capital planning is a large component of this policy type decision. All this will be easier to discuss Monday evening. If the above considerations tions can be understood Monday,the other question the Council may want to review is what if any other(besides franchise fee)concerns does the Council want staff to E/Z 3pdd 0LE6LEEZL9°QI N3l'VNO VAa3NN'3M=wnx4 / n = f,T / a-Tn-new focus on in developing this budget. Without some of those concerns, staff will attempt to sort • out City priorities as best we can, but it is always reassuring to know approximately where the Council's feelings will be on operation and service matters. Finally, because we will need to determine a preliminary levy for noticing in September,having another work session on August IS may help in giving the attention to the budget everyone would Iike. You will also be getting proposed department work plans and goals/objectives soon, if not this Monday. uarterly R_ snorts_Police, Fire and Economic Development will give theiruarter Monday. I have the City Administrator's report at the end of the meeting,although I mayowrtsnt to discuss with the Council what expectations exist for these reports. Personnel Consultant Re art and Staff Followu _ Staff and the employees met last week with the personnel consultant hired to evaluate internal business issues. The report gives some direction for improvements and I am following up with this with staff and employees. We have restructured our staff meetings,and have set up employee committees for various subjects within the organization. In addition,the consultant has advised on staff leadership training which I will be reviewing with him. Golf Course Su erintendent Contract Discussion:I realize the Council is very interested in this matter and it needs to be discussed. Bruce and Bob Long will be prepared to go over the particulars again on Monday. s Community Center Pro-ect Status: Cathy will give a briefing on the construction status of the Children's Home Society portion of the project. Of future concern is the e like that VB Digs will not be a participant. This leaves a few options to consider. Otheandr recreation lihood providers have been contacted, and while they appear willing to provide mamaemnt they are unlikely to construct space similar to VB Digs'plans. The obvious optionservices,o build a city gym and teen center and begin discussion of this with the architect. Three realities need to be kept in mind, one, without VB Digs management of the building needs to be figured out. Two, no increment is collected without a privately owned development on the site, and three, how much should be spent to build a city how developer should gym. EIsewhere on this agenda is a proposal from a wanting a negotiation agreement to essentially discuss buildingoffice ace. portion of the community center is one of the spaceThe east P areas being considered by the developer, which is also in the recently created TIF district. Time constraints are going to prevent me from getting more into going in fits and starts as one would expect We will report on this.Monday es memo. vening,,e I is want to discuss with the Council more the development situation beingoffered to the plusiI will a good weekend and see you Monday night at 6 pm ty. Have i /E 39ad 0IE6LEEZI9=QI N3l172tJ R 1CCi7NN�v:r.fnvs Item No. &;' Staff Report No.97—,W7/10_5 Meeting Date: • Type of Business: WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda;CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council �L From: Mike Ulrich, Director of Public Works Item Title/Subject: 1997 First Quarter Report Date of Report: April 14, 1997 SHOP -Attended: Collection Systems Seminar (Tim P.) Pesticide Training (Tim P.) Coaching Skills for Mgrs and Supervisors (Tim P.) Competent Person Training (Tim P.) Exam Preparation Class for Water License (Tim P.) Sweeper Clinic (Bruce) • Vactor Clinic (Bruce) -Obtained estimates for damaged City vehicles (Dump Truck and Staff car) -Perform needed and necessary maintenance on vehicles and equipment -Assisted in street patch i n g SEWER QEPARTMENT -Attended: Competent Person Training Vactor Clinic -Assisted in snow plowing and sanding -Assisted in water main break repairs -Assisted in street patching -Cleaned sump in fire department garage for the City of New Brighton -Compiled information and made a presentation at the Collection Systems Seminar (Wally) -Reviewed and ordered manhole lids for replacement of broken lids -Installed a new wing post on the plow for the loader WATEREPARTMENT -Attended: Competent Person Training Rural Water School (Mike) • -Pumped 98,679,000 gallons of water City of Mounds View Staff Report - April 14, 1997 Page 2 • WATER DEPARTMENT CONTINUED -Worked with Jim Hess and Mike on well head maintenance for #3 and #5. (Inspections, repairs, reviewal of bids received) -Cleaned reclaim tank at well #5 -Repaired (6) water main breaks, (1) service line repair -Inspected the pulled well parts at Alberg Water Services with Jim Hess -Assisted in street patching -Met with SEH on reservoir de-humidifiers -Repaired hydrant at Knollwood and Woodale (Hit by a car) STREETS DEPARTMENT -Attended: Pesticide Training (Tim F.) Competent Person Sweeper Clinic (Tim F.) Cracksealing Seminar -Replaced various street signs and posts -Received bids on a new rollpac . -Swept streets -Snow plowing/sanding -Street patching • Item No. Staff Report No. 7 c 7 / LOS Meeting Date: • Type of Business: 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 /tt Item Title/Subject: Second Quarter Report Date of Report: August 1, 1997 WATER Trouble shot and repaired meters Flushed hydrants Three employees attended the annual Water Certification Seminar Conducted tours of the Water plant for Public Works Week Repaired two water main breaks Extensive locations performed for Old 8 project Pumped 147,635,000 gallons of water STREETS Crack sealed streets Trimmed boulevard trees Cleaned up storm damaged boulevard trees Assisted in repairing water main breaks Patching streets in preparation of seal coating SHOP Assisted in crack sealing Assisted in street sweeping Assisted in patching Squad Car maintenance and repair City Hall HVAC maintenance and repair Public Works vehicle and equipment repair and maintenance Initiated installation of auto lube system on unit 4133 WASTEWATER Assisted New Brighton, Lino Lakes and Circle Pines in sewer related maintenance Televised main lines for two residential service wyes Dye tested residential service line Removed root cutter lost in main line by a contractor Installed new track on camera traction unit Rebuilt motors and pumps at Groveland Lift Station Assisted Townsedge Mobile Home Park with sewer blockage Cleaned and Inspected storm sewer on Spring Lake Road(3,500ft cleaned, 20 yds material removed) I Item No. 7 Staff Report No. 97-2172WS • Meeting Date 8-4-97 Type of Business WK WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business Mounds View City Council Work Session Staff Report To: Mounds View City Council From: Cathy Bennett, Director of Economic Development Item Title/Subject: Quarterly Report Date of Report: August I, 1997 Attached is the 1/2 year report for Economic Development. I have structured the report as an overview of the key items that have been worked on in the department since January. I would be happy to provide Council with more specific information regarding any of these items at the work session. Many of the items are a result of team work with other departments since I was on full maternity from December- February and part time from March - May. Thank you to all of those who helped keep pace with the increased interest in Mounds View this year. • 19971/2 Year Report • Economic Development January - June Business Retention and Attraction: ♦ Attended the North Metro Business Retention and Development Commission Annual Strategic Planning Session. • Attended monthly New Brighton/Mounds View Chamber of Commerce Board Meetings and Business Development Committee meetings. Meetings included a strategic planning session and the Business of the Year Preparation. • Participated in the Western Bank Advisory Committee quarterly meeting representing the City of Mounds View. • Attended the Economic Development Association of Minnesota Summer Conference on Construction Practices and Design Standards. • Actively responded to twenty inquiries regarding commercial/industrial/residential space availability in Mounds View. Held one meeting to discuss business relocation in Mounds View Industrial Park. ♦ Forwarded information regarding Mounds View's Business Improvement Partnership Loan Program to three Mounds View Businesses. ♦ Worked with the Everest Group in negotiation of a Tax Increment Financing Pay-As-You-Go Agreement for the development of a 103,000 sq.ft. building in Mounds View Business Park. Continue to work through language for a final agreement. ♦ Successfully negotiated a Tax Increment Financing Agreement for the attraction of Zep Manufacturing to build a 25,000 sq.ft. building, expandable to 40,000 sq.ft. in the Bridges Technology Park. ♦ Met with Mermaid attorney regarding financing possibilities for a Hotel/Conference Facility in Mounds View. ♦ Market 10 new businesses in Mounds View Matters and Business Beat and gave a focus on Midwest Industrial Supply,Fedor's Market and Western Bank. Administration of Tax Increment Funds: ♦ Worked with the EDC in drafting a Tax Increment Policy and Deposit Agreement for use and consideration of Tax Increment Financing. Approved by the EDA. • Monitored the final development and annual reporting requirements under the Development Assistance Agreements for Mounds View Business Park, Bridges Technology Park and Silver Lake Pointe Apartments. ♦ Prepared and coordinated a workshop on Tax Increment Financing for EDC and EDA members. • Revised allocation of available tax increment funds to priority projects in Mounds View. ♦ Assisted in the preparation of documentation of Mounds View Tax Increment Districts for State Auditor's Office and County Reporting Requirements. ♦ Assisted in the establishment of new Tax Increment District No. 4. 1 • Highway 10 Corridor: ♦ Coordinated the study of Section 9 with SRF Consulting Group and developed redevelopment strategies for the area. Held community workshop and several commission and EDA meetings to discuss goals,objectives and strategies for the development of Section 9. • Participated in the University of Minnesota Metropolitan Design Course which focused on Mounds View's Highway 10 Corridor. Resulted in a concept to develop a local circulator or ring road around Highway 10 to establish Mounds View's Community Core. Continue to work on strategies for implementation of a ring road to include the realignment of Edgewood Drive and partnerships for development of the concept. • Provided the EDC and EDA with a summary of the economic impact of a 16-screen movie theater, office buildings and restaurants in connection with the proposed O'Neil Development. EDC recommended the approval of the O'Neil Development as an enhancement to Highway 10 Corridor and the City of Mounds View. • Evaluate the proposal for the rehabilitation of Red Oak Apartments and construction of a new townhome development on Highway 10. The proposal includes a request to purchase EDA owned land and tax increment financing assistance. In addition,the proposal includes support for Ramsey County Home Funds and Minneapolis Public Housing Authority Hollman Units. Project is still pending final EDA action. Housing Replacement Program: + Successfully purchased and demolished 8283 Long Lake Road. Developing plan for sale and redevelopment. ♦ Developed procedures for the marketing and sale of 8265 Spring Lake Road. ♦ Developed an inventory of City/EDA owned land to include date of purchase, purchase price, size, location and proposed use. • Revised the Housing Replacement Program to include the option to provide demolition funds for construction of new single family home. Mounds View Community Center: + Approved the expenditure of tax increment funds as a loan agreement to finance the City's costs in connection with the Bel Rae Community Center Project. • Approved bids for demolition and phase I construction of the Community Center which began in June. ♦ Assigned as coordinator of construction activities for Phase I, finalize contracts, monitor change orders, ensure scheduling for move in of Children's Home Society on August 15. • Finalize the terms of the lease agreement with Mounds View School District Community Education. • Monitor the negotiation of an agreement with V.B.Digs for the construction of six volleyball courts in connection with the Community Center. • 2 r _ 1r-Terni Leadership of the Twin Cities c_Siaff RVrf/16• I/7-'7173a) 400 Croveland Avenue,Suite 613 Minneapolis,Minnesota 55403 (612)623-9511 Communication Climate Study City of Mounds View Description The City of Mounds View through Chuck Whiting, City Administrator, contracted with James Arnott, Principal and Senior Consultant, Leadership of the Twin Cities, a Minneapolis consulting group to conduct a communication climate study of City of Mounds View personnel, including the Mayor, City Administrator, Department Heads, and employees. These persons were • interviewed in June through a combination of focus groups and individual interviews. The option of contacting Arnott via telephone was also provided. All persons interviewed shared valuable information with the interviewer. The specific content shared is held in confidentiality;however, any personal names involving potentially controversial situations are not directly reported in this report. The consultant has restructured testimony into broader patterns of organizational behaviors. This procedure reporting information provides a valid picture of the City's workplace communication climate, while protecting the candidness of those reporting. The consultant also • studied retreat manuals, city descriptive information, and other reports to gain a better understanding of the City of Mounds View. A needs assessment questionnaire was followed in all focus group and individual interviews. The six major questions were raised in all interviews. The probes or supportive questions were used when appropriate, generally determined by the context of the group member's work or interest in issues. The same applied for individual interviews. The questions are listed here: 1. Please describe how city employees communicate in the workplace. Probes: Open communication is practiced? We have a top/down process? Employees communicate with whom they feel comfortable? 2. Do you believe that communication problems exist? Probes: Information regarding important decisions is not usually clearly communicated? Is this communication problem specific to your department? True for the entire organization? 3. How would you like to improve communication here? Probes: Better-written, uniform internal processes? A more open style of communication between department heads and • employees? 1I Communication Cllmato Study page 2 . City of Mounds Vl.w 4. Describe leadership styles at the City of Mounds View(elected and appointed officials). Probes: How does current leadership compare to past leadership? Mayor? Council? City administrator? 5. What changes would you like to experience to improve the quality of leadership here? Probes: Elected officials? Administration? Department heads? Yourself? 6. What are you willing to do as an(employee, administrator, elected official)to improve the work climate at the City of Mounds View? Probes: Please be specific. What do you want? What will you do? These questions and probes yielded considerable notes for the consultant to help him identify • characteristics and behaviors descriptive of the communication climate at the City of Mounds View. Further,the responses gained are crucial in the design of a training seminar series to be offered for the professional development of City personnel. The report is divided into Discoveries and Recommendations as sections. In the recommendations section is listed a potential series of seminars for professional development. Discoveries Preface The consultant found a committed workforce at the City of Mounds View with a collective sense of completing work well and in a professional manner. He further found that the City Administrator and his administrative support staff are genuinely interested in assessing the quality of communication in all work units in the City in an effort to encourage open communication as well as improve communication if necessary. Finally, the City Council under the Mayor's leadership willingly are committing resources to have an impartial professional consultant conduct an assessment regarding the communication climate and define means to continue to develop better communication. Overall: the consultant felt that the City of Mounds View is a good place to work, but that communication needs to be improved to assure the quality of the workplace. p• Communication Climate Study page 3 • City of Mounds View Consultant Observations Based on interviews with 28 persons of whom 27 are full-time City employees, or approximately one-half of the workforce. Communication Climate 1. Communication Models. The City Administrator and Department Heads set the tone for the communication climate, internally. Their genuine interest in open communication is modeled through consistency of friendly greetings, written communication, and directness of response. The Council members and Mayor, while serving an electorate, also model communication openly in the workplace when visiting City offices. Employees report that new Council members and one Department Head do not communicate directly with them. This is caused by either not knowing employee names, or simply not choosing to speak with people. If a greeting is not returned, especially by a superior in rank, then the practice of communicating begins to die. 2. Chain-of-Command. Information is not well shared within the City. Employees gain information from their supervisors who receive their information from the City Administration or directly from attending Council meetings. Further, information is . generated within the City which is shared reactively when a citizen complains. Time is lost, conflicts occur, and communication becomes negative when persons seem short changed on having information. The predictable outcomes are to violate the chain-of-command by g. �-_• -ctly to power sources, or by feeding the grapevine. The grapevine is alive and w; ' e City of Mounds View! 3. Customer Service. A consistent process and procedure to deal efficiently and effectively with customers is not practiced. Further, what written information is available needs to be updated for consistency. Employers seem committed to customer service, but are not always certain regarding how to conduct it effectively. Again, information on changes in policies needs to be openly communicated. 4. Organizational Chart. Who is in charge, when, and where is not well communicated. This has a negative impact on decision making. Internally, administrators struggle to make decisions, occasionally insignificant ones, but find themselves challenged on getting direct answers. A general lack of decisiveness from the City Administrator and the Department Heads sets a confusing tone for other personnel. These personnel struggle with wondering what decisions should be made, and if their opinions really count. The use of technology, particularly computers and management information systems, is a controversial issue, still bitterly contested regarding what technology should be used by whom and in what role. Morale and Productivity 1. Trust. Trust has been lost in some work units. This observation by personnel is largely • fueled by a sense of being second guessed by financial demands. Some personnel perceive 1 Communication Climate Study page 4 • City of Mounds Viow that their suggestions on purchases and directives invariably becomes subjected to a budgetary bottom-line. While the Council is committed to responsible financial management; a belief seldom challenged by employees at the City,this commitment seems to be played out to obsession by those who manage finance in the City. As a consequence, trust is lost because a person's contribution is not valued. Trust develops over time. When trust begins to drop, morale decline follows, and eventually productivity takes a negative impact. 2. Veterans v. Newcomers. An"us"versus "them"perception is in evidence. The newcomers reflect that new technologies,management practices involving cost effectiveness, and shifts in job functions are essential if the City is to remain a viable financial entity. The veteran perception is characterized as "why fix something that isn't broken,"rely on proven quantities in staffing and location, and be more decisive when dealing with decisions. Both perceptions are held by persons who firmly believe they are right. A"we" perception drawing the"us"versus"them" factions is not in evidence. 3. Power and Roles. A clearly defined mission is not being practiced. The Council is viewed to be a policy-making body. Whereas,the City Administration is seen as a procedure- implementation body. These roles in policy and procedure are confused in the estimation of those interviewed. When clear and precise actions are not perceived by personnel, then . confusion occurs about roles. Consequently, persons move toward whom they perceive to have power. Power seldom is matched to authority roles. Power at the City of Mounds View seems evident in who you know,your length of service,mastery of the budgetary process, and control over crucial information. Currently, power struggles are occurring, they will continue unless resolved. Conclusions The problems facing the City of Mounds View are all resolvable. The City is a good place to work. Leadership is needed at several levels, trust-building should be pursued, and a climate of open communication restored. Recommendations These recommendations are not exclusive to the consultant. They are predominantly drawn from ideas openly shared by personnel interviewed. When improving the organizational communication climate, it is usually advisable to draw on what is seemingly working tempered with well planned changes gradually implemented. These recommendations should be discussed. 1. Quality of the City Workforce. The average performance and commitment of the City employee, either manager or employee, is solid. An attitude of strength should be pursued in defining excellence. Leadership needs to draw more substantially on current resources in • defining its future. Employee suggestions, the Department Heads'collective resources, Communication Climate Study page 5 • City of Mounds View and the external professional experiences of the City Administrator should be drawn more closely together. The Council should present a united front in their collective commitment to support internal improvement, but clearly-define and inform their policies and strategies for change. 2. Communication. Names,roles, and employment histories need to be better understood by the City Council and new employees. While the City is not an extended family, the culture of the City workplace is family centered in behavior, especially communication. A friendlier environment is needed, initiated by communication modeling at the administrative level, internally, and by the Council, externally. Employee recognition, project presentations by City personnel to the Council, and open flow of pertinent information by the City Administrator and Department Heads to employees is strongly encouraged. 3. Organizational Structure. A formal organizational structure needs to be developed with immediacy. A well defined chart should define who is in charge when the City Administrator is absent, a Department Head needs to know his or her domain for making decisions,and to curtail crisis management. Job functions and cross training need to be indicated in assessing how business is done in different work units defined in the organizational chart. • 4. Administrative Team. Potentially, the Department Heads and City Administration meeting practices needs a drastic overhaul. The group needs training in problem solving, decision making, time management,leadership, and how to effectively and efficiently conduct a productive meeting. Future meetings should have agendm,revolving facilitator assignments, a moratorium on venting, and a checklist for desirable outcomes. This group should be collectively working closely together as the professional leadership team of this City. The human resources are in place,they need to be developed into a better leadership model. 5. Decision Making. Decisions should be made more openly and quickly. Further, administrators including Department Heads need to better define their range of making decisions on what items and procedures. While cost effectiveness is important, it should not surface as the only valid reason in weighing a decision. An organization perception is taking hold that all decisions are tied to cost in dollars. While there are exceptions to this perception, if balance is not provided in the City decision making process between cost and the potential value to people, then a reluctance to contribute to decision making will occur. This, predictably, is usually followed by a sense of cynicism toward those who are perceived to have authority by those lacking it. 6. Trust Building. Organizational climate studies reveal that trust is developed when working relationships are cultivated over time. When persons are not perceived as trustworthy, or their professional contributions are challenged, then trust is lost. The element of trust is lost in a short timeframe. The decision making process will need to welcome contributions from administrators and employees alike, with action quickly taken • Communication Climate Study page 6 i City of Mounds View on several projects, if trust is to be restored. In this situation, visible results and concerned behaviors over time will restore trust, but it will be a time consuming process. 7. Customer Focus. A customer service program needs to be developed based initially on major, recurring complaints raised by external customers. This should entail internal surveys of employees, charting frequency and type of complaint, and writing a customer service program. Further, this program should also accent the value of effective internal customer service by using the same criteria used in determining external complaints, but applying them internally. Questions needing to be asked concerning internal customers are: 0 Would you criticize an employee when a customer is present? $ Should you treat an employee in another department as if he or she were your customer? 0 Have you withheld valuable information from a fellow employee, but given it freely to an external customer? 0 Do you deal with customers more openly and honestly than you do your employees? Manager? Training • The initial proposal submitted by the consultant focused on employee development through training. The consultant believes that the training would best be done with the Department Heads, City Administrator, and administrative staff responsible for decision making and setting policy and procedure. Two options are suggested for training,they are: 0 First, a format of two full days of training offered on different days. This full-day session would address Communication Styles and Conflict Management. It would use instruments on personal profiling to assess the management styles of the Administrative Team, particularly how they delegate, manage time, deal with people,make decisions, and communicate. Further, these approaches to managing conflicts would be surveyed, analyzed, and discussed. The focus here would be how to openly deal with conflict as a dangerous opportunity with potential for positive outcomes. This one-day session could be divided into two four-hour sessions as an alternative format. The consultant would argue for the one-day plan to offer a longer session for personal contact. 0 Second, another full-day training session on Leadership and Teambuilding. This session would complement the session on styles and management by building on how we use techniques to identify leading and following patterns in team situations. Simulations would be used to reenact leadership meetings. The rationale behind the switch in emphasis from employee to administrator in training is to provide management application to leaders who can eventually model it to employees. • Communication Climate Study page 7 • City of Mounds iflow These sessions could be delivered in August and September, 1997. Planning could be done soon with the City Administrator, his team, and the Department Heads shortly after this report is circulated. Additionally, the City should consider using on a standby call basis an executive coaching expert to help with the individual development of management and support personnel who do not respond effectively to group training. Final Conclusion The City of Mounds View is an excellent municipal government, but it is being challenged by changes involving leadership, technology, and the basic way in which work is done. In order to continue excellence in performance in the workplace, the City will need to invest in training and the professional development of its workforce. Further, the decision making process will need to become larger, because the process of making decisions and who is directly involved is as important as the decision itself. If adequate resources are directed toward a strategic process of planning and human resource management, the City of Mounds View should continue to be an excellent place to work. • • • *interoffice MEMORANDUM to: Chuck Whiting, Adminstrator from: Mary Saarion, Director of Parks and Recreation ‘1.\, subject: Suggestions for Community Center management date: July 31, 1997 Yesterday you requested that I put together ideas on possibilities of managing the Community Center. I have called several communities that have community centers to gain information regarding management and operations. The Communities that I called include Shoreview, New Brighton, Columbia Heights, St. Anthony, Crystal, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Eden Prairie, Maplewood, North St. Paul and Maple Grove. All ten community centers listed above house their Parks and Recreation Department at the Community Center building. All the above use Parks and Recreation Department office staff as facility managers, monitoring and scheduling use and security of the community center building. All the above community Parks and Recreation Departments plan and implement activities at the community center facilities. • It is my recommendation that the City of Mounds View Parks and Recreation staff move to offices at the Community Center and be given the responsibility of monitoring and scheduling use of the community center. Daytime hours from 8a.m. -4:30 p.m. would be taken care of without any additional personnel. Arrangements for after school and evening activity supervision would need to be arranged through fee-subsidized instruction programs for programs such as basketball leagues, volunteer pool for programs such as teen open gyms and perhaps a joint agreement with the School District for after-school activities including intramurals, which would be a fee subsidized program as well. Weekend activities would be similar. However, it is suggested that a part time person be employed for Saturday and Sunday afternoon hours where activities in the community center can be offered to the community at no cost. This would be perhaps 8 hours/ week(4 hours on Sat and 4 hours on Sun) for 52 weeks at $8/hr wage equalling approximately $3,328 in wages plus approximately $300 in minimal benefits. In addition, this person could be the person that would monitor rental use of the building for weddings, reunions, conferences, etc. Time spent by the building supervisor would be paid for by fees required by renters. This is a common practice and one that we participate in with the school district. Therefore, supervision of the building during rentals would be paid for by the fees charged to the renters. In believe that the above is a very workable management program for the community center. Custodial services will be needed. The City has several options including extending the services • which are currently required for City Hall. Hiring a separate custodial contract for the Community Center, which would be a joint partnership with the School District and Children's Home Society. Another choice would be to hire an employee for this job. All these choices will Chuck Whiting, Adminstrator i Page 2 July 31, 1997 require additional budgetted spending. Having Public Works or Parks conduct this service would not cost additional money but would required cutting activities that are currently being done, that would need to be eliminated to have time to perform custodial services at the Community Center. I recommend that the City look into expanding the custodial contract of City Hall to include the Community Center. This would be an operational cost that would need to be paid by revenues of the community center. I would like to be able to work with you on the management portion of the Community Center. I think that this line of work is in the realm of Parks and Recreation Administration, is something that Parks and Recreation professionals are trained and experienced. In addition, the Parks and Recreation profession has a large bank of information and experiences to draw upon through the networking of ever-growing number of cities that have community centers. • MANAGEMENT STAFF MEETING NOTES Tuesday,July 29, 1997 • 2:00 PM Absent: John Hammerschmidt Mike Ulrich Agenda Additions: Item 1: Discuss format of management staff meetings. DEPARTMENT REPORTS will be moved from the agenda to item#5. Minutes from management meetings will be distributed via e-mail and will be posted. Item 2: Discuss Pam Sheldon's going away celebrations. Pam Sheldon's last day is Friday, August 8th. August 6, the Community Development Dept. will take Pam out for lunch and on Friday, August 8, all city employees will participate in a picnic/barbecue in the picnic area and are asked to bring something to share. Friday, August 8 after work there is another celebration outside of work at pps on I-35W and Larpenter. Monday, August 11, before the City Council Meeting there will be a reception for Pam at 6:00 PM. Approval of Minutes: No minutes to approve. Business: Chuck Whiting stressed the need for committees to be formed. There are five committees that the department heads came up with. Department heads volunteered employees from there departments with the option of volunteering themselves or objecting. Attached is a list of the committees and the employees on them. It was agreed that the department heads will discuss the committee groups in department staff meetings. Several dept. heads suggested the need for employee identification. Ideas were; an employee picture board, city picture badges and recognition in the city newsletters. These items will be discussed again with more information brought to the table regarding costs and procedures. Department heads reviewed the status of their 1998 budgets. Each dept. head will be meeting this week with Chuck and Bruce to go over individual dept. budgets. Chuck has called a Special Work Session for August 18, in regards to the budgets and also quarterly reports. Department staff training is tabled until the next meeting. The City Hall door will be opened by someone in the Finance Department by 7:58 AM, Monday through Friday. Custodian will be asked to synchronize clocks around City Hall. • Old computer equipment has been moved from the Finance area to Chuck's office until we can surplus the items. Submitted by: Tracy Sanchez c:\minutes\mngmnt\7-29-97 ID MOUNDS VIEW COMMITTEES The employees listed below for the following committees were suggestions that came from department heads. This membership is a one year committment to the committee and will allow for new employees to join and will also have employees rotate committees the following year. Employee Events&Recognition Committee Ethics Commmittee Barb Benesch Chuck Whiting Tim Fredberg Cathy Bennett Kitty Hickok Mary Tatarek Tim Fredberg Jennifer Bergman Tracy Sanchez Steve Dazenski Pat Michna Tim Brennan Tim Ramacher MIS Commi e Tim Ericson Tim Hess Mary Johnson Tracy Juell Bruce Kessel Chuck Whiting Bob Nelson Ideas &Practices Committee Chuck Whiting John Hammerschmidt Mary Saarion Lynnette Morgan Rick Jarson Bill Hangi Editorial Board Chuck Whiting Dave Brick Mary Johnson Tracy Sanchez • Jennifer Bergman Diane Clyne W U(Gc. CUA.O . • c:\committe\comm-nam.lst Item No. 10 Staff Report No. 97-2174WS Meeting Date 8-4-97 Type of Business WK WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business Mounds View City Council Work Session Staff Report To: Mounds View City Council From: Cathy Bennett, Director of Economic Development Item Title/Subject: Discussion on Community Center Redevelopment Date of Report: August I, 1997 The crew at the Bel Rae continue to plug along. Final punch lists will be done August 14th. Children's Home Society is scheduled to begin moving equipment in on August 15 with the daycare opening August 20. CHS will cater meals until the first of September when the kitchen is scheduled to be complete. WAI Continuum will be at the meeting to discuss possible options for Phase II. This would include the 411 remaining community center remodel, space for Community Education, gym space, teen center, brick work and parking lot improvements. They will provide potential configurations and cost estimations. I have attached a final draft of the Community Education lease. Slight modifications have been made to address previous Council concerns regarding shared space and assignment of the lease. These changes are in sections 5 and 12. In addition, we have completed a breakout of leasehold improvement costs and floor plan. The lease will be considered by the Mounds View School Board on August I 2th. Execution Copy • LEASE THIS INDENTURE made and entered into as of this day of 1997, by and between the City of Mounds View, Minnesota whose address is 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 (hereinafter referred to as "Landlord") and Independent School District No. 621, a public corporation under the laws of Minnesota, whose address is 2959 North Hamline Ave., St. Paul, MN 55113 (hereinafter referred to as "Tenant"). WITNESSETH: 1. DEMISED PREMISES. In consideration of the rents, covenants and agreements herein reserved and contained on the part of Tenant to be performed, Landlord does hereby lease to Tenant that portion of the building formerly known as the Bel Rae Ballroom located at 5394 Edgewood Drive, Mounds View, Minnesota 55112 (the "Building") consisting of that portion of the Building described on Exhibit A attached hereto and consisting of approximately 5,100 square feet (hereinafter referred to as the "Demised Premises"). 2. TERM. The term of this Lease and Tenant's obligation to pay rent •hereunderr shall commence on September 1, 1998 (the "Commencement Date") and shall continue until and the term of the Lease shall expire on January 31, 2003. In addition, Tenant shall have two (2) successive options of five (5) years each exercisable by written notice by Tenant to Landlord at least three (3) months prior to expiration of the then- current term and upon such exercise thereof this lease shall be extended for said term on all the same terms and conditions contained therein (except said option); provided that the Base Rent during each extension term shall be increased (but not decreased) by the increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) from the date hereof. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, either Landlord or Tenant may terminate this Lease at any time upon at least ninety (90) days prior written notice in which event this Lease shall become null and void and neither party shall have any further liability hereunder except for obligations for rent accruing prior thereto; provided that in the event that Tenant shall exercise the foregoing right of termination, Tenant shall pay to Landlord the unamortized portion of the cost of Landlord's Improvements set forth on Exhibit B attached hereto, which cost shall be amortized over the 60-month initial term of this Lease without interest, which amount shall be due no later than the date of lease termination. 3. RENT. During the term hereof Tenant agrees to pay as gross base rent (the "Base Rent") to Landlord at 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112, or at such other place as the Landlord may from time to time designate in writing, in advance in twelve equal monthly installments on or before the first day of each month during the term hereof the sum calculated on an annual basis equal to Ten and no/100 Dollars ($10.00) times the square footage in the Demised Premises; provided that with respect to L2ii117449 MI7205-1 any partial month or year, Base Rent shall be adjusted accordingly; provided further, however, that on each anniversary of the Commencement Date the rate per square foot shall be increased (but not decreased) by the increase in the Consumer Price Index, or successor index("CPI") from the CPI at the Commencement Date to the CPI immediately prior to such anniversary; provided, further that in no event shall such increase in the rate per square foot from one year to the next foot exceed five percent (5%). 4. GROSS LEASE; NO ADDITIONAL RENT. Except for the cost of telephone service, notwithstanding any contrary provision contained in this Lease, this Lease shall be deemed a "gross" lease, Landlord shall be responsible for the supply of electricity, natural gas, water, sanitary sewer, and trash collection and snow removal for the Demised Premises, and Landlord (and not Tenant) shall be responsible for any other monetary obligations associated with ownership or operation of the Demised Premises. 5. TENANT'S USE. During the term of this Lease, the Demised Premises shall be used solely for the purpose of general educational purposes. Tenant shall not assign this Lease or sublease the Demised Premises in whole or in part without Landlord's prior written approval. 6. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS. Landlord shall be responsible for 1111 repairs and maintenance of the Demised Premises, i.e., roof, glass and mechanical equipment. Tenant shall be responsible for damages caused by Tenant, its clients or invitees. 7. SURRENDER OF PREMISES. At the expiration or termination of this Lease, Tenant shall surrender the Demised Premises in the same condition as existed on the commencement date of this Lease, ordinary wear and tear excepted. All fixtures which have become attached shall be part of the Demised Premises, except trade fixtures. 8. LANDLORD IMPROVEMENTS. Landlord shall cause to be constructed the improvements on the Demised Premises as set forth in Exhibit B (Landlord Work) attached hereto. Without limiting the foregoing, Landlord shall cause the Demised Premises to contain two (2) separate, secure entrances. Tenant shall not construct any improvements in the Demised Premises or alter the Demised Premises without Landlord's prior written consent. 9. TENANT'S LIABILITY INSURANCE. Tenant shall during the entire term hereof keep in full force and effect a policy of public liability and property damage insurance with respect to the Demised Premises, and the business operated by Tenant and any sublessees with respect to the Demised Premises, in which the limits of public liability shall not be less than $1,000,000 per person and $1,000,000 per accident and in which the property damage liability shall not be less than $500,000. The policy shall name Landlord as additional insured and shall contain clauses that losses shall be payable L201117449 MU205-1 7 notwithstanding any act or negligence of the insured which might otherwise result in III forfeiture of said insurance, and that the insurer will not cancel or change the insurance without first giving the Landlord thirty (30) days prior written notice. 10. COVENANT OF QUIET ENJOYMENT. Tenant, subject to the terms and provisions of this Lease, on payment of the rent and observing, keeping and performing all of the terms and provisions of this Lease on its part to be observed, kept and performed, shall lawfully, peaceably and quietly have, hold occupy and enjoy the Demised Premises during the term hereof without hindrance or objection by any persons lawfully claiming under Landlord. 11. NOTICES. Any notice which is required under this Lease shall be deemed "given" upon hand delivery or three (3) days after prepaid posting in the U. S. Mail whichever shall first occur. Notice shall be addressed to the addresses listed at the beginning of this Lease or to any other address as shall be designated by written notice. 12. SHARED SPACE. Tenant shall have rights regarding shared space located in the Building at the then-going operational-fee-based rate payable to Landlord, provided that any such use by Tenant shall be subject to events or uses of such shared space scheduled by Landlord prior to Tenant's written notification to Landlord of Tenant's 0 desire to use said space. In addition, Landlord shall have the right, without any reduction in the rent to be paid hereunder, to use the two (2) conference rooms located in the Demised Premises and as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto at the then-going operational-fee-based rate payable to Tenant, provided that any such use by Landlord shall be subject to events or uses of conference rooms scheduled by Tenant prior to Landlord's written notification to Tenant of Landlord's desire to use said space. LMW117449 267205-1 3 1111 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have affixed their signatures the day and year first above written. LANDLORD: THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW BY: ITS: Mayor BY: ITS: City Clerk-Administrator TENANT: INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 621 BY: • ITS: • LM 117449 MQ205-1 EXHIBIT A DEMISED PREMISES • . . . I .. i It I igli .% I 7 , WALKWAY I L...// . i STORAGE STORAGE 25 S... • 231 S.F. 231 S.F. I 0° 7;] 2G S.F. Of ) 252.mEN , 0 o S.F. ... ID 0 c:( ) _ . Do 0 (2 Do OFFICE 240 s.,. 6TCE AND MULTI-PURPOSE 210 S.F. COW REI4-6146 h u ,113c:4F. u CORRIDOR j ; i < L.: ; ! w . -- -- --III OZ 1 C7 PSINCi,R.4M— STORAGE 1 1„.; 132 S.F. i , 0 .-m, — .---qW Ur,j E.L-1_=_•..------_= • E.` :'• , i 1 ta"(1: 1..... = == • 7 li Li- (1 z . -.1 7 <1 I TAT- , c ORR t DOR 0 - - O., ... i Q1) STORNI_ ORAE ss,..._. ,I 1 Ci, • . • . •cHmn qMACA/IOR____—___: 933 S.F. I I IQ I I PARENT EDUCATION CLASSROOM I CLASSROOM I CLASSROOM 510 S.F. ? • 300 S.F. 300 S.F. • 300 S.F. –411111""1111111111Th • . I I 1/004 I I I -... . - t . Li Ilk LMR117449 M05-1 5 • EXHIBIT B Construction/Renovation Costs Mounds View School District 621 Community Education Renovation Costs: Storage/Corridor/Office (621) 900 sq.ft. x$55/sq.ft. = $49,500.00 Toilets (MV) 200 sq.ft. x$120/sq.ft. = $24,000.00 New Construction: Interior Space - new(621) 4200 sq.ft. x$63.10/sq.ft= $265,020.00 Exterior Space -new(MV) 4200 sq.ft. x$31.90/sq.ft.= $133,139.00 Design Contingency: AK (621) $6,290.40 ) $4,000.60 TOTAL $481,950.00 Leasehold Improvement Costs: (621) $320,810.40 (MV) $161,139.60 • Item No. 11 Staff Report No. 97-2175WS • Meeting Date: August 4, 1997 Type of Business: WK WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: EDA President and Board Members From: Jennifer Bergman, Housing Inspector Item Title/Subject: Discussion Regarding Proposals for 8265 Spring Lake Road Date of Report: August 1, 1997 Discussion: In August, 1996,we purchased a home at 8265 Spring Lake Road from the Department of Housing and Urban Development under the Housing Replacement Program for$49,500. The property was appraised at$52,000, of which$30,000 is for the lot and$22,000 is for the house. The house met the blighted condition due to a bowing foundation. In October, 1996, we contracted services with Herbst& Sons Construction Company to have the home demolished for $6,300. The total investment by the EDA in this property has been$55,800. • On May 22, 1997, advertised the lot for sale by sending out a packet of information to approximately 15 interested developers and home buyers (see Attachment 1). In order to be considered for the purchase of the lot, we required an offer in writing which indicated four items: (1)Evidence of a builder and a buyer team; (2)An offer price on the lot; (3)A description of the proposed new home; and(4) The estimated value of the home upon completion. We asked that proposals be submitted by June 30, 1997. By June 30, we had only received one proposal. We placed a for sale sign on the property and extended the offer deadline to July 31. I received many phone calls and sent out an additional 20 packets. By July 31, we still have had only one response. The response we received is from a licensed general contractor who plans to build the home for himself(see Attachment 2). His primary work has been in the rehabilitation of houses, however, he has built one home. His original offer for the lot was $25,000. After some negotiation, he submitted another letter stating that he would purchase the lot for$27,000: His price was a result of the road reconstruction planned for Spring Lake Road in 1998. He had received an estimate of $3,000 for assessments for the reconstruction, and he reduced the appraised price by the amount. There are three steps in the procedure for buying a lot under the Housing Replacement Program. The first step is to select a builder/buyer team based the offer which was submitted including the • four items listed above. The second step is sign the Participation Agreement which requires the Developer to pay $500 and, in return, the EDA will grant the Developer exclusive rights to the property (see Attachment 3). The third step is to execute a Contract for Private Development 1 City of Mounds View Staff Report August 1, 1997 Page 2 • which will detail the EDA requirements for the development of the lot. Prior to executing the Contract for Private Development, we will require builder references and proof of financial capability. The Contract will include the requirements set forth by the EDA for redevelopment of the lot. jar 4Jenni er Beigman, Hosing Inspector Li • 110 MY OF ATTACHMENT 1 Phone: (612) 784-3055 Fax: (612) 784-3462 A� grecs • Partner° To: Residential Builders and Interested Home Buyers From: Jennifer Bergman, Mounds View EDA Subject: Notice of Residential Building Lots For Sale Date: May 22, 1997 The Mounds View Economic Development Authority(EDA) established the Housing Replacement Program to reduce the social costs of blight and increase the tax base. The purpose of the program is to replace deteriorating lower value housing on scattered sites throughout the City with larger,higher value housing designed for families. To accomplish this goal, the EDA purchases substandard homes, demolishes the home and sells the lot to prospective buyers for redevelopment. This will assist in eliminating the blighting influence of substandard housing and increasing the availability of quality housing for families. The EDA currently has a vacant site available for redevelopment. Please see the attached sheet isfor detailed information on this lot. In order to be considered, the builder must submit a proposal in writing by noon on July 31, 1997. The proposal shall include the offer price of the lot, a description of the proposed new home including the number of bedrooms and bathrooms, and proposed estimated value of the new home. The EDA will only consider proposals from a licensed residential home builder who has identified a buyer to occupy the home upon its completion. Please submit proposals to: Mounds View EDA ATTN: Jennifer Bergman 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View,MN 55112. The selected builder must comply with the Housing Design and Site Criteria and enter into a Participation Agreement with the EDA (see attachments). Upon satisfactory negotiations, the builder/buyer team must submit a$500 participation fee and enter into a Contract for Private Development with the EDA within 30 days of signature of the Participation Agreement. The participation fee is non-refundable and non-transferable. The development of all sites shall meet the development objectives as set forth in the Housing Design and Site Criteria. These guidelines were created to ensure that the homes built on the identified lots blend in with the surrounding neighborhood and respond to the objective of the Mounds View Housing Replacement Program. If you have any questions,please call Jennifer Bergman at 717-4023 or Cathy Bennett at 717-4002. -6 PRINTED WITH 2401 Highway 10•-Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 tw SOYINK TM 100°.recycled paper Equal Opportunity Employer 411/ Lot For Sale by the Mounds View Economic Development Authority 8265 Spring Lake Road Mounds View, MN Setback Requirements: Front Yard: 30 feet Rear Yard: 30 feet Side Yard: 10 feet SY • 5 View: East from Spring Lake Road n C0TV OF o NG W 218.0 11111f ON-'S 0 8265 Spring Lake Road m ° •z cc a. cn ''°r ARDAN AVENUE S dress ' Panties 7 I Housing n and Site b Design Criteria The Mounds View Economic Development Authority (EDA) established the Housing Replacement Program to reduce the social costs of blight and increase the tax base. The purpose of the program is to replace deteriorating lower value housing on scattered sites throughout the City with larger, higher value housing designed for families. To accomplish this goal, the EDA purchases substandard homes, demolishes the home and sells the lot to a prospective buyers for redevelopment. This will assist in eliminating the blighting influence of substandard housing and increasing the availability of quality housing for families. I. General a. The lot must be purchased by a buyer/developer team. b. The developer must be a licensed contractor. All sub-contractors must also be licensed. • c. The develo per,'buyer team must enter into a Contact for Private Development with the EDA which will specify design, set site criteria and establish value based upon new home construction in the surrounding area. d. Home design must comply with all federal, state and local building codes. e. The house must be able to be built within six(6) months from the time the Contract for Private Development is executed. An extension may be granted with the permission of the EDA. f. Each home must be single-family, owner occupied. 2. Building Standards a. All building plans must have been prepared in consultation with an Architect or Architectural Designer with a minimum two year technical degree. Housing design is a critical concern. b. A minimum of three bedrooms is required. • Page 1 •c. Two full bathrooms are preferred. A home design with 1%2 baths will be considered. d. A two-car attached garage is required. e.. Exterior materials (siding, doors and windows) should be low maintenance. Aluminum and vinyl are preferred. Natural cedar lap is acceptable if properly stained or painted. Hardboard panels or hardboard lap siding are not acceptable. f. Unit height and mass of the new homes shall be compatible with the scale of the surrounding neighborhood. g• Plans must present a balanced distribution of wall and window areas from all views. h. A full basement shall be provided in the house unless the selected design results in a split level,garden level type of basement 3. Site Standards a. The entire grounds shah be landscaped to be aesthetically pleasing in all seasons. Land forms and plant materials shall be used to define the site and blend with adjoining properties. The landscape plan must be reviewed by the City Forester. b. Existing trees shall be preserved when possible. Care should be taken to preserve existing root systems. Construction fencing around the root system must be provided on trees directly adjacent to active gading and construction areas. The City Forester can assist in recommending methods of protecting existing trees and shrubs. c. Site drainage shall be accommodated on the site so that water is directed away from the new home and the neighboring properties. The developer must comply with any federal, stare or local drainage requirements. Construction and the finished structure must not have a detrimental impact on storm water drainage patterns in the neighborhood. d. All air conditioning units must be located in the rear yard of the house. • • Page 2 • e. Utility meters shall be screened from street view; locations must be specified on plans. f. The neighboring property and adjacent public streets shall be kept free of construction debris at all times. The construction site shall be managed so not to become a nuisance. Under no circumstance during the construction period shall construction workers, construction equipment or construction materials enter, disturb, or damage neighboring properties. 4. Builder Requirements a. Demonstrate financial capability by providing: (1) A statement from a financial institution of sufficient construction capital (2) A letter of credit of the value of the lot (3) A summary of the financial conditions of the company (4) Evidence of a construction loan or ability to secure one b. Possess adequate Builder's Risk, Comprehensive General Liability and Worker's Compensation insurance coverage. 10 c. Posses a Home Owners Warranty insurance or equivalent to perform warranted repairs required by Minnesota State Statute. d. Provide references from: (1) Five customers; (2) Three major suppliers, one being the construction lumber supplier; (3) Building Inspectors from two cities in which the builder has constructed new housing within the past three years. e. Provide information on inventory of homes that builder currently has under construction. 5. Buyer Requirements a. Must be pre-approved for permanent financing prior to signing Contract for Private Development Page 3 ATTACHMENT 2 July 28,1997 • LOREN HANSON CONSTRUCTION MN Lic. #6843 Loren D. Hanson (612) 323-3999 11073 Xylon Ave. N. Champlin, MN 55316 Mounds View EDA ATTN.: Jennifer Bergman 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 Due to negotiations, I have increased my offer to $27,000 for the lot at 8265 Spring Lake Road. To restate the other details of my offer, I plan to build a two-story house including: three bedrooms with a 3/4 bath off the master bedroom and a full bath on the second i story; a great room, kitchen, dining room and 1/2 bath on the main level; and a roughed-in bath and egress window in the basement for future finishing. Attached to the house would be a three-car garage. Exterior siding will be maintenance free, vinyl or aluminum. Approximate value of the property will be$140,000. I am a licensed general contractor and have primarily been doing residential remodeling, . but I now would like to pursue new home construction. I plan to build a home for my fiancee and Ito occupy after we get married in September. Thank you for considering this offer. I look forward to hearing your response. Sincerely, 440A,..___ Loren D. Hanson • ATTACHMENT 3 • MOUNDS VIEW HOUSING REPLACEMENT PROGRAM PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of 19 by and between the ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW, a body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, having its principal office at 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 (EDA) and , a Minnesota havingits principal office at . (Developer) In consideration of the mutual covenants and obligations of the EDA and the Developer, the parties do hereby covenant and agree as follows: 1. The Developer agrees to pay$500 to the EDA for the rights to participate in redevelopment of a property owned by the EDA in accordance with the guidelines of the Mounds View EDA's Housing Replacement Program. 2. In return for S500, the receipt of which from the Developer is hereby acknowledged by the EDA, the EDA grants to the Developer the exclusive right to enter into a contract to redevelop the property located at and legally described as in accordance with the Mounds View EDA's Housing Replacement Program. This right will expire , 19unless,prior thereto,the Developer and the EDA have executed a Contract for Private Development with regard to the property. 3. The EDA agrees to negotiate in good faith with the Developer regarding redevelopment of the property but nothing contained in this Agreement shall require the EDA to enter into a Contact for Private Development if, at the EDA's sole discretion, it deems such not to be in its best interests. 4. The fee paid by the Developer to the EDA in connection with this Agreement for participation in the EDA's Housing Replacement Program is non-refundable and non- transferable to any other property or site owned by the EDA. DEVELOPER EDA By: By: Its President • Its By: Its Executive Director Item No. 12 Staff Report No. 97-2176WS • Meeting Date 8-4-97 Type of Business WK WK: Work Session;PH:Public Hearing; CA:Consent Agenda;CB:Council Business Mounds View City Council Work Session Staff Report To: Mounds View City Council From: Cathy Bennett, Director of Economic Development Item Title/Subject: Discussion of Estimated Costs to Purchase Single Family Rental Homes under the Housing Replacement Program Date of Report: August I, 1997 At the July work session staff was directed to research the potential costs of acquiring homes that are being rented under the Housing Replacement Program. Currently the program does not provide for the purchase of homes that are being rented because of the cost associated with relocation. It is possible to make a minor revision to the program that would allow the EDA to consider the purchase of tenant occupied homes.. 1111 In discussions with a relocation consultant it was estimated that relocation costs associated with single family homes is high because it is difficult to find comparable rental property due to the limited amount of single family rental units. The EDA would be responsible to provide assistance based on the difference of the current rent and the new rent of a comparable home or 30% of the tenants income whichever is greater. The EDA would also be responsible for moving expenses and utility hook up charges. Based on this information it can be estimated that is could cost a maximum of$30,000 per household for relocation. With this in mind,Jennifer Bergman prepared an estimate of what it could cost to purchase the homes along Long Lake Road/Ardan Ave. (See attached memo). If the City was interested in pursuing the purchase of these homes based on this cost estimations my recommendation would be to discuss a partnership with the owner. If the owners are interested in selling at some point in the future, we could request that they not renew the leases and then have them make a proposal to the City for purchase of the homes. With this approach the City is not directly responsible for relocation costs but there is still a risk of incurring these costs. Therefore, if you wish to proceed it would be with the understanding that we may need to invest an additional $30,000 in the cost of the house. Staff if looking for direction regarding how to proceed on this matter. • 1 IN T E R OFFICEmEmo• To: Cathy Bennett, Di ctor of Economic Development From: Jennifer Bergm Subject: Information on Cost of Purchasing Rental Properties Date: July 31, 1997 Estimates: Listed below are the estimates for the purchase price and relocation costs for 8271 Long Lake Road and 2510 Ardan Avenue. ii: •iii}iii::.::5::^:•'f.ii:i:i::::::i:i::ili::::::ii: "-': .......::ii::iiiii::i:: r.. :.v......i........iiiiiii:::}::is�::.:: :f{iL::i::::::ii:iii $48,000 $8,000 $30,000 8 .40(,: dan., venu . ::.:.._:::::::. $95,000 $10,000 $30,000 • (Must seal and remove septic) P ) Purchase Price: The table below compares the house that was purchased at 8283 Long Lake Road to the adjacent rental homes located at 8271 Long Lake Road and 2510 Ardan Avenue. The percentage increase from the tax value of the property at 8283 Long Lake Road and the purchase price of the property was 22%. Therefore, using that figure, we could guess that the purchase price of the home at 8271 Long Lake Road would about$48,000, and the purchase price for 2510 Ardan Avenue would be about $95,000. However, I believe that the appraisal on 2510 Ardan Avenue would be considerably lower than$95,000. I would make an estimate closer to $55,000, such as 8283 Long Lake Road, but to be cautious I used the $95,000 figure. • • Cathy Bennett, Director of Economic Development Page 2 •uly3l, 1997 :;:;:S;:;Y:}::i::;:;i}:i:tii:tiiti%::}'i:ti:•i$:::•:::•:}}i;::r•:i%:};ti::i:::::ti{.q:4 ?•:•'•:•:•'}'::•S:•}'•i:<: i: h is>i:ti : ' not:::•:I,ma e :' yid v:::..::•.•:} '... :..•.. ;L ; "' $50,500 $55,000 $45,000 1,384 38,740 i ' `'' trt''' ; at :: _ _ $39,100 624 29,800 ak`± a�•:.' '•..;. ' `" 78 000 704 — — $ 3 8,740 Demolition: The demolition for 8265 Spring Lake Road was $6,300. The demolition for 8283 Long Lake Road was $7,700. I estimated the cost for the demolition of 8271 Long Lake Road at$8,000. The house is smaller than both of the properties we have already demolished. Unless environmental issues must be addressed, I believe that the cost of demolition should not exceed$8,000. W'he house at 2510 Ardan Avenue does have a septic tank and a well. The septic tank is still in use and, Wevhen demolished, would need to be properly sealed. I contacted the Department of Health and they do not have a record of the well abandonment. Therefore,the estimate reflects the cost of sealing both the well and septic. Relocation Costs: I spoke with Sandra Luegge of Evergreen Land Services Company regarding the Relocation Act. Sandra was hired by the City of Mounds View to assist with the relocation of the tenants on Old Highway 8 prior to the road reconstruction. I called her for estimates of the relocating tenants from rental single family homes should the EDA pursue purchasing rental properties. She informed me that the EDA would be responsible for providing relocation assistance to the tenants of the units. Relocation benefits are paid to the tenants based on the difference of the current rent and the rent of the new rental unit or 30% of the tenants income whichever is greater. In addition,the relocation benefits must also include moving costs and utility hook-up charges. The Relocation Act requires that funds be provided for the family to move to a comparable unit;therefore, she stated that relocation of tenants from single family rental homes is the most difficult because of the limited amount of single family rental units. She stated that it is very difficult to give an estimate without knowing detailed information, for example the family's income, the current rent;the size of the unit and the size of the unit needed. She did say, however, that the figure could be anywhere from $8,000 to $30,000. Because the homes are single family rental homes in poor condition, she stated the replacement housing cost will be closer to $30,000. C:♦y Odom :b \\\�� PPOPOSED StTzs • _....._ ._ __ . _ . _ c� N - - - - . _ _��_ --- 3460 g ( I- ---, 3470 8475 / 3466 8490 8467 ? i Item No. /3 Staff Report No.g7-a/77&..s Meeting Date: August 4, 1997 Type of Business: Work Session 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: Discussion of Ordinance No. 602 revising the Wetland Zoning District Date of Report: July 30, 1997 Summary: Staff has prepared revisions to the Wetland Zoning District to address issues raised at your May 5, 1997 worksession. These include distinguishing between wetland buffer and wetland alteration permits, and adding to the list of minor construction projects which would receive administrative, rather than City Council, approval. Discussion: Attached you will find a copy of proposed Ordinance 602, which makes revisions to the Wetland Zoning District. We have placed it on a worksession agenda to give City Council an opportunity • to make comment and ask questions prior to it being heard at a regular meeting. We are also attempting to smooth the transition, and have the current Community Development Director handle questions from City Council on August 4 rather than leaving them to the Planning Associate at the regular meeting on August 11. A public hearing on this ordinance is scheduled for August 11, 1997. The key changes are as follows: Page 2 Creating two types of permits: wetland alteration and wetland buffer permits. Using the term"wetland alteration permit" for all permits, whether they are in the buffer or in the wetland itself, causes some confusion with citizens and applicants and often gives the wrong impression that work will be done in the wetland when it will not. Provision has been made where a project overlaps between the wetland and the buffer that only one permit is required, and it shall be reviewed by the City Council if any of the activities require City Council action. Page 3-5 Standards for Approval of Permits has been reorganized to group items under topics, so the discussion in staff reports of whether or not standards have been met can be done by topic rather than for 21 criteria. • Page 5-6 Standards for Denial of Permits are the same as are now in the ordinance, but are underlined because they have been moved from Section 1010.09. City of Mounds View Staff Report July 30, 1997 Page 2 • Page 6-7 Building and structural additions to a principal building where the addition does not exceed 1264 square feet have been added to items which can be approved by Administrative Authority i.e. Director of Community Development. The revisions also clarify that additions to detached garages, accessory buildings and driveways which do not require a conditional use permit, can be approved by Administrative Authority. Page 8 The considerations in granting approval are stricken because they have been moved from this section to Page 10. Page 10 Clarifies that action by City Council is to be done by resolution, and action by the Director of Community Development by written notice. Page 11 The section on variances and appeals has been changed to address appeals only. Staff feels that it is a duplication of effort to require an applicant to get both a variance and a wetland alteration or wetland buffer permit. The permit procedure substitutes for a variance. Recommendation: •Direct that this ordinance be brought forward for public hearing and first reading on August 11, and for second reading and action on August 25. A public hearing notice has been published for August 11. N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHAREVSPECPROJ\SP017.971SP017.CC2 i • ORDINANCE NO. 602 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO WETLAND ZONING REGULATIONS AND AMENDING TITLE 1000, CHAPTER 1010, SECTIONS 1010.07, 1010.08 and 1010.09 THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 1010.07 Subd. 1 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: Subd. 1. Permit-Required Required Permits: • . . • • . no, .41• •• • •• II . •• .. . • 1 • •• •. I . el .4 . . •• .i . .. . • . I . • • • • • • • • • : :.:: • I • • . • I • ••' A wetland alteration permit or a wetland buffer permit shall be required for any development in a wetland zoning district as provided in Section 1010.08 Subd. 2. Section 2. Section 1010.07 Subd. 3a.(3)(a) and (b) are hereby amended to read as follows: (a) All buildings, including vthci lluut accessory buildings, as defined in Title 1100 of this Code shall be setback at least one hundred feet (100') from a wetland, except as allowed by an approved wetland alteration permit or approved wetland buffer permit as provided in Section 1010.08 . . . ".1 • • • • .11 I .. • • •I .• . .II • ii■ subdivisiod 1104.01(3). Section 3. Section 1010.08 is hereby amended to read as follows: 1010.08: WETLAND ALTERATION PERMITS PERMIT REQUIREMENTS &PROCEDURES Subd. 1. Activities Requiring Permits: The following activities in or upon a wetland zoning district shall requir either a wetland alteration permit or a wetland buffer permit, as provided in Section 1010.08 Subd. 2. a. The digging, dredging, filling, draining or in any way altering or removing any material . from a wetland. Ordinance 602 July 14, 1997 Page 2 b. The alteration of vegetation within the wetland or the destruction of vegetation within the wetland zoning district, except to abate a public nuisance. c. The construction, alteration or removal of any structure. d. The altering of any embankment or ponding area or the changing of the flow of water or ponding capacity. e. The storing of materials which would interfere with the flow of water and/or ponding capacity. f. Disposing of waste materials, including but not limited to demolition debris and yard waste. g. Installation or maintenance of essential services. Subd. 2. Types of Permits Required: The following permits shall be required for any development in a wetland zoning district. • a. Wetland Alteration Permit: No development shall be allowed within that portion of a wetland zoning district which is delineated as a wetland on the Wetland Zoning District Map without first having obtained a wetland alteration permit from the City as provided for in this Section 1010.08 b. Wetland Buffer Permit: No development shall be allowed in the area defined as the wetland buffer area as shown on the Wetland Zoning District Map without first having obtained a wetland buffer permit from the City as provided for in this Section 1010.08 c. Development Overlapping Wetland and Wetland Buffer Area: Authority for Approval with Combinations of Activities Having Different Approval Authorities: Where a proposed development includes area in both the wetland and wetland buffer area, the applicant shall only be required to apply for a wetland alteration permit which shall cover the entire development area. Where a proposed development includes activities subject to City Council approval, and activities subject to administrative approval, the permit shall cover all activities and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council. Subd. 2. Subd. 3. Exceptions to Permit Requirements: a. Emergencies: Upon the declaration of an emergency by the City, emergency work necessary to preserve life or property shall be permitted in a wetland zoning district. • • Ordinance 602 July 14, 1997 Page 3 b. Repairs: Upon application and approval by the City Council, a person may repair or maintain any lawful use of land existing on the effective date hereof. c. Recreation Areas or Parks: Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code to the contrary, a person may develop a Municipally-owned recreation area or park facility on City-owned lands which will involve the development within a wetland zoning district as part of an integrated plan, comprising not less than seventy five(75) acres, where such development would reasonably conserve, preserve and enhance the environment by providing facilities that would protect the public health, safety and welfare. Subd. 4. Standards for Approval of Permits: No permit shall be issued unless the City finds and determines that the proposed development complies with the following standards . .. '.. . . • .. . . • o o.; • ; • • . Approval of either a wetland alteration permit or wetland buffer permit shall constitute approval of a variance to the requirements of this Chapter 1010. • a. Minimum Alteration in Ecological and Hydrological Characteristics: A minimum alteration of a wetland may be allowed when necessary for the use of property but only when it will not have a substantially or significantly adverse effect, as determined by the City, upon the ecological and hydrological characteristics of the wetland. However, in no case shall the restrictions set out below in Section 1010.08 Subd. 3.a.(1)-(6)be exceeded. Since the extent of alteration which can be permitted is limited, the City, when considering a permit application, shall consider equal apportionment of alteration opportunity. The alteration opportunity within the wetland shall be allocated among property owners in proportion to the area of wetland located within each property. (1) Any alteration shall not cause a reduction in the flood storage capacity of the wetland. Flood storage capacity shall be determined by analysis of the runoff from the entire developed wetland drainage district resulting from both the 2-year and 100-year frequency, 24-hour SCS Type I distribution storms. (2) An alteration shall not reduce the existing water quality enhancement value of a wetland under conditions of ultimate development, during both the 2-year and 100-year frequency, 24-hour SCS Type I distribution storms. Water quality enhancement value of a wetland shall be determined using methods approved by the City. (3) Any alteration shall not reduce the existing wildlife habitat value of a wetland • as measured using methods approved by the City. 14.)(5) Alterations shall be carried out so as to minimize the impact on vegetation. Ordinance 602 S July 14, 1997 Page 4 Removal of vegetation within a wetland zoning district shall be permitted only when reasonably required for the placement of structures and use of property. ( )(6) Alterations shall not adversely affect the water flow characteristics within the wetland as determined by the City. ((14) Storm water runoff from a development may be directed to the wetland when in conformance with the Local Water Management Plan' and only when substantially, as determined by the Council, free of sediment, debris and chemical pollutants and only at rates which will not substantially disturb vegetation or increase turbidity as determined by the City. (7)(15) The proposed action shall not cause storm water runoff from the development to take place at a rate which would exceed the rate or volume of runoff as anticipated by the City's Local Water Management Plane. (1G) The quality of water infiltrated to the water table or aquifer shall remain substantially, as determined by the City, unchanged by the alteration of the site. • (9) No part of any sewage disposal system requiring on-land or in-ground disposal of waste shall be located closer than one hundred feet(100')from the wetland. All on-land or in-ground sewage disposal systems shall meet criteria set out in Minnesota Rule 6, MCAR 4.8040,Individual Sewage Treatment System Standard (10) Waste which would normally be disposed of at a solid or hazardous waste disposal site or which would normally be discharged into a sewage disposal system or sewer shall not be, directly or indirectly, discharged to a wetland. b. Soil Conditions: Control of Erosion: 11)(11) Construction erosion control measures and retention facilities shall be designed to limit soil loss from the development site to not more than five(5)tons per acre per year. Plans and supporting documentation for such measures and facilities shall be developed and approved by the City prior to commencement of construction. X2,)(12) The applicant for the wetland alteration permit or wetland buffer permit shall be required to demonstrate that, after the development is completed, the conditions 1 See Chapter 1302 of this Code. • 2 See Chapter 1302 of this Code. • Ordinance 602 July 14, 1997 Page 5 on site will be stabilized such that the yearly soil loss from the site will not be greater than five-tenths (0.5)ton per acre per year. (3)(13) Sediment and soil loss shall be determined utilizing the Universal Soil Loss Equation as defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service Technical Field Guide, as amended from time to time, as provided for Ramsey Soil and Water Conservation District. (4) Only fill substantially free of chemical pollutants and wastes, as determined by the City, may be used. (5)(19)A building's minimum elevation permitted in a wetland zoning district shall be as defined in the Local Water Management Plana. (6)(2O) No alteration shall be allowed which will endanger the health, safety or welfare of persons or which may result in unusual road maintenance costs or utility line breakages due to soil limitations, including high frost action. • c. (-8) Scheduling of work: Work in the wetland will not be performed during the breeding season of water fowl or fish spawning season. d. (7)Size of area: The size of the altered area shall be limited to the minimum required for the proposed action. -•• •• V 1 - , • .1 • • • ••'1 VIII - , .A • •• • 'I ••• • • II •• , .11 • •I. • .A • ■ • • :: • • •• .• .. (18) All accvssury buildings, as dvfacd in Titly 1100 of this Code, shall by sct back. • •'• • • • ••••• •• := : • • , •• • • •.I • • r • •• II • •• • .I • • it • • all • • I • • 1 • •• •I • . • • • •II • • • . • • I .1 • • • III •• Subd. 5. Standards for Denial of Permits: No wetland alteration or wetland buffer permit may be granted which would allow any use that is prohibited in the zoning district in which the property is located or which will: a. Result in incompatible land uses or which would be detrimental to surface and ground • water resources. 3 See Chapter 1302 of this Code. Ordinance 602 • July 14, 1997 Page 6 b. Increase the financial burdens imposed on the community through increasing floods and overflow of water onto land areas within this City or onto land areas adjacent to Rice Creek. c. Be not in keeping with land use plans and planning objectives for the City or which will increase or cause danger to life or property. d. Be inconsistent with the objectives of encouraging land uses compatible with the preservation of the natural land forms, vegetation and wetlands within the City. e. Include development of land and water areas essential to continue the temporary withholding of rapid runoff of surface water which contributes to downstream flooding or water pollution or development of land and water areas which provide ground water recharge or development which diminishes the land or water which are necessary to carry increased flows of storm water following periods of heavy precipitation. Subd. 4 6. Permit Issuing Authority: The issuing authority for wetland alteration permits shall be as set forth hereinafter: • a. Administrative Issuiiig Authority: (1) The Director of Community Development or designe- a: •• • : . . • . • • ' shall have has the authority to issue wetland alteration or wetland buffer permits which meet the standards in this Chapter iffor the following types of activities: (a) The pests Repair or maintenance of any lawful use of land existing on the effective date hereon. (b) kit, . •• ••• •• .8 • •..: • • • • • •I • • 'I .. (-c)Q) Th Public and/or private utility work on existing facilities. • • • • •. • • Zil • • •2 •• • 1188 I I • • • • .0 I • . • • • • • • •• .1 • A • •• • 1 • •1 • •• • • • • t •• .• • WV ; • •• II • • . • • _ .• impactruporr the-wetlands:. (c) Alterations within the wetland buffer if they do not extend into or create an • adverse impact the adjacent wetland as follows: • Ordinance 602 July 14, 1997 Page 7 (1)(a) Installation and maintenance of fences. (2)(b) Landscaping, and impervious surfaces which surfaces do not exceed 864 square feet (3)(c) Detached garages, accessory buildings and driveways, and additions thereto which do not require a conditional use permit. (d) Grading which does not adversely alter storm water storage capacity, storm water flow direction or runoff intensity. (5)(e) Temporary structures not requiring permanent foundations or pads for support. (6)Building and structural additions to a principal building which addition does not exceed 1264 square feet. • b. City Council Authority: The City Council may issue permits which meet the standards in this Chapter and are beyond the scope of the administrative authority stated in Section 1010.08 Subd. 5.a. . • • to Council or which are appealed to Council after having been reviewed and denied by City staff. Subd. 5 7. Application and Review Procedures: a. Submittal Materials Required: : The following drawings and exhibits may be required with a permit application, unless specific items are waived by the Director of Community Development based on the scope of the proposed development: a (1) The name and address of the subdivider, developer and owner or any other party of interest. b: (2) A legal description of the proposed site with a map showing its location with indications of private access roads and existing or proposed public roadways within and surrounding the development site. c (3) A full and adequate description of all phases of the operation and/or • proposed physical changes. d (4) A soil survey map of the proposed development site. A topographic map of the development area with contour information at Ordinance 602 July 14, 1997 Page 8 two foot(2') intervals or spot elevations at two hundred foot (200') intervals and at a horizontal scale of one inch to one hundred feet (1"=100') or larger. f. (6) A detailed site plan of the proposal showing: it. (a) information on existing drainage and vegetation of all lands within the site and to a distance of five hundred feet (500') surrounding the site or to the wetland drainage district boundary, whichever is shorter. b the location of existing and future man-made features within the site and to a distance of five hundred feet (500') surrounding the site or to the wetland drainage district boundary, whichever is shorter. proposed drainage, grading and landscaping r. (7) The time period for commencement and completion of the development, including time for staging of development, if applicable. 4111 al Design specification and plan for all sediment and erosion control measures as well as all grading and drainage appurtenances and practices. lc:(9) Engineering data related tocomputations of existing and proposed hydrology, water quality, hydraulics and soil loss. + (10) Such additional information as necessary to evaluate the permit application. Subd-67-eunsiderations in Granting of Approval. In cunsidcration of an application fur the . .4 • •• .• • .• • • • 1 • . • • • • • • . • • 1 .• . 1 .• • . I I • • is , r.. • .A • ••• • • • •• . •. • • . • • • — • •• • .. .• • .. • '• • 1 . • •1 • '• • .•, • I .•1 •.• • • • •• • I • • • I . • Including. a. The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprthens ve Plan and the i,npai.,t of the I • •• • . • - •• •• • • • •. •t .. b. The impact ufthepiuposed wetland alteration on the surface waterturage, fish and • b. Subd. 7. Processing of Application: • Ordinance 602 July 14, 1997 Page 9 a7Lu The permit application shall be submitted to the City. The City shall process the permit application according to the provisions of this Section 1010.08 subdivision 4 hereof. For permits requiring City Council action. the Community Development Department shall prepare a report and recommendation for consideration by City Council prior to the City Council taking action on the permit application. The Community Development Department or the City Council may refer the permit application to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its recommendation prior to action being taken on the permit application. orthe-City .11 • • •• .1 • •• • . • • . . • • I . . • 1 • V • . • • • • •' • • •• • I . II. . . . . : • V .' '. .1 • ' ' :: • • . 1 '•.1 •. ( A wetland alteration permit may be processed concurrently coextensively with any other application for use permit approval that may be required under other provisions of the Municipal Code. c. Subd. 8. Action on Permit;Conditions: • a:f 1 Compliance with standards: No wetland alteration _ ) p or wetland buffer permit shall be approved except it meet the standards set forth in Section 1010.08 Subd. 4. A permit may be approved subject to conditions reasonable and necessary to ensure compliance with the requirementr contained-in Nubdivisiou 1, 3 and G hereof aforementioned standards in Subd. 4. Such conditions may, among other matters: (al(-1-) Provide for the enhancement of wtticu d storm water storage, fish and wildlife habitat, and water quality enhancement functions of wetland zoning districts; O.)(2) Provide for enhancement of recreation and education opportunities in wetland zoning districts; (c) (5) Limit the size, kind or character of the proposed work; (d)(4) Require the construction of storm water detention facilities or other structures; (5) Require replacement of vegetation; • f.D(6) Establish required monitoring or maintenance procedures, including the payment of costs for such procedures; Ordinance 602 • July 14, 1997 Page 10 • (g)(7) Stage the work over time and increments of land to be developed; OAS-) Require the alteration of the site design to insure buffering; (9) Require posting of sufficient surety to guarantee conformance to the purposes of the permit and all laws regulating the activity; a peifoitummy bond; or Q)(10) Require the conveyance to the City of certain lands or interest therein. b- (2) Modification of Zoning Requirements: The dimensional requirements of the underlying zoning ordinance may be modified in furtherance of the purposes of this Chapter. (3) Considerations in Granting of Approval: The City shall consider all relevant factors specified in other sections of this Chapter, as well as the following: a. The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive Plan and the • impact of the proposed use on the wetlands in the surrounding area. b. The impact of the proposed wetland alteration on the surface water storage. fish and wildlife habitat and water quality enhancement values of the wetland. c (4) Action by Resolution or by Written Notice: Action on permits shall be by the City Council or by the Director of Community Development, as provided in Section 1010.08 Subd. 6. A permit approval may include such terms and conditions as is deemed necessary by the approval body to protect the public health, safety and welfare and to meet the standards set forth in this Chapter 1010. For permits requiring City Council action, the City Council shall take action to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a permit application by resolution. For permits allowing action by the Director of Community Development, the director shall notify the applicant in writing of the decision on the permit. Upon approval of the application for the pvruut, the City Council may establish such tams and • • • , � .• • • . • • N ., • • , I . • • • •• • I •• , .A • "5, • • • • •• • 1 ., '.S • .1 • •• . ., ' •• •• 1 • • ;$ • •, • • • • ., ., . • • ., • ••, •• • :. . ' • • • • • • . .V . . . • Ordinance 602 July 14, 1997 Page 11 . 1. .• . 1• • •.1 • . 1 1 1 • • • • I , • •. 1 . • • • ' • .. tCrIus aad conditions, in addition to tlius<r spcLifn,ally cityd-in this Chapter or Title 1100 uf I •1 , .1. • .1 • 9 I • 1 1 1 1 .1 Y/ • .1 • •• • - -. •• '1 • III, • II • • •1.1 ./ • / • .1 • 1. 1• • 1 1 .1 • .11 . • 11 . 1 • • • • 1006.06 of this Titic may also by required. Subd. 9. Subd. 8. Expiration;Extensions and Renewals: A permittee shall begin the work authorized by the permit within ninety(90) days from the date of issuance of the permit unless otherwise set forth in the permit. The permittee shall complete the work authorized by the permit within the time limit specified on the permit which shall in no event exceed more than twelve(12) months from the date of issuance unless such time limit is extended by the eotmcil approval authority. The permittee shall notify the City at least forty eight (48) hours prior to the commencement of work. Should the work not be commenced as specified herein, the permit shall become void. (Ord. 505, 4-27-92) Section 4. Section 1010.09 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: 1010.09: APPEALS: Subd. 1. Appli.,ation for Varianct or Appyal An applicant may appeal the denial of a wetland alteration or wetland buffer permit by the Director of Community Development to the City Council. An appeal shall be filed in writing no more than 14 days following the date of the decision by the Community Development Director. The appeal shall be schedule for consideration by City Council at the next regular City Council meeting which is at least seven days from the date of the appeal Consideration of appeals shall be in accordance with the standards and procedures set forth in this Chapter 1010. A decision by the City Council shall be final. -•-• • .. ; . •• • •.1 •.1 • • •• •1 • •11 • .11 I I• . •1 • 9 I 1.1 • • ./ .1 •• •.1 .1 • • • p •1 • •• , •.•. • .1 • •• .1 • • • 1 • ;1' • '1 • ;1 1. .1 .. ; . . . • . . . . .. ; ..', • • 1 11 • 1. 1 .1 . 1 9 •• I ..•1 • 1 • 1 .1 9 • • •1 . -1 •1 • waterresourcesT b. Increazy the-financial buy dens imposed on the ,mmunity the ough incl yasing-f oods-and i • • • .• • . . • • .1 • •1 . •• 1 1 • • 9 9 • I •1 - . .• . - • Creek. • Ordinance 602 • July 14, 1997 Page 12 c. Be not in keeping-with land use plans and pla►„,ns VbJectives fin the City or v•hicli will -�i . • . • • .1 • 11 • • •• • • . • •, • I • •• •• • 9 •• . =J1 .t • • 9 I. • •• • • . • • • • .1 •1 • • , • •_ • • .1 1 •• •1 • ••'• 11 • ' • e. Include dvvelopafent of land and *atcl areas ussential to continue the tcinpo,aiy "• 99199 9 • • • • • .1 • .1 • • . .1 •w •• 1 • • • • •4 •• • ••• • • • • • •• I • t II I .1 • • • . •• 1 .t .1 • • .1 • I • • • • •• • • ••. • • •• I • •• • . • • 9 • • • • ••. • • •• •1 I . • I I • ••1 .1 .11 • • • • III . •• 1 .1 , 'I • ••• • • • I• • • • .11 • • I T41I I • • • • • • , • .1 .1 • • 'I I • • •• w • • I I • • • • 1 i • • I • •• 9 affvt,ted land and water areas. (01d. 505, 4-27-92) Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this day of , 1997. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this day of , 1997. Duane McCarty, Mayor ATTEST Charles S. Whiting, City Clerk-Administrator APPROVED AS TO FORM: Robert Long, City Attorney N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\SPECPROJ\SP017.97\WETLAND.ORD 1 - Item No. 14 Staff Report No. Meeting Date: August 4, 1997 • Type of Business: Work Session 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: Discussion of Request for TIF Funding to develop a specific housing strategy as part of the Comprehensive Plan Update and to meet the Metropolitan Council's deadline for updating the City's Housing Action Plan Date of Report: August 3, 1997 Summary: The continued health of the City's housing stock and addressing housing issues has been a high priority item in Mounds View. The City has a sizeable supply of pre-and post-war, single family housing which is now approaching or exceeds 40 years of age. The City also has 28%of its housing stock in rental units and 12%of its housing stock in manufactured homes. Goals,policies and action steps related to maintaining and rehabilitating existing units, as well as replacing substandard housing stock appears in the adopted 1982 Comprehensive Plan,in Mounds View Focus 2000 Implementation Plan from September 1994, and in the City's 1996 Housing Action Plan for the Liveable Communities Act. iStaff is requesting approval from City Council for an allocation of$15,000 from tax increment funding to hire professional services to prepare the following: ■ an update of the Housing Action Plan by December, 1997 as is required by Minnesota Statutes • a handbook of specific programs to address the most pressing issues related to housing in the community, and identification of funding sources Discussion: Staff regards the following as the most pressing issues related to housing in the community: • Rehabilitation and improvement of the smaller pre-and post-war, single family houses, built prior to 1960. According to the City's Housing Action Plan prepared in 1996,there are 1308 single family homes in Mounds View or 47%of the single family housing stock which were built prior to 1960. These homes are approaching 40 years of age. They are also smaller and have less amenities than homes which are being built on the fringe of the metro area. In order to keep these homes from deteriorating or becoming obsolete, reinvestment is necessary. Homes need to be rehabilitated and improved. The idea of developing a City-sponsored housing rehabilitation program has been discussed. One of the expectations for the housing replacement program is that the income derived from reselling the lots • acquired through this program will be used to create a revolving loan fund for housing rehabilitation. Since the housing replacement program is in its infancy,we do not yet have income from lot sales. City of Mounds View Staff Report August 3, 1997 Page 2 Also the income is expected to be modest in comparison to the number of homes needing rehabilitation • and/or improvement. Staff feels what is needed at this time is to mount an aggressive effort to identify funding sources, and ways to tap them, in order to implement a more ambitious single family rehabilitation and improvement program in Mounds View. Funding sources could include Community Development Block Grant (administered by Ramsey County) and the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. Other sources may exist. Expectations of Consultant: The consultant would locate all possible funding sources,identify for City Council and staff what steps need to be taken to gain access to these funds, and prepare sample forms and procedures for operating a revolving fund. The consultant may be asked to make a presentation to the I-35W Corridor Coalition to identify ways in which a cooperative effort might gain access to more funding sources. Staff would be responsible for preparing grant applications and liaison with the funding agencies, unless City Council wanted to include this work as Phase 2 of the consultant contract. • Smaller scale rental projects. Mounds View has a variety of rental housing developments. Staff has observed,however, a key factor in whether a rental project is well-maintained is whether there is professional on-site management. Having on-site management usually depends on the scale of the project. What staff has observed is that the smaller rental projects, such as duplexes,fourplexes, and apartment buildings that have less than 50 units either have no manager on site,have a"tenant-manage?'that fields telephone calls for the • management company and collects rent checks, or have a"owner-manager"who is living in one of the units. Tenant-managers and owner-managers often do not have any training in how to screen tenants or deal with tenant problems. These properties usually show signs of deferred maintenance, and in some cases, are declining in value. Small rental projects do not generate sufficient income to allow the owners to hire on-site professional management. Staff is very concerned about the decline in the condition of some of these projects, especially the fourplexes on Hillview and Quincy. It is a constant battle to keep these projects in good repair through the inspection program. We feel it is time to do some"outside the box"thinking about how to deal with small scale rental projects. Should the City form a management cooperative,which would provide professional management for these fourplexes or smaller-scale rental projects in general. Property owners would join the cooperative and pay a fee,thus obtaining the benefit of professional management. Should the City provide seed money for the first five years, and allow the property owners' fee to be deferred, with the expectation that professional management will lead to higher rents and more cash flow for the owners? Should the City encourage the conversion of these fourplexes into housing cooperatives or condominiums to create more stability and pride of ownership? Should the City look at redeveloping this area? Should the City establish a requirement that property owners go through a property management training program and be licensed before they can rent units to tenants in the City of Mounds View? Expectations of Consultant: The consultant would evaluate the smaller scale rental projects in Mounds View, and conduct a series of brainstorming sessions with staff City Council, and property owners to develop a series of programs to address the management and maintenance problems which tend to • ! . ' City of Mounds View Staff Report August 3, 1997 Page 3 . afflict these projects. The consultant would also do research on what other communities are doing City regarding this issue, and would identify sources of funding. Once the City Council had selected the most promising ideas,the consultant would prepare the necessary forms and procedures for implementing the preferred programs, although this work may need to be added as a Phase 2 task to the contract. • Manufactured home parks. As City Council is aware,there are many problems with housing maintenance in the manufactured home parks in Mounds View. There is also a desire on the part of park residents, especially in Towns Edge Terrace,to get these problems addressed. Staff is concerned about the long run prognosis for these parks. There is a real question how much longer some of the manufactured homes will last,given their vintage. Once again, we feel that some"outside the box"thinking and brainstorming is needed to develop specific program ideas on how to assure this part of the City's housing stock remains healthy or suitable housing alternatives are available. For example, should the City facilitate a resident buy-out which would turn over the park and its management to the residents? Should a program be developed that would assist residents in replacing their existing, older manufactured home with a new home? Could the manufactured home parks be included in the housing replacement program? Expectations of Consultant: Similar to the previous item, i.e. the consultant would develop a series of options or program ideas,through brainstorming with City Council, staff, park residents and park owners and doing research on what other communities have done. Funding sources would be • identified. Once the City Council had selected the most promising ideas,the consultant would prepare the necessary forms and procedures for implementing the preferred programs, although this work may need to be added as a Phase 2 task to the contract. Recommendation: Direct staff to prepare an Request for Proposal for professional services to update the City's Housing Action Plan and to prepare a handbook of specific housing programs to address the most pressing housing issues in Mounds View. The amount of the budget is estimated at$15,000,to be paid from tax increment funding. The RFP and specific approval of tax increment funding would be presented for action at a regular Economic Development Authority meeting. Staff feels it is very important to move forward to develop specific housing programs and funding sources to address the three areas noted in this report. There is also a State requirement that the City's Housing Action Plan be updated this year. Given workload and the need for expertise in the housing program design, we feel that the most appropriate approach to deal with these two items is to hire professional services. . \f/k,U1A4–N__.— Pamela heldon, Community Development Director • N:\DATA\USERS\PAMS\SHARE\SPECPROJ\SP053.97\HOUSACr.CC1 — Y ANTHONY PROPERTIES • Real Estate Development &Investment 12770 Coit Road,Suite 1170 • Dallas,Texas 75251 July 28, 1997 (972)991-4484•Fax(972)991-4494 Mr. Charles S. Whiting Via: Fax& Airborne Express City Clerk- Administrator City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 Re: Mounds View, Minnesota Dear Chuck, As you know, Anthony Properties has worked through the City of Mounds View to successfully rezone the O'Neil tract, south of City Hall. We are now working in concert with the City and MNDOT to obtain approval for a loop road which should connect Edgewood Avenue to Long Lake Road. Shorty after obtaining MNDOT approval for our signalized intersection we hope to begin construction. • Through our development efforts to date, I believe that we have developed an excellent working relationship with the City, City Council and city staff. Recognizing our past achievements and track record of previous developments, I ask that Anthony Properties be named as the designated developer to work with the City on an exclusive basis for a nine month term to develop the Mounds View Community Center(Old Bel-Rae Ballroom property). We understand that the City hopes to realize tax increments financing(TIF) benefits from this property and we are confident that we can facilitate this. We further believe that there are benefits to developing this tract in harmony with the theatre property and city property associated with the realignment of Edgewood. Finally, we request an agreement which addresses previous discussions of swapping our property to be dedicated as part of the loop road for the abandoned triangle of City property bounded by Highway 10, the current Edgewood Avenue and proposed new Edgewood Avenue. We will be glad to provide additional information or references at your request. Sincerely yours z:: .......\..o.,_za_"_..A_. s..__________, R. Jay An • RJA/clw