Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2010/08/09CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MOUNDS VIEW CITY HALL Monday, August 9, 2010 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL: Flaherty, Stigney, Hull, Mueller, Gunn 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 5. PUBLIC INPUT: Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes. 6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A. Beyond the Yellow Ribbon – Presentation by Lt. Col. Barb O’Reilly 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. 7:05pm Public Hearing for Select Senior Living Housing Program B. 7:10pm Public Hearing to Consider a PUD, Development Review and Major Subdivision for the Coventry Senior Living Development at 2320-40 County Highway 10 and 5260 O’Connell Drive C. 7:15pm Public Hearing to Consider an Appeal for a Variance Request by Eichi, Inc. to Allow Reduced Lot Widths in a Wetland District on the Longview Estates property D. Resolution 7659, Approving the Purchase of a New Fuel Pump and Tank Monitor and Rescind Resolution 7651 E. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 849, an Ordinance Implementing a Franchise Fee on Center Point Energy Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View. F. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 850, an Ordinance Implementing a Franchise Fee on Xcel Electric and Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View. 8. CONSENT AGENDA A. Licenses for Approval B. Resolution 7654, Approving Continued Participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act, and Establishing New Affordable and Life-Cycle Housing Goals for the Years 2011 through 2020 C. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, August 23, 2010 at 7:05pm to Consider a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversize Garage at 8191 Spring Lake Road August 9, 2010 City Council Agenda Page 2 8. CONSENT AGENDA - Continued D. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, August 23, 2010 at 7:10pm to consider Ordinance 849 Implementing a Franchise Fee on Center Point Energy Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View E. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, August 23, 2010 at 7:15pm to consider Ordinance 850 Implementing a Franchise Fee on Xcel Energy Electric and Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View F. Resolution 7657, Approving a New Contract to Provide Section 8 Housing Inspection Services for the Metropolitan Council for the Years 2010 through 2015 G. Resolution 7656, Acceptance of Office of Traffic Safety In-Car Video Camera Grant Award 9. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. June 28, 2010, City Council Minutes B. July 12, 2010, City Council Minutes C. July 26, 2010, City Council Minutes 11. REPORTS A. Reports of Mayor and Council B. Reports of Staff 1. Please Announce: Primary Election, Tuesday, August 10th, Mounds View Community Center, 7am to 8pm C. Reports of City Attorney 12. Next Council Work Session: Tuesday, September 7, 2010, at 7 p.m. Next Council Meeting: Monday, August 23, 2010, at 7 p.m. 13. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MOUNDS VIEW CITY HALL Monday, August 9, 2010 7:00 p.m. Revised as of August 6, 2010 at 1pm 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL: Flaherty, Stigney, Hull, Mueller, Gunn 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 5. PUBLIC INPUT: Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes. 6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A. Beyond the Yellow Ribbon – Presentation by Lt. Col. Barb O’Reilly 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. 7:05pm Public Hearing for Select Senior Living Housing Program B. 7:10pm Public Hearing to Consider a PUD, Development Review and Major Subdivision for the Coventry Senior Living Development at 2320-40 County Highway 10 and 5260 O’Connell Drive C. 7:15pm Public Hearing to Consider an Appeal for a Variance Request by Eichi, Inc. to Allow Reduced Lot Widths in a Wetland District on the Longview Estates property D. Resolution 7659, Approving the Purchase of a New Fuel Pump and Tank Monitor and Rescind Resolution 7651 E. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 849, an Ordinance Implementing a Franchise Fee on Center Point Energy Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View. F. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 850, an Ordinance Implementing a Franchise Fee on Xcel Electric and Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View. G. Resolution 7660, Initiating the Process to Fill the Vacant PSO Position Due to the Resignation of the Current PSO 8. CONSENT AGENDA A. Licenses for Approval B. Resolution 7654, Approving Continued Participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act, and Establishing New Affordable and Life-Cycle Housing Goals for the Years 2011 through 2020 C. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, August 23, 2010 at 7:05pm to Consider a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversize Garage at 8191 Spring Lake Road D. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, August 23, 2010 at 7:10pm to consider Ordinance 849 Implementing a Franchise Fee on Center Point Energy Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View E. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, August 23, 2010 at 7:15pm to consider Ordinance 850 Implementing a Franchise Fee on Xcel Energy Electric and Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View F. Resolution 7657, Approving a New Contract to Provide Section 8 Housing Inspection Services for the Metropolitan Council for the Years 2010 through 2015 G. Resolution 7656, Acceptance of Office of Traffic Safety In-Car Video Camera Grant Award 9. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. June 28, 2010, City Council Minutes B. July 12, 2010, City Council Minutes C. July 26, 2010, City Council Minutes 11. REPORTS A. Reports of Mayor and Council B. Reports of Staff 1. Please Announce: Primary Election, Tuesday, August 10th, Mounds View Community Center, 7am to 8pm C. Reports of City Attorney 12. Next Council Work Session: Tuesday, September 7, 2010, at 7 p.m. Next Council Meeting: Monday, August 23, 2010, at 7 p.m. 13. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MOUNDS VIEW CITY HALL Monday, August 9, 2010 7:00 p.m. Revised as of August 6, 2010 at 1pm 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL: Flaherty, Stigney, Hull, Mueller, Gunn 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 5. PUBLIC INPUT: Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes. 6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A. Beyond the Yellow Ribbon – Presentation by Lt. Col. Barb O’Reilly 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. 7:05pm Public Hearing for Select Senior Living Housing Program B. 7:10pm Public Hearing to Consider a PUD, Development Review and Major Subdivision for the Coventry Senior Living Development at 2320-40 County Highway 10 and 5260 O’Connell Drive C. 7:15pm Public Hearing to Consider an Appeal for a Variance Request by Eichi, Inc. to Allow Reduced Lot Widths in a Wetland District on the Longview Estates property D. Resolution 7659, Approving the Purchase of a New Fuel Pump and Tank Monitor and Rescind Resolution 7651 E. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 849, an Ordinance Implementing a Franchise Fee on Center Point Energy Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View. F. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 850, an Ordinance Implementing a Franchise Fee on Xcel Electric and Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View. G. Resolution 7660, Initiating the Process to Fill the Vacant PSO Position Due to the Resignation of the Current PSO 8. CONSENT AGENDA A. Licenses for Approval B. Resolution 7654, Approving Continued Participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act, and Establishing New Affordable and Life-Cycle Housing Goals for the Years 2011 through 2020 August 9, 2010 City Council Agenda Page 2 8. CONSENT AGENDA - Continued C. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, August 23, 2010 at 7:05pm to Consider a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversize Garage at 8191 Spring Lake Road D. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, August 23, 2010 at 7:10pm to consider Ordinance 849 Implementing a Franchise Fee on Center Point Energy Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View E. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, August 23, 2010 at 7:15pm to consider Ordinance 850 Implementing a Franchise Fee on Xcel Energy Electric and Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View F. Resolution 7657, Approving a New Contract to Provide Section 8 Housing Inspection Services for the Metropolitan Council for the Years 2010 through 2015 G. Resolution 7656, Acceptance of Office of Traffic Safety In-Car Video Camera Grant Award 9. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. June 28, 2010, City Council Minutes B. July 12, 2010, City Council Minutes C. July 26, 2010, City Council Minutes 11. REPORTS A. Reports of Mayor and Council B. Reports of Staff 1. Please Announce: Primary Election, Tuesday, August 10th, Mounds View Community Center, 7am to 8pm C. Reports of City Attorney 12. Next Council Work Session: Tuesday, September 7, 2010, at 7 p.m. Next Council Meeting: Monday, August 23, 2010, at 7 p.m. 13. ADJOURNMENT Item No: 06A Meeting Date: August 9, 2010 Type of Business: Special Order of Business Administrator Review : ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Desaree Crane, Assistant City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Beyond the Yellow Ribbon – Presentation by Lt. Col Barb O’Reilly Lt. Col Barb O’Reilly would like to address the City Council on the Beyond the Yellow Ribbon Program. Attached is information regarding the program. Further information can be found on their website at www.beyondtheyellowribbon.org. Respectfully submitted, ____________________ Desaree Crane Item No:7B Meeting Date: August 9, 2010 Type of Business: Public Hearing Administrator Review: _________ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Introduction & First Reading of Ordinance 848, Rezoning to a PUD, Resolution 7655, Consideration of a Development Review and Preliminary Plat for the proposed “Coventry Senior Living” Housing Development on County Highway 10; Planning Case MU2010-001 Introduction: Coventry Senior Living, represented by Greg Johnson, has submitted a planning application for a 95-unit senior housing development on three lots at 2340 County Highway 10 (“The Car Wash”) and the two adjacent vacant lots to the southwest. The building would have 18 independent living units, 45 assisted living units, 16 high-acuity units, and 16 memory care units. The developer/applicant has purchase agreements to buy the properties. This proposal involves three planning actions: 1. Rezone three properties from B-3, Highway Business and R-1 Single Family to PUD, Planned Unit Development 2. Major Subdivision to combine three lots into one parcel (2-steps - Preliminary Plat and Final Plat) 3. Development Review of the overall site plan Background: As you know, Select Senior Living has been trying to build a senior housing building on County Highway 10 and Groveland Road for the last couple of years. Due to the collapse of the financial markets, they have not been successful so far in securing financing for their project. Recently an opportunity presented itself to a previous member of the Select Senior Living project to build the senior housing on a different site in Mounds View. Coventry Senior Living LLC was then formed with an additional developer, and the owner of The Car Wash at 2340 County Highway 10 wants to partner with them on this new site. The development site includes three parcels with an area totaling approximately 2.18 acres. County Highway 10 runs along the northeast side and O’Connell Drive runs along the southwest side of the site. The three parcels involved have mixed zoning designations - 2320 and 2340 County Highway 10 are zoned B-3, Highway Business, and 5260 O’Connell Drive is zoned R-1, Single-Family Residential. 2340 County Highway 10 currently has a self-serve car wash on the site, and the other two parcels are vacant. The immediate area consists of single-family homes, an apartment building, the vacant commercial “Premium Stop” lot, and directly across County Highway 10 is the Saturn/Motor Trend auto dealership. Coventry Senior Living Staff Report August 9, 2010 Page 2 REZONING DISCUSSION: The applicant is requesting to rezone the properties located at 2320 and 2340 County Highway 10 (B-3 Highway Business) and 5260 O’Connell Drive (R-1 Single Family). At over two acres, this project qualifies to rezone to a Planned Unit Development for senior housing. The city rezones properties by ordinance. This means that the City Council will hold two readings of the ordinance in order to approve the zoning change. After Council approval, the ordinance goes into effect 30 days after the City publishes the ordinance in the newspaper. Rezoning Criteria: Chapter 1125 of the Mounds View Zoning Code addresses rezoning requests. The procedure and conditions of approval are the same as for conditional use permits, which means the Planning Commission is to consider possible and potential adverse effects of the requested rezoning. The Planning Commission shall make findings of fact and make a recommendation to the City Council based upon the review of potential adverse effects and the findings of fact. Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan: According to the Comprehensive Plan, the City has designated the area as Mixed-Use PUD, planned unit development. This is defined as land containing a building or buildings with significant amounts of residential uses in combination with commercial and/or office uses. By using the Mixed-Use PUD designation in the Comprehensive Plan, the City has more options for the allowed uses.. Sites with this designation could be developed as planned unit developments (PUD) to allow flexibility if the project meets the PUD criteria. An important component of the Comprehensive Plan, the Housing Element, has goals and policies toward maintaining and improving the quality and diversity of the existing housing stock and providing infill-housing opportunities where both possible and practical. The proposed project would help promote a greater diversity of housing choices in the City, and help the City meet it’s housing goals as required by the Metropolitan Council. Geographical Area: The subject area proposed for redevelopment currently consists of a car wash and two vacant lots. Adjacent on the northwest end (5284 Greenfield) is a 17-unit apartment building, and the city- owned vacant “Premium Stop” site. The properties to the southwest of the subject parcels are zoned R-1, single family residential, and are developed as such. The City expects the owners of the five single-family homes south of this development site that front County Highway 10 to redevelop their properties in the future (2310 County Highway 10 is scheduled for demolition in August). Directly across County Highway 10 is the Saturn/Motor Trend auto dealership. County Highway 10 properties tend to be developed with more intense land uses, whether commercial or residential, than in other parts of the city. Depreciation: The question of depreciation is a difficult one to answer with any quantifiable certainty. Most studies that examine property value impacts of development generally find little correlation between a well designed project and subsequent property values. While property values may not depreciate as a result of the development, one can argue that quality of life for the existing residents that would be adjacent to the project could be impacted. From the perspective of tax base and market values, the rezoning would promote a substantial increase in market value at the site, increasing from the present approximate valuation of $819,800 to an estimated $12,000,000. Coventry Senior Living Staff Report August 9, 2010 Page 3 Demonstrated Need for Such a Use: The applicant wants the City to rezone the properties to allow for senior housing. This type of housing is under-represented in the City’s housing demographic, and is in high demand state-wide. The primary housing option now in the City is single family detached with higher-density rental housing and manufactured homes second and third respectively. There are currently three senior housing buildings in Mounds View, but none offer assisted living or memory care units. The research done by Select Senior Living has shown there is a need for this type of senior housing in the city. The requested rezoning to PUD would not be out of character for the County Highway 10 corridor and would not be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Most of the commercial and light industrial property along County Highway 10 that is south of this site is zoned PUD. The City has anticipated a mix of housing and commercial / office development in this area. The proposed development that would be permitted via the requested rezoning would increase the market value of the subject area from $819,800 to over $12,000,000. While enhanced market value is desirable, the Council needs to determine if the potential use allowed by the proposed change would be appropriate for the subject area. It is the belief of the applicant that this type of housing is in demand and that it would be a positive addition to the City’s housing stock and to the City as a whole. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DISCUSSION: Chapter 1006 of the Mounds View City Code requires that any new development project larger than one or two family dwelling units must obtain approval of a development review. The purpose of a development review is to allow the Planning Commission and City Council to evaluate proposed development in terms of its consistency with City Codes and other requirements and to ascertain and mitigate any potential impacts to the adjoining properties and the community as a whole. The Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council, which then acts upon the request. Building Design and Materials: The plans indicate that the building will be three-story with an underground garage. The building elevations show a mix of siding styles with stone and/or brick accents on the exterior of the buildings. The plan has the driveway access and main front entrance facing County Highway 10. The building design is a residential style with a peaked roof line, instead of a flat- roofed, more commercial-looking building. Parking: This development is proposed to be a senior housing PUD, which has its own set of parking requirements: (a) Independent living = 1 space per unit with half of the spaces enclosed (b) Assisted living = 0.5 spaces per unit (c) Nursing homes and memory care = 1 space for every 4 beds (d) Facility staff = 1 space for every employee on the largest shift The proposed parking shown with the concept plan shows a total of 63 parking spaces – 23 open spaces and 40 in the underground garage. Per the City Code, they are required to provide a total of 59 spaces, with 9 of those spaces covered. The preliminary site plan shows 4 more spaces than the total number required by the City Code. There are also 12 “proof of parking” spaces on the south end of the parking lot, by the garage entrance. These spaces were removed in order to allow more green space for pine trees that will be screening for the adjacent home. Coventry Senior Living Staff Report August 9, 2010 Page 4 Setbacks: The proposed development meets the required building setbacks of 30 feet for the front and rear yards and 20 feet for side yards. All parking areas meet the required five-foot setbacks. Access and fire prevention: The site plan shows two driveways accessing County Highway 10. City staff has communicated with Ramsey County about there being two driveways as the county would prefer there only be one driveway for this site. The county agreed to allow two driveways as long as one is only an entrance and the other is only an exit. The site needs the two access points for delivery trucks since there is no room for them to turn around. The developer has accommodated the neighbors’ request of keeping all traffic from this project out of the adjacent residential area by having the driveways on County Highway 10. There are no public or private roads in this development. The rear of the building is easily accessible from O’Connell Drive, and there is one existing fire hydrant located across O’Connell Drive, and another may need to be added to the project site. Sprinkler systems are required for the entire building per state code. The Fire Marshall has reviewed the proposed plans and found no concerns with the proposal. Snow Storage: All snow plowed during the winter must either be removed or stored onsite, and in such a way as to not effect adjoining property owners. If the plowed snow reduces parking on the site, the property owner would be responsible for removing the excess snow from the site. Landscaping Plan: To construct this project, the contractor would clear the entire site and all new vegetation will be planted. The plans show the entire site sodded and landscaped after construction is completed. The City will require that an irrigation system be installed for all landscaped areas. The City’s consultant has reviewed the landscape plan and found it acceptable. The developer and City Staff have talked to the adjacent single-family property owner at 5250 O’Connell Drive about what they would like for screening along the north side of their property. That neighbor was agreeable to pine trees planted along the south end of the property for screening, since they already have a fenced backyard. Signage: According to Chapter 1008.11 of the City Code, senior living facilities are allowed to have up to 100 square feet each of wall and ground monument signage. The developer has indicated to staff that they are planning to have one monument sign along County Highway 10. Lighting: The lighting plan as submitted by the applicant meets the city code requirements regarding glare, light spillage and foot-candle readings. Local Water Management Plan: This planning document guides the City in regards to drainage and storm water management. The development area is located in the EW-11 watershed. The minimum recommended building elevation for this sub-watershed is 875.5 feet. The basement/underground garage floor elevation will be at 900, well above the minimum. The city’s engineering consultant, Bonestroo, has reviewed the proposed stormwater management and grading plans, and the applicant’s engineer is now updating the project plans based on Bonestroo’s comments. Coventry Senior Living Staff Report August 9, 2010 Page 5 Stormwater Drainage Plan: The grading plan illustrates the proposed grading, drainage and erosion control for the development. The parking areas will have curb and gutter, and the developer is opting to use underground stormwater storage rather than adding ponds, although there will be three rain gardens. All of the runoff generated from the development will be contained within the site. The applicant will be responsible for receiving approval from RCWD for this development before the City issues a building permit. RCWD staff has scheduled the review of this permit application for their August Board meeting. Wetlands: There are no wetlands in this development area. Utilities: All utilities on the site would need to be installed underground, per Section 1203.10. Water and sanitary sewer lines are already present in the O’Connell Drive right of way. All utilities would be installed and paid for by the developer. Trail Fee: For all new development along County Highway 10, the City requires the property owner/developer to contribute funds for the future trail system. This development area has 413 feet of County Highway 10 frontage. The past contribution amount for the future trail have been $20 per linear foot. Based on this standard, the suggested trail fee for this project is $8,260. Development Review Summary: With the zoning change to a PUD, the proposed high-density senior housing use on these parcels would be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and would bring new development and tax base to the site. The additional traffic from this project would only be on County Highway 10, and would not be overly excessive even with the high number of units since most of the residents do not drive. The City will need to execute a development agreement with the applicant to ensure all of the specific requirements and conditions of development are satisfied and adhered to. MAJOR SUBDIVISON DISCUSSION (Preliminary Plat Review): Coventry Senior Living has submitted an application for a major subdivision of three parcels at 2320-2340 County Highway 10 and 5260 O’Connell Drive. The proposed 2.18 acre subdivision would replat the three lots into one parcel. Major subdivisions are a two-step process. First, a preliminary plat is submitted and reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council. Then a final plat is submitted after any recommended changes are done, and the City Council makes a final decision. Park Dedication Requirements: The Subdivision Code indicates that any subdivision of land is subject to a park dedication fee. The dedication imposed is intended to mitigate public costs to the parks system associated with land development. The fee shall be reasonable and based on the extent of the development. Due to the increased intensity of the new development by adding 95 new residential units (although the actual increase in park usage by these residents would be minimal), the recommended fee amount would be equal to 10% of the market value of the land. To establish the market value, staff uses Ramsey County determined land values as the basis for dedication computation. Coventry Senior Living Staff Report August 9, 2010 Page 6 The development area comprises 95,084 square feet (2.18 acres) with a 2010 total land value of $675,000. A 10% dedication amount would then be $67,500. The City Council should make the final determination on the fee amounts. Section 1204.02, Subd. 6 of the Mounds View City Code allows the applicant the right to appeal the park dedication fee. Easements: The standard city required easements along the property lines are included on the site plans and would be dedicated by plat. Major Subdivision Summary: This major subdivision request meets City Code requirements. The preliminary plat and title commitments have gone through a legal review by the City Attorney. The payment of the park dedication fee and trail contribution amount will be required before the City signs the final plat for recording with Ramsey County. PLANNING REQUEST SUMMARY The Coventry staff has held two neighborhood meetings about this project – one in March and the second meeting on Monday, July 19, 2010. Several residents attended the first meeting in March and one resident attended the July meeting. At the March neighborhood meeting, attending residents did not like that the facility only accessed O’Connell Drive. They did not want any additional traffic in their neighborhood. The developer then turned the building around and now the traffic for the site only accesses County Highway 10. Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission considered this proposal at their July 21, 2010 meeting. Staff mailed letters to property owners within 500 feet of the project site to notify residents about the meeting even though it was not a public hearing. No residents attended the Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission voted unanimously 6-0 (Stevenson absent) to approve the rezoning, development review and preliminary plat. Public Notice: Public hearing notices were mailed to residents within 500 feet of this project (a larger area than the required 350 feet) and the notice was published in the newspaper. City Staff received one email comment, which is included in this report. Deadline for Action: The city accepted this planning application on July 14, 2010 and in accordance with MN Statute 15.99, a decision shall be made within 60 days of application acceptance. The deadline for action for this request is September 12, 2010 unless the city exercises its option to extend the timeline for another 60 days. Coventry Senior Living Staff Report August 9, 2010 Page 7 Possible Council Actions: After taking testimony from staff and the applicant, and any public comments, the Council may take the following actions related to the request: 1. Hold the First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 848 to rezone three properties to PUD, and Approve Resolution 7655 for the Development Review and Preliminary Plat, as requested. 2. Deny any of the requested actions for rezoning development review or the preliminary plat. The Council should direct staff to draft a resolution of denial with findings appropriate to support the denial. 3. Table the request. If the Council needs additional information before making a decision or if more discussion is needed, the Council can move to table the request until such information has been provided. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Coventry Senior Living proposal. As such, the Council should hold the introduction and first reading of Ordinance 848 and approve Resolution 7655, as noted in #1 above. Respectfully submitted, Heidi Heller Planning Associate Attachments: 1. Comment from resident 2. Zoning Map 3. Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map 4. Aerial View 5. Narrative from the applicant 6. Site Plans 7. Preliminary Plat 8. Ordinance 848 9. Resolution 7655 for Preliminary Plat and Development Review Comment from resident Zoning Map * Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential Comp Plan Future Land Use Map Project area is designated as “Mixed Use PUD” Aerial View Narrative from Applicant ORDINANCE 848 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE REZONING OF 2.18 ACRES OF LAND AT 2320 & 2340 COUNTY HIGHWAY 10 AND 5260 O’CONNELL DRIVE TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Appendix A of the Mounds View Municipal Code entitled “Specific Rezonings” is hereby amended to include reference to the following Ordinance 848. Subdivision 1. Purpose. The Mounds View City Council has determined that to further economic development and organized land use controls that the present zoning classification of certain parcels should be reclassified to allow for a comprehensive redevelopment of the identified parcels consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan. Subdivision 2. The Mounds View City Council has determined that there would be no adverse effects to adjoining properties resulting from the rezoning and that the rezoning would not be detrimental to the community at large. Subdivision 3. Accordingly, the Mounds View City Council approves the rezoning and directs that the City’s official Zoning Map and the zoning classification for the following described parcel be amended as follows: Parcel Address Existing Zoning Designation New Zoning Designation 2320 County Highway 10 PID 08-30-23-31-0070 B-3 PUD 2340 County Highway 10 PID 08-30-23-31-0069 B-3 PUD 5260 O’Connell Drive PID 08-30-23-31-0061 R-1 PUD and as shown on the map attached Exhibit A. Ordinance 848 Page 2 SECTION 2. This ordinance takes effect 30 days after its publication in the official City newspaper. PUBLIC HEARING, INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 9th day of August, 2010. SECOND READING AND ADOPTION by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 23rd day of August, 2010. PUBLICATION DATE: September 2, 2010 _______________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST _______________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) Exhibit A. RESOLUTION NO. 7655 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING THE “COVENTRY SENIOR LIVING” DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, AND PRELIMINARY PLAT AT 2320 & 2340 COUNTY HIGHWAY 10 AND 5260 O’CONNELL DRIVE, MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASES MU2010-001-DE-1 AND MU2010-001-MA-1 WHEREAS, Coventry Senior Living has requested approval of a development review, and preliminary plat for the “Coventry Senior Living” 95 unit senior housing development on the properties at 2320 & 2340 County Highway 10 from B-3, Highway Business, and 5260 O’Connell Drive legally-described as follows: That part of Lot 2, Block 5, EIGENHEER SECOND ADDITION lying southeasterly of the following described line: Commencing at the northwest corner of said Lot 2; thence East along the northerly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 92.00 feet to an iron; thence southeasterly, along the northeasterly line of said Lot 2, a distance of 140.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be herein described; thence southwesterly at a right angle to said northeasterly line a distance of 196.52 feet, more or less, to the southwesterly line of said Lot 2 and there terminating, except that part platted in EIGENHEER THIRD ADDITION, according to the recorded lat thereof, and situate in Ramsey County, Minnesota (PIN 08-30-23-31-0070) And, That part of Lot 2, Block 5, EIGENHEER SECOND ADDITION lying northwesterly of the following described line: Commencing at the northwest corner of said Lot 2; thence East along the northerly line of said Lot 2 a distance of 92.00 feet to an iron; thence southeasterly, along the northeasterly line of said Lot 2, a distance of 140.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be herein described; thence southwesterly at a right angle to said northeasterly line a distance of 196.52 feet, more or less, to the southwesterly line of said Lot 2 and there terminating according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Ramsey County, Minnesota (PIN 08-30-23-31-0069) And, Lot 1, Block 1, EIGENHEER THIRD ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Ramsey County, Minnesota (PIN 08-30-23-31-0061) WHEREAS, The applicant has requested to rezone the above described lands to PUD, Planned Unit Development, and are designated as Mixed-Use on the Comprehensive Plan; and, Resolution 7655 Page 2 WHEREAS, Coventry Senior Living has submitted site plans for a development review for a 95-unit senior housing development that includes independent living, assisted living, high-acuity care and memory care; and, WHEREAS, Coventry Senior Living has submitted a preliminary plat for the major subdivision that would combine the existing three lots into one parcel; and, WHEREAS, the community development staff has reviewed the preliminary plat and finds that it satisfies the minimum subdivision requirements as articulated in Titles 1100 and 1200 of the Mounds View Municipal Code and meets the county platting requirements; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, the subdivision is subject to a park dedication fee in the amount of $67,500; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, the subdivision is subject to a County Highway 10 Trail contribution based on the 413 feet of road frontage in the project area, in the amount of $8,260; and, WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision is NOT within a Wetland District; and, WHEREAS, the development review and preliminary plat has been reviewed by the City, City Attorney and Engineering consultant, and is subject to the applicant or developer receiving permits from Rice Creek Watershed District, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, MN Department of Health, MN Pollution Control Agency, and Ramsey County; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council has reviewed the following documents about this proposal: 1. Zoning Map 2. Aerial View 3. Site Plans – including grading, landscaping and lighting 4. Preliminary Plat 5. Staff Report NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council approves the Development Review submitted by Coventry Senior Living 95-unit facility subject to the following conditions: 1. Coventry Senior Living shall enter into various agreements with the City including (but not limited to) the Developers Agreement. 2. The applicant shall satisfy the requirements of the city’s engineering consultant, Bonestroo, as described in their Preliminary Site Development Plan Review. Resolution 7655 Page 3 3. The applicant shall satisfy all Ramsey County requirements. 4. Coventry Senior Living shall obtain permits from Rice Creek Watershed District, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, MN Department of Health, MN Pollution Control Agency, Ramsey County, and the City before starting construction. 5. All utilities within the development area shall be located underground. 6. No snow storage shall be allowed on site that would reduce the number of parking stalls or drive aisle widths, or extend beyond the property lines. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council approves the Preliminary Plat submitted by Coventry Senior Living subject to the following conditions: 1. Coventry Senior Living shall pay the City a park dedication fee of $67,500 and a County Highway 10 Trail contribution in the amount of $8,260. 2. The applicant shall satisfy all requirements made by the City Attorney as stated in the plat opinion. 3. Coventry Senior Living shall submit a Final Plat no later than 6 months after the date of City Council approval or the Preliminary Plat approval will become null and void. Adopted this 9th day of August, 2010. _____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) 0Item No: 5A ne 16, 2010 Item No: 7C Meeting Date: August 9, 2010 Type of Business: Public Hearing Administrator Review: _________ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing to Consider Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of a Variance for Reduced Lot Sizes in a Wetland District at Longview Estates, PIN 07-30-23-42-0066; Planning Case VR2010-0003 Introduction: The applicants and property owner, Eichi, Inc. (represented by Marty & Paul Harstad), want to subdivide a 7.14-acre parcel into single-family lots that would all front Longview Drive. This property is located in a wetland district. The City requires single-family lots in wetland districts to be a minimum of 125 feet wide and 20,000 square feet in area. These standards are larger than the lot size requirements for single-family lots in non-wetland districts. The Harstads are requesting a variance to allow for reduced lot widths in order to subdivide the property facing Longview Drive into 10 single-family lots. Without a variance, the owner could subdivide the property into a maximum of eight lots fronting Longview Drive. They have not yet applied for the major subdivision as they want to see the outcome of their variance request first. On June 16, 2010, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 (2 Commissioners absent) to deny the variance for reduced lot widths within the proposed Longview Estates subdivision. The Commission did not find sufficient hardship to warrant granting the variance and as such approved Resolution 927-10 denying the variance request. Mr. Harstad has appealed the Planning Commission’s decision to the City Council. Discussion: City Code Chapter 1010 has the Mounds View Wetlands Zoning Regulations: Chapter 1010.07 a. Rationale for Density Standards: The following regulations are required to control the density of development in wetland zoning districts. The purpose of controlling development density is to reduce the financial burdens imposed on the community through rescue and relief efforts occasioned by the occupancy or use of areas subject to periodic flooding, to minimize loss of life, property damage and the losses and risks associated with flood conditions and to minimize the detrimental effects of urbanization on the wildlife habitat, water quality enhancement, recreational and aesthetic values of wetlands. (1) Minimum Lot Size: Twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. (2) Minimum Lot Width: One hundred twenty five feet (125') as measured at the building setback line. (3) Building Setback: (a) All buildings, including accessory buildings, as defined in Title 1100 of this Code, shall be set back at least one hundred feet (100') from the wetland, except as allowed by an approved wetland alteration permit or approved wetland buffer permit as provided in Section 1010.08. (Ord. 602, 8-25-97) Longview Estates Variance Appeal Report August 9, 2010 Page 2 This seven-acre parcel is large enough to be subdivided into more than the requested 10 lots if there were lots fronting on both Longview Drive and Silver Lake Road. The City approved the applicant’s last request for a 15-lot subdivision in 2003, but the approval expired since the applicant did not record the plat with Ramsey County. It should be noted that with the 15-lot subdivision, neither the City nor Ramsey County liked the plan as it would have added seven driveways onto Silver Lake Road. The Harstads request that the City approve a 10-lot subdivision for the site. The propsed plan has the lots running east to west, but with street access only onto Longview Drive. In a wetland district, the minimum lot size is 125 feet wide (as measured at the building setback line) and 20,000 square feet of lot area. While the proposed lots satisfy the expanded lot area requirement, they do not all meet the expanded 125 foot wide requirement. Based on the 125 foot minimum width requirement, only eight lots would be allowed. The Harstads are requesting a variance to have reduced lot widths in order to subdivide the property into 10 lots. All of the proposed lots meet the 20,000 square foot requirement, and two of the lots meet the 125 foot width requirement. The proposed lots range from 90 feet wide to 152.42 feet wide. The Harstads are requesting City approval to have 10 lots because when the City constructed Longview Drive in 1966, 10 water and sewer service stubs were installed for this parcel in anticipation of a subdivision. The Harstad family has owned this property since the early 1970’s. The cost for installing the 10 utility services had been assessed to the property taxes to be paid back over many years. The Harstads received approval from Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) in 2004 for the 15-lot subdivision. The RCWD Board met on June 9, 2010 and determined that the 10-lot subdivision was a better plan for the site with less negative impacts, and as such, approved the proposed 10-lot plan. The builder or contractor also would need to apply to the City for wetland alteration permits for each of the future homes since each of them would be set back less than 100 feet from the wetland. Variance Considerations: For the Council to overturn the Planning Commission’s denial, it must find that, in its opinion, there is a demonstrated, substantial hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive to the property owner. State statutes require that the governing body review a set of specified criteria for each application and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. The City has set these criteria in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardship exists when all of the criteria are met. The individual criteria are as follows: Longview Estates Variance Appeal Report August 9, 2010 Page 3 a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property, which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had no control. The property known as Longview Estates is a 7.14-acre parcel located entirely in a wetland district, which could be considered a unique circumstance. The property proposed for residential replatting was originally platted in 1963 as part of the Mueller Addition. Even so, sanitary and water utility stubs were installed during the road construction in anticipation of eventual development on the west side of the road. It can be argued that to not use the preinstalled utilities would cause a hardship upon the applicant and would take away to some extent a preexisting development expectation. The plat was approved and the utilities installed before the City’s adoption of the more restrictive wetland zoning regulations in 1992. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. If this property were not located in a wetland district, the applicant would be able to develop it into more lots. The applicant is at a disadvantage to subdivide the property as other landowners might because the property is entirely in a wetland district and subject to additional regulations. However, other property owners within wetland zoning districts would face similar requirements. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The land was originally platted in 1963 and the utilities were installed not too long thereafter. The utilities were presumably installed with the expectation of future development. While the applicant was fully aware of the development constraints of the site, the applicant did not cause the special conditions or circumstances (the wetlands and the wetlands ordinance of 1992.) d. That granting the variance requested would not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. The parcel is zoned R-1, single family residential. The applicant is proposing a development consisting of single-family homes. Granting a variance in this case would not confer a special privilege denied to other property owners. The city would require the owner or developers to meet all other city platting requirements for this site. Longview Estates Variance Appeal Report August 9, 2010 Page 4 e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow for some lots 13 feet to 35 feet narrower than the minimum width required by the city code in order to be able to use the ten utility stubs that are already in place for this property. f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. The intent of the wetlands ordinance and the resulting subdivision requirements is to protect the integrity of the hydrological system and the City’s surface water management system. In addition, wetlands preservation and sensible land use management are critical to the present and future health, safety and general welfare of the land, animals and people within the City. That being said, such preservation and conservation efforts need to be balanced with the right to develop one’s property. Because Rice Creek Watershed District, the local regulatory agency governing wetlands development, has approved the plat and the alteration plans, and because the lots all exceed 20,000 square feet, staff believes the variance for the reduced lot widths would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of the Wetlands Zoning Regulations, especially considering that fifteen lots could be platted on this site, which would be much more intense of a development. g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The requested variance should not cause any of the adverse effects as stated above. The proposed 10 lots would be the same density as the homes across the street and should not negatively affect the wetlands or storm water drainage in the area. Public Hearing: As with any requested variance, a public hearing is required. City staff mailed notices to all property owners within 350 feet of the Longview Estates parcel. Staff has not received any resident comments with this recent notification, but did receive two emails and a few phones calls before the Planning Commission meeting from residents who stated they were against the City granting the variance. Council Actions: The City Council should hold the public hearing and consider testimony and documentation. If the Council believes that the Planning Commission’s action was appropriate and that the findings contained in Resolution 927-10 are proper, the Council could approve version 1 of Resolution 7658. This is a resolution that upholds the Planning Commission denial by rejecting the applicant’s appeal. If the Council finds there is in fact sufficient hardship to justify the applicant’s variance request (thus overturning the Planning Commission’s denial), the Council could approve version 2 of Resolution 7658. This is a resolution that approves the variance for reduced-width lots to have 10 lots within the Longview Estates Major Subdivision. Longview Estates Variance Appeal Report August 9, 2010 Page 5 Recommendation: It is staff’s opinion that the applicant has met the City’s hardship requirements for approving a variance, and that the applicant has satisfied the spirit and intent of Chapter 1010 by proposing a subdivision with lots all in excess of 20,000 square feet. As such, City Staff recommends that the Council approve version 2 of Resolution 7658. Respectfully submitted, Heidi Heller Planning Associate Attachments: 1. Narrative from Applicant 2. Request for an Appeal 3. Zoning Map 4. Wetland Map 5. Aerial Photo 6. Site Plan – dated May 20, 2010 7. Resolution 927-10 8. Resolution 7658 – Version 1 & Version 2 Narrative from Applicant Appeal Request ZONING MAP * Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential Wetland Map - 2006 Aerial View Eichi, Inc. owned parcel City owned lot – adjacent to Woodcrest Park Site Plan MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 927-10 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE FOR REDUCED LOT WIDTHS WITHIN A WETLAND DISTRICT FOR THE LONGVIEW ESTATES PROPERTY; PLANNING CASE VR2010-002 WHEREAS, the applicant, Eichi, Inc. represented by Paul Harstad, applied to the City for a variance to allow for reduced lot widths for new lots in a wetland district; and, WHEREAS, the proposal would have eight of the ten single family lots in the proposed Longview Estates subdivision with reduced lot widths; and, WHEREAS, the location of the proposed subdivision is south of County Road H2 and east of Silver Lake Road; and, WHEREAS, the City has zoned the property known as Longview Estates R-1, Single Family Residential, and it is legally described as follows: Lot 4, Block 1, Mueller Addition Ramsey County, Minnesota PIN 07-30-23-42-0066 WHEREAS, all the proposed lots would be in a wetland district; and, WHEREAS, Section 1010.07 Subd. 3a(2) of the Mounds View Zoning Code indicates that the minimum lot width within a wetland district is 125 feet as measured at the building setback line; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to allow for reduced lot widths (varying widths from 90 feet to 112.67 feet) for eight lots to subdivide the property to into ten single-family residential lots; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents about this proposal: 1. Narrative from Applicant 2. Zoning Map 3. Wetland Map 4. Aerial Photo 5. Site plan, date stamped May 20, 2010 6. Staff Report Resolution 927-10 Page 2 WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief to property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements imposes a hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner’s control; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on Wednesday, June 16, 2010, about this variance request; and, WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria that must be satisfied in order for the City to grant a variance to the Zoning Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings of fact related to the hardship criteria identified in Section 1125.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code: 1. The proposed lots would be located within in a wetland district. 2. While the proposed lots meet the subdivision requirements of Chapter 1202, the lots do not meet the requirements of Chapter 1010 that regulate subdivisions within a wetland zoning district. 3. The minimum lot width within a wetland zoning district is 125 feet. 4. The parcel is substantially covered by wetlands, which is neither exceptional nor extraordinary given the number of wetlands within the City. 5. The literal interpretation of the Code would not deprive Eichi, Inc. of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district in that the parcel could support a subdivision of up to eight parcels fronting Longview Drive that could meet all City subdivision requirements. 6. Granting a variance in this case would confer a special privilege not enjoyed by other property owners in that there does not appear to be a sufficient hardship to warrant approval of the variance. 7. The variance would be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title in that the purpose of controlling development density is to minimize the detrimental effects of urbanization on the wildlife habitats, water quality enhancement, recreational and aesthetic values of wetlands. 8. The applicant has not met or satisfied the hardship criteria as identified in Section 1125.02 of the Mounds View City Code. Resolution 927-10 Page 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon its review of the hardship criteria, testimony presented at the public hearing and the identified findings of fact, does hereby deny the variance request for reduced lot widths in a wetland district associated with a subdivision of the property known as Longview Estates. Adopted this 7th day of July, 2010. _____________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: _____________________________________ Kenneth Roberts, Community Development Director (SEAL) Version 1 RESOLUTION NO. 7658 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DENIAL OF A VARIANCE FOR REDUCED LOT WIDTHS WITHIN A WETLAND ZONING DISTRICT; PLANNING CASE NO. VR2010-002 WHEREAS, Eichi Inc., represented by Marty & Paul Harstad, applied to the City for a variance to allow for reduced lot widths within a wetland zoning district; and, WHEREAS, the proposal would have eight of the ten single family lots in the proposed Longview Estates subdivision with reduced lot widths; and, WHEREAS, the City has zoned the property known as Longview Estates, R-1, Single Family Residential, and the subject parcel is legally described as follows: Lot 4, Block 1, Mueller Addition Ramsey County, Minnesota PID 07-30-23-42-0066 WHEREAS, all of the proposed lots would be in a wetland district; and, WHEREAS, Section 1010.07 Subd. 3a(2) of the Mounds View City Code indicates that the minimum lot width for single-family residential lots within a wetland zoning district is 125 feet as measured at the building setback line; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to allow for reduced lot widths (varying widths from 90 feet to 112.67 feet) for eight lots in order to subdivide the property into ten single-family residential lots; and, WHEREAS, on June 16, 2010, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and received resident, applicant and staff input about this request; and, WHEREAS, on July 7, 2010, the Planning Commission approved Resolution 927-10, a resolution denying the variance requested by Eichi, Inc. due to a lack of demonstrated hardship; and, WHEREAS, on July 16, 2010, the applicant submitted a written appeal, requesting that the City Council overturn the Planning Commission’s denial; and, WHEREAS, on August 9, 2010, the City Council held a public hearing about this appeal; and, Resolution 7658 Page 2 WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the following documents about this appeal: 1. Zoning Map 2. Aerial Photo 3. 2006 Wetland Map 4. Proposed Subdivision Plan, dated May 20, 2010 5. Applicant’s Narrative, dated May 21, 2010 6. Staff Report, dated August 9, 2010 7. Planning Commission Resolution 927-10 WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief to property owners when the strict enforcement of the code requirements imposes a hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to substantial practical difficulties brought about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner’s control; and, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mounds View City Council does hereby uphold the decision of the Mounds View Planning Commission to deny Eichi, Inc. a variance request for eight reduced-width lots associated with the proposed Longview Estates major subdivision, due to a lack of demonstrated hardship, citing by reference the same findings presented in Planning Commission Resolution 927-10. Adopted this 9th day of August, 2010. _____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) Version 2 RESOLUTION NO. 7658 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION OVERTURNING THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION’S DENIAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR REDUCED LOT WIDTHS WITHIN A WETLAND ZONING DISTRICT THEREBY APPROVING THE VARIANCE AS REQUESTED; PLANNING CASE NO. VR2001-002 WHEREAS, Eichi Inc., represented by Marty & Paul Harstad, applied to the City for a variance to allow for reduced lot widths within a wetland zoning district; and, WHEREAS, the proposal would have eight of the ten single family lots in the proposed Longview Estates subdivision with reduced lot widths; and, WHEREAS, the City has zoned the property known as Longview Estates, R-1, Single Family Residential, and the subject parcel is legally described as follows: Lot 4, Block 1, Mueller Addition Ramsey County, Minnesota PID 07-30-23-42-0066 WHEREAS, Section 1010.07 Subd. 3a(2) of the Mounds View City Code indicates that the minimum lot width for single-family residential lots within a wetland zoning district is 125 feet as measured at the building setback line; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to allow for reduced lot widths (varying widths from 90 feet to 112.67 feet) for eight lots in order to subdivide the property into ten single-family residential lots; and, WHEREAS, on June 16, 2010, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and received resident, applicant and staff input about this request; and, WHEREAS, on July 7, 2010, the Planning Commission approved Resolution 927-10, a resolution denying the variance requested by Eichi, Inc. due to a lack of demonstrated hardship; and, WHEREAS, on July 16, 2010, the applicant submitted a written appeal, requesting that the City Council overturn the Planning Commission’s denial; and, WHEREAS, on August 9, 2010, the City Council held a public hearing about this appeal; and, Resolution 7658 Page 2 WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the following documents about this appeal: 1. Zoning Map 2. Aerial Photo 3. 2006 Wetland Map 4. Proposed Subdivision Plan, dated May 20, 2010 5. Applicant’s Narrative, dated May 21, 2010 6. Staff Report, dated August 9, 2010 7. Planning Commission Resolution 927-10 WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief to property owners when the strict enforcement of the code requirements imposes a substantial hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner’s control; and, WHEREAS, the intent of the wetlands ordinance and the City subdivision requirements is to protect the natural environment, the integrity of the hydrological system and the City’s surface water management system, however such preservation and conservation efforts need to be balanced with the right and allowance to develop one’s property; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council hereby makes the following findings of fact about this request: 1. The proposed lots as depicted on the subdivision plan meet the subdivision requirements of Chapter 1202 of the City Code. The lots are located within a wetland zoning district, however, which has more restrictive lot width requirements than Chapter 1202. 2. The minimum lot width within a wetland zoning district is 125 feet, and the applicant has submitted to the City a site plan with 10 residential lots - eight lots that would range from 90 feet to 112.67 feet wide, a 125 foot wide lot and a 152 foot wide lot. 3. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in that the property now proposed for residential replatting was originally platted in 1963 and that sanitary and water utility stubs were installed during the construction of the adjacent street in anticipation of eventual development on this site. 4. The literal interpretation of the Code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district in that while other property owners within this wetland zoning district would face similar requirements, few if any other property owners would have a preexisting vested interest in their undeveloped property as in this case. Resolution 7658 Page 3 5. The special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant in that the land was originally platted in 1963 and the utilities were installed not too long thereafter and many years before the City adopted any wetland protection standards. The utilities were installed with the expectation of future development. While the applicant was fully aware of the development constraints instituted by the City in 1992, the applicant did not cause the special conditions or circumstances. 6. Granting a variance in this case would not confer a special privilege not enjoyed by other property owners in that the applicant is proposing single family homes in a single family home district on lots that exceed the minimum standard subdivision requirements. 7. The variance requested is the minimum variance that would alleviate the hardship and allow the applicant to use the existing 10 water and sewer service stubs for this site. 8. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. 9. It is the belief of the City Council that the proposed variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mounds View City Council, based upon the above-cited findings of fact, does hereby overturn the decision of the Mounds View Planning Commission as presented in Resolution 927-10, and does hereby approve the variance as requested for proposed Longview Estates lots 2 – 9, as depicted on the preliminary plat date-stamped May 21, 2010, subject to the following: 1. If within one year after granting the variance, the work as permitted by the variance has not been completed, then such variance shall be come null and void unless an extension of time has been requested by the applicant and granted by the City Council. Such extension shall be requested by the applicant in writing, and submitted to the City at least 30 days before the expiration of the original variance. 2. For each proposed house pad, soil borings shall be taken to determine construction suitability. The applicant shall submit the borings analyses to the City along with any soils correction plans for Public Works Director and City Engineer review. A grading permit may be required by the City. Resolution 7658 Page 4 Adopted this 9th day of August, 2010. _____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) Item No: 07D Meeting Date: August 9, 2010 Type of Business: Council Business Administrator Review: ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Don Peterson, Public Works Supervisor Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7659 Authorizing the Purchase of a Fuel Tank Monitor and Used Fuel Pump for the Public Works Facility and Rescinding Resolution 7651 Background: On Monday July 26, 2010, City Council approved Resolution 7651 authorizing the purchase of a new tank monitor and fuel pump from Pump and Meter Services, Inc. of Hopkins MN for the diesel fuel tank at Public Works. On Wednesday, July 28, 2010, Staff contacted the vendor to inform them of Council direction and to arrange for the purchase of the new tank and monitor. The vendor then informed Staff that the quote he had earlier provided was for the tank monitor only, a new pump would be an additional cost. The vendor was informed that this information would need to be reviewed by the Public Works Director before any further action would be taken due to the confusion over the quote. Discussion: Staff received two quotes from qualified vendors. Minnesota Petroleum Service of Columbia Heights quote includes a used fuel pump and a new tank monitor at the cost of $6,734.09. The revised Pump and Meter Services, Inc. quote is for a new fuel pump and tank monitor for $11,115.55. (Pump and Meter Services cannot provide a used fuel pump.) Recommendation: Staff recommends rescinding Resolution 7651 and further recommends the purchase of a fuel tank monitor and used fuel pump from Minnesota Petroleum Service, Inc. at the quoted amount of $6,734.09 which includes sales tax and any shipping costs. Staff is also recommending that a 5% contingency be added to the quote for unknowns that may be discovered during the installation of the used fuel pump and tank monitor that would be required to complete the repair work. The 5% contingency would add $336.70 to the quoted amount for an amount not to exceed $7,070.79. Respectfully submitted, Don Peterson Public Works Supervisor RESOLUTION 7659 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 7659 AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF A FUEL TANK MONITOR AND USED FUEL PUMP FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY AND RESCINDING OF RESOLUTION 7651 WHEREAS, on July 26, 2010 the City Council Approved Resolution 7651 which authorized the purchase for a new fuel pump and diesel fuel tank monitor located at the Public Works Facility; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) mandates monitoring of all underground fuel tanks to detect fuel leakage from the tank; and WHEREAS, the City’s fueling station is in need of repairs to comply with MPCA mandates, including an inoperable tank monitoring unit and a severely deteriorated pumping station; and WHEREAS, the City solicited and received two quotes by qualified vendors to provide said purchase; and WHEREAS, the apparent low quote from Pump and Meter Services, Inc., approved by Resolution 7651, did not include the cost of the fuel pump; and WHEREAS, the quote from Minnesota Petroleum Service, Inc. in the amount of $6,734.09, which includes a new fuel tank monitor and a used fuel pump, is the low quote; and WHEREAS, Staff recommends that the City Council consider a 5% contingency to the Minnesota Petroleum Service, Inc. quote, to account for any necessary unknowns that may be required to complete the work required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council does hereby rescind Resolution 7651 and approve the purchase of a used fuel pump and fuel tank monitor from Minnesota Petroleum Service, Inc. in the amount of $7,070.79 which includes sales tax, shipping costs and 5% contingency to be funded equally from the following accounts: 100-4360-5110, 100-4460-5130, 100-4465-5130, 100-4470-5130, 100- 4472-5130, 245-4417-1230, 700-4823-5130, 730-4823-5130. Adopted this 9th day of August, 2010 ____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) Item No: 7E Meeting Date: August 9, 2010 Type of Business: Council Business Administrator Review: ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Mark Beer, Finance Director Item Title/Subject: First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 849, an Ordinance Implementing a Franchise Fee on Center Point Energy Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View Attached is an ordinance to receive an introduction and first reading. The second reading and adoption will be held at a Public Hearing on Monday, August 23, 2010. A notice of the Public Hearing was published in the August 12, 2010 edition of the Sun Focus. This ordinance continues the agreement with Center Point Energy under which Center Point Energy will collect a franchise fee in the amount of 3.87% of Center Point’s natural gas gross operating revenues for services within the City of Mounds View during the year 2011. This is a 2% increase over 2010’s rate of 3.79% Ordinance 625 passed on June 28, 1999 originally enacted the franchise agreement. It provides that the City may impose a franchise fee of not more than 4% of Center Point’s gross operating revenues at any time through July 1, 2019. The franchise fee was first collected in 2001. It has been the practice to include a sunset provision in the ordinance requiring it to be re-enacted each year. Franchise fees collected under this agreement are minimal due to Center Point Energy’s small customer base within the City of Mounds View. The ordinance will be brought back to the City Council for second reading and adoption at the August 23, 2010 meeting. It will be published in the Sun Focus and take effect 30 days after publication. Staff would request that a summary ordinance be published with the complete ordinance available on-line and at City Hall. Respectfully Submitted, Mark Beer ORDINANCE NO. 849 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING A FRANCHISE FEE ON CENTER POINT ENERGY NATURAL GAS OPERATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City of Mounds View Municipal Code Appendix D is hereby amended to include reference to the following Special Ordinance. Subdivision 1. Purpose. The Mounds View City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide natural gas and electric services within the City of Mounds View. a. Pursuant to City Ordinance No. 625, a Franchise Agreement between the City and Center Point Energy (formerly Reliant, formerly Minnegasco), the City has the right to impose a franchise fee of not more than four (4) percent on Minnegasco in amount and fee designs as set forth in Section 4.1 of the Minnegasco Franchise. Subd. 2. Franchise Fee Statement. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Center Point Energy under its natural gas Franchise Agreements in the amount of three and eighty-seven one hundredths of a percent (3.87%) of Center Point Energy’s gross revenues, as defined in Section 4.1 of the Franchise Agreements commencing with Center Point Energy’s January 2011 billing month. Subd. 3. Payment. The said franchise fee shall be payable to the City in accordance with the terms set forth in Section 4.4 of the Franchise. Subd. 4. Surcharge. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission requires each said utility company to add to its effective rates for the utility service on which the public utility gross earnings fee is imposed, a surcharge to reimburse such utility company for the cost of the fee. Subd. 5. Proof of Company Gross Revenues. Center Point Energy shall make each payment when due and shall quarterly furnish a complete and correct statement of gross revenues for said quarter. Center Point Energy shall permit the City and its designated representative free access to the company’s records for the purpose of verifying such statements. Subd. 6. Enforcement. Any dispute, including enforcement of a default regarding this ordinance will be resolved in accordance with the Franchise Agreement. Subd. 7. Effective Date of Franchise Fee. Notwithstanding the effective date of this ordinance and notwithstanding any contrary provisions in Section 4 of the Franchise, the effective date of the fee collected under Subdivision 2 of this ordinance is the later of ten (10) days after the publication and after the sending of written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted ordinance upon Center Point Energy by certified mail. Subd. 8. Sunset Clause. This ordinance shall automatically sunset on December 31, 2011. SECTION 2. This ordinance takes effect as provided herein. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 9th day of August, 2010. Read and passed by the City Council of the city of Mounds View this 23rd day of August, 2010. Publication Date: _________________ _____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________________ Jim Ericson, City Clerk-Administrator (SEAL) ORDINANCE SUMMARY ORDINANCE NO. 849 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING A FRANCHISE FEE ON CENTER POINT ENERGY NATURAL GAS OPERATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW On August 23, 2010, the Mounds View City Council adopted an ordinance which implements a franchise fee on Center Point Energy natural gas operations within the City of Mounds View for the year 2011. A copy of Ordinance 849 is on file and available for public viewing at the office of the Clerk-Administrator. The ordinance is also posted in its entirety on the City’s website, located at www.ci.mounds-view.mn.us. __________________________________ Jim Ericson, City Clerk-Administrator Item No: 7F Meeting Date: August 9, 2010 Type of Business: Council Business Administrator Review: ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Mark Beer, Finance Director Item Title/Subject: Introduction, and First Reading of Ordinance 850, an Ordinance Implementing a Franchise Fee on Xcel Energy Electric and Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View Attached is an ordinance to receive an introduction and first reading. The second reading and adoption will be held at a Public Hearing on Monday, August 23, 2010. A notice of the Public Hearing was published in the August 12, 2010 edition of the Sun Focus. This ordinance continues the agreement with Xcel Energy under which Xcel Energy will collect a franchise fee in the amount of 3.87% of Xcel’s electric and natural gas gross operating revenues for services within the City of Mounds View during the year 2011. This is a 2% increase over 2010’s rate of 3.79% Ordinances 517 and 518 passed on October 13, 1992 originally enacted the franchise agreement. It provides that the City may impose a franchise fee of not more than 4% of Xcel’s gross operating revenues at any time during the 20-year term of the franchise. The 20-year term runs from 1993 through 2012 and the franchise fee was first collected in 1993. It has been the practice to include a sunset provision in the ordinance that requires it to be re-enacted each year. The ordinance will be brought back to the City Council for second reading and adoption at the August 23, 2010 meeting. It will then be published in the Sun Focus and take effect 30 days after publication. Staff would request that a summary ordinance be published with the complete ordinance available on-line and at City Hall. Respectfully Submitted, Mark Beer ORDINANCE NO. 850 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING A FRANCHISE FEE ON XCEL ENERGY ELECTRIC AND NATURAL GAS OPERATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The City of Mounds View Municipal Code Appendix D is hereby amended to include reference to the following Special Ordinance. Subdivision 1. Purpose. The Mounds View City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide natural gas and electric services within the City of Mounds View. a. Pursuant to City Ordinance No. 517 and Ordinance No. 518, which are the Franchise Agreements (“Franchise Agreements”) between the City of Mounds View (the “City”) and Xcel Energy (formerly Northern States Power Company), a franchise fee of not more than four (4.0) percent of Xcel Energy’s gross operating revenues may be imposed by the City at any time during the 20 year term of the Franchise. The franchise fee is paid as full compensation for the rights to transmit and furnish electric energy for light, heat, power and import, transport, sell and distribute natural gas for heating, illuminating and other purposes as outlined in Section 2 of Ordinance Nos. 517 and 518. Subd. 2. Franchise Fee Statement. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Xcel Energy under its electric and natural gas Franchise Agreements in the amount of three and eighty-seven one hundredths of a percent (3.87%) of Xcel Energy’s gross revenues, as defined in Section 4.2 of the Franchise Agreements, commencing with Xcel Energy’s January 2011 billing month. Subd. 3. Payment. The said franchise fee shall be payable to the City in accordance with the terms set forth in Section 4 of the Franchise Agreements. Subd. 4. Surcharge. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission requires each said utility company to add to its effective rates for the utility service on which the public utility gross earnings fee is imposed, a surcharge to reimburse such utility company for the cost of the fee. Subd. 5. Proof of Company Gross Revenues. Xcel Energy shall make each payment when due and shall monthly furnish a complete and correct statement of gross revenues for said month. Xcel Energy shall permit the City and its designated representative free access to the company’s records for the purpose of verifying such statements. Subd. 6. Enforcement. Any dispute, including enforcement of a default regarding this ordinance will be resolved in accordance with the Franchise Agreements. Subd. 7. Effective Date of Franchise Fee. Notwithstanding the effective date of this ordinance and notwithstanding any contrary provisions in Section 4 of the Franchise Agreements, the effective date of the fee collected under Subdivision 2 of this ordinance is the later of ten (10) days after the publication and after the sending of written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted ordinance upon Xcel Energy by certified mail. Subd. 8. Sunset Clause. This ordinance shall automatically sunset on December 31, 2011. SECTION 2. This ordinance takes effect as provided herein. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 9th day of August, 2010. Read and passed by the City Council of the city of Mounds View this 23rd day of August, 2010. Publication Date: _________________ _____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________________ Jim Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) ORDINANCE SUMMARY ORDINANCE NO. 850 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING A FRANCHISE FEE ON XCEL ENERGY ELECTRIC AND NATURAL GAS OPERATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF MOUNDS On August 23, 2010, the Mounds View City Council adopted an ordinance which implements a franchise fee on Xcel Energy electric and natural gas operations within the City of Mounds View for the year 2011. A copy of Ordinance 850 is on file and available for public viewing at the office of the Clerk-Administrator. The ordinance is also posted in its entirety on the City’s website, located at www.ci.mounds-view.mn.us. __________________________________ Jim Ericson, City Administrator Item No: 7G Meeting Date: August 9, 2010 Type of Business: CB Administrator Review : ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Thomas Kinney, Deputy Police Chief Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7660, Initiating the Process to Fill the Vacant PSO Position Due to the Resignation of the Current PSO Background: On May 3, 2010, Resolution 7605 was approved authorizing the hire of Jaren Zech to the part- time position of Public Service Officer (PSO). PSO Zech has submitted his resignation due to another employment opportunity effective August 13, 2010. Discussion: The Mounds View Police Civil Service Commission maintains an active eligibility list for the PSO position that was certified on April 20, 2010 with three names. If the process to move forward with replacing the PSO is approved, the Commission can be convened to update the top three names on the eligibility list. The PSO is an essential position to the operations of the Police Department and Community Development Department. Having a PSO in place ensures the continuity of police operations and code enforcement duties. The duties of the PSO include: • Pickup stray animals as required or as requested by citizen complaint • Assist officers with traffic control, traffic and radar surveys • Perform house-watch duties to help ensure the safety and security of property belonging to residents out of the city for a period of time • Trap and relocate undomesticated animals • Assist in the maintenance of agency equipment and medical supplies • Transport equipment or personnel as requested • Answer administrative phones when needed • Recovery of stolen, lost or abandoned property (i.e. bicycles) • Assist with code enforcement throughout the City The starting wage for the PSO position at the Step 1 pay rate is $12.73 per hour. Recommendation: I recommend approval be granted to begin the process to fill the PSO position from the current eligibility list maintained by the Police Civil Service Commission. Respectfully Submitted, __________________ Thomas Kinney Deputy Police Chief RESOLUTION NO. 7660 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVAL TO INITIATE PROCESS TO FILL THE VACANT PUBLIC SERVICE OFFICER (PSO) POSITION DUE TO THE RESIGNATION OF THE CURRENT PSO WHEREAS, the Mounds View Police Department will have a vacancy in the Public Service Officer (PSO) position effective August 13, 2010, due to the resignation of current PSO Zech; and WHEREAS, the Public Service Officer position is an essential position in the operations of the police department by handling animal control complaints, assisting officers with traffic and radar surveys, maintenance of department supplies, recovery of abandoned property and assisting with code enforcement issues; and WHEREAS, the Mounds View Police Civil Service Commission maintains a current and certified eligibility list of candidates; and WHEREAS, the replacement PSO would be selected from the existing eligibility list. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council does hereby authorize conducting the requisite background investigation on the top candidate on the eligibility list certified by Police Civil Service Commission in order to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of the current PSO. Adopted this 9th day of August 2010. ____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ Jim Ericson, City Administrator (seal) Item No: 08A Meeting Date: August 9, 2010 Type of Business: CA Administrator Review : ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Barb Benesch, Community Development Technician Item Title/Subject: CONTRACTOR LICENSES FOR APPROVAL Please consider the following contractor licenses for approval. All contractor licenses will expire on December 31, 2010. All applicants have submitted appropriate fees and proof of insurance. Those companies that are “new” include applicants that have never been licensed with the City or they may have been licensed with the City in the past, but were not licensed in 2009. Those that are “renewals”, at a minimum, were licensed in 2009. The type of license they are applying for follows the company name. C & B Masonry, Inc. Masonry/Cement New Dave’s Heating & Air HVAC Renewal Carter Custom Construction & Fireplaces HVAC New Drobnick’s Demolition/Container Service Demolition New Hofmann Concrete Masonry/Cement New Jay Hawk Mechanical HVAC New Opus Design Build, LLC General (Commercial) New Polar Plumbing, Inc. HVAC New Recommendation: Approve license applications as requested. Item No: 8B Meeting Date: August 9, 2010 Type of Business: Consent Administrator Review: ________ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7654, Continue Participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Local Incentives Account for 2011 through 2020 Introduction: The City of Mounds View previously chose to be a participant in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Local Housing Incentives Account (LCA LHIA). Participation in the voluntary LCA LHIA program provides the City with the opportunity to compete for grants and loans to support activities that help the City meet its affordable and life cycle housing goals, clean up polluted sites, and support demonstration projects linking jobs, housing and transit. The City’s previously adopted LCA LHIA affordable and life cycle housing goals were negotiated with the Metropolitan Council for the period 1996-2010. If the City wants to continue to participate in the LCA, then we must now establish new affordable and life-cycle housing goals for the next decade (2011 through 2020). Discussion: As part of the recently completed 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update, the City acknowledged its fair share of the region’s affordable housing need. For Mounds View, the fair share number is 81 additional units over the next 10 years. Although the Metropolitan Council fully supports the need for this total number of new affordable units over the next decade, they also acknowledge the reality of limited funding and opportunities available to create new affordable housing. For this reason, the Metropolitan Council is asking the City to establish its LCA affordable housing goal as a range of 53 to 81 units for the period 2001 to 2020 with the low end of the range representing the number of units that can be accomplished at currently available funding levels region-wide. Regarding the City’s life-cycle housing goal to diversify the type and density of housing to meet residents’ changing housing needs and preferences, the Metropolitan Council is asking the City to establish a goal range of 80 to 200 units over the next decade. The low end of the range represents the City’s total share of the region’s affordable housing need, and the high end is the potential number of units permitted by the land use designations in the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update for medium, high and mixed-use residential development, or the total forecasted household growth for the Community to 2020, whichever is less. The 2010 estimated number of households in Mounds View is 5,400, and in the year 2020, that number is estimated to be 5,600 – an increase of 200 households (page 2-5 in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update). The potential number of units permitted by medium, high and mixed-use land use designations in the Comprehensive Plan Update is a minimum of 132 units (page 3-27 in the2008 Comprehensive Plan Update). Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Report August 9, 2010 Page 2 Although Mounds View has not received an LCA grant, the City submitted two applications in 2001 for funding - $75,000 for a Laport Meadows Housing Development (undeveloped area southeast of Ardan Park – this area remains undeveloped) and $50,000 for a Highway 10 Reconstruction/Revitalization Study. For more information about the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act, please visit the Metropolitan Council website at http://www.metrocouncil.org/services/livcomm.htm The City of Mounds View must pass a resolution to make official the City’s decision to continue participation in the LCA and forward the resolution to the Metropolitan Council by September 1, 2010. Additionally, before December 1, 2010, the City must develop a Housing Action Plan outlining the steps the City will take to help meet its LCA goals. The City can take much, if not all, of this action plan from the housing implementation section of the City’s Comprehensive Plan Update. On July 21, 2010, the Planning Commission discussed the new affordable and life-cycle housing goals that Mounds View must adopt for the next decade. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the Affordable Housing Goal of 60, and Life-Cycle Housing Goal of 132 for the next decade. Recommendation: Approve Resolution 7654, which adopts housing goals and approves the City’s continued participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Local Housing Incentives Account (LCA LHIA) for the calendar years of 2011 through 2020. Sincerely, Heidi Heller Planning Associate Attachments: 1. Livable Communities Act information 2. Resolution 7654 RESOLUTION NO. 7654 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATING IN THE LOCAL HOUSING INCENTIVES ACCOUNT PROGRAM UNDER THE METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT CALENDAR YEARS 2011 THROUGH 2020 WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act (Minnesota Statutes sections 473.25 to 473.255) establishes a Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund which is intended to address housing and other development issues facing the metropolitan area defined by Minnesota Statutes section 473.121; and, WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund, comprising the Tax Base Revitalization Account, the Livable Communities Demonstration Account, the Local Housing Incentive Account and the Inclusionary Housing Account, is intended to provide certain funding and other assistance to metropolitan-area municipalities; and, WHEREAS, a metropolitan-area municipality is not eligible to receive grants or loans under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund or eligible to receive certain polluted sites cleanup funding from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development unless the municipality is participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program under Minnesota Statutes section 473.254; and, WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act requires the Metropolitan Council to negotiate with each municipality to establish affordable and life-cycle housing goals for that municipality that are consistent with and promote the policies of the Metropolitan Council as provided in the adopted Metropolitan Development Guide; and, WHEREAS, previously negotiated affordable and life-cycle housing goals for municipalities participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program expire in 2010; and, WHEREAS, a metropolitan-area municipality can participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program under Minnesota Statutes section 473.254 if: (a) the municipality elects to participate in the local Housing Incentives Program; (b) the Metropolitan Council and the municipality successfully negotiate new affordable and life-cycle housing goals for the municipality; (c) the Metropolitan Council adopts by resolution the new negotiated affordable and life-cycle housing goals for the municipality; and (d) the municipality establishes it has spent or will spend or distribute to the Local Housing Incentives Account the required Affordable and Life-Cycle Housing Opportunities Amount (ALHOA) for each year the municipality participates in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program. Resolution 7654 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Mounds View: 1. Elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act for calendar years 2001 through 2020. 2. Agrees to the following affordable and life-cycle housing goals for calendar years 2011 through 2020: Affordable Housing Goal Life-Cycle Housing Goal 60 132 3. Will prepare and submit to the Metropolitan Council a plan identifying the actions it plans to take to meet its established housing goals. Adopted this 9th day of August, 2010. _____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) Item No: 08G Meeting Date: August 9, 2010 Type of Business: CA Administrator Review : ____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Thomas Kinney, Deputy Police Chief Item Title/Subject: Resolution 7656, Acceptance of Office of Traffic Safety In- Car Video Camera Grant Award Background: The Office of Traffic Safety, a division of the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, offered an in-car video camera grant to law enforcement agencies across the state. The Mounds View Police Department submitted an application requesting two squad video cameras to outfit our two squad cars currently not equipped with cameras. Due to a high volume of requests, our application was reduced to an award for one video camera. Discussion: The Mounds View Police Department currently equips five of our marked squad cars with the Digital Ally DVM 750 digital camera system. The purchase of an additional camera will increase the total inventory of in-car video cameras to six. This grant award is for a matching Digital Ally DVM 750 camera unit so as to be compatible with our existing equipment. This camera unit sells for approximately $4295.00 through Tactical Solutions, the local distributor for Digital Ally. A condition of the grant award is for the law enforcement agency to provide local matching funds of $300.00 to the Minnesota Sheriff’s Association, who has been designated to coordinate the purchase and distribution of the cameras. Up to $200.00 of those matching funds can be used for the installation of the camera unit. The installation will be handled by our existing squad car set up company, PCS Safety Systems. The remaining $100.00 would be required to be paid to the Minnesota Sheriff’s Association. Recommendation: Staff recommends the acceptance of the grant award for one Digital Ally DVM-750 video camera with the condition of local matching funds of $300.00, of which $200.00 may be used for the cost of installation. The total cost required by the city for payment to the Minnesota Sheriff’s Association is $100.00. Respectfully Submitted, __________________ Thomas Kinney Deputy Police Chief RESOLUTION NO. 7656 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY IN-CAR CAMERA VIDEO GRANT AWARD WHEREAS, the Office of Traffic Safety offered a grant for the purchase of In-Car video cameras; and WHEREAS, The addition of one squad video camera will increase our inventory of cameras in use to a total of six in-car video cameras; and WHEREAS, The Mounds View Police Department made application for this grant and was awarded one Digital Ally DVM-750 video camera valued at approximately $4295.00; and WHEREAS, a condition of the grant award is for the law enforcement agency to provide matching funds of $100.00 to assist with the installation costs of the camera unit; and WHEREAS, The Minnesota Sheriff’s Association has been designated to purchase and distribute the cameras to the awarded agencies and is to receive the $100.00 matching fund payment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota to approve the acceptance of the Office of Traffic Safety In-Car Camera grant award for one Digital Ally DVM-750 camera and agreement to provide matching funds of $100.0 payable to the Minnesota Sheriff’s Association. Adopted this 9th day of August 2010. ____________________________________ Joe Flaherty, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ Jim Ericson, City Administrator (seal) Corrections made by Councilmembers Mueller and Gunn, City Administrator Ericson, Community Development Director Roberts, and Assistant City Administrator Crane PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL 1 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 2 RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA 3 4 Regular Meeting 5 June 28, 2010 6 Mounds View City Hall 7 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 8 7:00 P.M. 9 10 11 1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER 12 13 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 14 15 3. ROLL CALL: Flaherty, Hull, Mueller, Gunn. 16 17 NOT PRESENT: Stigney. 18 19 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 20 A. Monday, June 28, 2010, City Council Agenda. 21 22 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Approve the Monday, June 28, 2010, agenda as 23 presented. 24 25 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 26 27 5. PUBLIC INPUT 28 29 Tom Winiecke, 2740 Sherwood Road, questioned who was responsible for maintaining the 30 infiltration basins or rain gardens. Mayor Flaherty indicated the City is responsible for the grade 31 and placement of the rain gardens, but the homeowner needs to maintain the boulevard, including 32 the infiltration feature. City Administrator Ericson reiterated that homeowners were responsible 33 to maintain and mow grass in the City easements. 34 35 Mr. Winiecke suggested the City fix Harvey Kowalzek’s property immediately as it could not be 36 mowed. Public Works Director DeBar stated a punch list was being worked on at this time and 37 the City has encouraged the contractor to complete the work by the end of June. He explained 38 the City was having trouble with the subcontractor and the City did have funds in escrow to 39 assure that the work would be completed. 40 41 The Council further discussed the general contractor used for Project A. The Council was 42 generally not in favor of using this contractor for future projects given the poor performance 43 provided by the chosen subcontractor. 44 45 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 2 6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 1 A. Annual Public Information Meeting for MS4 SWPPP 2 3 Public Works Director DeBar stated that each year the City is required to have an annual 4 stormwater public information meeting. He reviewed the goals for the City with regard to 5 stormwater management along with the minimum control measures (MCM). Public Education 6 and Outreach was the first MCM and he explained that six articles were printed in the Mounds 7 View Matters newsletter this past year to educate further the public on stormwater issues. 8 9 Public Works Director DeBar indicated the second MCM was Public Participation/Involvement 10 that led the City to hold household clean-up days, an annual public meeting and the new adopt a 11 rain garden program. The third MCM was Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination which 12 provided a yearly stormwater management map update, illegal dumping enforcement, illicit 13 discharge inspection program and sanitary sewer maintenance program. He explained the City 14 inspected 32 outfalls and cleaned 47 miles of sanitary sewer in the past year. 15 16 Public Works Director DeBar noted the fourth MCM was Construction Site Stormwater Runoff 17 Control which assisted with erosion and sediment control regulations, construction site plan 18 review, erosion control inspections and enforcements, and grading precon meetings. The fifth 19 MCM was Post Construction Stormwater Management which provided permanent stormwater 20 management design standards, post construction plan reviews and long-term reviews. 21 22 Public Works Director DeBar indicated the sixth MCM was Prevention/Good Housekeeping that 23 created a municipal lawn care maintenance program, a street sweeping program, a street de-icing 24 program and pond/outfall basin inspections. He explained an OSHA inspection was completed 25 this year and the public works facility was brought into compliance. 26 27 Public Works Director DeBar explained that going into the future the Stormwater Management 28 Plan would be looking into wellhead protection planning, SIP monitoring, a stormwater pond 29 inventory, and an impaired waters review to Rice Creek. The City’s MS4 General Permit was 30 applied for in 2003 and would expire in May of 2011. This would have to be reviewed in the 31 near future to assure the State renews the permit. 32 33 Council Member Mueller questioned how the stormwater basins would be recognized if not 34 stenciled. Public Works Director DeBar indicated the basins would have a stamp in the iron. 35 36 Council Member Mueller asked what residents could do when they see a stormwater basin or 37 grate clogged grass clippings, sticks and leaves. Public Works Director DeBar encouraged the 38 residents to contact the Stormwater Management Hotline at 717-4063. This would allow the 39 City to track and monitor the calls. He noted leaves or grass could be raked up into the 40 boulevard but warned residents not to approach an area that had a large amount of water ponded. 41 42 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS 43 A. 7:05 p.m. Public Hearing, to Consider Resolution 7636, to Consider Approval 44 of a Temporary 3.2 On-Sale Liquor License for the Anoka/Blaine Jaycees to 45 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 3 Serve Liquor during the Mounds View Festival in the Park on Saturday, 1 August 21, 2010. 2 3 Assistant City Administrator Crane stated a temporary liquor license has been requested from the 4 Anoka/Blaine Jaycees to serve liquor during the Mounds View Festival in the Park. City Code 5 did not allow the liquor request to be for more than two days. She explained the Festival 6 Committee has approved the Anoka/Blaine Jaycees, contingent upon receiving a temporary 7 liquor license. All the proper paperwork has been submitted and a satisfactory background check 8 has been received. Staff recommends approval of the temporary liquor license. 9 10 Keith St. Marie reviewed the proposed Jaycee operations for the Mounds View Festival in the 11 Park. He indicated the beer would be sold within a fenced area. All people requesting to be 12 served would need to show a valid ID and would need to have a wristband on in order to be 13 served. Tickets would be sold for the beverages. Any alcohol brought in would be confiscated 14 and all minors would be removed from the fenced area. 15 16 Mr. St. Marie questioned if the City would have a police presence on park grounds the day of the 17 Festival. Mayor Flaherty indicated the Mounds View Police Department would have officers 18 present for the event. 19 20 Mayor Flaherty opened the public hearing at 7:46 p.m. 21 22 Hearing no public input, Mayor Flaherty closed the public hearing at 7:46 p.m. 23 24 Council Member Mueller asked if the beverage servers were trained to stop serving people that 25 have had too much to drink. Mr. St. Marie indicated several members of the Jaycees were Tip 26 Certified which provided proper training to the members who are serving alcohol. 27 28 Council Member Mueller questioned if the Jaycees were responsible for the cleanup and 29 maintenance of the fenced in area. Mr. St. Marie explained the Jaycees could be responsible for 30 clean up of the area after the event. 31 32 Council Member Gunn suggested the Jaycees use compostable cups. Mr. St. Marie indicated he 33 has had this request before and he would look into biodegradable cups. If the price was feasible, 34 he would consider the expense, but the cost may be prohibitive. 35 36 Mayor Flaherty indicated this was the first year the City was allowing alcohol at the Festival in 37 some time. He encouraged the Jaycees to be in contact with Deputy Police Chief Kinney before 38 the event to establish rules of understanding. 39 40 Community Development Director Roberts questioned the hours of operation. Mr. St. Marie 41 indicated the Jaycees would be serving alcohol from noon to 9:30 p.m. 42 43 Community Development Director Roberts suggested signage be placed near the entrance with a 44 clear list of rules and regulations. 45 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 4 1 Community Development Director Roberts asked if the operation would be within a tent or open 2 air. Mr. St. Marie stated this was still being investigated. 3 4 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Hull. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7636, approving 5 a Temporary 3.2 On-Sale Liquor License for the Anoka/Blaine Jaycees to Serve Liquor during 6 the Mounds View Festival in the Park on Saturday, August 21, 2010 at Mounds View City Hall 7 Park. 8 9 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 10 11 B. 7:10 p.m. Public Hearing, to Consider a Revision or a Revocation of the 12 Conditional Use Permit for an Outside Sales Operation for Robert’s Sports 13 Bar at 2400 County Road H2. 14 15 Community Development Director Roberts stated that this item is regarding the operation of an 16 outside sales and Flea market at Robert’s Sports Bar. The original permit was approved in 2009 17 for the sales to run from April through September. While the City wants to remain supportive of 18 a local business, the City must also be sure that any changes or new land use activities in the City 19 meet all code requirements. The proposed use may prove to be a valuable asset to Mounds View 20 but the City must also ensure that it does not cause any negative effects on the occupants of 21 nearby properties. 22 23 Community Development Director Roberts indicated that Mr. Halverson has made positive steps 24 toward meeting the conditions set by the City Council in Resolution 7444 by having the parking 25 lot repaired and by having all the flea market signs removed. There still is however, the issue of 26 the unpaid attorney’s fees of $639.90. The City should require Mr. Halverson to pay the City for 27 this debt. It is important to note that the CUP will remain in effect indefinitely as long as there 28 are no changes to the operation and if there have been no problems or reasons that would warrant 29 the City Council to reexamine the CUP. 30 31 Staff recommends the Council hold a public hearing, not make any changes to the CUP and that 32 Mr. Halverson be required to pay the City $639.90 for the unpaid City attorney’s fees by July 30, 33 2010. 34 35 Mayor Flaherty opened the public hearing at 8:02 p.m. 36 37 Hearing no public input, Mayor Flaherty closed the public hearing at 8:02 p.m. 38 39 Council Member Hull questioned what would happen after July 30, 2010 if the fees remained 40 unpaid. Community Development Director Roberts indicated the fees would be certified to the 41 property taxes. 42 43 Finance Director Beer addressed the Council regarding the outstanding attorney’s fees noting 44 they have been outstanding for almost a year. He indicated the Council would have to consider 45 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 5 this further before renewing the liquor license. 1 2 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Flaherty. To Reaffirm Resolution 7444, approving the 3 Conditional Use Permit to Allow an Outside Sales Operation at 2400 County Road H2 for 4 Roberts Sports Bar and that Mr. Halverson be required to pay the City $639.90 for unpaid 5 Attorney’s fees by July 30, 2010. 6 7 Mayor Flaherty understood the need to have the expense paid and felt this was a CUP fee and 8 should not be tied to the liquor license. However, if the fees were not paid in 30 days he would 9 like to see the expense certified to the property taxes for payment in 2012. 10 11 Ayes – 3 Nays – 1 (Hull) Motion carried. 12 13 Council Member Mueller requested Item F be moved up on the agenda for discussion as a 14 resident was present for this Item. The Council was in favor with this suggestion. 15 16 F. Resolution 7637, Resolution of Denial for Second Driveway Access for 17 Property at 2832 Woodcrest Drive. 18 19 Community Development Director Roberts explained Dick Comben was requesting City Council 20 approve the retention of a second street access for the existing driveway at 2832 Woodcrest 21 Drive. On June 10, 2010, Mr. Comben submitted an application to the Public Works Department 22 for a second driveway access as part of the City’s private improvement plan (PIP). Staff 23 reviewed the application and the site conditions and determined that the proposed second 24 driveway access does not meet current city standards as the driveway was gravel and not in 25 conformance with current City code. Staff was seeking additional input from Council regarding 26 this issue, but recommended denying the request for two driveways. 27 28 Dick Comben, 2832 Woodcrest Drive, requested the Council consider the aesthetics of the 29 current driveway as the home was designed around the rainbow-style driveway. Mr. Comben 30 indicated the entry steps to the house were 16 feet wide again matching the style of the driveway. 31 He explained the driveway had been in its current state for 30+ years. 32 33 Council Member Mueller thanked Mr. Comben for providing pictures to the Council as it 34 assisted in providing a proper visual picture of the property. She pointed out that a tree was 35 saved by the designing in the driveway and agreed the Class 5 driveway did match the rural feel 36 of the property. 37 38 Council Member Hull questioned what the City’s policy was for single gravel driveways in the 39 City. Community Development Director Roberts stated a single driveway could remain gravel, 40 would receive a curb cut but the second access was the concern for this property. 41 42 Council Member Gunn asked if the Street Utility Committee discussed two curb cuts for a single 43 driveway and were any standards established. Jim Battin, Chairman of the Street Utility 44 Committee indicated this was discussed in 2008 and the Resolution passed by Council was based 45 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 6 on the recommendations of the Committee. Mr. Battin stated the major consideration of double 1 driveways was the cost for two curb cuts on a single lot. He felt the current property being 2 discussed predated the current Ordinance. 3 4 Council Member Gunn questioned if the pictures provided to Council were recent. Mr. Comben 5 indicated the pictures were taken this spring after the driveway was graded. 6 7 Council Member Gunn expressed concern about setting precedence with other double driveways 8 in the City. She noted the Street Utility Committee created standards that should apply to the 9 entire community. 10 11 Mayor Flaherty indicated the City was willing to take on each resident on a case-by-case basis 12 and did not feel precedence would be set on this case. He explained the driveway has been in 13 this position for over 30 years and was extremely well maintained. Mayor Flaherty noted the 14 second curb cut would be at the homeowner’s expense and recommended allowing the second 15 curb cut. 16 17 Council Member Mueller felt that because single access driveways were not required to be 18 upgraded to be a paved surface, this property owner should not be required to be paved. She 19 stated she would be in favor of a new Resolution approving the second driveway access for Mr. 20 Comben. 21 22 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. Directing Staff to revise Resolution 7637, to show approval 23 of the owner’s requested Waiver or Variance to have two driveway accesses for the property at 24 2832 Woodcrest Drive, acknowledging the homeowner will be responsible for the expense of the 25 second curb cut. 26 27 City Administrator Ericson stated staff would revise Resolution 7637 to state approval of the 28 variance request in the affirmative allowing the double driveway access. He indicated the 29 Resolution would be rewritten and brought back to Council for approval on the Consent Agenda 30 at the July 12th Council Meeting. 31 32 Council Member Hull thanked staff for the proper recommendation and all information provided 33 regarding the variance request to Council. However, he felt the property should not be 34 “punished” for recent Code changes. 35 36 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 37 38 C. Continued Public Hearing, Resolution 7625, a Resolution to Consider an On 39 Sale Intoxicating Liquor License Renewal for Robert’s Sports Bar and 40 Entertainment located at 2400 County Road H2. 41 42 Assistant City Administrator Crane explained Robert’s Sports Bar and Entertainment did submit 43 the city liquor license application after the June 14, 2010, City Council Meeting. Fees, 44 Certificate of Liability Insurance and the background check application were received on Friday, 45 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 7 June 18, 2010. Staff checked with Ramsey County Property Tax Records, and this property is 1 up to date on property tax payments. The Mounds View Police Department has issued a 2 satisfactory report for Robert’s Sports Bar and Entertainment. The City’s Fire Marshal has 3 issued an unsatisfactory report for Robert’s Sports Bar and Entertainment. No changes were 4 made to bring the site into compliance. 5 6 Assistant City Administrator Crane indicated the Finance Department issued an unsatisfactory 7 report. Robert’s Sports Bar and Entertainment owes the City $1,610.69 for a past due utility bill 8 and another totaling $639.00 for attorney fees associated with the Conditional Use Permit for 9 outdoor sales. Staff has sent four certified letters to Robert’s Sports Bar regarding these 10 concerns. 11 12 Assistant City Administrator Crane contacted Robert’s Sports Bar and Entertainment (Floyd 13 Halverson) on June 22, 2010 to inform the establishment of this delinquency. Staff was 14 informed by Mr. Floyd Halverson that the license holder (Kevin Halverson), is aware of what is 15 owed, and that the City should “…take it up with the owner. That is between the City and Kevin 16 Halverson.” Staff further informed Mr. Floyd Halverson that this delinquency will have to be 17 reported to the City Council and this delinquency may jeopardize their liquor license renewal. 18 The Halverson’s were aware of the public hearing scheduled for this renewal, nut were out of 19 town. 20 21 Staff explained the City Council could either not renew the liquor license due to the delinquency 22 and failed fire inspection or renew the license contingent on full payment of utility bill, attorney 23 fees, and a satisfactory fire inspection by a deadline set by the City Council. If delinquencies are 24 not paid, and no corrections have been made since the last fire inspection by the deadline date, 25 then the City Council could choose to suspend or revoke the liquor license at a later City Council 26 Meeting. If the City Council wishes to approve the liquor license renewal, then the license 27 period would be from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011. It was noted the current license would lapse 28 on June 30, 2010. 29 30 Mayor Flaherty reopened the public hearing at 8:55 p.m. 31 32 Hearing no public input, Mayor Flaherty closed the public hearing at 8:55 p.m. 33 34 Council Member Mueller expressed concern about the lapse in fire monitoring services at 35 Robert’s. She indicated the unsatisfactory fire re-inspection was also a great concern. Council 36 Member Mueller felt she could agree to a payment plan for the utility fees, but did not know if 37 the failed fire inspection could be overlooked. 38 39 Council Member Hull questioned what would happen if a fire head were to go off at Robert’s 40 with out the monitoring company support. Community Development Director Roberts indicated 41 this would delay fire calls to the site. He indicated the establishment was required by City code 42 to have a fire monitoring contract for the site. 43 44 Council Member Hull expressed great distress due to the fact the applicant was not present at the 45 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 8 meeting given the fact the establishment’s liquor license was two days away from lapsing. 1 Assistant City Administrator Crane indicated the City has made every effort to be on contact with 2 the owner. 3 4 Council Member Gunn explained the failed fire inspection could not go unnoticed, along with 5 the lapsed monitoring service. She stated this would create a great fire hazard to the neighboring 6 properties. Council Member Gunn was not in favor of renewing the liquor license given the 7 current issues and the applicant’s complete disregard to follow the City’s rules and regulations. 8 9 Mayor Flaherty indicated he has always given this organization the benefit of the doubt, and 10 understood the liquor license was crucial for the operation of this business. However, Robert’s 11 has not demonstrated any effort to complete a satisfactory fire inspection, which was necessary to 12 keep the business viable. He explained he was willing to go to the July 22nd deadline if Robert’s 13 corrected the fire inspection and paid the outstanding dues. After July 22nd the liquor license 14 would lapse. 15 16 Council Member Mueller asked if a new fire monitoring company could have been hired by 17 Robert’s. Assistant City Administrator Crane stated this could be the case, but the fire 18 monitoring contracts have lapsed in the past. 19 20 Council Member Mueller explained she would be in favor of allowing Robert’s time to come 21 into compliance by July 22nd. 22 23 City Administrator Ericson stated if the Council was willing to extend the license to July 22nd, 24 the Council was effectively approving the liquor license for a year. The Council would then have 25 to go through the entire revocation process after July 22nd. He recommended the issues be 26 addressed at this time. If the Council were to take no action at this time, the current license 27 would lapse on June 30, 2010. 28 29 City Attorney Riggs indicated the Council did not have the right to extend the current license as 30 it would lapse. He explained the applicant should have been present at tonight’s meeting to 31 address the Council’s concerns. The Council had the right to shut down the business due to the 32 fire, health and safety risks found by the Fire Marshal. 33 34 City Attorney Riggs added that the outstanding fines also need to be addressed before Council 35 could approve a liquor license. He suggested the Council have the applicant present at the July 36 12th meeting for questioning to assure the concerns at hand are addressed. 37 38 Council Member Mueller stated it was unfortunate the Council had to come to this decision. She 39 questioned if the Fire Marshal could reexamine the site before the July 12th meeting. Community 40 Development Director Roberts stated this would be done. 41 42 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Gunn. To Adopt Resolution 7625, approving an On Sale 43 Intoxicating Liquor License Renewal for Robert’s Sports Bar and Entertainment located at 2400 44 County Road H2 with the understanding the current issues (fire, health and safety concerns, and 45 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 9 outstanding utilities) would be discussed at a Hearing on July 12, 2010, at which time the 1 License could be Revoked if not addressed to the satisfaction of the City Council. 2 3 City Attorney Riggs indicated this was a difficult situation as the applicant was unresponsive. 4 The Council needed answers from the applicant. 5 6 Assistant City Administrator Crane read through the revised Resolution to assure she had all of 7 the Council’s requirements. 8 9 Council Member Hull stated the City was “bending over backwards” for a business that has 10 required a great deal of City staff time and energy and has remained unresponsive. He explained 11 he would not support this Resolution given the fact the applicant was not even present to address 12 the numerous City concerns. 13 14 Ayes – 3 Nays – 1 (Hull) Motion carried. 15 16 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Direct Staff to Notify the Robert’s Sports Bar located 17 at 2400 County Road H2, there will be a Revocation Hearing on July 12, 2010 and that proper 18 notification be published. 19 20 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 21 22 D. Continued Public Hearing, Resolution 7626 a Resolution to Consider an On 23 Sale Intoxicating Liquor License Renewal for The Mermaid located at 2200 24 County Highway 10. 25 26 Assistant City Administrator Crane stated The Mermaid did submit the city liquor license 27 application materials and fees on June 21, 2010. The Mounds View Police Department has 28 issued a satisfactory report for The Mermaid. Staff submitted a background check application on 29 the owner of The Mermaid to the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) on June 30 22, 2010. The City’s Fire Marshal has issued an unsatisfactory report for The Mermaid. 31 32 Assistant City Administrator Crane noted The Mermaid is up to date on payment of all utility 33 bills. However, The Mermaid currently owes money for the first half of 2010 property taxes in 34 the amount of $121,987, and for Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) fees for the outdoor patio in 35 the amount of $4,200. She stated she spoke with the County regarding these outstanding dues as 36 The Mermaid shows them paid. 37 38 Assistant City Administrator Crane indicated the City Council could either not renew the liquor 39 license due to the delinquencies and failed fire inspection or renew the license contingent on full 40 payment of all outstanding fees and a satisfactory fire inspection at a deadline set by the City 41 Council. Staff recommended approving the liquor license contingent upon full payment of all 42 outstanding fees and a satisfactory fire inspection. If the City Council wishes to approve the 43 liquor license renewal, then the license period would be from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011. 44 45 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 10 Mayor Flaherty reopened the public hearing at 9:20 p.m. 1 2 Hearing no public input, Mayor Flaherty closed the public hearing at 9:20 p.m. 3 4 Council Member Mueller indicated she would be willing to give the applicant an additional 30 5 days to assure that all fire violations are corrected. This would give them until July 30th to 6 comply with all City and State fire codes. 7 8 City Administrator Ericson stated the applicant was fine with the outstanding fees being certified 9 to the property taxes. He questioned how the Council wanted to handle the statement within the 10 resolution stating “full payment of property taxes.” 11 12 City Attorney Riggs suggested the Resolution read, “full payment of applicable property taxes 13 and Sewer Availability Charges.” If the SAC fees were not paid these would be certified to the 14 property taxes by the City. 15 16 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7626, 17 approving an On Sale Intoxicating Liquor License Renewal for The Mermaid located at 2200 18 County Highway 10 contingent upon a satisfactory fire inspection by July 30, 2010 and full 19 payment of applicable property taxes and Sewer Availability Charges. 20 21 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 22 23 Mayor Flaherty stated the Council was willing to work with its businesses and residents to 24 resolve issues and keep operations viable. However, certain rules have to be followed and the 25 Council will hold these businesses accountable to assure they are in compliance. He was proud 26 of the Council for taking the time to review each case at length and in detail. 27 28 E. Resolution 7635, Ratifying the Mounds View Election Judges for the 2010 29 Primary and General Elections. 30 31 Assistant City Administrator Crane stated that State law requires that election judges for the 32 Primary and General Elections be appointed by the municipal governing body. Resolution 7635 33 contains a finalized list of election judges for the 2010 Primary Election (August 10, 2010), and 34 the General Election (November 2, 2010). The City currently has trained over 60 judges for the 35 Primary Election and General Election. Staff recommends Council approve the appointment of 36 election judges for the 2010 Primary and General Election. 37 38 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7635, 39 ratifying the Appointment of Election Judges for the 2010 Primary and General Elections. 40 41 Council Member Gunn thanked all those willing to serve and participate in the election process. 42 43 Mayor Flaherty agreed with these comments and thanked the residents serving the community in 44 the upcoming elections. 45 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 11 1 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 2 3 G. Resolution 7634, Authorization to Advertise and Create an Eligibility List to 4 Fill a Police Officer Position in the Mounds View Police Department. 5 6 Deputy Police Chief Kinney stated The Mounds View Police Civil Service eligibility list for 7 Police Officers is no longer current, and the police department anticipates an additional opening 8 on July 31, 2010 due to a retirement of a current police sergeant. Staff was seeking approval to 9 create an active Civil Service eligibility list for police officer and seek approval to begin the 10 process to hire a police officer to fill the future vacancy. This most recent vacancy will reduce the 11 number of sworn officers to 17 from the department authorized strength of 19 officers. The Civil 12 Service Commission dissolved the 2009 list and recommended the authorization to advertise to 13 create an eligibility list to fill the opening in the Mounds View Police Department. 14 15 Mayor Flaherty questioned how long the eligibility lists were used. Deputy Police Chief Kinney 16 stated the last list was created in May of 2009 and two officers were hired off this list. He 17 indicated the list could possibly be stretched to three years, but the Civil Service Commission 18 recommended creating a new list for the current patrol position. 19 20 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Hull. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7634, 21 authorization to Advertise to Create an Eligibility List to fill a Police Officer Position in the 22 Mounds View Police Department. 23 24 City Administrator Ericson stated the 2011 budget was going to be discussed at the next work 25 session meeting. He suggested this Resolution be postponed until after the budget was discussed 26 further as costs will be incurred through the eligibility list. 27 28 Mayor Flaherty felt it would benefit the City to begin the process as it was timely. The City 29 would then have a potential candidate list if the Council chooses to fill the position in 2011. 30 31 Council Member Mueller questioned where the funding came from to create the eligibility list. 32 Finance Director Beer indicated this came out of the general fund. 33 34 City Administrator Ericson suggested the Council could proceed with the eligibility list but 35 informed the Council the current Resolution does state the City would then hire an officer. He 36 recommended this language be omitted. 37 38 MOTION AMENDMENT: Gunn/Hull. To Omit the Language within Resolution 7634, stating 39 the City would then Hire an Officer from the Eligibility List. 40 41 Council Member Gunn did not feel this language had to be removed. 42 43 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 44 45 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 12 H. Resolution 7640, Approving a Construction Contract for 2010 Miscellaneous 1 Concrete Repairs. 2 3 Public Works Director DeBar explained each winter the City experiences breaks in the water 4 distribution system. Much of the City’s watermain is located in turfed boulevard areas; however, 5 excavating to repair the breaks often requires removal of concrete curbing, driveways, and hot-6 mixed asphalt to provide safe trenches. Restoration of the damaged curbing, pavement, 7 sidewalk, turf, etc. is typically performed the following spring/summer. 8 9 Public Works Director DeBar explained the Public Works Department typically handles all the 10 restoration except concrete repairs. Of the 11 break locations, only two require concrete repairs. 11 One location (8132 Long Lake Road) requires minor work involving constructing concrete curb 12 and gutter. The other location (2612 County Road I) requires significantly more work. The 13 County Road I repair was the location of the New Year’s Eve watermain break that leaked 14 approximately 1.2 million gallons and drained the water tower and a portion of the ground 15 reservoir, leaving the entire City with low water pressure. 16 17 Public Works Director DeBar stated a quote proposal package was prepared by Public Works and 18 distributed to five local concrete contractors to submit quotes. Quotes were received by four of 19 the five and ranged from $15,362.50 to $25,925.76. However, the lowest three quotes only had a 20 difference of $984.50. The low quote was submitted by Neeck Construction, Inc. of Minneapolis, 21 MN. The adopted 2010 budget has $10,000 in this account, which is under the low quote 22 amount of $15,362.50. The restoration of the watermain break on County Road I is much more 23 significant than those in the past since the road is concrete and Ramsey County requires specific 24 measures in the repair. In addition, one-half of the concrete driveway entrance to Mounds View 25 Square also needs replacement, along with a nearby sidewalk. Public Works believes the quote 26 amount is appropriate. The work was projected to be completed by July 31, 2010. 27 28 Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution 7640 that will award the construction 29 contract for $15,362.50 to Neeck Construction, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota for the 2010 30 Miscellaneous Concrete Repairs. In addition, it is recommended that the City Council consider 31 adding a 10% construction contingency to the authorized amount for minor work associated with 32 unknowns that could occur during construction. This contingency would add an additional 33 $1,536 to the $15,362.50 for a grand total authorized amount not to exceed $16,898.50. 34 35 Council Member Mueller questioned what funds would be used for the repairs. Public Works 36 Director DeBar stated the water utility fund would be used to pay for the repairs. He explained 37 no consultants were used for the bid package and Public Works staff would supervise the project. 38 39 Mayor Flaherty asked if the 10% contingency was necessary. Public Works Director DeBar 40 stated the contingency would allow the bid to run over the $15,000 without having to come back 41 to Council for approval. He did not anticipate needing the additional 10%. 42 43 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7640, 44 awarding a Construction Contract for the 2010 Miscellaneous concrete repairs for City Project 45 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 13 2010-00I to Neeck Construction in an amount not to exceed $16,898.50. 1 2 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 3 4 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Continue the Meeting past 10:00 p.m. 5 6 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 7 8 8. CONSENT AGENDA 9 10 Council Member Gunn asked to remove Item B. 11 12 Council Member Mueller asked to remove Item D. 13 14 A. Licenses for Approval. 15 B. Resolution 7638, Approving Mounds View Business Licenses. 16 C. Resolution 7633, a Resolution Approving a Joint Powers Agreement for 17 Development of the North East Metropolitan Area Municipal Network, a 18 Regional Broadband Network Collaborative. 19 D. Resolution 7639, Approving Independent Contractor Agreements for 2010 20 Tree Removals with Upper Cut Tree Services and 4 Seasons Tree Care. 21 22 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Hull. To approve Consent Agenda Items 8A and 8C. 23 24 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 25 26 B. Resolution 7638, Approving Mounds View Business Licenses. 27 28 Council Member Gunn questioned the licenses being approved for Robert’s and The Mermaid 29 and if the proper fees had been paid to the City. City Administrator Ericson indicated the proper 30 fees had been paid. 31 32 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7638, 33 approving Mounds View Business Licenses. 34 35 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 36 37 D. Resolution 7639, Approving Independent Contractor Agreements for 2010 38 Tree Removals with Upper Cut Tree Services and 4 Seasons Tree Care. 39 40 Council Member Mueller commented on the services provided by the tree care service 41 companies. She explained both provided great service to the City last year and each has agreed 42 to give continued contract services at the same price as 2009. 43 44 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 14 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7639, 1 approving Independent Contractor Agreements for 2010 Tree Removals with Upper Cut Tree 2 Services and 4 Seasons Tree Care. 3 4 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 5 6 9. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 7 8 Finance Director Beer answered the Council's questions related to claims. 9 10 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Approve the Just and Correct Claims as presented. 11 12 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 13 14 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 15 A. May 24, 2010, City Council Meeting Minutes. 16 17 Council Member Gunn requested a correction on Page 1, Line 36, Excel should read Xcel. Page 18 5, Line 26, the Edgewood Drive address should have a house number. Page 5, Line 40, remove 19 “s” from buildings. Page 6, Line 12, the line should read, “thrift stores belong in the B-3 zoning 20 district”. Page 14, Line 14, the line should read, “Mounds View Forestry needs with the 21 remainder of his time working in New Brighton”. Page 17, Line 21, should read, “all options to 22 gain compliance, noting that the fees can be certified and added on to property taxes”. 23 24 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Hull. To Approve the May 24, 2010, City Council meeting minutes 25 as amended. 26 27 Ayes - -- 4 Nays - -- 0 Motion carried. 28 29 B. June 14, 2010, Executive Session Minutes. 30 31 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Approve the June 14, 2010, City Council Executive 32 Session meeting minutes as submitted. 33 34 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 35 36 11. REPORTS 37 A. Reports of Mayor and Council. 38 39 Council Member Mueller reported the Summer 2010 Mounds View Matters was printed and 40 includes information regarding the pests invading local trees. A registration form was included 41 for the Car and Tractor Show. She encouraged all to attend the Festival in the Park on August 42 21, 2010 at City Hall Park. 43 44 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 15 Council Member Mueller noted she attended the League of Minnesota Cities Conference titled 1 Leading in Challenging Times on June 23, 24, and 25, 2010. She reviewed the seminars she 2 attended and explained the conference provided great information to all that attended. 3 4 Council Member Gunn also attended the League of Minnesota Cities Conference. She reviewed 5 the list of seminars she attended noting they varied from Council Member Mueller’s. 6 7 Mayor Flaherty indicated the financing and budgeting processes were going to change for the 8 City from this point on. 9 10 B. Reports of Staff. 11 1. Administrator Report. 12 13 City Administrator Ericson reviewed information regarding the police chief recruitment with the 14 Council. He indicated the next step would be direction from Council to complete a background 15 check and psychological examination on the top qualified candidate. 16 17 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Hull. To Authorize City Staff to schedule the background check 18 and psychological examination for the top qualified candidate for Police Chief. 19 20 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 21 22 City Administrator Ericson noted the City Appreciation Luncheon was held on June 16th and was 23 very well attended. He thanked all who attended and provided food for the event. 24 25 City Administrator Ericson indicated he attended the League of Minnesota Cities Conference as 26 well and stated he would provide further information on his seminars in his quarterly report. The 27 City would need to prepare for the upcoming budgeting cycle but should note the economy will 28 continue to turn around. 29 30 City Administrator Ericson welcomed Jim Battin to the Charter Commission on behalf of the 31 City of Mounds View. 32 33 City Administrator Ericson noted City Hall would be closed on Monday, July 5th in observance 34 of Independence Day. 35 36 C. Reports of City Attorney. 37 38 City Attorney Riggs had nothing to report. 39 40 12. Next Council Work Session: Tuesday, July 6, 2010, at 7:00 p.m. 41 Next Council Meeting: Monday, July 12, 2010, at 7:00 p.m. 42 Mounds View City Council June 28, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 16 1 13. ADJOURNMENT 2 3 The meeting was adjourned at 10:37 p.m. 4 5 Transcribed by: 6 7 Carla Wirth 8 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 9 Corrections made by Councilmembers Stigney and Gunn, City Admi nistrator Ericson, Community Development Director Roberts, Public Works Director DeBar, and Assistant City Administrator Crane PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL 1 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 2 RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA 3 4 Regular Meeting 5 July 12, 2010 6 Mounds View City Hall 7 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 8 7:08 P.M. 9 10 11 1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER 12 13 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 14 15 3. ROLL CALL: Flaherty, Stigney, Hull, Mueller, Gunn. 16 17 NOT PRESENT: None. 18 19 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 20 A. Monday, July 12, 2010, City Council Agenda. 21 22 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Gunn. To Approve the Monday, July 12, 2010, agenda as 23 presented. 24 25 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 26 27 5. PUBLIC INPUT 28 29 Tom Winiecki, 2748 Sherwood Road, thanked the City for the work completed to improve the 30 City’s streets. He indicated Mr. Kowalzek’s drainage basin was finally completed and can now 31 be mowed. 32 33 Jeff Moritko, 2400 Highway 10, requested to be on the next Council agenda to discuss an 34 outdoor event. In addition, he wanted to have the Council reconsider temporary banners as 35 permanent signs if attached to the building. 36 37 Mayor Flaherty suggested staff place Mr. Moritko on the next agenda and that a discussion be 38 held at the next work session regarding temporary signs. 39 40 Doug Solmonson, 7820 Woodlawn Drive, asked that Council review the recreational fire 41 language within City Code. He expressed concern with his neighbors burning habits and 42 reported that the police have been called on several occasions. Mr. Solmonson explained that 43 burning six or seven days a week all day long was not recreational. He indicated the neighbor 44 has been burning garbage as well. 45 Mounds View City Council July 12, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 2 1 Mayor Flaherty questioned if the current recreational fire code had a time limit. City 2 Administrator Ericson explained there was not a time restriction. 3 4 Dan Haugen, 8439 Knollwood, understood the concerns with recreational fires but did not feel 5 the City needed to review this issue further. He suggested the resident burning garbage be 6 addressed and that Codes for recreational fires remain as is. 7 8 Mayor Flaherty suggested staff bring the recreational fire ordinance to the Council at the next 9 work session meeting and that neighboring community’s fire codes be reviewed. The Council 10 was in favor of this request. 11 12 Tom Huth, 7814 Woodlawn Drive, explained he is a neighbored the resident that is burning 13 garbage as well. He indicated he would also like to see time restrictions set as his neighbor was 14 burning garbage, household items, siding, roofing, etc. 15 16 6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 17 18 None. 19 20 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS 21 A. Public Hearing to Consider a Suspension or Revocation of an On-Sale 22 Intoxicating Liquor License at Robert’s Sports Bar and Entertainment at 23 2400 County Road H2. 24 25 Assistant City Administrator Crane stated the Council, at its June 28, 2010 meeting, approved 26 Robert’s Sports Bar and Entertainment’s On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License contingent on full 27 payment of their utility bill, and full payment of attorney fees associated with the Conditional 28 Use Permit (CUP) on file with the City by July 30, 2010. In addition, the On-Sale Intoxicating 29 Liquor License was contingent on a satisfactory fire inspection by July 12, 2010. If a satisfactory 30 fire inspection was not completed by July 12th, then the City Council would review their liquor 31 license status, and make a determination by public hearing whether to suspend or revoke the On-32 Sale Intoxicating Liquor License (see attached Resolution 7625). 33 34 Assistant City Administrator Crane explained Staff notified Robert’s Sports Bar and 35 Entertainment, by certified mail, about this public hearing. In addition, Staff notified both 36 owners by phone. On July 8, 2010, the Fire Marshal re-inspected Robert’s Sports Bar and 37 Entertainment and issued a satisfactory report. In addition, Olsen Fire has been re-instated and 38 will be continuing to monitor the sprinkler system. This was verified by a phone call received by 39 the Fire Marshal from Olsen Fire Inspection, Inc. 40 41 Assistant City Administrator Crane stated Robert’s has met the requirements of the City Council 42 and this public hearing is no longer needed. Staff will keep the City Council informed on the 43 status of their utility bill and attorney fee delinquencies. 44 45 Mounds View City Council July 12, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 3 Mayor Flaherty was pleased that all issues were addressed by Robert’s as the Council must look 1 out for the safety and welfare of Robert’s patrons. 2 3 Kevin Halverson, owner of Robert’s Sports Bar, explained the previous owner had the mail 4 switched to his home address, which meant he did not receive any utility bills. Upon receiving 5 the bills, he spoke with the City to arrange back payments. He indicated he would have attended 6 last month’s meeting but was told by City Staff that it was not necessary not necessary. 7 8 Mr. Halverson further explained how other issues were resolved with Olsen Fire Inspection, the 9 Fire Marshal, and the City. He expressed frustration with how the Council addressed the issues 10 at Robert’s and the lack of professionalism. Mr. Halverson did not want to have to be hostile 11 when resolving issues with the City. 12 13 Council Member Mueller stated she had a conversation with Mr. Halverson regarding a recent 14 newspaper headline. She thanked the owners of Robert’s for bringing their establishment into 15 compliance. 16 17 B. First Reading of Ordinance 846, an Ordinance Amending Section 512.08 of 18 the City Code about the Suspension or Revocation of a Cigarette or Tobacco 19 License. 20 21 Assistant City Administrator Crane stated the Ramsey County Tobacco Coalition reviewed The 22 City Code pertaining to Suspension/Revocation of the Cigarette/Tobacco Business License. The 23 Ramsey County Tobacco Coalition strongly recommends that the City use the word 24 "consecutive" in their day’s requirements for a suspension of the license. It eliminates confusion 25 and clarifies what the state law and the City Code intends to do. 26 27 Assistant City Administrator Crane noted in Staff’s professional opinion, the recommended 28 language would clarify the suspension process, and would not change the intent. Staff 29 recommends approval of the first reading and introduction of Ordinance 846. The Second 30 Reading of this Ordinance is scheduled for the July 26, 2010, City Council Meeting. 31 32 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Stigney. To Approve the First Reading and Introduction of 33 Ordinance 846, an Ordinance Amending Section 512.08 of the City Code about the Suspension 34 or Revocation of a Cigarette or Tobacco License. 35 36 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 37 38 C. Resolution 7641, a Resolution relating to a Multifamily Senior Housing 39 Development and the Issuance of Revenue Bonds to Finance the Costs 40 thereof under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as Amended; Granting 41 Preliminary Approval Thereto; Establishing Compliance with certain 42 Reimbursement Regulations under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as 43 Amended; and taking certain other actions with respect thereto. 44 45 Mounds View City Council July 12, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 4 Finance Director Beer stated that the City Council was introduced to the economic development 1 tool of the conduit debt financing at the May work session. Select Senior Living of Mounds 2 View, LLC, had requested the Council consider this financing tool for their senior housing 3 project. The Council was supportive of moving forward with the use of conduit debt financing. 4 There are a number of steps that will need to happen before housing revenue bonds can be 5 issued. 6 7 Finance Director Beer indicated the Council needs to grant preliminary approval and authorize 8 submission of an application to the Minnesota Office of Management and Budget for an 9 allocation of bonding authority from the State pool. Staff recommends the Council review the 10 information and approve the Resolution. 11 12 Council Member Mueller questioned what this program could do for the City of Mounds View. 13 She understood the City was not liable for the performance of the bond. 14 15 Jenny Boulton, Kennedy & Graven, stated the City would be acting as a gateway to the developer 16 and would give the developer access to tax exempt bonds. The borrower would be responsible 17 for making all payments. 18 19 Mayor Flaherty questioned what the City’s debt service was at this time. Finance Director Beer 20 explained the debt service could not exceed 3% of the City’s tax capacity. In addition, the City 21 could have $30 million in bank debt. Ms. Boulton explained the conduit debt financing would 22 not qualify as bank debt and, thus would not limit the City’s debt service. 23 24 Council Member Stigney asked who selected Ms. Boulton to represent the City. Finance 25 Director Beer indicated he and the City Administrator selected Kennedy & Graven to represent 26 the City. 27 28 Council Member Stigney questioned how many assisted living units were within the senior 29 housing development. Joel Larson, representing Select Senior Living of Mounds View, stated 30 there would be 32 independent assisted living units with 95 units in total. 31 32 Council Member Stigney asked how many people would be within each unit. Mr. Larson 33 explained each unit could have two people per unit. 34 35 Council Member Mueller questioned when construction would begin. Mr. Larson indicated he 36 would like to break ground in September and anticipated the building to be ready for occupancy 37 in September of 2011. 38 39 Council Member Mueller asked how many jobs would be brought into the City through the 40 senior housing project. Mr. Larson estimated that 40 part-time/full-time positions would be 41 needed to run the senior housing development. 42 43 Mayor Flaherty indicated he received positive feedback from neighboring communities when 44 discussing conduit debt. He questioned if the City had an administrative fee established for the 45 Mounds View City Council July 12, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 5 conduit debt. Finance Director Beer explained the City would be receiving 1% of the bond 1 proceeds at closing as an administrative fee. 2 3 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7641, 4 approving a Resolution relating to a Multifamily Senior Housing Development, and the Issuance 5 of Revenue Bonds to Finance the Costs thereof under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as 6 Amended; Granting Preliminary Approval Thereto; Establishing Compliance with certain 7 Reimbursement Regulations under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as Amended; and taking 8 certain other actions with respect thereto. 9 10 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 11 12 D. Resolution 7642, Approving the Appointment of Freddy Duane Martin to the 13 Street and Utilities Committee. 14 15 City Administrator Ericson stated the Streets and Utilities Committee has one vacant term seat. 16 On July 8, 2010, Staff received an application from Freddy Duane Martin, who would like to be 17 considered by the City Council in becoming a member of this committee. It is recommended that 18 the City Council consider Freddy Duane Martin, and approve his appointment to the Streets and 19 Utilities Committee. 20 21 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7642, 22 Approving the Appointment of Freddy Duane Martin to the Street and Utilities Committee. 23 24 Mayor Flaherty thanked Mr. Martin for stepping forward and being willing to serve on the 25 committee. 26 27 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 28 29 E. Resolution 7643, Authorizing Bonestroo to Perform Engineering Services for 30 the Design Phase for Area D of the Street and Utility Improvement Program. 31 32 Public Works Director DeBar stated the Council authorized preliminary survey for Area D on 33 September 28, 2009. These land surveys will be utilized for final design and plans for the Area 34 D project. Bonestroo’s proposal for the Design Phase for Area D is $234,000, the bid phase is 35 $7,000 and the construction phase is $249,000. 36 37 Public Works Director DeBar explained the estimated fees for the bid and construction phases 38 could change based on completion of the final design plans. He explained how the Master 39 Agreement fee compensation had been changed. Staff recommends the City Council adopt the 40 Resolution authorizing the engineering services for Area D. 41 42 Council Member Mueller questioned what area of the City would be included in Area D. Public 43 Works Director DeBar reviewed a City map outlining Area D. 44 45 Mounds View City Council July 12, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 6 Council Member Stigney asked how the hourly charges for Area D compared to the expenses 1 charged for Area B and C. Public Works Director DeBar stated the expenses were comparable. 2 Joe Rhein, Consulting Engineer with Bonestroo, explained the rates were similar for Areas B and 3 C, except a few employees’ hourly rates had increased. 4 5 Mayor Flaherty stated the City’s learning curve was becoming increasingly short with the 6 completion of each street improvement project. He felt the design phase for Area D would be 7 less than with Areas B and C. He requested staff provide the design phase numbers from 8 Bonestroo for each phase. 9 10 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7643, 11 Authorizing Bonestroo to Perform Engineering Services for the Design Phase for Area D of the 12 Street and Utility Improvement Program. 13 14 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 15 16 F. Resolution 7644, Authorizing Bolton & Menk to Perform Engineering 17 Services for the Municipal Well No. 2 Motor Replacement Project. 18 19 Public Works Director DeBar stated Municipal Well No. 2 was constructed in August of 1962 20 and is located within the Public Works Facility at 2466 Bronson Drive. Well No. 2 is unique in 21 that the well pumps are powered by a natural gas engine, but all others in the City have electric 22 motors. The Caterpillar engine was used by the City and installed 35 years ago. The motor for 23 Well No. 2 runs erratically and is compromising the water distribution system. The well was 24 only used in times of high usage. 25 26 Public Works Director DeBar explained the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) has $100,000 27 slated for the motor replacement from the Water Enterprise Fund. Staff recommends the City 28 Council authorize Bolton & Menk to perform engineering services for the Municipal Well No. 2 29 motor replacement. 30 31 Council Member Mueller questioned if the feasibility study was necessary or if the $20,000 could 32 be put into a new electric motor. Public Works Director DeBar stated the $20,000 would cover 33 the expense of electrical engineer drawings and plans and specifications needed to bid for the 34 new motor, which could not be completed in house. 35 36 Council Member Mueller asked for the expense of both the natural gas and electric motor. 37 Public Works Director DeBar stated the natural gas motor was a more expensive option costing 38 upwards of $100,000. The electric motor with a variable frequency drive would cost 39 approximately $30,000 and Xcel was offering $10,000 rebates at this time. After the 40 replacement of this motor, Well No. 2 would become the primary well for the City as it was 41 located at the Public Works Facility and would have a backup generator onsite. 42 43 Council Member Mueller requested Staff proceed with the electric motor alone to reduce the 44 study expense. Public Works Director DeBar indicated the services provided by Bolton & Menk 45 Mounds View City Council July 12, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 7 would serve the City well by creating valuable plans and specifications for the replacement motor 1 that could not be completed by staff in-house. He explained further that the well house building 2 itself could need modifications through this replacement process and this information would be 3 gained through the study as well. 4 5 Council Member Stigney questioned if the conversion to electric was the best option for the City 6 and requested detailed information from the consultant with regard to the recommendations. 7 Public Works Director DeBar stated he would be overseeing the project study and the findings 8 could be presented to the Council at a future meeting. He indicated Bolton & Menk was a 9 reputable company and has worked with the City of Mounds View in the past. 10 11 Mayor Flaherty felt the electric motor would be the less expensive option for the City and 12 suggested staff look into a soft start option. He questioned how long the analysis would take. 13 Public Works Director DeBar reviewed the anticipated timeline stated the recommendations 14 would be back to the City in eight to nine weeks. 15 16 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Hull. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7644, 17 Authorizing Bolton & Menk to Perform Engineering Services for the Municipal Well No. 2 18 Motor Replacement Project. 19 20 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 21 22 8. CONSENT AGENDA 23 24 Council Member Stigney asked to remove Item C. 25 26 A. Licenses for Approval. 27 B. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, July 26, 2010 at 7:05 p.m. to Consider a 28 Conditional Use Permit Request for an Oversized Garage at 7515 Knollwood 29 Drive. 30 C. Resolution 7637 – A Resolution Approving a Request to Keep Two Existing 31 Driveway Access Points for the Property at 2832 Woodcrest Drive. 32 33 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Approve the Consent Agenda Items A and B. 34 35 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 36 37 C. Resolution 7637 – A Resolution Approving a Request to Keep Two Existing 38 Driveway Access Points for the Property at 2832 Woodcrest Drive. 39 40 Council Member Stigney explained he was not present for the discussion on this item and would 41 not be voting for this item. 42 43 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7637, 44 Approving a request to keep two existing driveway access points for the property at 2832 45 Mounds View City Council July 12, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 8 Woodcrest Drive. 1 2 Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Abstain – 1 (Stigney) Motion carried. 3 4 9. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 5 6 Finance Director Beer answered the Council's questions related to claims. 7 8 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Approve the Just and Correct Claims as presented. 9 10 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 11 12 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 13 A. June 14, 2010, City Council Meeting Minutes. 14 15 Mayor Flaherty stated that Line 40 of Page 1 should read, Dick Comben and not Dave Connelly. 16 17 Council Member Stigney requested a change on Page 3, Line 25 should read the ‘‘type of 18 mitigation proposed .’’ 19 20 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Hull. To Approve the June 14, 2010, City Council meeting minutes 21 as corrected. 22 23 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 24 25 11. REPORTS 26 A. Reports of Mayor and Council. 27 28 Mayor Flaherty reported he attended a meeting today with representatives from Arden Hills, 29 Shoreview, New Brighton and Roseville. Each City was preparing for the upcoming budget 30 cycle. He explained the TCAAP property has not been sold to date and was currently on hold. 31 32 Mayor Flaherty noted the Council would be holding a retreat meeting at Random Park at 6:00 33 p.m. on Monday, July 19th. 34 35 B. Reports of Staff. 36 37 1. Public Works Quarterly Report. 38 39 Public Works Director DeBar reviewed his Public Works Quarterly Report with the Council in 40 detail. Snow removal was the main expense for quarter one along with maintaining the snow 41 removal equipment. There were 13 snow removal events in total with the last event in February. 42 The public works department hired a supervisor on March 30th, Don Peterson, who has been a 43 great addition to the department. 44 45 Mounds View City Council July 12, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 9 Public Works Director DeBar reported there were 21 call back events in quarter one. The City 1 had five watermain breaks and 24 water samples taken during this time as well. He explained the 2 public works facility underwent a voluntary OSHA inspection and time was spent addressing 3 several concerns. He reviewed the expenditures to date stating all were on track. 4 5 Public Works Director DeBar noted the baseball field at Greenfield Park is proposed to be 6 improved with memorial funding from Kate Wisser. The two improvements that would be 7 provided within the range of funding would be a scoreboard and a batting cage. A resolution will 8 come before the Council to accept the donation at the Council’s next meeting. A memorial event 9 has been scheduled for late August at the park. He questioned if Council was in favor of the 10 proposed improvements. The Council supported staff proceeding with these items. 11 12 Mayor Flaherty thanked staff for the thorough report. 13 14 Council Member Mueller stated she reported a sinkhole to Ramsey County dispatch along Ardan 15 Avenue this past weekend. A member of public works arrived and put a barricade around the 16 sinkhole. 17 18 City Administrator Ericson explained that this week he would be attending municipal clerk and 19 finance officer certification program. 20 21 C. Reports of City Attorney. 22 23 City Attorney Riggs had no report. 24 25 12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, August 2, 2010, at 7:00 p.m. 26 Next Council Meeting: Monday, July 26, 2010, at 7:00 p.m. 27 28 13. ADJOURNMENT 29 30 The meeting was adjourned at 9:31 p.m. 31 32 Transcribed by: 33 34 Carla Wirth 35 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 36 Corrections made by Councilmembers Hull and Gunn, City Administrator Ericson, Community Development Director Roberts, and A ssistant City Administrator Crane PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL 1 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 2 RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA 3 4 Regular Meeting 5 July 26, 2010 6 Mounds View City Hall 7 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 8 7:00 P.M. 9 10 11 1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER 12 13 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 14 15 3. ROLL CALL: Flaherty, Stigney, Hull, Mueller, Gunn. 16 17 NOT PRESENT: None. 18 19 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 20 A. Monday, July 26, 2010, City Council Agenda. 21 22 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Approve the Monday, July 26, 2010, agenda as 23 presented. 24 25 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 26 27 5. PUBLIC INPUT 28 29 Wayne Mecl, 6969 Knollwood Drive, explained he applied to the City for a second driveway 30 access on his property. He requested the Council allow his property to have two curb cuts as this 31 was the way his property had been for 45 years. Public Works Director DeBar indicated he 32 received an application from Mr. Mecl for a second curb cut on July 12th; the application was due 33 back in May. He then reviewed the five conditions for approval as stated within Resolution 34 7338. Mr. Mecl’s application met four out five conditions but the driveway in question was not 35 an improved surface. Public Works Director DeBar did not recommend the second driveway 36 curb cut be allowed. 37 38 Council Member Mueller asked if Mr. Mecl received previous mailings from the City regarding 39 the street improvement project. Mr. Mecl indicated he did not recall receiving this information. 40 He learned of the application for a second curb cut from a City staff member that was working 41 near his property on July 9th. 42 43 Mounds View City Council July 26, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 2 Council Member Mueller questioned the purpose of the second driveway as it did not connect to 1 the first driveway or the garage. Mr. Mecl stated his children park in it and it was used every 2 day. 3 4 Council Member Mueller asked staff if the second curb cut should remain to give the property 5 owner the option of subdividing his lot. Public Works Director DeBar indicated it was fairly 6 simple to put in a curb cut if needed in the future. 7 8 Mayor Flaherty commented that the second driveway did not appear to be a finished surface. He 9 reiterated that a second curb cut would be at the expense of the homeowner. Mr. Mecl stated the 10 second driveway was on the site when he purchased the home in the 1960’s. He noted he would 11 be willing to pay for the second curb cut and to complete a finished surface for the second 12 driveway. 13 14 Council Member Gunn felt this request differed greatly from the previous request as this second 15 driveway was not connected and did not appear in any way to be a driveway. She stated she 16 would not support a second curb cut. 17 18 Council Member Mueller indicated the previous request was already a finished surface and 19 connected to the property’s garage. 20 21 Council Member Stigney stated the second driveway appeared to be a parking pad and not a 22 driveway. He noted he would not support a second curb cut. 23 24 Council Member Hull agreed. 25 26 Mayor Flaherty indicated the Council had to follow the City’s code and did not feel the site was 27 designed to be a second driveway. He felt the Council could not make an exception or justify the 28 need for a second curb cut. 29 30 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Deny the second Curb Cut request from Mr. Meckel at 31 6969 Knollwood Drive based on the fact it does not meet City Code requirements. 32 33 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 34 35 Dan Mueller, 8343 Groveland Road, expressed concern with the excessive number of vehicles 36 parked on a neighboring property. He urged City staff to take action, as the site was becoming a 37 growing concern. Mr. Mueller encouraged the Council to view the site to see he was not 38 exaggerating the problems with his neighbor’s property. He then explained the City Code should 39 be enforced. 40 41 Mayor Flaherty requested staff follow up on this issue further to assure that City codes are being 42 enforced. 43 44 Mounds View City Council July 26, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 3 6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 1 2 None. 3 4 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS 5 A. 7:05 p.m. Public Hearing to Consider Resolution 7645, a Conditional Use 6 Permit for an Oversized Garage at 7515 Knollwood Drive. 7 8 Planning Associate Heller stated that the applicant Richard Wyatt is requesting approval of a 9 conditional use permit to construct an oversized garage on his property at 7515 Knollwood 10 Drive. The applicant wants to demolish his current attached garage and construct a new larger 11 attached garage. The current garage is a single car size that is 14’ wide x 24’ deep (336 square 12 feet). The applicant wants to build a new double car wide 24’ x 60’ garage with an attached 13 covered patio in the rear. 14 15 Planning Associate Heller indicated the site plan submitted shows a garage area in excess of what 16 the City allows without a conditional use permit. Accessory buildings, attached or detached, are 17 limited to 952 square feet. Anything larger than 952 square feet must go through a conditional 18 use permit application process. The garage proposed for 7515 Knollwood would be 1,440 square 19 feet plus an 8’ x 16’ attached covered patio. The applicant indicates that he wants to have a two-20 car garage so he can park his vehicles indoors, and have the extra garage depth for a workshop. 21 22 Planning Associate Heller noted that on July 7, 2010, the Planning Commission voted 23 unanimously to recommend approval of this conditional use permit. The Planning Commission 24 also unanimously approved a variance to allow the garage to have a two-foot side yard setback. 25 Staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit for the oversized garage as 26 requested. 27 28 Mayor Flaherty opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m. 29 30 Hearing no public input, Mayor Flaherty closed the public hearing at 7:34 p.m. 31 32 Council Member Stigney questioned if the applicant restored and sold the vintage motorcycles. 33 Richard Wyatt, 7515 Knollwood Drive, explained he has sold motorcycles in the past, but his 34 work in the shop was merely a hobby for him. 35 36 Council Member Stigney asked what the City’s recourse would be if the homeowner began to use 37 the garage for commercial purposes. City Attorney Riggs indicated the City would have the right 38 to stop the commercial use at the property. 39 40 Council Member Mueller questioned if the expansion of the garage would change the width of 41 the driveway. Mr. Wyatt stated the driveway would be widened to the south to assure there was 42 proper alignment for his cars. 43 44 Mayor Flaherty commented the homeowner took great care of his property and thanked Mr. 45 Mounds View City Council July 26, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 4 Wyatt for speaking with his neighbors about the garage expansion. 1 2 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7645, a 3 Conditional Use Permit to allow for a 1,440 square foot Oversized Garage at 7515 Knollwood 4 Drive. 5 6 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 7 8 B. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 846, an Ordinance Amending 9 Section 512.08 of the City Code about the Suspension and Revocation of a 10 Cigarette/Tobacco License. 11 12 Assistant City Administrator Crane stated that the Ramsey County Tobacco Coalition reviewed 13 City Codes in a number of cities in Ramsey County to include the Mounds View Code. The 14 Ramsey County Tobacco Coalition reviewed our Code pertaining to Suspension/Revocation of the 15 Cigarette/Tobacco Business License. The Ramsey County Tobacco Coalition strongly 16 recommends that the City uses the word "consecutive" in their day’s requirements for a 17 suspension of the license. It eliminates confusion and clarifies what the state law and the City 18 Code intends to do. 19 20 Assistant City Administrator Crane noted that in Staff’s professional opinion, the recommended 21 language would only further clarify the suspension process, and would not change the intent. 22 Attached is Ordinance 846, which revises §512.08 of the Mounds View City Code by adding the 23 word “consecutive.” The City Council approved the first reading on July 12, 2010 and Staff 24 recommends approval of the second reading and adoption of Ordinance 846. 25 26 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance 846, 27 an Ordinance Amending Section 512.08 of the Mounds View City Code about the Suspension 28 and Revocation of a Cigarette/Tobacco License. 29 30 ROLL CALL: Hull/Stigney/Mueller/Gunn/Flaherty. 31 32 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 33 34 C. Resolution 7646, Approving Step Increases for Vanessa Van Alstine (Cable 35 Television Coordinator), Michael Strand (Part Time Cable Television 36 Technician), Officer Greggory Neumann (MVPD), and a Longevity Increase 37 for Officer Nicholas Erickson (MVPD). 38 39 Assistant City Administrator Crane stated that Cable Television Coordinator Vanessa Van 40 Alstine is a current employee with the City of Mounds View. Her supervisor, Desaree Crane, has 41 reviewed his performance as it relates to his responsibilities outlined in the job description. 42 43 Mounds View City Council July 26, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 5 Part Time Cable Television Technician Michael Strand is a current employee with the City of 1 Mounds View. His supervisor, Vanessa Van Alstine, has reviewed his performance as it relates 2 to his responsibilities outlined in the job description. 3 4 Police Officer Greggory Neumann is a current employee with the Mounds View Police 5 Department. His supervisor, Sergeant Menard has reviewed his performance as it relates to his 6 responsibilities outlined in the job description. 7 8 Police Officer Nicholas Erikson is a current employee with the Mounds View Police Department. 9 His Supervisor, Interim Chief Kinney, has reviewed his performance as it relates to his 10 responsibilities outlined in the job description. 11 12 Staff recommends approval of Resolution 7646, approving the listed step and longevity 13 increases. 14 15 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7646, 16 Approving Step Increases for Vanessa Van Alstine (Cable Television Coordinator), Michael 17 Strand (Part Time Cable Television Technician), Officer Greggory Neumann (MVPD), and a 18 Longevity Increase for Officer Nicholas Erickson (MVPD). 19 20 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 21 22 D. Resolution 7647, Approving the 2010 Mounds View Festival in the Park 23 Agreement. 24 25 Assistant City Administrator Crane stated the Mounds View Festival in the Park is scheduled for 26 Saturday, August 21, 2010. For 2010, the City has budgeted $4,500 in support of the Festival in 27 the Park, to pay for City personnel and equipment expenses. Last year, the City Council passed 28 Resolution 7469, which authorized additional contributions from the City to the Festival to assist 29 in payment of professional bands, port-a-potties, Irondale Marching Band, Car and Tractor Show, 30 and Parade and Children Entertainment. This year the Festival Committee is not requesting any 31 additional contributions from the City. The 2010 Festival in the Park Agreement was reviewed 32 by the Festival Committee, and approved the agreement for execution at this City Council 33 Meeting. Staff recommends approval of Resolution 7647, authorizing the execution of the 34 agreement with the Festival in the Park of Mounds View for the August 21, 2010, Festival in the 35 Park event. 36 37 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7647, 38 Approving the Execution of the Agreement with the Festival in the Park of Mounds View for the 39 August 21, 2010 Festival in the Park event. 40 41 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 42 43 E. Resolution 7648, Accepting Donations for Greenfield Park Baseball Field 44 Improvements and Approving Naming the Field in Memory of Mark Wisser. 45 Mounds View City Council July 26, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 6 1 Public Works Director DeBar indicated Kate Wisser, a New Brighton resident, contacted the City 2 as she was interested in making a donation in memory of her late husband, Mark Wisser. Mr. 3 Wisser was actively involved with the Little Lakes Little League youth baseball as a coach, 4 umpire and volunteer and was a big fan of the baseball field at Greenfield Park. Potential ball 5 field improvements were discussed by the Parks and Recreation and Forestry Commission to 6 utilize the memorial donation. Staff was directed to obtain cost estimates for an electronic 7 scoreboard and batting cages. 8 9 Public Works Director DeBar explained Ms. Wisser has inquired whether the baseball field at 10 Greenfield Park could be “named” in honor of her late husband if memorial funds were used for 11 the ball field improvements. The PRF Commission endorsed naming the ball field in honor of 12 Mark Wisser and feel this is a project worth pursuing. 13 14 Public Works Director DeBar noted Staff has finalized the scope of the work with Ms. Wisser 15 that best matches the donations available. The proposed improvements include a 5’ x 8’ 16 electronic scoreboard, including electrical supply installation and a 14’W x 72’L x 12’H batting 17 cage. The scoreboard will have 19.5”H x 8’L placard mounted on top with “Mark Wisser 18 Memorial Field” applied. The estimated costs for these improvements are $7,464.68 for the 19 scoreboard and electrical work and $16,820 for the batting cage. Ms. Wisser has pledged 20 $25,000 to the City and staff believes this donation will cover all costs associated with the 21 improvements. 22 23 Public Works Director DeBar indicated the PRF Commission recommended the Council accept 24 the donation and approve the scoreboard and batting cage improvements. They further 25 recommend that the baseball field at Greenfield Park be named “Mark Wisser Memorial Field”. 26 Staff agrees with the Commission’s recommendations and requests Council adopt a resolution 27 accepting the $25,000 donation from Ms. Wiser for the baseball field improvements. 28 29 Council Member Gunn thanked Ms. Wisser for honoring her husband and providing the City 30 with the memorial funds. 31 32 Mayor Flaherty thanked Ms. Wisser as well stating Mark Wisser was very involved in youth 33 athletics in the City of Mounds View. 34 35 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7648, 36 Accepting Donations from Kate Wisser for Greenfield Park Baseball Field Improvements and 37 Approving Naming the Field in Memory of Mark Wisser. 38 39 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 40 41 F. Resolution 7649, Approving Purchase of Electronic Scoreboard and Contract 42 for Electrical Supply Construction for Baseball Field at Greenfield Park. 43 44 Public Works Director DeBar stated staff has worked with Ms. Wisser to find an acceptable 45 Mounds View City Council July 26, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 7 scoreboard to install at Greenfield Park. After much investigation staff recommends Varsity 1 Scoreboards of Murray, Kentucky to be the lowest quote and best value at $4,014.68. Staff also 2 solicited quotes for electrical contractors to construct electrical power supply to the scoreboard. 3 The lowest quote was submitted by North Side Electric of New Brighton, Minnesota. The 4 scoreboard is proposed to be located near centerfield at the ball field. 5 6 Public Works Director DeBar explained the PRF Commission recommended Council approve 7 the purchasing of the electronic scoreboard and electrical installation, which will be paid from 8 the Mark Wisser memorial funds. Staff agrees with this recommendation and requests Council 9 approve Resolution 7649. 10 11 Council Member Mueller asked if the scoreboard posts could be scaled by children. Public 12 Works Director DeBar explained the scoreboard would be quite high off the ground above the 13 outfield fence and described how the structure would be constructed to avoid vandalism. 14 15 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7649, 16 Approving the Purchase of an Electronic Scoreboard and the Contract with Electrical Supply 17 Construction for the Baseball Field at Greenfield Park. 18 19 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 20 21 G. Resolution 7650, Approving Contract for Batting Cage Construction at 22 Greenfield Park. 23 24 Public Works Director DeBar indicated staff solicited bids from qualified fencing contractors to 25 construct a batting cage at Greenfield Park. The lowest quote was for $14,420 and was 26 submitted by Century Fence Company of Forest Lake, Minnesota. The batting cage is proposed 27 to be just south of the right field line and east of the parking lot. The City will need to complete 28 some grading and excavation work to level out the batting cage site prior to the fence being 29 installed. The grading work will not exceed $2,400. Payment for the batting cage fencing and 30 grading will be paid from the Mark Wisser memorial funds. 31 32 Public Works Director DeBar explained the PRF Commission recommended the Council 33 approve construction of the batting cage. Staff agrees with this recommendation and requests 34 Council approve Resolution 7650. 35 36 Mayor Flaherty questioned if the batting cage would be open at all times for the residents. Public 37 Works Director DeBar suggested the City establish a policy and fee schedule for hours of 38 operation and that this be scheduled through the YMCA. 39 40 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Mueller. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7650, 41 Approving an Independent Contractor Agreement with Century Fence Company to construct a 42 batting cage for $14,420 at Greenfield Park and Authorizing staff to Contract the Grading work 43 for the batting cage in an amount not to exceed $2,400. 44 45 Mounds View City Council July 26, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 8 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 1 2 H. Resolution 7651, Approving Contract with Pump and Meter Service, Inc. to 3 Repair the Fuel Pumping Station and Tank Monitor Unit at the Public 4 Works Facility. 5 6 Public Works Supervisor Peterson stated the diesel-powered vehicles and equipment used by the 7 Public Works are re-fueled onsite at the Public Works Facility. The fueling system is comprised 8 of a 3,000 gallon underground tank, a pumping station and a tank monitoring system that 9 includes a monitor unit located inside the Public Works Supervisor’s office. The monitoring 10 system is mandated by the MPCA to detect any tank leakage. The tank monitor unit for the 11 fueling system has not property worked for some time. A new tank monitor unit is needed to 12 comply with MPCA mandates. 13 14 Public Works Supervisor Peterson added that the pumping station is showing signs of severe 15 deterioration. After evaluating new and used pumping stations, a determination was made that 16 the cost of a used, rebuilt pumping station would be more cost effective than purchasing a new 17 one. Staff solicited and received quotes from qualified vendors for the necessary repair work. 18 The low quote was submitted by Pump and Meter Service, Inc. of Hopkins, Minnesota for 19 $5,780.14. This repair work was not included in the 2010 budget. Staff recommended a 5% 20 contingency be added the estimated amount to cover unknowns that may be discovered during 21 repairs. This contingency would add $289.86 to the quote amount for a total budget amount not 22 to exceed $6,070. 23 24 Public Works Supervisor Peterson recommended the Council award a contract to Pump and 25 Meter Services, Inc. of Hopkins, Minnesota for the necessary repairs to the fuel pumping station 26 and tank monitor unit at the Public Works Facility. 27 28 Mayor Flaherty questioned the age of the current pump. Public Works Director DeBar estimated 29 it to be from 1986 when the facility was last upgraded. 30 31 Council Member Mueller asked if it was typical to see freight charges being passed along to the 32 City. Public Works Supervisor Peterson stated this was becoming more common on large items 33 due to the cost of fuel. 34 35 Council Member Mueller requested Staff speak with the vendor to split the freight charges 50/50. 36 37 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7651, 38 Approving Contract with Pump and Meter Service, Inc. to Repair the Fuel Pumping Station and 39 Tank Monitor Unit at the Public Works Facility for an expense not to exceed $6,070. 40 41 Ayes - -- 5 Nays - -- 0 Motion carried. 42 43 I. Resolution 7652, Approving Contract with Cummins Power Company to 44 Repair and Service the Emergency Generator located at the Booster Station. 45 Mounds View City Council July 26, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 9 1 Public Works Supervisor Peterson stated the Booster Station has a 275 kW Onan standby 2 emergency generator. This unit provides backup power supply to the Booster Station, Water 3 Tower, and Water Treatment Plant No. 1/Well No. 3 during power outages. The generator was 4 purchase new in 1990 and preventative maintenance service has been minimal. Public Works 5 staff runs the generator on a monthly basis to ensure that it will start during power outages. 6 However, during a recent start it was discovered the fuel heater burned up and the cooling system 7 requires maintenance. Staff obtained quotes from two qualified vendors to complete the 8 necessary service work. The low quote totaling $3,721.38 came from Cummins N Power, LLC 9 of St. Paul, Minnesota. Staff requested a 5% contingency be added to the quote amount for a 10 total budget amount not to exceed $3,907. 11 12 Public Works Supervisor Peterson recommended that the Council consider approval of the 13 contract with Cummins N Power Company, LLC for repairs and service work to the Onan 275 14 kW emergency generator located at the Booster Station. 15 16 Council Member Mueller questioned if a maintenance schedule should be established for the 17 generator. Public Works Supervisor Peterson does look at the generator on a yearly basis, but he 18 would recommend the City enter into a contract with a qualified vendor to inspect the generator 19 on a routine basis. 20 21 Mayor Flaherty asked how many emergency generators the City had at this time. Public Works 22 Supervisor Peterson indicated the City had two at this time. 23 24 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7652, 25 Approving the Contract with Cummins N Power Company to Repair and Service the Emergency 26 Generator located at the Booster Station for an expense not to exceed $3,907. 27 28 Ayes - -- 5 Nays - -- 0 Motion carried. 29 30 J. Resolution 7653, Approving Purchase of a Pole Camera for Sewer 31 Inspections. 32 33 Public Works Supervisor Peterson stated part of the Public Works Department’s maintenance 34 program is to inspect the existing infrastructure throughout the City. Maximizing the 35 infrastructure’s service life by monitoring its condition and selecting appropriate follow-up 36 action will reduce both the monetary costs and inconvenience costs to the City. To perform 37 inspections more safely and efficiently, staff recommends the City buy a pole camera system. 38 This system will allow the need for only one employee to perform the inspection. Two quotes 39 were received and the low bid was submitted by Flexible Pipe Tool Company of St. Joseph, 40 Minnesota for an Aries Zoom Pole Camera in the amount of $16,349.74. The pole camera was 41 not a budgeted item for 2010. Staff recommends the Council approve the purchase of the Aries 42 Zoom Pole Camera which would be paid by the Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater funds. 43 44 Council Member Mueller indicated the quote was for a demonstrator model and questioned the 45 Mounds View City Council July 26, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 10 savings to the City. Public Works Supervisor Peterson explained a new model was $24,000. 1 The City would be seeing a cost savings close to $8,000 and the demo model would come with 2 the same warranty as a new model. 3 4 Mayor Flaherty questioned if this would eliminate the need for Public Works staff to enter 5 manholes. Public Works Supervisor Peterson stated this was the case as the pole camera could 6 be lowered into the manhole to take the proper readings. 7 8 Council Member Stigney questioned how often the pole camera would be used and if it could be 9 shared with neighboring cities. Public Works Supervisor Peterson stated the City would be 10 inspecting all sanitary sewer throughout the City and the storm sewer would be next. He was not 11 sure if any neighboring communities had the same camera system to support the pole camera. 12 13 Mayor Flaherty felt this camera was a great investment in the City’s infrastructure. 14 15 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Adopt Resolution 7653, 16 Approving the Purchase of a Portable Pole Camera for Sewer Inspections. 17 18 Ayes - -- 5 Nays - -- 0 Motion carried. 19 20 8. CONSENT AGENDA 21 22 A. Licenses for Approval. 23 B. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, August 9, 2010 at 7:10 p.m. to Consider 24 the Coventry Senior Living Development at 2320 & 2340 County Highway 10 25 & 5260 O’Connell. 26 C. Set a Public Hearing for Monday, August 9, 2010 at 7:15 p.m. to Consider an 27 Appeal for a Variance Request from Eichi, Inc. for the Longview Estates 28 Property. 29 30 MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Stigney. To Approve the Consent Agenda as presented. 31 32 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 33 34 9. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 35 36 Finance Director Beer answered the Council's questions related to claims. 37 38 MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Approve the Just and Correct Claims as presented. 39 40 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 41 42 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 43 44 None. 45 Mounds View City Council July 26, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 11 1 11. REPORTS 2 A. Reports of Mayor and Council. 3 4 Council Member Mueller reminded residents the Festival in the Park was scheduled on Saturday, 5 August 21, 2010 at Mounds View City Hall Park. This would be the 4th Annual Car and Tractor 6 Show and volunteers were still needed. School supply or food donations would be accepted. 7 8 Council Member Mueller indicated National Night Out was scheduled for August 3, 2010. 9 10 Council Member Mueller explained she would need to be excused from the August 9, 2010 11 meeting as she would be out of town. 12 13 Mayor Flaherty reported the League of Minnesota Cities recognized the district’s Senator, Don 14 Betzold. He read aloud a letter from the League of Minnesota Cities and thanked Senator 15 Betzold for his work on behalf of the City. 16 17 Council Member Gunn thanked the Police Department and the Public Works Department for the 18 fine work completed the night of the storm. 19 20 B. Reports of Staff. 21 22 1. Administration Quarterly Report. 23 24 City Administrator Ericson reviewed the Second Quarter Administrative Report with the 25 Council. He indicated the 2011 budget was beginning to take shape as the State was again 26 looking to have a large deficit. This would create a gap in the budget if there was another 27 reduction in LGA funds. The Council would need to continue to work to reduce the imbalance. 28 29 City Administrator Ericson highlighted the upcoming events for third quarter with the Council 30 along with the goals achieved by the City through second quarter. He stated the City has created 31 a Facebook page and posts information on a weekly basis. Staff created a two page mini 32 newsletter and was sent out with the quarterly utility bills. This mailing provided more timely 33 and fresh information to property owners. 34 35 City Administrator Ericson reviewed the proposed agenda for the August 2, 2010 work session 36 meeting. 37 38 Community Development Director Roberts reviewed recent actions taken by the EDC. The EDC 39 was working to improve the housing stock in the City of Mounds View and to make the proper 40 investments. 41 42 Public Works Director DeBar stated the Public Works Department would not be picking up 43 debris from residential properties that fell from the recent storm. 44 45 Mounds View City Council July 26, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 12 C. Reports of City Attorney. 1 2 City Attorney Riggs reviewed Kennedy & Graven has resolved the disputed expenses with 3 Robert’s. Council Member Stigney thanked Kennedy & Graven for waiving the fees. 4 5 12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, August 2, 2010, at 7:00 p.m. 6 Next Council Meeting: Monday, August 9, 2010, at 7:00 p.m. 7 8 13. ADJOURNMENT 9 10 The meeting was adjourned at 9:08 p.m. 11 12 Transcribed by: 13 14 Carla Wirth 15 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 16