The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packets - 2005/03/28SIGN IN SHEET Date: 3 - ,2 --C35 PRINT NAME I SIGNATURE j&R I I I CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Monday March 28, 2005 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Boy Scout Troop 167 will lead the Pledge of Allegiance) 3. ROLL CALL: Marty, Stigney, Gunn, Flaherty, Thomas 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 7. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 8. CONSENT AGENDA A. Resolution 6480 Approving the Purchase of Items Associated with the 2005 Parks Improvement Project It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution 6480, approving the purchase of items that will be associated with the 2005 Parks Improvement Project. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ B. Resolution 6483 Authorizing the hire of Steve Maki to the Position of Part-Time Temporary Building Inspector within the Community Development Department On January 10, 2005, the City council adopted Resolution 6432, which authorized staff to advertise to fill a temporary part-time position for a building inspector. It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution 6483, authorizing the hire of Steven Maki to the position of part-time temporary building inspector within the Community Development Department. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ C. Resolution 6486 Approving the Contract Award for the 2005 Tree Removal Program. Bids are received for tree removal annually. This is done as part o the Joint Powers Agreement the City of Mounds View has with the City of New Brighton. It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution 6486, approving the contract award for the tree removal program. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ D. Licenses for Approval Approve the listed license applications as requested. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ E. Resolution 6489 Approving Expenditure of Funds to Repair Roof Top Unit No.4 at the Community Center. The City has experienced multiple failures o “Roof Top Unit No.4” at the Mounds View Community Center. This unit provides both the heating and cooling for the commons area and the entire front desk area. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ 9. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. 7:05 pm Public Hearing to Consider the Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 758, an Ordinance Limiting Garbage Pickup to Thursdays only. (ROLL CALL VOTE) Staff recommends approval of the second reading of Ordinance 758 pertaining to Thursdays only for residential garbage pickup. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ B. 7:10 pm Public Hearing to Consider Resolution 6484, Approval of an Interim use Permit Application for a Temporary Outdoor Structure Upon completion of the AmericInn Hotel construction and renovation of the existing facility, the Mermaid erected a temporary outdoor membrane structure for banquets, receptions, and other events. At the time of erection there were no zoning regulations to address such a structure. In 2004 the City adopted new provisions with the passing of Ordinance 735. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of Resolution 6484, approval of the interim use permit for a temporary outdoor structure. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ C. 7:15 Public Hearing to Consider a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversized Garage at 5343 Clifton Drive. The applicants are requesting approval of a conditional use permit to construct an addition to the existing detached garage. They would construct a 456 square foot addition onto the existing 576 square foot garage. After the public hearing, staff recommends the City Council to take one of the following actions: 1. Approve Resolution 6482, approving the conditional use permit for a 1,032 square foot garage at 5343 Clifton Drive. Staff and the Planning Commission support this option. 2. Deny the conditional use permit. If the City Council were to select this option, staff would need to be directed to draft a resolution of denial with the findings of fact appropriate to support the denial. Staff is not presently aware of findings that would warrant such action. 3. Table the request. If additional information is needed before a decision can be rendered or if more discussion is needed, the Council may simply move to table the request until such information has been provided. Because of the 60-day requirements, the Council would need to act upon the request within a reasonable period of time or risk inadvertent approval. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ D. 7:20 pm Public Hearing to consider Resolution 6487 to adopt the proposed assessment for the Hidden Hollow project. An assessment role has been created. The total proposed assessed amount is $395,596.63 to be divided equally among the (17) seventeen benefiting properties. This equates to an assessment of $23,270.39 per lot. Staff recommends that the City Council approve Resolution 6487 to adopt the proposed assessment for the Hidden Hollow project. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ E. 7:25 pm Public Hearing to consider Resolution 6488 to adopt the proposed assessment for the Mounds View Manufactured Home Park Second Access Project. An assessment role has been created. The total project cost is $73,789.80. The proposed assessed amount is $16,508.75. Staff recommends that the City Council approve Resolution 6488 to adopt the proposed assessment for the Mounds View Manufactured Home Park Second Access Project. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ F. Resolution 6479 Supporting the Selection of a Construction Manager and Architectural Firm Associated with the Construction of a New Fire Station in the City of Blaine. A representative from each firm will have a short presentation. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the selection of a construction manager and architectural firm associated with the construction of a new fire station in the City of Blaine. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ G. Resolution 6485 Approving Three 2005 Public Works Summer Seasonal Employee Positions. On March 14, 2005 the City Council approved Resolution 6436 approving several Public Works seasonal positions, including seven (7) summer seasonal positions of the original ten (10) that were proposed. Staff recommends that the City Council approve Resolution 6485 approving three 2005 Public Works summer seasonal employee positions. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ H. Resolution 6481 Approving the General Concept Plan for 105-Room Expansion to the AmericInn Hotel at the Mermaid Event and Entertainment Center located at 2200 County Road 10. Applicant and property owner Dan Hall is requesting concept plan review of a proposed 105-room, four-story hotel addition that would be connected to the existing hotel at the south end by a skywalk system. The draft plans indicate 81 rooms with a possible 24 additional rooms to the west. The applicant desires general concept plan consideration before going to the time and expense of preparing full-scale engineered site plans. Staff recommends that the City Council approve Resolution 6481 approving the general concept plan for the 105-room expansion to the AmericInn Hotel at the Mermaid Event Center located at 2200 County Road 10. Motion Made: ____________________ Motion Second: _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Special City Council Minutes, February 7, 2005 B. City Council Minutes, March 14, 2005 11. REPORTS A. Reports of Mayor and Council B. Reports of Staff 1. Golf Course Quarterly Report C. Reports of City Attorney 12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, April 4, 2005 Next Council Meeting: Monday, April 11, 2005 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Boy Scout Troop 167 will lead the Pledge of Allegiance) 3. ROLL CALL: Marty, Stigney, Gunn, Flaherty, Thomas 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 7. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 8. CONSENT AGENDA A. Resolution 6480 Approving the Purchase of Items Associated with the 2005 Parks Improvement Project B. Resolution 6483 Approving the Hire of a Part-time Temporary Building Inspector C. Resolution 6486 Approving the Contract Award for the 2005 Tree Removal Program D. Licenses for Approval E. Resolution 6489 Approving Expenditure of Funds to Repair Roof Top Unit No. 4 at the Community Center 9. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. 7:05 pm Public Hearing to Consider the Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 758, an Ordinance Limiting Garbage Pickup to Thursdays only. (ROLL CALL VOTE) B. 7:10 pm Public Hearing to Consider Resolution 6484, a Resolution Pertaining to an Interim use Permit for a Temporary Membrane Structure at the Mermaid Banquet and Entertainment Center C. 7:15 pm Public Hearing to Consider a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversized Garage at 5343 Clifton Drive D. 7:20 pm Public Hearing to consider Resolution 6487 to adopt the proposed assessment for the Hidden Hollow project E. 7:25 pm Public Hearing to consider Resolution 6488 to adopt the proposed assessment for the Mounds View Manufactured Home Park Second Access Project F. Presentation by Architect and Construction Manager for the Fire Station Construction Project and Resolution 6479 in Support of Selection of Architect and Construction Manager by the City of Blaine. G. Resolution 6485 Approving Three 2005 Public Works Summer Seasonal Employee Positions H. Resolution 6481 Approving the General Concept Plan for a 105-Room Expansion to the AmericInn Hotel at the Mermaid Event and Entertainment Center Located at 2200 County Road 10 City Council Agenda March 28, 2005 Page 2 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Special City Council Minutes, February 7, 2005. B. City Council Minutes, March 14, 2005. 11. REPORTS A. Reports of Mayor and Council B. Reports of Staff 1. Golf Course Quarterly Report C. Reports of City Attorney 12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, April 4, 2005 Next Council Meeting: Monday, April 11, 2005 Item No. 8A Meeting Date: March 28, 2005 Type of Business: CA WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City Administrator Review _______ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works Item Title/Subject: Resolution No. 6480 Approving the Purchase of Items Associated with the 2005 Parks Improvement Project Background: In the spring of 2003, the Parks and Recreation Commission initiated a “Parks Needs Analysis”. The Parks and Recreation Commission spent several months visiting and reviewing all of the City’s parks to identify any problems and deficiencies. Based on this review, the Commissioners created a list of “needs” for the parks. On June 26, 2003 the needs list was categorized into three categories: A. Maintenance (do now) B. Budget (budgeted items for 2004, 2005, or 2006) C. Long Term (add to Capital Improvement Program) Each category was then carefully reviewed and prioritized. In the fall of 2004, the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the previously approved Parks Needs analysis and provided recommendation on several minor revisions and updates. On October 28, 2004, the Parks and Recreation Commission completed the update of the Parks Needs Analysis. Final approval by the Commission occurred on February 24, 2005. This is attached for review. Discussion: At the February 24, 2005 Parks and Recreation meeting, the Commissioners made a motion to submit a final list to the City Council and recommend it for approval and inclusion in the 2005 Budget and Capital Improvement Program. This list included items that were included in the 2005 budget. It also included items that were budgeted in 2004 but were not installed. The following is a list of these recommended park improvement items: Budgeted Items for 2005 Carry Over from 2004 (Total Cost estimate -$23,353) 1. Install nets above backstop at Greenfield Park. B ($2,400) DO IN 2005 2. Add more picnic tables at Hillview Park. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. B ($2,500) TWO MORE TABLES TO BE INSTALLED IN 2005 3. Resurface roller blade rink at Hillview Park. B ($6,000) DO IN 2005 4. Replace picnic tables at Oakwood Park. B (One Table-$1,000) DO IN 2005 5. Install chain-link fence on west end of field for soccer play at Oakwood Park. B ($500) DO IN 2005 6. Replace doors on building at Random Park. B ($600) DO IN 2005 7. Crack seal parking lot at Silver View Park. B ($1,520) (seal coat, included@ $6,533.00) DO IN 2005 8. Replace doors on shelter at Silver View Park. B ($800) DO IN 2005 9. Install Lambert Fence in front of team benches at Lambert Park. B ($1,500) DO IN 2005 2005 (Total Cost estimate -$38,400) 1. Basketball Hoop at Greenfield Park: add to the court next to the tennis courts. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. B ($1,000) 2. Basketball Court at Greenfield Park: look at resurfacing it. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. B ($1,700) 3. Baseball Field at Greenfield Park: Increase the height of the fence ten feet (or 20’total) – right field to center field, tighten netting and re-string support line, Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. B ($16,000) 4. Re-do volleyball court at Groveland Park. Replace standards. B ($500) 5. Resurface basketball and tennis courts at Groveland Park. B ($5,000) 6. Install heavy-duty hockey nets at Hillview Park. B ($800) 7. Replace broken sections of sidewalks at Lambert Park. B ($1,000) 8. Replace border on playground at Random Park. B ($2,200) 9. Perform tuck-pointing (fix / fill mortar joints) on the building and re- paint it at Silver View Park. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. B ($2,000) 10. Resurface basketball court at Silver View Park. B ($5,000) 11. Replace trash receptacles around parking lot & near shelter as needed at Silver View Park. B ($2,000) 12. Perform a City-wide survey. This will be done in spring of 2005. (6parks questions /51total questions) X$10,200 = $1,200 to be financed with Park Dedication Funds B ($1,200) The 2005 Park Dedication Fund (Fund 251) has $43,200.00 budgeted for the purchase and installation of the aforementioned 2005 items. The items from the 2004 list were previously approved on April 12, 2004 via Resolution No. 6224. The Bethlehem Baptist Church has agreed to donate $12,000 toward the purchase and installation of these items. It is proposed that the remaining funds would be derived from the Park Dedication Fund as indicated in the approved 2005 budget. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the purchase of these items associated with the 2005 Parks Improvement Project. Respectfully Submitted, Greg Lee, Director of Public Works RESOLUTION NO. 6480 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF ITEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THE 2005 PARKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, in the spring of 2003, the Parks and Recreation Commission initiated a “Parks Needs Analysis”; and WHEREAS, on October 23, 2003,the Parks and Recreation Commission made a motion to submit a final list to the City Council and recommend it for approval and inclusion in the 2004 Budget and Capital Improvement Program; and WHEREAS, on February 24, 2005 the Parks and Recreation Commissioners made a motion to submit a final list to the City Council and recommend it for approval and inclusion in the 2005 Budget and Capital Improvement Program; and WHEREAS, the Park Dedication Fund, Construction Account (Account 285-4470-7050) of the approved 2005 Budget has $43,200.00 budgeted for the purchase of the items identified to be purchased and installed in 2005 according to the Parks Needs Analysis. WHEREAS, the items from the 2004 list were previously approved on April 12, 2004 via Resolution No. 6224. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows: 1. The purchase of items identified for purchase and installation in 2005 according to the Parks Needs Analysis is hereby approved. 2. Staff is hereby authorized to obtain quotes for the various items to be purchased, thus adhering to City Charter and Chapter 429 of state statute. 3. The estimated cost of the 2004 items, which is $23,353.00, is to be funded using Parks Dedication Funds as approved by Resolution No. 6224. 4. The estimated cost of the 2005 items, which is $38,400.00, is to be funded from the construction account of the Park Dedication Fund (Fund 251) of the approved 2005 Budget. 5. The City accepts the financial donation from the Bethlehem Baptist Church in the estimated amount of $12,000 and will apply these funds toward the purchase and installation of said park items. Adopted this 28th day of March 2005. (ATTEST) ____________________________________ Rob Marty, Mayor (SEAL) ____________________________________ Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator Last Revised: February 25, 2005 MOUNDS VIEW PARKS AND RECREATION PARK NEEDS ANALYSIS The following is a list of park related needs as originally identified by the Parks and Recreation Commission in 2003 and up dated in 2004. These include both short term and long term needs. The identification of the park needs is the first step in developing a long term Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and developing recommendations pertaining to the City’s park system for consideration in the City’s Budget. The needs list are categorized into three categories: A. Maintenance (do now) B. Budget (budgeted item for 2005, 2006, or 2007) C. Long Term (add to Capital Improvement Program) The following list is the updated needs list developed in 2003 with the category for each item noted. (A, B, OR C) Sorted by Catagory A. Maintenance (do now) 1. Repair storm drain at Greenfield Park. A Temporary repair is DONE. Working with Public Works Surface Water Division and The Rice Creek Watershed District. 2. Iron railing at Random Park – fix or replace iron railing. This was in the 2003 budget A DO IN 2005 3. Install bridge for disc golf course at Silver View Park. A DO IN 2005 Using Oakwood Trail Bridge 4. Repaint inside of shelter at Silver View Park. A DO IN 2005 5. Replace toilet enclosure at Silver View Park. A DO IN 2005 6. Blacktop repair at path entrance at Woodcrest Park. A DO IN 2005 7. Develop a Parks (City) Facility Brochure A -2003 DO IN 2005 8. Redo Silver View Ball Field No. 1 and warning track. DO IN 2005 9. Install Sidewalk 8’ from Hillview Road to Hillview Park Shelter front door. DO IN 2005 (This will be constructed by the City) B. Budget (budgeted item for 2005, & 2006) Carry Over from 2004 (Total Cost estimate -$23,353) 1. Install nets above backstop at Greenfield Park. B ($2,400) DO IN 2005 2. Add more picnic tables at Hillview Park. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. B ($2,500) TWO MORE TABLES TO BE INSTALLED IN 2005 3. Resurface roller blade rink at Hillview Park. B ($6,000) DO IN 2005 4. Replace picnic tables at Oakwood Park. B (One Table-$1,000) DO IN 2005 5. Install chain-link fence on west end of field for soccer play at Oakwood Park. B ($500) DO IN 2005 6. Replace doors on building at Random Park. B ($600) DO IN 2005 7. Crack seal parking lot at Silver View Park. B ($1,520) (seal coat, included@ $6,533.00) DO IN 2005 8. Replace doors on shelter at Silver View Park. B ($800) DO IN 2005 9. Lambert Fence in front of team benches at Lambert Park. B ($1,500) DO IN 2005 2005 (Total Cost estimate -$37,200) 1. Basketball Hoop of Greenfield Park: add to the court next to the tennis courts. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. B ($1,000) 2. Basketball Court of Greenfield Park: look at resurfacing it. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. B ($1,700) 3. Baseball Field of Greenfield Park: Increase the height of the fence ten feet (or 20’total) – right field to center field, tighten netting and re-string support line, Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. B ($16,000) 4. Re-do volleyball court at Groveland Park. Replace standards. B ($500) 5. Resurface basketball and tennis courts at Groveland Park. B ($5,000) 6. Heavy-duty hockey nets at Hillview Park. B ($800) 7. Replace broken sections of sidewalks at Lambert Park. B ($1,000) 8. Replace border on playground at Random Park. B ($2,200) 9. Perform tuck-pointing (fix / fill mortar joints) on the building and re- paint it at Silver View Park. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. B ($2,000) 10. Resurface basketball court at Silver View Park. B ($5,000) 11. Replace trash receptacles around parking lot & near shelter as needed at Silver View Park. B ($2,000) 12. Perform a City wide survey B This will be done in spring of 2005. $10,200 to be financed with non-park funds 2006 (Total Cost estimate -$35,600) 1. Replace rink and court lights with more efficient fixtures at Groveland Park. B (apx. $8,000) May be part of larger Park Lighting Project. See item C8 2. Level pleasure rink area and plant with hardy seed at Groveland Park. B ($800) 3. Develop a proposal to treat the algae in Silver View Lake. 1.) Do nothing, 2.) Barley Straw Treatment, 3.) Bacterial Treatment. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. B ($2,000) 4. Re-roof (shingle) building at Silver View Park. B ($7,000) 5. Central map for disc golf at Silver View Park. B ($600) 6. Repair storm drain in southwest corner at Woodcrest Park. B- storm sewer budget ($2500) 7. Repair/sealcoat parking lot of Greenfield Park. B ($2,500) 8. Add Netting at Greenfield Park along the third baseline to address foul balls. Suggested at the May 22nd meeting. ($4,000) 9. Greenfield Park Trail - repair/sealcoat. B ($1,000) 10. Silver View Path - repair/sealcoat B ($7,200 - $5,200 for seal coat/$2,00 for repairs) C. Long Term (add to Capital Improvement Program) 1. Irrigation System at City Hall – add an irrigation system to the south, east, and west side for City Hall. Currently in CIP for 2005. C – 2005 ($12,000) 2. Edgewood Drive Boulevard Project – place colored concrete or brick pavers between the curb and pathway on Edgewood Drive. C- 2006 ($28,000) 3. Playground replacement at City Hall. Park. C- 2007 ($31,000) (includes $6,000 for fibarfill) 4. Community Center Parking Lot – redesign so the front ends of vehicles do not overhang the sidewalk. There is a drainage problem that needs to be addressed in front of the daycare. Add storm sewer catch basin and pipe it out to Bronson Drive. C- 2007 ($30,000) 5. Tennis Courts of Greenfield Park – Clean up, crack seal surface, slurry coat, add a gate to the fence for maintenance purposes. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. C – 2006 ($10,000) 6. Look into developing a soccer field in the undeveloped area near Trunk Highway 10 of Greenfield Park. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. C – 2009 ($50,000) 7. Park Lighting Program – Add / replace lights on all City property. Replace with energy efficient fixtures. Must have a positive cost/benefit ratio. C – ($150,000 in CIP; $100,000 from Park Dedication, $50,00 from Special Project Fund) This program is currently being developed. Highly subject to change. 8. Replace security light with more efficient fixtures at Greenfield Park. Park Foreman Recommendation. C – 2006 ($5,000) May be part of larger Park Lighting Project. See item C8 9. Park Building at Groveland Park – replace existing building. 2004 design / 2005 construction C – 2004/2005 ($20,000 in 2004 for Design/ $227,000 in 2005 for Construction) 10. Playground replacement at Hillview Park. C – 2008 ($32,000 -includes $6,000 for fiberfill) 11. Park Building at Lambert Park – replace existing building. CIP 2010 design / 2011 construction C – 2010 ($250,000 $20,000 in 2010 for Design/ $230,000 in 2011 for Construction) 12. Elevation on ballfield and repair drainage ditch at Lambert Park. Park Foreman Recommendation. C – 2007 ($25,000) 13. Pave the pathway on the northwest corner of Hillview and Quincy at Oakwood Park. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. C – 2007 14. Determine the feasibility of developing a small soccer field at the northwest corner of Hillview and Quincy at Oakwood Park. Suggested during May 8, 2003 park tour. C – 2006 ($20,000+$4,000) 15. Park Building at Random Park – replace existing building. CIP 2010 design / 2011 construction C – 2012 ($250,000 - $20,000 in 2012 for Design/ $230,000 in 2013 for Construction) 16. Random Parking Lot – reconstruct the parking lot. C – 2008 ($30,000) 17. Resurface parking lot at Silver View Park. C – 2008 ($50,000) 18. Paved trail at Woodcrest Park. C – 2007 Item No. 08B Type of Business: Consent Meeting Date: March 28, 2005 City Administrative Review: ______ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Resolution 6483 Authorizing the Hire of Steve Maki to the Position of Part-Time Temporary Building Inspector within the Community Development Department Introduction: On January 10, 2005, the City Council adopted Resolution 6432, which authorized staff to advertise to fill a temporary part-time position for a building inspector within the Community Development Department. Discussion: An announcement for the part-time position was posted with the League of MN Cities, on the City’s website, with local technical schools offering building inspection programs and in the Star Tribune. Twenty individuals applied for the opening, most of whom had some level of education and training in the field of building inspections. Interviews were held with ten individuals having the greatest education and trade experience. Of the ten individuals interviewed by myself and Building Official Kathi Osmonson, one person stood out as being the most qualified for the position, that being Steve Maki. Mr. Maki has more than twenty years of experience in the construction industry, has his limited Building Official certificate and is completing a two-year degree program at North Hennepin Community College. References have been checked and results are very positive. If his hire is approved, Mr. Maki’s start date would be April 4, 2004 and his employment would be classified as part time, temporary. Under this arrangement, Mr. Maki’s employment would last for no more than 26 weeks from the date of hire and would be limited to no more than 40 hours per pay period. The offered rate of pay is $14.00 per hour. Mr. Maki is aware that a full-time temporary position could be created if the Medtronic development moves forward this year and he has expressed a willingness and ability to assume full time duties should that occur. Appointment to that position or any other position subsequent to the initial term of employment however is not guaranteed and is subject to Council authorization. PT Temp Building Inspector March 28, 2005 Page 2 Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council approve Resolution 6483 authorizing the hire of Steven Maki to the position of part-time temporary building inspector within the Community Development Department. Respectfully Submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director RESOLUTION NO. 6483 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE HIRE OF STEVEN MAKI TO THE POSITION OF PART-TIME, TEMPORARY BUILDING INSPECTOR WITHIN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council has given direction to advertise for the position of part-time temporary building inspector within the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the position was posted and the City received twenty applications; and, WHEREAS, Steven Maki possesses the necessary background, training and skills to perform the duties assigned to this temporary, part-time position; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Maki shall be compensated at the rate of $14.00 per hour not to exceed 40 hours per pay period; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Maki’s employment shall begin on or after April 4, 2005 and shall terminate no later than six months after his date of hire. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council does hereby approve the hire of Steven Maki to the part-time, temporary position of building inspector within the Community Development Department, subject to satisfactory background checks. Adopted this 28th day of March, 2005. ______________________________________ Rob Marty, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator (Seal) Item No. 8C Meeting Date: March 28, 2004 Type of Business: CA WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City Administrator Review _______ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works Item Title/Subject: Resolution No. 6486 Approving the Contract Award for the 2005 Tree Removal Program Background: Annually, bids are received for tree removal, as needed, throughout the City. This is done as part of the Joint Powers Agreement the City of Mounds View has with the City of New Brighton. Discussion: On March 7, 2004 bids were received for the 2005 season. The bidding process is set up to differentiate between two operational scenarios: one whereby vehicle and equipment access is available to the site where the trees to be removed are located; the other for cases where access with vehicles is not possible. A total of three bids were received. A summary of the quotes follows: Company Bid (with access) Bid (without access) 4 Seasons Tree Care $15.00 / diameter inch $26.00 / diameter inch All Tree Service $15.00 / diameter inch $25.00 / diameter inch Miller Tree Service $22.00 / diameter inch $19.75 / diameter inch There were two low bidders for trees with access; 4 Seasons Tree Care and All Tree Service with a bid of $15.00 / diameter inch. It is recommended that a contract be awarded to both companies. This may allow the City’s Forester to assign tree removal (with access) to the company that will provide the best response time and service to the City. The low bidder for trees without access was Miller Tree Service with a bid of $19.75 / diameter inch. Miller Tree Service has successfully completed contracts for Mounds View in the past and possesses the required equipment and personnel to do the work. All firms will be monitored closely for deadline and technical tree removal requirements, as stated in the contract and agreement papers. For comparison purposes, All Tree Service was the awarded the 2004 contract for sites with access with a bid of $15.00 / diameter inch. Also, Miller Tree Service was awarded the 2004 contract for sites without access with a bid of $16.00 / diameter inch. The total amount of tree removal work contracted annually by the City of Mounds View is typically in the range of $15,000 to $20,000. The 2005 budget has $20,500 allocated for tree removal (account 100-4380-3520). Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council approve an annual contract to expire December 31, 2005, with 4 seasons Tree Care and All Tree Service in the amount of $15.00/diameter inch for trees with vehicle access. Staff also recommends that the City Council approve an annual contract to expire December 31, 2005, with Miller Tree Service in the amount of $19.75/diameter inch for trees without vehicle access. Respectfully Submitted, Greg Lee, Director of Public Works RESOLUTION 6486 APPROVING THE CONTRACT AWARD FOR THE 2005 TREE REMOVAL PROGRAM CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA WHEREAS, annually bids are received to perform tree removal as needed throughout the City; and WHEREAS, this service was budgeted for in 2005; and WHEREAS, a total of three bids were received, bidding on two categories: with vehicle access and without vehicle access; and WHEREAS, the low bidder was 4 Seasons Tree Care and All Tree Service in the amount of $15.00/diameter inch for trees with vehicle access; and WHEREAS, the low bidder was Miller Tree Service in the amount of $19.75/diameter inch for trees without vehicle access. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Mounds View City Council does hereby approve an annual contract to expire December 31, 2005, with 4 Seasons Tree Care and All Tree Service in the amount of $15.00/diameter inch for trees with vehicle access. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, THAT the Mounds View City Council does hereby approve an annual contract to expire December 31, 2005, with Miller Tree Service in the amount of $19.75/diameter inch for trees without vehicle access. Adopted this 28th day of March 2005. (ATTEST) ____________________________________ Rob Marty, Mayor (SEAL) ____________________________________ Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator Item No 8D Meeting Date: March 28, 2005 Type of Business: CA City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Barb Benesch, Administrative Assistant Item Title/Subject: CONTRACTOR LICENSES FOR APPROVAL Please consider the following contractor licenses for approval. All contractor licenses will expire on December 31, 2005. 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 2004. Those companies renewing their license were licensed, at a minimum, in the year 2004. The type of license they are applying for follows the company name. Design 1 of Edina Excavating New Earth Wizards, Inc. Asphalt Renewal Install This Awning & Signs Co. Sign New Miller Tree & Landscaping Tree Trimming/Removal Renewal Staff Recommendation: Approve license applications as requested. Reviewed by City Administrator: ________ Item No: 9B Meeting Date: March 28, 2005 Type of Business: PH & CB Administrator Review: _____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Resolution 6484, Approval of an Interim use Permit Application for a Temporary Outdoor Membrane Structure Introduction: Upon completion of the AmericInn Hotel construction and renovation of the existing facility, the Mermaid erected a temporary outdoor membrane structure within which banquets, receptions and other events have been held. At the time of erection, there were no zoning regulations to address such a structure, and as is typically the case in Zoning Codes, the absence of an allowance constitutes a disallowance. Staff communicated with Mr. Hall and explained that the City would need to consider new zoning regulations specific to temporary outdoor uses such as what was erected at the Mermaid. In 2004, the City completed its review and adopted new provisions with the passing of Ordinance 735. The ordinance is attached for your reference and the requirements form the basis of this review process. Discussion: The process for reviewing an interim use permit for a temporary outdoor membrane structure is the same as if it were a conditional use permit. That means that a public hearing will be scheduled and notices sent to property owners within 350 feet of the subject parcel. The specific requirements of the approval process are as follows: 1. The tent or membrane structure shall comply with all provisions of the Fire Code and receive an annual fire permit issued by the Fire Marshal. A fire permit will be required for this installation, procured on an annual basis. At the time of fire permit application, the fire marshal will review the application and conduct an inspection post erection. 2. The property owner shall annually apply for a Zoning Permit, the duration of which cannot exceed 180 days. He Applicant will need to apply for this permit annually along with the fire permit, to ensure there are no changes or issues with setbacks, spacing, distances, etc. The Mermaid structure is anchored to the concrete pad so it is not likely to violate any setbacks. 3. Adequate parking to accommodate the occupancy shall be provided at a ratio of one parking space per 40 square feet of tent area. (The City Council may waive the parking requirement if it can be shown that the site has sufficient existing parking capacity.) Mermaid Tent Report March 28, 2005 Page 2 The Mermaid has eliminated the nightclub in the lower level of the facility thus freeing up a substantial amount of parking during evening hours. The Mermaid’s parking demands overall are satisfied with what is available and thus no additional parking should be required. 4. The structure may not be located in or on a parking lot displacing parking stalls, unless it can be shown that an adequate amount of parking remains. The tent is and has been located in a courtyard area that had been planned for outdoor events. 5. The tent or membrane structure shall be subject to same building setbacks as the principal building on the lot. No tent or membrane structure shall be allowed instead of or without a principal building. The tent does not encroach into any required setback area. 6. The tent or membrane structure shall be limited in size to 5,000 square feet or 10 percent of the principal buildings’ square footage, whichever is less. The tent is 4,200 square feet and is much less than ten percent of the Mermaid floor area. 7. The membrane or cover shall be constructed of a durable reinforced material to withstand wind and snowloads. There have been no problems with the tent’s reinforced membrane cover to date. The membrane is removed during winter months. 8. The structure shall be anchored to the ground. The tent structure is anchored to the ground as required. 9. The tent or membrane structure shall be maintained in a good condition. Deficiencies shall be corrected as soon as practicable. This condition will be added to the resolution recommending approval. 10. The IUP can be reviewed at any time by the City if problems arise which would necessitate revision or termination of the IUP. This condition also has been added to the resolution. 11. The IUP would become null and void if the property owner fails to comply with the provisions of the permit or if the structure is removed for more than a one-year period, or if the property undergoes a change of ownership. Again, this condition has been added to the resolution. Mermaid Tent Report March 28, 2005 Page 3 Chapter 1125 Considerations: Ordinance 735 indicates that a tent IUP application be reviewed similarly to a conditional use permit as articulated in Chapter 1125 of the Zoning Code. The chapter requires that the Planning Commission review and address any potential adverse effects which include, but are not limited to, relationship with the Comprehensive Plan, geographical area involved, potential depreciation, the character of the surrounding area and the demonstrated need for such a use. Each of these potential adverse effects is listed below along with responses. Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal to maintain an outdoor temporary membrane structure would not be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan, which guides this parcel as regional commercial planned unit development. The Geographical Area Involved. The applicant’s property is a nine-acre site with multiple land uses associated. The general topography of the site is gently sloping to the south with little variation. The stormwater from the site is routed to a regional stormwater pond west of the Mermaid on the north side of County Road H. Depreciation. No depreciation to the subject property or surrounding properties as a result of the tent’s existence. The Character of the Surrounding Area. The site is prominently located at the corner of County Road 10 and County Road H. The tent however is located within a courtyard area and is screened from all sides but the front by the Mermaid buildings. All of the uses in the general area are commercial or retail with the exception of the Rice Creek Corridor and County open space to the south. The Demonstrated Need for Such a Use. The applicant has indicated that the need is because he is better able to serve his clientele and attract different types of events. Planning Commission Review: The Planning Commission considered this request at their meeting on March 2, 2005. While generally in support of the application, there was some debate regarding the appropriate duration of the term of approval. An interim use, by definition, is not a permanent approval and at some point the use for which the approval was granted would be removed. (Another example of a Mounds View interim use would be billboards.) Staff recommended that the approval be open-ended such that all conditions remained satisfied. The Commission felt more comfortable applying a date-certain to the permit, thus requiring re-approval regardless of the circumstances. The Commission’s resolution recommending approval contains a five- year review provision which is not opposed by the applicant, Dan Hall. Mermaid Tent Report March 28, 2005 Page 4 Summary: By virtue of the adoption of Ordinance 735, the Zoning Code now allows by interim use permit temporary structures in commercial districts. The tent has been erected in previous years without any issue from a zoning perspective and all of the ordinance requirements are satisfied. The applicant has indicated that it would be his preference to have the approval be for an indefinite time period however is not opposed to a five year review. Recommendation: Hold the public hearing, take testimony from the public, staff and the applicant, review and consider the request for the Interim Use Permit to allow an outdoor temporary membrane structure in the courtyard area at the Mermaid Entertainment and Event Center. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the interim use permit. Resolution 6484 is attached for the Council’s consideration. _____________________________________ James Ericson Community Development Director This is a photo of the tent framework without the membrane cover Zoning Map THE MERMAID The Mermaid Site Plan Membrane Structure ORDINANCE 735 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MOUNDS VIEW ZONING CODE TO PERMIT TEMPORARY TENTS AND MEMBRANE STRUCTURES IN COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, WITH AN INTERIM USE PERMIT The City Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby ordain: SECTION 1: This section shall represent a summary of Ordinance 735, adopted by the Mounds View City Council on May 10, 2004, and shall be published along with the ordinance title in lieu of the whole ordinance, consistent with the provisions of Mounds View City Charter Section 3.07: SUMMARY Ordinance 735 adopts amendments to the Zoning Code to allow temporary tents and membrane structures in the commercial and industrial zoning districts of the City. Such uses shall be allowed by approval of an Interim Use Permit (IUP), Fire Permit and Zoning Permit. The IUP may be approved for multiple years, however the Fire and Zoning requirements limit such uses to 180 days in duration in a given year. Tents and membrane structures are limited to 5,000 square feet or ten percent of the principal building area, whichever is less. Tents shall not displace parking needed for the principal use unless it can be shown that an adequate number of parking stalls remain for the temporary and principal uses. Tents and similar structures erected for periods not exceeding one week shall not require an IUP, however Zoning and Fire Permits are still required. SECTION 2. Chapter 1112 of the Mounds View Zoning Code has been amended with additions underlined and deletions stricken: CHAPTER 1112 B-1, NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT SECTION: 1112.01: Purpose 1112.02: Permitted Uses 1112.03: Accessory Uses 1112.04: Conditional Uses 1112.05: Interim Uses 1112.05: INTERIM USES: The following are interim uses in a B-1 District requiring an Interim Use Permit. An interim use permit must be obtained in accordance with procedures identical in form and substance to the conditional use permit procedures found in Section 1125.01, subdivision 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. Interim Use Permits may be approved for a determined or undetermined period of time at the sole discretion of the City Council. Subd. 1. Temporary Tents and/or Membrane Structures, under the following conditions: a. The tent or membrane structure shall comply with all provisions of the Fire Code and receive an annual fire permit issued by the Fire Marshal. b. The property owner shall annually apply for a Zoning Permit, the duration of which cannot exceed 180 days. c. Adequate parking to accommodate the occupancy shall be provided at a ratio of one parking space per 40 square feet of tent area. (The City Council may waive the parking requirement if it can be shown that the site has sufficient existing parking capacity.) d. The structure may not be located in or on a parking lot displacing parking stalls, unless it can be shown that an adequate amount of parking remains. e. The tent or membrane structure shall be subject to same building setbacks as the principal building on the lot. No tent or membrane structure shall be allowed instead of or without a principal building. f. The tent or membrane structure shall be limited in size to 5,000 square feet or 10 percent of the principal buildings’ square footage, whichever is less. g. The membrane or cover shall be constructed of a durable reinforced material to withstand wind and snowloads. h. The structure shall be anchored to the ground. i. The tent or membrane structure shall be maintained in a good condition. Deficiencies shall be corrected as soon as practicable. j. The IUP can be reviewed at any time by the City if problems arise which would necessitate revision or termination of the IUP. k. The IUP would become null and void if the property owner fails to comply with the provisions of the permit or if the structure is removed for more than a one-year period, or if the property undergoes a change of ownership. l. Exceptions: (1) Tents or Membrane structures erected for periods that do not exceed one week shall not require an interim use permit, however a zoning permit and fire permit are required regardless of the time frame. (2) To eliminate duplication of review, when a use (e.g., outdoor sales or storage) would otherwise require a conditional use permit, an interim use permit shall not be required if a tent or membrane structure is involved and is addressed as part of the CUP. SECTION 3. Chapter 1113 of the Mounds View Zoning Code has been amended with additions underlined and deletions stricken: CHAPTER 1113 B-2, LIMITED BUSINESS DISTRICT SECTION: 1113.01: Purpose 1113.02: Permitted Uses 1113.03: Accessory Uses 1113.04: Conditional Uses 1113.05: Interim Uses 1113.05: INTERIM USES: The following are interim uses in a B-2 District requiring an Interim Use Permit. An interim use permit must be obtained in accordance with procedures identical in form and substance to the conditional use permit procedures found in Section 1125.01, subdivision 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. Interim Use Permits may be approved for a determined or undetermined period of time at the sole discretion of the City Council. Subd. 1. All permitted interim uses as allowed in a B-1 District. SECTION 4. Chapter 1114 of the Mounds View Zoning Code has been amended with additions underlined and deletions stricken: CHAPTER 1114 B-3, HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT SECTION: 1114.01: Purpose 1114.02: Permitted Uses 1114.03: Accessory Uses 1114.04: Conditional Uses 1114.05: Interim Uses 1114.05: INTERIM USES: The following are interim uses in a B-3 District requiring an Interim Use Permit. An interim use permit must be obtained in accordance with procedures identical in form and substance to the conditional use permit procedures found in Section 1125.01, subdivision 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. Interim Use Permits may be approved for a determined or undetermined period of time at the sole discretion of the City Council. Subd. 1. All permitted interim uses as allowed in a B-2 District. SECTION 5. Chapter 1115 of the Mounds View Zoning Code has been amended with additions underlined and deletions stricken: CHAPTER 1115 B-4, REGIONAL BUSINESS DISTRICT SECTION: 1115.01: Purpose 1115.02: Permitted Uses 1115.03: Accessory Uses 1115.04: Conditional Uses 1115.05: Interim Uses 1115.05: INTERIM USES: The following are interim uses in a B-4 District requiring an Interim Use Permit. An interim use permit must be obtained in accordance with procedures identical in form and substance to the conditional use permit procedures found in Section 1125.01, subdivision 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. Interim Use Permits may be approved for a determined or undetermined period of time at the sole discretion of the City Council. Subd. 1. All permitted interim uses as allowed in a B-3 District. SECTION 6. Chapter 1114 of the Mounds View Zoning Code has been amended with additions underlined and deletions stricken: CHAPTER 1116 I-1, INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT SECTION: 1116.01: Purpose 1116.02: Permitted Uses 1116.03: Accessory Uses 1116.04: Conditional Uses 1116.05: Compliance with Other Provisions 1116.06: Interim Uses 1116.06: INTERIM USES: The following are interim uses in an I-1 District requiring an Interim Use Permit. An interim use permit must be obtained in accordance with procedures identical in form and substance to the conditional use permit procedures found in Section 1125.01, subdivision 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. Interim Use Permits may be approved for a determined or undetermined period of time at the sole discretion of the City Council. Subd. 1. All permitted interim uses as allowed in a B-4 District. SECTION 7. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its publication in the official City newspaper. INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this 26th day of April, 2004. PUBLIC HEARING, SECOND READING and ADOPTION by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 10th day of May, 2004. Jerry Linke, Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ Kurt Ulrich, City Clerk / Administrator (SEAL) Approved as to form: ______________________ Mounds View City Attorney MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 787-05 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR A TEMPORARY OUTDOOR MEMBRANE STRUCTURE AT THE MERMAID LOCATED AT 2200 COUNTY ROAD 10; PLANNING CASE NO. IU05-001 WHEREAS, Dan Hall has applied for an interim use permit for a temporary outdoor membrane structure at the Mermaid, located at 2200 County Road 10; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned PUD, Planned unit Development, and has a Comprehensive Plan future Land Use Map designation of Regional Commercial PUD; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code allows temporary outdoor membrane structures in commercial districts by interim use permit; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Staff and the Planning Commission have reviewed the zoning requirements associated with temporary tents in commercial districts and finds that all conditions are satisfied by this request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact related to the conditional use permit request: 1. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan. 2. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Zoning Code. 3. The size of the structure is within permitted allowances and complies with setback provisions. 4. There have been no complaints filed regarding the use of the tent in the previous year. 5. The applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that a need exists for the temporary outdoor structure. 6. The site has adequate parking area available to satisfy the demands of the temporary structure. Resolution 787-05 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the interim use permit for an outdoor temporary membrane structure with conditions as follows: 1. The tent or membrane structure shall comply with all provisions of the Fire Code and the applicant shall apply for and receive annual fire permits issued by the Fire Marshal and receive a satisfactory inspection. 2. The property owner shall annually apply for a Zoning Permit, the duration of which cannot exceed 180 days in a calendar year. 3. The tent framework and membrane covering shall be maintained in a good condition. Deficiencies shall be corrected as soon as practicable. 4. The interim use permit can be reviewed at any time by the City if problems arise which would necessitate revision or termination of the permit. 5. The interim use permit will become null and void if the property owner fails to comply with the provisions of the permit or if the structure is removed for more than a one-year period, or if the property undergoes a change of ownership. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends that the permit approval shall remain in force for a period of five years from the date of City Council approval, so long as the conditions above and those of the Zoning Code remain satisfied. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 2nd day of March, 2005. _____________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: ____________________________________ James Ericson, Community Development Director (SEAL) RESOLUTION NO. 6484 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR A TEMPORARY OUTDOOR MEMBRANE STRUCTURE AT THE MERMAID, LOCATED AT 2200 COUNTY ROAD 10; PLANNING CASE NO. IU05-001 WHEREAS, Dan Hall has applied for an interim use permit for a temporary outdoor membrane structure at the Mermaid, located at 2200 County Road 10; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned PUD, Planned unit Development, and has a Comprehensive Plan future Land Use Map designation of Regional Commercial PUD; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code allows temporary outdoor membrane structures in commercial districts by interim use permit; and, WHEREAS, the proposal satisfies all interim use permit and zoning requirements associated with temporary tents in commercial districts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council makes the following findings of fact related to the conditional use permit request: 1. The request is not inconsistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan. 2. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Zoning Code. 3. The size of the structure is within permitted allowances and complies with setback provisions. 4. There have been no complaints filed regarding the use of the tent in the previous year. 5. The applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that a need exists for the temporary outdoor structure. 6. The site has adequate parking area available to satisfy the demands of the temporary structure. 7. The Mounds View Planning Commission has adopted a resolution in support of the application. Resolution 6484 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council approves the interim use permit for an outdoor temporary membrane structure with conditions as follows: 1. The tent or membrane structure shall comply with all provisions of the Fire Code and the applicant shall apply for and receive annual fire permits issued by the Fire Marshal and receive a satisfactory inspection. 2. The property owner shall annually apply for a Zoning Permit, the duration of which cannot exceed 180 days in a calendar year. 3. The tent framework and membrane covering shall be maintained in a good condition. Deficiencies shall be corrected as soon as practicable. 4. The interim use permit can be reviewed at any time by the City if problems arise which would necessitate revision or termination of the permit. 5. The interim use permit will become null and void if the property owner fails to comply with the provisions of the permit or if the structure is removed for more than a one-year period, or if the property undergoes a change of ownership. 6. The interim use permit automatically expires five years from the date of approval. Adopted this 28th day of March, 2005. _____________________________________ Rob Marty, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ Kurt Ulrich, City Clerk / Administrator (SEAL) Item No: 9C Meeting Date: March 28, 2005 Type of Business: PH & CB Administrator Review: _____ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Jim Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversized Garage at 5343 Clifton Drive; Planning Case No. CU2005-001 Introduction: The applicants, David and Leann Siercks, are requesting approval of a conditional use permit to construct an addition to their existing detached garage at 5343 Clifton Drive. The applicants indicate that they would construct a 456 square foot addition onto the existing 576 square foot garage. The proposed addition would then create a garage that has an area of 1,032 square feet. Requirements: Section 1106.03, Subd. 1: This part of the Code limits the height of an accessory building, the number of accessory buildings and the backyard coverage ratio of accessory buildings. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required for garages exceeding 952 square feet. Section 1106.04, Subd. 6: This part of the Code enumerates the conditions for garage exceeding 952 square feet, which are that the garage be permanent, be uniform in appearance with the home, not exceed 35 feet in width, and not exceed 1,800 square feet of total accessory building area on the lot. Section 1125.01, Subd. 1: The City is required to review the possible adverse effects of the requested conditional use. Discussion: Below is a matrix of the various code requirements and an assessment of whether the request is in compliance with the specific regulation. Existing Proposed Compliance? Setbacks Side: 5 feet Rear: 31 feet Side: 5 feet Rear: 12 feet Yes Garage Height 12 feet 12 feet Yes Garage Area 576 square feet 1,032 square feet Yes Accessory Buildings Two Two Yes Backyard Coverage % 11.7 % 19.8 % Yes Siercks CUP Request March 28, 2005 Page 2 As can be seen from the table on the previous page, the request for a conditional use permit to construct the 1,032 square foot garage satisfies the zoning requirements. The applicants are planning to construct an addition to the back of the existing detached garage. The proposed garage addition would be setback five (5) feet from the side (south) property line and twelve (12) feet from the rear (west) property line. Section 1104.01 requires a five (5) foot setback, which the proposed garage satisfies. In addition to the proposed garage, there is an existing 8 X 10 shed on the property. The proposed garage and the existing shed would have a combined area of 1,112 square feet, which would make up 19.8% of the rear yard area. This satisfies the Code, as the Code allows the combined square footage of accessory structures to be up to 20% of the rear yard area. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property, 5343 Clifton Drive, as low-density residential. CUP Considerations: Subdivision 3b of Section 1125.01 of the Mounds View Zoning Code indicates that the City Council is to consider a general set of criteria when reviewing conditional use permits in addition to any specific conditions enumerated. These general conditions are listed as follows: (1) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. The expanded garage will not create an excessive burden. No change in the land use is being proposed. (2) The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. The expanded garage will allow for additional interior storage of vehicles and possessions which are presently stored outside. The expanded garage will provide screening to the applicants’ possessions and their activities, which include maintenance of racecars they own. (3) The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. The garage will be expanded to 1,032 square feet, well below the maximum area of an accessory building. The expansion will be finished to have a uniform and consistent appearance with the existing garage, from the siding to the roof-line. Siercks CUP Request March 28, 2005 Page 3 (4) The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. The City Council has historically supported granting conditional use permits for oversized garages when consistent with the zoning regulations. (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. The expanded garage is consistent with the provisions and purposes of the zoning code. (6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas so as to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. (7) The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. There would be no additional traffic generated by this request. (8) Adequate utilities, access, drainage and facilities have been or will be provided. All utilities and infrastructure are presently available and sufficient. Planning Commission Review Chapter 1125 of the Zoning Code requires that the Planning Commission review and address any potential adverse effects which include, but are not limited to, relationship with the Comprehensive Plan, geographical area involved, potential depreciation, the character of the surrounding area and the demonstrated need for such a use. Each of these potential adverse effects is addressed on below. Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. As previously stated, the Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas so as to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. 5343 Clifton Drive is designated as low-density residential and the proposed garage expansion would not be inconsistent with the Comp Plan. The Geographical Area Involved. The applicants’ home is located on Clifton Drive. The proposed garage expansion would not be out of place for this area and the size of the applicant’s lot would accommodate the expanded garage. Depreciation. The garage expansion would benefit the subject property both in a practical sense by providing additional on site, indoor parking and storage area, and in an economic sense, as the addition would increase the “value” of the property. Increased property values are of course a benefit to everyone. Siercks CUP Request March 28, 2005 Page 4 The Character of the Surrounding Area. This part of the City is strictly residential; strictly single family dwellings. Most of the homes were constructed during the 1950s. Many of the properties in the area have completed garage expansions to allow for additional storage. The expanded garage would not be out of character in this area. The Demonstrated Need for Such a Use. The applicants have found that a larger garage is necessary for their storage needs, specifically for storing racecars. The added garage space would be a substantial improvement for the applicants and would have a positive impact on the neighborhood, as the additional cars could be stored in the garage. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 at 7:00 pm and considered the Siercks’ conditional use permit request. No residents attended the meeting however we received one letter from a resident expressing concern regarding the proposal. (That letter is attached for the Council’s review.) After questioning the applicants’ representative regarding noise, what would be stored in the garage and if the applicants would be using the garage for commercial purposes, the Planning Commission approved a resolution which recommends approval of the conditional use request, finding that there would be no adverse effects associated with the request. The Planning Commission’s resolution is also attached for the Council’s reference. Recommendations: After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the applicants and affected neighbors, the City Council may take one of the following actions related to the request: 1. Approve the conditional use permit. Resolution 6482 is attached if the Council selects this option. Staff and the Planning Commission support this option. 2. Deny the conditional use permit. If the City Council were to select this option, Staff would need to be directed to draft a resolution of denial with findings of fact appropriate to support the denial. Staff is not presently aware of findings that would warrant such action. 3. Table the request. If additional information is needed before a decision can be rendered or if more discussion is needed, the Council may simply move to table the request until such information has been provided. Because of 60-day requirements, the Council would need to act upon the request within a reasonable period of time or risk inadvertent approval. Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Zoning Map Photographic Documentation Aerial Photograph of 5343 Clifton Drive Photograph of Existing Home and Garage Area of Proposed Expansion MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 788-05 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A 1,032 SQUARE-FOOT GARAGE AT 5343 CLIFTON DRIVE; PLANNING CASE NO CU2005-001 WHEREAS, property owners David and Leanne Siercks have applied for a conditional use permit to construct a 1,032 square foot garage; and, WHEREAS, the subject property, located at 5343 Clifton Drive, is zoned R-1, Single Family residential, and is legally described as follows: Lot 8, Block 13, Pinewood Terrace No. 4 Ramsey County, Minnesota WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code conditionally allows garages in excess of 952 square feet in area with a maximum accessory building area not to exceed 1,800 square feet; and, WHEREAS, the proposed expanded garage would be 1,032 square feet, thus necessitating application for a conditional use permit; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. Location Map d. Site Plan e. Photographic Documentation f. Staff Report WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the conditional use permit request on Wednesday, March 16, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact related to the conditional use permit request: 1. The proposed oversized 1,032 square foot garage satisfies the dimensional requirements as outlined in Chapters 1104 and 1106 the Zoning Code. 2. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan in that the Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas so as to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. 3. The proposed garage would not be out of place given the character and geography of the surrounding area involved. 4. The proposed garage would not depreciate the neighborhood. 5. The applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that a need exists for the proposed oversized garage. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permit for the 1,032 square foot garage, with conditions as follows: 1. The garage shall not be used for commercial purposes, living space or other uses not allowed within the R-1 Single-Family Residential district or by the Zoning Code. Should the use change for which the permit was granted; the conditional use permit shall be considered null and void. 2. The garage expansion shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform appearance with the existing house. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 16th day of March, 2005. _____________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: ____________________________________ James Ericson, Community Development Director (SEAL) RESOLUTION NO. 6482 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 1,032 SQUARE- FOOT GARAGE AT 5343 CLIFTON DRIVE; PLANNING CASE NO CU05-001 WHEREAS, property owners David and Leanne Siercks have applied for a conditional use permit to construct a 1,032 square foot garage; and, WHEREAS, the subject property, located at 5343 Clifton Drive, is zoned R-1, Single Family residential, and is legally described as follows: Lot 8, Block 13, Pinewood Terrace No. 4 Ramsey County, Minnesota WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code conditionally allows garages in excess of 952 square feet in area with a maximum accessory building area not to exceed 1,800 square feet; and, WHEREAS, the proposed expanded garage would be 1,032 square feet, thus necessitating application for a conditional use permit; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. Location Map d. Site Plan e. Photographic Documentation f. Staff Report g. Planning Commission Resolution 788-05 WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the conditional use permit request on Monday, March 28, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council makes the following findings of fact related to the conditional use permit request: 1. The proposed oversized 1,032 square foot garage satisfies the dimensional requirements as outlined in Chapters 1104 and 1106 the Zoning Code. 2. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan in that the Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas so as to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. 3. The proposed garage would not be out of place given the character and geography of the surrounding area involved. 4. The proposed garage would not depreciate the neighborhood. 5. The applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that a need exists for the proposed oversized garage. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council approves the conditional use permit for the 1,032 square foot garage, with conditions as follows: 1 The garage shall not be used for commercial purposes, living space or other uses not allowed within the R-1 Single-Family Residential district or by the Zoning Code. Should the use change for which the permit was granted; the conditional use permit shall be considered null and void. 2. The garage expansion shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform appearance with the existing garage and house. Adopted this 28th day of March, 2005. _____________________________________ Rob Marty, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ Kurt Ulrich, City Clerk / Administrator (SEAL) Item No. 9F Meeting Date: March 28, 2005 Type of Business: CB WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City Administrator Review _______ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Jodi Salmonson, Receptionist Item Title/Subject: Selection of an Architect and Construction Manager for the Fire Station Construction Project A representative from Bossardt Corporation and a representative from Tushie Montgomery will be making a brief presentation. After the presentations they will be available to answer any questions regarding the project. Thank you. Sincerely, Jodi Salmonson (763) 717-4017 RESOLUTION NO. 6479 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE SELECTION OF A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AND ARCHITECTURAL FIRM ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW FIRE STATION IN THE CITY OF BLAINE WHEREAS, the cities of Spring Lake Park, Blaine, and Mounds View have been served by the Spring Lake Park Fire Department since 1944, and; WHEREAS, the Department and the Cities have been working together to develop a Capital Improvement Plan, and; WHEREAS, a joint city council meeting held July 22, 2004 resulted in a consensus to move the plan forward, and; WHEREAS, during the month of February all three cities held public hearings on adoption of the plan and all three councils passed a resolution indicating funding for the plan was to be in the form of Capital Improvement Bonds, and; WHEREAS, state law requires a 30 day reverse referendum period which has now expired with no citizens of any of the three cities filing a petition for referendum, and; WHEREAS, the next step in the project is to contract with an architectural firm and a construction manager firm, and; WHEREAS, a selection committee comprised of staff members identified ten architectural firms and fourteen construction manager firms, investigated all, and conducted final interviews with four firms from each group, and; WHEREAS, the selection committee forwarded their recommendation to the Project Management Team established by the three city councils and received a presentation by the recommended construction manager and architect firms. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Mounds View supports the firm of Bossardt Corporation for the purpose of providing construction manager services and the firm of Tushie Montgomery for the purposes of providing architectural services for the construction of the new SBM Fire Station to be located in the 117th and Ulysses area of the City of Blaine. Adopted this 28th day of March, 2005. _____________________________________ Rob Marty, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ Kurt Ulrich, City Clerk / Administrator (SEAL) Item No. 9G Meeting Date: March 14, 2005 Type of Business: CB WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City Administrator Review _______ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works Item Title/Subject: Resolution No. 6485 Approving Three 2005 Public Works Summer Seasonal Employee Positions Background On March 26, 2001 the City Council adopted Resolution 5546, which describes the procedure for hiring seasonal employees. This resolution requires that the City Council approve all seasonal positions. On March 14, 2005 the City Council approved Resolution 6436 approving several Public Works seasonal positions, including seven (7) summer seasonal positions of the original ten (10) that were proposed. Discussion BUDGET ISSUE The Seasonal accounts are assigned to several departments, including: Parks, Athletic Fields, Pavement Management, Storm Water Management, Surface Water, Water, and Sanitary Sewer. For the last several years, the combined expenditures for seasonal employees in these accounts have been exceeding the budgeted amount. In 2001 there was a deficit of $15,509.95, in 2002 - $14,651.20, in 2003 - $31,547.95 and in 2004 - $21,830.47. The seasonal employee budgeting deficit has not caused any major financial issues for the City. However, this deficit reduced the year-end balance in the affected funds. To address this issue, the proposed 2006 budget for seasonal employees will be adjusted to better reflect actual historical expenditures. In terms of the 2005 budget, the City Council did not want to approve all of the summer positions without knowing the adjustments that will need to be made to the 2005 budget to address the shortfall. On March 14, 2005 the City Council approved Resolution 6436 approving seven (7) summer seasonal positions of the original proposal of ten (10). City Council also directed Staff to show how the remaining three position could be funded with funds in the 2005 budget. The following is the recommendation for which funds should be utilized to address the estimated $16,000 to $20,000 seasonal employee shortfall in 2005: SANITARY SEWER DIVISION 730-4823-5160 System Maintenance $5,000 The 2005 root control contract is $12,000; there was $15,000 budgeted. Also there was $50,000 budgeted for sewer main and manhole repair. The City will not be spending near this amount based on current scheduled repairs- use $5,000 of the $50,000 budgeted. 730-4823-9100 Contingency $2,000 Use $2,000 of the $15,000 budgeted. 730-4823-3030 Professional Services $2,000 The 2005 budget has $5,000 for reimbursements for the Sanitary Sewer Illicit Connection Program. There have been only a few properties that have taken advantage of this reimbursement in 2005. Use $2,000 of the $5,000 budgeted. WATER DIVISION 700-4823-5155 Water Service Repairs $5,000 This account has been running a net surplus for the last two years. $15,143.38 in 2004 and $24,703.63 in 2003. 700-4823-9100 Contingency $2,000 Use $2,000 of the $15,000 budgeted. STREET SNOW AND ICE DIVISION 100-4472-1600 Supplies, Operating $3,000 The 2005 budget has $24,500 for salt and $2,250 liquid Mg Chloride. Due to the lack of precipitation during the2004-2005 season these item are in excess of what is needed. VEHICLE & EQUIPMENT DIVISION 100-4465-1600 Supplies, Operating $1,000 The 2005 budget has $5,300 for this account. Most of the items have already been purchased or ordered. It is anticipated that the budgeted amount will exceed the actual expenditures for 2005. PARKS DIVISION 100-4465-1210 Supplies, Buildings and Grounds $2,000 The 2005 budget has $15,700 for this account. Most of the items have already been purchased or ordered. It is anticipated that the budgeted amount will exceed the actual expenditures for 2005. The aforementioned budgeted adjustments account for $22,000 of the $16,000 to $20,000 needed to authorize the remaining three summer seasonal positions. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council approve three 2005 Public Works seasonal employee positions. Respectfully Submitted, Greg Lee, Director of Public Works RESOLUTION NO. 6485 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA APPROVING THREE 2005 SEASONAL PUBLIC WORKS POSITIONS WHEREAS, Resolution No. 5546 requires that seasonal positions must be approved by the Mounds View City Council; and WHEREAS, Seasonal Employees benefit the City by providing labor services that are relatively less expensive and are available during periods of greater labor; and WHEREAS, for the last several years, the combined expenditures for seasonal employees have been exceeding the budgeted amount; and WHEREAS, on March 14, 2005 the City Council approved Resolution 6436 approving several Public Works seasonal positions, including seven (7) summer seasonal positions of the original ten (10) that were proposed for the Public Works Department; and WHEREAS, the City Council directed Staff to show how the remaining three positions could be funded with funds in the 2005 budget; and WHEREAS, the City Charter, Section 7.08, gives the City Council authority to amend the budget by resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows: 1. Three 2005 Summer Seasonal Public Works Positions are approved. With the approval of Resolution 6436 on March 14, 2005, a total of ten (10) Summer Seasonal positions are approved for 2005. 2. All Public Works seasonal positions will be filled, with new hires starting at the hourly rate of $10.25/hr with the possibility of advancing to $10.75/hr after one month of satisfactory performance. Returning seasonal workers will be compensated at rate of $11.00/hr. 3. The 2005 Budget is amended to reallocate funds to the various seasonal employee accounts from the following accounts: 730-4823-5160 System Maintenance $5,000 730-4823-9100 Contingency $2,000 730-4823-3030 Professional Services $2,000 700-4823-5155 Water Service Repairs $5,000 700-4823-9100 Contingency $2,000 100-4472-1600 Supplies, Operating $3,000 100-4465-1600 Supplies, Operating $1,000 100-4465-1210 Supplies, Buildings and Grounds $2,000 4. Each position will work forty (40) hours per week. 5. All Public Works seasonal positions will remain on staff for a period no longer than six months. Adopted this 28th day of March 2005. (ATTEST) ____________________________________ Rob Marty, Mayor (SEAL) ____________________________________ Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator Item No: 9H Meeting Date: March 28, 2005 Type of Business: CB Administrator Review: ______ City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and Mounds View City Council From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Concept Plan Review for a Hotel Expansion Associated with the Mermaid Entertainment and Event Center Introduction: Applicant and property owner Dan Hall is requesting concept plan review of a proposed (maximum) 105-room, four-story hotel addition that would be connected to the existing hotel at the south end by a skywalk system. The draft plans indicate 81 rooms with a possible 24 additional rooms to the west. The applicant desires general concept plan consideration before going to the time and expense of preparing full-scale engineered site plans Discussion: The Mermaid property is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD) with allowed uses that include Hotel, Restaurant, Bowling, Office, Nightclub, Convention and Banquet area. While the expanded hotel would not in itself necessitate a PUD amendment, because there would be a reduction in parking spaces and a reduced setback, the PUD would require amendment for the project to proceed. Parking. There are presently 825 parking stalls on the site to serve the various uses associated with the Mermaid. Staff is not aware of a time at which the parking lot has ever been full. The hotel expansion would eliminate 50 parking stalls along County Road H. When the original hotel was approved in 2000, there was some debate regarding the actual parking demands given the number of overlapping uses. The PUD process provided some flexibility in determining what the actual count should be, yet staff was reluctant to stray too far form the strict application of the parking codes. In the end, a reduction of 20 stalls was approved, recognizing that there would be some overlap in parking demands. After the hotel was constructed and the banquet area completed, it became clear that there was more than adequate parking on site during all times of day and night. Last year, the nightclub (an intense night use) was closed and converted into additional conference/banquet space. This eliminated the highest nighttime demand for parking, shifting usage to the dayside where there had previously been and remains excess parking available. Given the excess parking, Mr. Hall currently leases part of the parking lot to Metro Transit as an overflow for the Park and Ride lot on County Road H. This arrangement would likely be terminated upon construction of the hotel addition. According to the City’s parking code requirements, a hotel would be required to provide parking according to the following schedule: one space per room plus one space per ten rooms and a space for each employee on the busiest shift. At maximum expansion, this would result in the need to provide an additional 120 parking stalls. That assumes, however, no reduction for complementary usage which for this development is quite extensive. Mermaid Hotel Report March 28, 2005 Page 2 While staff is confident that the site can support the hotel expansion without further expansion of the parking lot, it would be beneficial to have a consultant conduct a parking needs analysis and site assessment for confirmation prior to formal development review plan adoption. Staff received three quotes from consultants to perform such a study, the least expensive of which was $2,700. The Planning Commission suggested that staff identify comparable uses in the north metro area to assess the parking issue. There are two facilities in the north metro area that can be considered reasonably comparable—Northland Inn and Grand Rios, both in Brooklyn Park. (See the attached summary sheet toward the end of this report.) Both facilities are hotels with convention / banquet centers, restaurants and other features. Northland Inn has 231 hotel rooms and 20,000 square feet of banquet space with seating for about 1,200 people in the two main rooms. Northland Inn has 562 parking stalls. Grand Rios has 224 hotel rooms and 11,000 square feet of banquet space and a 45,000 square foot water park. (The water park feature could be comparable to the Mermaid’s bowling center.) Grand Rios has 460 parking stalls available for its guests. Setbacks. The PUD for the Mermaid site allows for a principle structure setback of 50 feet. This setback exceeds what would normally be allowed in a commercial district and was imposed recognizing that the existing buildings would more than satisfy that requirement. It was not anticipated at the time the PUD was drafted that an expansion to the south of the existing building would be contemplated. Ordinarily, such a setback would be 30 feet. The concept plans submitted by Mr. Hall indicate a building setback that ranges from 12 feet to 30 feet. The distance from the property line to the County Road H roadway is another 15 to 20 feet. Upon first review of the plans, staff felt approval of such a setback reduction would be highly unlikely, however after subsequent review and consideration, such a reduction may not be undesirable. County Road H is not a highly traveled roadway and during the evening hours (when most guests would be sleeping) the road sees very limited traffic. Trends in land use planning are shifting away from standard inefficient suburban type requirements toward more traditional development patterns with reduced setbacks, bringing buildings closer to the front line of the lot and tucking parking behind the uses. While we are not recommending a comprehensive overhaul of our zoning requirements to satisfy the Mermaid’s request, it certainly may be worthwhile to examine zoning standards within the corridor and make changes to promote a more efficient use of the land. In the meantime, because the PUD does offer flexibility in what can be allowed, staff would not be opposed to the proposed reduced building setback. Summary: Dan Hall is requesting concept plan approval to construct a four story, 105-room addition to his AmericInn Hotel at 2200 County Road 10. Such an expansion would bring additional tax base to the community and would potentially bring in hundreds of additional guests on a daily basis who would then consume other goods and services in our community. The availability of the additional rooms would allow Mr. Hall to market his facility to a greater target audience for even larger banquet, reception and convention events. Mermaid Hotel Report March 16, 2005 Page 3 Recommendation: Review and consider the attached resolution, Resolution 6481, which approves the concept plan submitted by Mr. Hall that contemplates a 105-room addition to the existing hotel. If the Council is comfortable with the plan submitted and with the assumptions presented in this report, the resolution may be acted upon as presented. If the Council has questions or would like additional information prior to making a decision on the request, a tabling action would be in order. If the Council opposes the expansion plan, staff would draft a new resolution for action at the next City Council meeting that articulates the basis for your opposition. If you should have any questions relating to the request, please do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience. _____________________________________ James Ericson Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Planning Application 2. Aerial Photo 3. Zoning Map 4. Site Plan 5. Memo from Bruce Bissonette to Dan Hall 6. Hotel / Convention Comparables 7. Planning Commission Resolution 789-05 8. City Council Resolution 6481 Aerial Photographic Documentation Photo taken October 31, 2002 Footprint of proposed hotel expansion Zoning Map THE MERMAID The Mermaid Site Plan Membrane Structure Proposed Hotel Expansion COUNTY ROAD H Local Hotel and Conference Centers Grand Rios Water Park 6900 Lakeland Ave North Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55428 763-566-8855 http://www.grandrios.com/ 224 Guest rooms 460 Parking stalls 11,000 sf banquet/conference, 400 seat max 45,000 square foot Indoor Water Park 3,800 sf. Family Arcade Two restaurants One café with Starbucks, Bridgemans Fitness Center Gift shop Northland Inn 7025 Northland Drive Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 (763) 536-8300 http://www.northlandinn.com/ 231 Guest Rooms 562 Parking stalls 138 seat Amphitheater 11 conference rooms, up to 24 ppl in each room Minnesota Ballroom – 360 capacity (4,248 square feet) Northland Ballroom – 850 capacity (8,010 square feet) Sinclair Lewis Room – 150 capacity (2,100 square feet) F. Scott Fitzgerald – 100 seat capacity (2,124 square feet) August Stuebner Room – 90 capacity (1,180 square feet) Wilder Room -- ? Capacity (1,711 square feet) Lindbergh Room – 40 Capacity (? Square feet) Restaurant Lounge Indoor Pool Fitness area Arcade Mermaid Event and Entertainment Center 2200 County Road 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 763-784-7350 http://mermaidminnesota.com/ (Existing Features) 70 Guest Rooms 825 Parking Stalls Banquet Room – 500 capacity (5,900 square feet) Atlantis Room – 600 capacity (7,400 square feet) Garden Tent – 300 capacity (4,200 square feet) 32 Lane Bowling Center American Grille Sports Bar and Restaurant Banquet Center Pool and water slide \\Trout\CommDev\Users\JIME\Comm Dev Stuff\Hotel and Conference Centers.doc MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 789-05 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONCEPT PLAN FOR A 105-ROOM ADDITION TO THE MERMAID AMERICINN HOTEL FACILITY LOCATED AT 2200 COUNTY ROAD 10; PLANNING CASE NO. DE05-001 WHEREAS, Dan Hall has applied for concept plan approval for a 105-room addition to the existing AmericInn Hotel located at 2200 County Road 10; and, WHEREAS, the concept plan, attached as Exhibit A to this resolution, contemplates 81 guest rooms on four levels with the ability to add 6 additional rooms per floor, for a maximum potential guest room addition of 105 rooms; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned PUD, Planned unit Development, and has a Comprehensive Plan future Land Use Map designation of Regional Commercial PUD; and, WHEREAS, the PUD allows for specific uses on the Mermaid site including Hotel, Restaurant, Banquet and Convention, Office, Nightclub, Bowling and Office; and, WHEREAS, the proposed concept plan for a hotel addition would be consistent with the land uses allowed by the PUD. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission generally supports the proposed hotel expansion concept plan and recommends approval by the City Council, subject to the following conditions and stipulations: 1. In conjunction with the development stage plan review, the applicant shall consent to a parking needs analysis of the site conducted by a third-party land use consultant at the expense of the applicant. 2. In conjunction with the development stage plan review, the applicant shall apply for a PUD amendment to revise the parking, setback and building height allowances. NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that approval of this general concept plan does not constitute approval nor obligate approval of the subsequent development stage plan review for the hotel expansion. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Resolution 789-05 Page 2 Adopted this 16th day of March, 2005. _____________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: ____________________________________ James Ericson, Community Development Director (SEAL) RESOLUTION NO. 6481 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONCEPT PLAN FOR A 105-ROOM ADDITION TO THE MERMAID AMERICINN HOTEL FACILITY LOCATED AT 2200 COUNTY ROAD 10; PLANNING CASE NO. DE05-001 WHEREAS, Dan Hall has applied for concept plan approval for a 105-room addition to the existing AmericInn Hotel located at 2200 County Road 10; and, WHEREAS, the concept plan, attached as Exhibit A to this resolution, contemplates 81 guest rooms on four levels with the ability to add 6 additional rooms per floor, for a maximum potential guest room addition of 105 rooms; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned PUD, Planned unit Development, and has a Comprehensive Plan future Land Use Map designation of Regional Commercial PUD; and, WHEREAS, the PUD allows for specific uses on the Mermaid site including Hotel, Restaurant, Banquet and Convention, Office, Nightclub, Bowling and Office; and, WHEREAS, the proposed concept plan for a hotel addition would be consistent with the land uses allowed by the PUD. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council generally supports the proposed hotel expansion concept plan subject to the following conditions and stipulations: 1. In conjunction with the development stage plan review, the applicant shall apply for a PUD amendment to revise the parking, setback and building height allowances. 2. Approval of this general concept plan does not constitute approval nor obligate approval of the subsequent development stage plan review for the hotel expansion. Adopted this 28th day of March, 2005. _____________________________________ Rob Marty. Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator (SEAL) EXHIBIT A. Site Plan PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL 1 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 2 RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA 3 4 Special Meeting 5 February 7, 2005 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: Marty, Stigney, Gunn, Flaherty, and Thomas 16 17 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 18 19 Monday, February 7, 2005 City Council Agenda. 20 21 MOTION/SECOND: Flaherty/Gunn. To Approve the Monday February 7, 2005 agenda as 22 presented. 23 24 Ayes –4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 25 26 (Thomas did not vote.) 27 28 5. PUBLIC INPUT 29 30 Marcy Winkler, 2372 Laport Drive, stated that Planning and Development has spoke to three 31 developers regarding developing Laport Meadows. She asked if it was final that the woods were 32 going to be developed. 33 34 Mayor Marty stated that nothing was final until it came before the Council. 35 36 Ms. Winkler asked whether there was anything in the Comprehensive Plan that allows for 37 preservation of wildlife, nature trails, and the woodlands in Mounds View. She stated that the 38 times that the City Council and Planning Commissions are being broadcast are at 1:00 and 3:00 39 in the morning, and they are inconvenient to watch. 40 41 Mayor Marty stated that if the land is owned by someone else, the City doesn’t have jurisdiction. 42 He stated he has talked to the City Clerk/Administrator regarding tree preservation because 43 Mounds View is a tree city. He stated that the City, as well as Rice Creek Watershed, does have 44 Mounds View City Council February 7, 2005 Special Meeting Page 2 some control over wetlands. He stated that the City’s web site shows the different times that the 1 meetings are broadcast, and they are not all at 1:00 and 3:00 in the morning. 2 3 Director Ericson stated that there are a couple of developers that are discussing developing the 4 area. He stated that if something does get developed and if it’s privately held properties, it can be 5 developed if it’s consistent with the Zoning Code. He stated that they would want anybody who 6 does develop that property to install the sound walls. He stated that nothing has been brought 7 forward to the Planning Commission yet. He stated when the process gets further along, a 8 neighborhood meeting would be held. 9 10 Ms. Winkler stated she would like to see Mounds View keep its small town atmosphere, and not 11 another suburban strip of town homes and chain stores. 12 13 Mayor Marty stated that the Comprehensive Plan is a public document, and she could come to 14 the Community Development office to review it. 15 16 Bill Siercks, 2210 Pinewood Drive, stated that he didn’t think it was necessary for the plows to 17 have been out last Monday with only one inch of snow. He stated that the plows are going to 18 wear out faster if they are overused. He questioned why two police cars per year are being 19 purchased rather than two one year and one the next year as it was previously done. He asked 20 whether a million and some dollars was going to be used to renovate City Hall. 21 22 Mayor Marty stated that the renovation of City Hall was going to be discussed at the work 23 session following this meeting. 24 25 City Clerk/Administrator Ulrich stated that it’s on the agenda for the meeting next week. 26 27 Mr. Siercks stated he would question spending that much money on City Hall when the streets 28 need to get built. He questioned whether new people would want to move into Mounds View 29 with the taxes being so high. 30 31 Mayor Marty stated they need to attract more businesses so that the businesses can help with the 32 tax base. He stated that the Public Works Director spoke at the last City Council meeting 33 regarding the snow plowing, and he had stated that the slush needs to be removed from the 34 streets; otherwise, it will freeze during the night and make the streets buckle. He had also stated 35 that if the streets don’t get plowed, the police call the Public Works Department to come plow 36 them in the middle of the night, and then overtime has to be paid. 37 38 Mr. Siercks stated that the surrounding communities only plow when there is a three-inch 39 snowfall, and he thought that that was what their standard was also. He stated he thought the 40 plows were out sometimes when they shouldn’t be, and so do his neighbors. 41 42 Mayor Marty stated that they don’t want to remodel all of City Hall, but there is no insulation in 43 the ceilings at all, and some of the outside walls don’t have insulation. He stated that those items 44 Mounds View City Council February 7, 2005 Special Meeting Page 3 need to be fixed. He stated that they were going to have a discussion as to the priorities for 1 remodeling City Hall, but they weren’t going to be throwing money at things that aren’t broken. 2 3 Dave Jahnke stated there was no sound being broadcast for the Council meeting, and the problem 4 was rectified. He stated he agreed regarding the snow plowing. 5 6 Carol Mueller, 8343 Groveland Road, stated that when she had been campaigning, she had been 7 told by many citizens that they don’t want the roads widened or narrowed or have sidewalks 8 added or fancy curbs. She stated that they want repairs done to the existing roads, and they don’t 9 want a lot of money spent on it. 10 11 Mayor Marty stated that the roads are not going to be widened or narrowed, but they are putting 12 in concrete curb and gutter. He stated that the initial outlay would be a little bit greater, but for 13 all future road replacement they would be able to mill an overlay, and the cost would be less than 14 if they have bituminous curb and gutter. 15 16 Ms. Mueller asked that they work with the post office on the road issue because at the present 17 time with the bituminous curbs they can drive right up to the mailboxes on either side of the road 18 with no problem, but if there are going to be concrete curbs, they may need to put all the 19 mailboxes on one side of the street. 20 21 6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUISNESS 22 23 A. Resolution 6448, Canvass of the February 1, 2005 Special Election. 24 25 Desaree Crane stated that there was a special election on February 1, 2005 to fill a vacancy on the 26 City Council created by the seat vacated by Council Member Marty. She stated that they need to 27 canvass the election via resolution, and Resolution 6448 was before them. 28 29 MOTION/SECOND. Gunn/Stigney. To approve Resolution 6448, Canvassing the Election 30 Results of the February 1, 2005 Special Election. 31 32 Council Member Gunn asked Mayor Marty to read the results aloud. 33 34 Mayor Marty read the Resolution aloud. 35 36 City Clerk/Administrator Ulrich stated that there should be a correction to the Resolution to say 37 it’s for a term ending December 31, 2006. 38 39 Ayes-4 Nays-0 Motion carried. 40 41 (Thomas did not vote.) 42 43 Mounds View City Council February 7, 2005 Special Meeting Page 4 B. Oath of Office for City Council Member Barbara Thomas 1 2 City Clerk/Administrator Ulrich gave the oath of office to new Council Member Thomas. 3 4 Mayor Marty welcomed Council Member Thomas and thanked the other candidates for running 5 for the office. 6 7 6. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS. 8 9 None. 10 11 7. CITY BUDGET QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS 12 13 None. 14 15 8. CONSENT AGENDA 16 None. 17 18 9. COUNCIL BUSINESS. 19 20 A. Resolution 6447 Appointing City Council Members and City Staff as 21 Representatives for City Commissions and other organizations 22 23 Desaree Crane stated that on January 10, 2005 the City Council had passed Resolution 6424, 24 appointing City Council members to various city commissions and other organizations for 2005. 25 She stated that Staff had been directed to review these appointments again after the new City 26 Council member had been sworn in. 27 28 The Council discussed the various committees and who would be appointed to serve on them and 29 filled in Resolution 6447. 30 31 MOTION/SECOND. Marty/Flaherty. To approve Resolution 6447 Appointing City Council 32 Members and City Staff as Representatives for City Commissions and other organizations. 33 34 Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried. 35 36 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 37 38 None. 39 40 11. REPORTS 41 42 A. Reports of Mayor and Council 43 44 Mounds View City Council February 7, 2005 Special Meeting Page 5 Council Member Gunn stated that the YMCA is having a garage sale at the Community Center 1 on February 19th, with the proceeds to go to the Y Partners Program, which helps youth within 2 the community who cannot afford recreation programs. She stated if anyone has items to donate, 3 they should bring them to the Community Center. She stated that it would be a bag sale, with 4 each bag costing $3. 5 6 Mayor Marty stated that he would like Council Members, citizens, and staff to be recognized by 7 the Chair before speaking so there aren’t open discussions popping up during the Council 8 meetings. He stated he would like civility maintained while speaking to one another. He stated 9 he would like people to feel they can come to City Hall and not be chewed out or belittled. 10 11 B. Staff 12 13 City Clerk/Administrator Ulrich stated that the tax increment financing legislation had been 14 introduced in both houses under the authorship of Senator Betzold and Representative Bernardy. 15 He stated there is a hearing scheduled on February 9th at noon before the Environmental and 16 Natural Resources Committee regarding the reverter clause language. 17 18 Director Ericson stated that the 7th Annual Home and Garden Show will be Saturday, March 5 19 from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. at the National Sports Center in Blaine. 20 21 Public Works Director Lee stated that there will be a neighborhood meeting regarding the 2005 22 Street Improvement Project on Thursday, February 17th at 6:30 p.m. at the City Council 23 Chambers. He stated the streets proposed for this project are the streets that lie south of County 24 Road H2 and west of Silver Lake Road. He stated there would be a brief presentation to go over 25 the project, and then there will be a question and answer session. 26 27 Council Member Stigney asked if that would be a cable broadcast. 28 29 Public Works Director Lee stated that it would not, but they could check to see if the video 30 people were available to tape it. 31 32 C. Reports of City Attorney 33 34 None. 35 36 12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, February 7, 2005, (Following this 37 meeting). 38 Next Council Meeting: Monday, February 14, 2005 at 7pm. 39 Mounds View City Council February 7, 2005 Special Meeting Page 6 1 13. ADJOURNMENT 2 3 The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. 4 5 Transcribed and recorded by: 6 7 8 Sheree Theobald 9 Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 10 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL 1 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 2 RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA 3 4 Regular Meeting 5 March 14, 2005 6 Mounds View City Hall 7 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 8 7:05 P.M. 9 10 11 1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER 12 13 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 14 15 3. ROLL CALL: Marty, Stigney, Gunn, Flaherty, and Thomas 16 17 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 18 19 Monday, March 14, 2005 City Council Agenda. 20 21 MOTION/SECOND: Flaherty/Gunn. To Approve the Monday March 14, 2005 agenda as 22 presented. 23 24 Ayes –5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 25 26 5. PUBLIC INPUT 27 28 Tom Winiecki, 2700 block of Sherwood Road. He asked whether he will be assessed the same 29 amount of money for the street improvement project in three or four years when his street is done 30 as the citizens whose streets were redone this past year. 31 32 Public Works Director Lee stated that they can’t guarantee the same project value in the future as 33 the 2004 project, but it would be based on the same methodology, which is that 25 percent of the 34 total project cost would be divided equally among the total single family properties. 35 36 6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUISNESS 37 38 A. YMCA Quarterly Report (oral report with handouts) 39 40 Pat Riemersma from the YMCA stated that the total revenue for Parks and Recreation was 41 $101,830, total expenses were $70,463, management fee was $8,807, and so the City received a 42 check for $22,560. She explained the Income Statement for Management of the Facility for 43 2004 and the other handouts she provided to the Council. She explained the need for the new 44 cash register they are going to buy. 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 2 1 7. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS. 2 3 Council Member Thomas asked about Check 115600, final payment for County Road H. She 4 asked if the county had reimbursed them. 5 6 Public Works Director Lee stated that they would be invoicing the County for about $150,000 for 7 that soon. 8 9 Council Member Thomas asked what the $646 was for on page 10 to Anderson. 10 11 Finance Director Hanson stated it was part of the water service program, and it was for locating 12 leaks and doing repairs on that. 13 14 Council Member Flaherty asked what the $493 for advertising was for on page 2 of the second 15 report. 16 17 Finance Director Hanson stated it was advertising for the golf course. 18 19 Council Member Flaherty asked if the $12,244 on page 4 was the last payment for the 20 redevelopment for BRAA Construction. 21 22 Finance Director Hanson stated it was the latest invoices received from BRAA Construction, and 23 that this is just the start of the invoices that they would be receiving from them. 24 25 Council Member Flaherty asked if this would be a monthly bill. 26 27 Public Works Director Lee stated that this is for the Highway 10 corridor improvement. He 28 indicated they would be providing monthly updates on where they are at with the project. 29 30 Council Member Gunn asked about page 11, the first item, 1156700, traffic control. 31 32 Public Works Director Lee stated that this was approved on January 10 with Resolution 6430, 33 and it was contracting with the County to upgrade the signal system, and it would be paid off in 34 three years. 35 36 Council Member Stigney asked what vehicle was damaged for the $371.76 for vehicle repair on 37 page 6. 38 39 Public Works Director Lee stated it was for a 2000 three-quarter ton pickup that was backed into 40 in the shop and had a damaged bumper and grill. He stated the repairs had been done in-house, 41 and it would have cost five times that much had it been sent out somewhere else. 42 43 MOTION/SECOND. To approve the Just and Correct Claims as Presented. 44 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 3 Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried. 1 2 8. CONSENT AGENDA 3 4 Council Member Flaherty asked to remove Item A. 5 6 A. Resolution 6421 Approving the Purchase of a Replacement Water Tanker 7 Truck 8 B. Schedule a Public Hearing for 7:05 pm for Monday, March 28, 2005 to 9 consider the Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 758, an Ordinance 10 Limiting Garbage Pickup Thursdays Only. 11 C. Schedule a Public Hearing for 7:10 pm on Monday, March 28, 2005 to 12 consider Resolution 6475, a Resolution Pertaining to a Proposed Interim Use 13 Permit (IUP) for a Temporary Outdoor Membrane Structure at the 14 Mermaid. 15 D. Schedule a Public Hearing for 7:15 pm on Monday, March 28, 2005 to 16 Consider a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversized Garage at 17 5343 Clifton Drive. 18 E. Resolution 6476 Approving a Certificate of Correction for the Velmeir CVS 19 Final Plat 20 F. Licenses for Approval 21 22 MOTION/SECOND. Thomas/Gunn. To approve Items B, C, D, E, and F of the Consent 23 Agenda as presented. 24 25 Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried. 26 27 A. Resolution 6421 Approving the Purchase of a Replacement Water Tanker 28 Truck. 29 30 Council Member Flaherty said he noticed Item 7 talked about a 20 year warranty on a stainless 31 steel drum and he wondered if they wouldn’t be asking for another truck for 20 years. 32 33 Finance Director Lee stated that their replacement program is actually 25 years. 34 35 MOTION/SECOND. Gunn/Flaherty. To approve Resolution 6421 Approving the Purchase of a 36 Replacement Water Tanker Truck and to waive the reading. 37 38 Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried. 39 40 9. COUNCIL BUSINESS. 41 42 A. 7:20 Public Hearing for the 2005 Street Improvement Project, Resolution 43 6474 Approving the Feasibility Report 44 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 4 1 Public Works Director Lee pointed out the location on the map of the section of streets slated for 2 improvement in the 2005 Street Improvement Project that are south of County Road I 3 and east of Silver Lake Road. He stated the reason for doing this section is economy due to its 4 proximity to the location of the streets that were done in 2004 and storm water utility 5 considerations. He advised that the map was set up based on 1 ½ miles of streets per year, which 6 correlates to $1.5 million per year. He stated this is a complete street upgrade, and the streets 7 would be completely removed and new subgrade added. There would be concrete curb and 8 gutter and a new bituminous. There would be utility repairs, sanitary sewer repairs, and storm 9 sewer added, along with storm water infiltration basins. He stated that as part of this plan, they 10 would like to add a sidewalk on Knollwood and Woodcrest. He stated that $950,000 of the cost 11 would be paid out of city funds, and they would be selling bonds for that, and there would be 12 $350,000 of assessments allocated between 101 single family properties. The single family 13 residential home assessment would be a little under $3,000, payable over 10 years with an 14 interest rate of 5 percent, although this could be paid off early to avoid interest charges. 15 16 Public Works Director Lee stated that should the Council proceed with this project, the next 17 thing that would occur is a 60-day appeal period established by the City’s Charter, and if there is 18 a Petition filed with the City Council with more than 50 percent of the people in that area, this 19 project cannot go forward. However, if the project does go forward, Staff would be coming back 20 to the City Council on May 9th to order the project, and July 11th would be the assessment 21 hearing, and awarding the contracts for construction would begin August 1st. 22 23 Public Works Director Lee reported that a survey had been sent out regarding the sidewalks on 24 Knollwood and Woodcrest, and they had received 26 responses back, all opposed to the 25 sidewalks. 26 27 Mayor M arty opened the public hearing. 28 29 Valerie Amundsen, 3048 Woodale Drive, stated that since she had sent her survey in, she had 30 decided she was opposed to the project because there is a property across the street from hers that 31 has not been developed yet. She informed that over the last three or four years the City has been 32 dumping fill from projects on the property, and there has been substantial damage that has 33 occurred to their street as a result of that. She doesn’t believe this project should move forward 34 until the dumping has ceased and the property has been developed. 35 36 Mayor Marty stated it was his understanding that the fill had stopped last year. 37 38 Public Works Director Lee advised that their grade permit had expired, so they would have to 39 come back to the City to get another grading permit. 40 41 Ms. Amundsen stated that the property could not be developed as it is now, and there would need 42 to be major work to make that property buildable. She stated she didn’t want to waste her $3,000 43 until that was done. 44 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 5 Jim Wilson, 7025 Pleasant View Drive, stated that it was his opinion that the streets didn’t need 1 to be completely redone because they weren’t in that bad of shape. He stated he works for 2 MnDOT in construction, and he believed that an inch and a half overlay would be sufficient for 3 the amount of traffic that goes down those streets. He also wasn’t sure that curb and gutter was 4 needed because there weren’t any water problems. He stated he would like to read the feasibility 5 study so he could get a better idea of what is needed. 6 7 Mayor Marty indicated that the feasibility study is matter of public record. 8 9 Public Works Director Lee informed that a condensed version of the feasibility study was mailed 10 to every property owner. 11 12 Mr. Wilson said an overlay would save the city and the taxpayers a lot of money. 13 14 Public Works Director Lee noted that soil borings had been done, and the subgrade underneath 15 the road is in very poor condition. 16 17 Mr. Wilson remarked that there is no reason to drive down his street unless you live there. 18 19 Mayor Marty indicated that they were trying to fix the roads and construct them so they will last 20 50 years. 21 22 Public Works Director Lee stated that the garbage trucks are extremely heavy, and those are the 23 vehicles that really damage the street, especially on the edges of the streets. 24 25 Jerry Blanski, 2933 Woodale Drive, remarked he went through the feasibility study with a fine-26 tooth comb, and he couldn’t find anything wrong with it and it was a very good report. He stated 27 for $3,000 it was a good deal, and he thanked the people who put the report together. 28 29 Brian Amundsen, 3048 Woodale Drive, stated he is opposed to the concrete curb and also 30 opposed to the project. He is also opposed to the holding ponds that are being built in the city. 31 He reported that Minneapolis had done this years ago, and they had issues with drowning deaths 32 of young children. He said that holding ponds damage and disrupt natural wetland that exist 33 today and seem counter to allowing nature to take care of itself. He reiterated the concerns 34 regarding the property across the street as listed above by his wife. He stated he has prepared a 35 petition that he has started circulating already so they can all see what the neighborhood really 36 wants to do. He stated that there are issues that still need to be addressed that don’t have answers 37 yet. 38 39 Mayor Marty asked what those issues were. 40 41 Public Works Director Lee stated the sidewalks continue to be an issue, there is an issue with the 42 Silver Lakes Condominiums, and there is an issue with how Springview Lane terminates. 43 44 Mayor Marty stated he had received phone calls from citizens that had been totally against the 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 6 project last year, but that most everyone has been very happy with the outcome. 1 Mr. Amundson said he was glad that neighborhood was happy, but that didn’t have anything to 2 do with this neighborhood. He stated he would be going house to house with his petition, but if 3 anyone wished to call him, his phone number is (763)786-5699. 4 5 Mayor Marty stated they are trying to be proactive by fixing the sewers while they are putting in 6 the streets so they don’t have a problem later and have to rip the streets up. 7 8 Dick Comden, 2832 Woodcrest Drive, stated he wasn’t sure if this was the forum for his 9 concern, but in reading the report he discovered he has a nonconforming driveway. He said his 10 he has a circular driveway because a member of his family is in a wheelchair. He stated as far as 11 he is concerned he doesn’t want to do the project if they are going to cut off his driveway, but 12 other than that, it’s a good deal. 13 14 Public Works Director Lee stated they thought it had been important to identify nonconforming 15 properties, and as part of this project they would provide a concrete driveway apron. 16 17 Mr. Wilson stated that by building the holding pond they would be ripping up the woods and 18 displacing the wildlife that they all enjoyed, and they had already been displaced from the County 19 Road H2 project. 20 21 Mike ____, 3540 Browning Lane, stated he thought that someone from Rice Creek Watershed 22 District should be present at some of these meetings to address the reasoning behind the ponding 23 issues. He stated when you propose ponds, you are looking for a place for a kid to drown. He 24 stated that the citizens should be able to dictate what happens to their property. 25 26 Mayor Marty stated they are well aware of the disadvantages of working with Rice Creek 27 Watershed District, but they hold power over them as far as what they can and cannot do. 28 29 Charles Asproth, 2948 Springview Lane, asked for an explanation of the ponding south of his 30 area. 31 32 Public Works Director Lee stated that the feasibility report is in draft form at the present time and 33 there are three options, and there is a meeting tomorrow with the property owners. 34 35 Mr. Asproth asked what size pond was being considered. 36 37 Public Works Director Lee stated that it was a rain garden, not a pond. He stated in larger rain 38 events it would fill with water, but it would infiltrate into the ground over a day or two. 39 40 Mr. Asproth stated that they had looked at the idea of working with the city in the future to 41 actually build a pond there in the future, but they hadn’t gotten that far. He stated he would be 42 very interested in having a pond put near this area, and he would be more than willing to give 43 access through his yard and would encourage that. 44 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 7 Someone in the audience stated that as his neighbor, he would be opposed to that. 1 2 There was a short discussion about the rain garden concept. 3 4 Keith Ihnen, 2940 Woodale Drive, stated he had paid top dollar for his property and had spent a 5 substantial amount of money on an addition and remodeling. He stated that his issue is not with 6 the City of Mounds View, but it is with the Rice Creek Watershed District. He stated that the 7 proposed ponding area would wipe out his back yard, and it would become a huge liability issue 8 regarding drawing the youth in the neighborhood. He stated that the water isn’t really running in 9 the first place, so he has no idea where Rice Creek Watershed is coming from with this need for a 10 pond. He stated there is going to be a lot of future debate from he and the rest of the neighbors 11 on the amount of trees that are going to need to be removed for this pond. He stated they don’t 12 want to lose the wildlife that they bought their property to enjoy. He stated that it’s time to take 13 a stand against the Rice Creek Watershed District. 14 15 William Werner, 2765 Sherwood Road, stated he had worked at the Charter Commission before, 16 and he stated that they are talking about the big picture policies of the Rice Creek Watershed 17 District, and he invited others to consider joining the Charter Commission. 18 19 Council Member Gunn stated that perhaps they should invite their resident Rice Creek 20 Watershed Commissioner to attend one of these meetings. 21 22 Jerry Blanski, 2933 Woodale Drive, stated he thought they were to be talking about the feasibility 23 report on the Street Improvement Project tonight, but it seems like they have shifted to the report 24 on the regional pond, and he did not come prepared to speak to that. 25 26 Public Works Director Lee stated they are linked to some degree, but at this point in time they are 27 two separate projects. 28 29 David Rudnik, 7191 Knollwood, stated the parking situation at the church is extremely 30 hazardous, and he went into details of that. He brought up the issue of phosphorous and whether 31 anyone had tested the water coming through the pipes through that drainage area to figure out 32 where phosphorous containment is required. He stated if the wetland isn’t cleaning the water 33 sufficiently, as good neighbors they need to look at working with Rice Creek. He asked how the 34 pond would be paid for. 35 36 Public Works Director Lee stated that it was being paid for out of the City Storm Water Utility 37 Fund. 38 39 Mr. Rudnik asked how they could make a decision in the next 60 days when they didn’t know 40 what the cost of the pond was going to be. 41 42 Public Works Director Lee stated that they are two separate projects. 43 44 Mr. Rudnik pointed out that they couldn’t do one without the other. 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 8 1 Public Works Director Lee stated that they could if they worked with the Watershed District and 2 said that the bond isn’t feasible and it’s too exorbitant and the property owners aren’t agreeable. 3 4 Mr. Rudnik stated he is in support of the street project, and the streets need to be redone, but the 5 biggest issue is finding a solution for the ponding that doesn’t destroy everything. 6 7 Mr. Amundsen stated he didn’t understand why this section of town was being done right now 8 when there were other sections in the city where the streets were in worse condition than his 9 neighborhood. 10 11 Kimberly Christ, 2824 Woodale Drive, stated that it was time to stand up against the Rice Creek 12 Watershed District. She also stated that she is definitely opposed to the sidewalks. She stated 13 she agreed with the comments made about the dangerous parking situation at the church. 14 15 Mayor Marty closed the public hearing. 16 17 Council Member Stigney asked whether there were areas of the city that had streets in worse 18 condition than this area. 19 20 Public Works Director Lee stated that some of the areas slated for 2006 were in worse condition 21 than this area that was slated for 2005. 22 23 Council Member Stigney asked if the main factor was the contractor’s proximity to the 2004 24 project, regardless of whether they were bidding for the 2005 project or not. 25 26 Public Works Director Lee stated that another factor was that the City Council had wanted to 27 look at doing a larger project in 2004, and at that time they were using the 1999 pavement 28 condition indexes, and since that time those have been updated. 29 30 Council Member Stigney stated it would have been preferable to have asked on the feedback 31 form whether they were in favor of concrete curb or bituminous, but his personal opinion was 32 that if it was only a $186 difference, he would definitely favor concrete. He asked why the 33 county didn’t put concrete on Silver Lake Road. 34 35 Public Works Director Lee stated that they hadn’t because it’s not permanent, and they are 36 planning to do something else with Silver Lake Road in the near future so that’s why they used 37 bituminous. 38 39 Council Member Thomas stated she felt the question regarding concrete curb and gutter versus 40 bituminous was important to be asked of the citizens in each separate project. 41 42 Mayor Marty stated from here on out, they better put that question back in at the neighborhood 43 meetings every year. 44 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 9 Council Member Flaherty stated that what he is hearing is that the curb and gutter are virtually 1 secondary, and that he is hearing that they don’t want them touching their streets this year. He 2 stated they need to take a look at the future on what they are doing. 3 4 Council Member Gunn stated she felt there should be concrete curbs and gutter to make the roads 5 last as long as they possibly can. 6 7 Mayor Marty stated he didn’t see the need for sidewalks in this section of town. He asked how 8 the trailway along Silver Lake Road was coming along. 9 10 Public Works Director Lee stated that it is scheduled for construction in 2005, and the draft 11 report would be ready in mid April. 12 13 Mayor Marty stated they need to look at the parking by the church. He stated that tonight they 14 would not be approving the project per se, but they would just be going forward with the 15 feasibility study. He stated that the public would have a lot more opportunity to give input on 16 what they would and wouldn’t like. 17 18 Council Member Gunn asked what the percentage was for and against this area. 19 20 Public Works Director Lee stated that it was 58 percent in favor and 42 percent generally 21 opposed. He said that last year’s project was 82 percent in favor, and 12 percent opposed. 22 23 Council Member Gunn asked what it would entail to choose another area for this year. 24 25 Public Works Director Lee stated it would cost probably just a couple of thousand dollars, and all 26 the information that was collected as part of the report would basically remain as is. 27 28 Council Member Gunn stated that she was sure there would be enough signatures on the petition 29 to stop the project, and they could hold off on this area for a couple more years, and there was 30 other areas in the city that were in much more dire need of replacement than this area. 31 32 Council Member Thomas stated she wasn’t against curb and gutter, but there were places it was 33 useful and places were it wasn’t. She stated that the curb would last 50 years, but the road would 34 still have to be replaced in 25 to 30 years. She said that the roads in the sections in blue and red 35 on the map were in worse condition than the area on Woodcrest. 36 37 Council Member Flaherty stated that the Council wants to do what is best for the community, and 38 he hopes that people aren’t of the opinion that they don’t. 39 40 Mayor Marty asked if there would be time to do a street project this year if they decided to 41 choose another area. 42 43 Public Works Director Lee stated that even if everything had gone smoothly for this area, the 44 timing would have been tight, so if another area is chosen, the earliest they could start is next 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 10 year. He stated that they could perhaps do three miles of replacement next year, and, in fact, it’s 1 more efficient to have a larger project. He stated that the red and green areas could be the 2006 2 project. 3 4 Mayor Marty stated that if the petition comes in, then this project would be dead, but they should 5 start working on the 2006 project. 6 7 Council Member Thomas questioned whether the red section should be put into the 2006 project 8 because there is undeveloped land. She stated she thought they should tackle the places that were 9 already fully developed first. 10 11 Mayor Marty stated that at the EDA meeting it had been brought up that there were some 12 developers interested in developing that land there, and why would they want to put in new 13 streets and then have heavy equipment running over it. 14 15 Public Works Director Lee stated that they would not allow any hauling on the road for 16 development in the area. 17 18 Council Member Thomas stated that if they approve the feasibility report, it doesn’t mean they 19 are approving the project; it only means they can use the report in three years. 20 21 Public Works Director Lee stated that approving the report does not make the project official. 22 23 MOTION/SECOND. Gunn/Flaherty. To approve Resolution 6474 Approving the Feasibility 24 Report. 25 26 Mayor Marty reminded everyone that this is a work in progress, and he invited everyone to attend 27 future meetings. 28 29 Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried. 30 31 B. Resolution 6436 Approving the 2005 Public Works Seasonal Employee 32 Positions 33 34 Public Works Director Lee stated that they had been under budgeting for seasonals for the last 35 several years by about $15,000, so they need to do one of two things. Either they need to cut the 36 services and not hire as many seasonals, or they need to adjust the budget to keep the same level 37 of service. He felt that they get a lot of value out of their seasonals and their numbers in the 38 Public Works Department is fairly low in comparison to other cities on a per capita basis. 39 40 Council Member Thomas asked for an explanation of why this wasn’t in the budget and hadn’t 41 been caught the years before. 42 43 Public Works Director Lee stated he would take responsibility for that, and he hadn’t checked the 44 personnel part of it. 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 11 1 Council Member Thomas stated she hadn’t made up her mind yet, but she was having a difficult 2 time thinking of going over budget when it’s only March. 3 4 Mayor Marty asked whether Public Works had gone over budget in the last couple of budgets. 5 6 Finance Director Hanson stated individual components may have been over, but Public Works as 7 a total entity had not been over. 8 9 Council Member Flaherty stated he didn’t like going over budgets, but if there was somewhere 10 else to shift the money from, he wouldn’t have a problem with approving it. 11 12 Council Member Thomas and Mayor Marty stated they would also feel comfortable with that. 13 14 Council Member Stigney stated perhaps this was an opportune time to work with a reduced staff 15 of seven people. He raised an issue of seeing employees standing and driving around aimlessly 16 in the past. 17 18 Council Member Thomas stated she would like to adopt the Resolution with Option 1 with seven 19 positions, and have two weeks of discussion on what to do regarding hiring three others. 20 21 MOTION/SECOND. Thomas/Gunn. To Approve Resolution 6436 with Option 1 with seven 22 positions, Approving the 2005 Public Works Seasonal Employee Positions. 23 24 Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried. 25 26 C. 7:25 Public Hearing to Consider a Variance Request for a Reduced Number 27 of Covered Parking Spaces at Greenfield Estates Located at 7635 Greenfield 28 Avenue 29 30 Director Ericson informed the Council that Greenfield Estates would like to build 100 31 garages, and by Code they are required to have 125 since they have 125 units. He stated they 32 only rent 50 percent of their current 125 garages out now. The Planning Commission voted 3-3 33 on this issue, so the motion failed, and the applicant has appealed that decision. He stated that he 34 has not received any comment from the property owners in the area regarding this issue, but that 35 Staff supports this plan and the renovation of the site. However, the Planning Commission 36 recommends that this not be approved because they fail to find a hardship and there is adequate 37 space to construct 125 stalls. 38 39 Mayor Marty opened the public hearing at 10:13 p.m. 40 41 Alan Menning, who offices at 321 University Avenue SE, Minneapolis, stated he has managed 42 Greenfield Estates for 20 some years. He explained the problems they’ve had with the garages 43 being placed where they are, and with people starting fires, vandalism, climbing fences, dumping 44 garbage, etc. He also explained that the new garages will have garage door openers so that 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 12 people won’t have to get out of their cars anymore to open and close the garage doors. He stated 1 they would exceed the Code for outdoor parking by having 325 spaces. He explained how if they 2 were to rent garages out for storage space to outside parties, they end up spending in excess of 3 $1,300 for court costs and dumping charges to get rid of it when the parties don’t pay, so it 4 doesn’t make economic sense. He stated that most young people today who rent apartments 5 don’t want to rent a garage, and they want to park in the parking lot close to the apartment doors. 6 He added that as part of this improvement they will be regarding and resurfacing the parking lot. 7 8 Director Ericson suggested perhaps a compromise would be to approve the Resolution with the 9 addition that if all 100 garages were to become rented out, that would trigger a requirement to 10 build 25 more. 11 12 Council Member Flaherty stated a concern regarding this being a common garage because of 13 storage of paint thinners and other hazardous waste products. He stated he agreed with the 14 concept of building less garages because of the low percentage of rental of the existing garages. 15 16 Council Member Gunn stated she would like to approve this variance. 17 18 Council Member Stigney stated he could not see a hardship, and the City Council is bound by 19 following the same Code that the Planning Commission is bound by. 20 21 Mayor Marty stated that possibly a code change is warranted, but he couldn’t vote against a 22 city ordinance without a hardship being demonstrated. 23 24 Council Member Flaherty stated he would like to go ahead and grant the variance with the 25 stipulation that Director Ericson had mentioned previously regarding the extra 25 garages. 26 27 There was a discussion regarding the length of time it would take to make the necessary 28 code amendments. 29 30 Mayor Marty stated if a hardship existed, he wouldn’t have a problem granting the variance, but 31 if they granted a variance in this situation, they would be setting a precedent. 32 33 Mr. Menning stated the hardship is that he can’t rent 125 garages. 34 35 Director Ericson suggested upholding the Planning Commission’s denial of the variance request, 36 and that the applicant could then come back with a plan in the future to build 100 garages, and 37 if those all became rented out, to build another 25,and that plan could be brought forward to the 38 Planning Commission. 39 40 Council Member Thomas stated that in the meantime they could take a look at the Code as it 41 relates to covered parking. 42 43 Mayor Marty closed the public hearing. 44 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 13 MOTION/SECOND. Stigney/Marty. To waive the reading and to approve Resolution 6475, 1 Affirming the Planning Commission’s Denial of a Variance Request to Allow for a Reduced 2 Number of Covered Parking Spaces at Greenfield Estates Located at 2370 County Road I and 3 7521-7661 Greenfield Avenue; Mounds View Planning Case VR2005-002. 4 5 Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried. 6 7 D. Resolution 6472 Appointing a Planning Commission Member and approving 8 the Planning Commission Chairperson 9 10 Mike Maroney, 5045 Brighton Lane, stated that he did not have any agenda for wanting to be 11 on the Planning Commission and simply wanted to become involved in the community. He 12 stated he had been a homeowner in Mounds View for 15 years and raised four children here. He 13 stated he had run for City Council, but he felt that being on the Planning Commission would help 14 to prepare him for a position such as that in the years to come. 15 16 Al Hull told the Council he had run for Mayor and for City Council in the last election, and being 17 on the Planning Commission would provide a good vehicle for him to learn what’s going on in 18 the city. He stated he had been involved in some issues involving the service station he works at, 19 but he would abstain from any future votes regarding that station, and that he had no particular 20 agenda. 21 22 Council Member Flaherty stated he appreciated both gentlemen applying and wanting to serve 23 their community. 24 25 MOTION/SECOND. Marty/Gunn. To appoint Al Hull to the Planning Commission. 26 27 Council Member Stigney suggested flipping a coin or discussing why one candidate would be 28 better over the other. 29 30 Mayor Marty stated that it was close, but he made the motion for Mr. Hull because of the amount 31 of time and effort he had put into the last two elections. 32 33 Council Member Gunn added that she had seconded the motion because the deciding factor was 34 that Mr. Hull works in the city, which she felt added an insight that the Planning Commission is 35 lacking in. 36 37 Council Member Stigney made the comment that the election process has nothing to do with 38 serving on the Planning Commission. He stated that Mr. Maroney has lived in the community 39 for 15 years, whereas Mr. Hull has only just moved into the city, so he would lean more towards 40 Mr. Maroney for his experience. 41 42 Council Member Thomas pointed out that there are openings on the Charter Commission. 43 44 Ayes-4 Nays-1 (Stigney) Motion carried. 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 14 1 Mayor Marty stated that the Chair of the Planning Commission will be Gary Stevenson. 2 3 E. Resolution 6473 Approving Step/Longevity Increases for Deputy Chief Tom 4 Kinney, Officer Ben Zender, Officer Kasey Keckeisen, Officer Steve 5 Geringer, and Jodi Salmonson. 6 7 MOTION/SECOND. Flaherty/Gunn. To approve Resolution 6473, Approving Step/Longevity 8 Increases for Deputy Chief Tom Kinney, Officer Ben Zender, Officer Kasey Keckeisen, Officer 9 Steve Geringer, and Jodi Salmonson. 10 11 Council Member Stigney read the Resolution aloud. 12 13 Council Member Thomas noted that the “a” in the Resolution title should be deleted. 14 15 Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried. 16 17 F. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 758, an Ordinance Limiting 18 Garbage Pickup to Thursdays Only. 19 20 MOTION/SECOND. Gunn/Flaherty. To waive the reading and approve the first reading of 21 Ordinance 758, an Ordinance Limiting Garbage Pickup to Thursdays Only. 22 23 Council Member Stigney noted that the only thing being removed is Wednesday pickup, yet 24 there was a lot of money spent putting the whole ordinance in the newspaper. 25 26 Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried. 27 28 G. Resolution 6478 Converting one Patrol Officer Position to a Sergeant 29 Position. 30 31 Chief Sommer stated this resolution involves converting one patrol officer position to a sergeant 32 position, and the promotion would be effective May 1st and would be funded by reducing the 33 amount of funding given to the New Brighton Police Department to help fund a school resource 34 officer over several years by the amount necessary to fund the sergeant position. 35 36 There was a discussion regarding funding the school resource officer, and it was decided that it 37 wouldn’t reduce the funding that much this year, and it could be worked into the budget in more 38 detail in later years. 39 40 MOTION/SECOND. Thomas/Flaherty. To waive the reading and adopt Resolution 6478 41 Converting one Patrol Officer Position to a Sergeant Position. 42 43 Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried. 44 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 15 H. Resolution 6477 Approving Transfers Between Funds for the Year 2004. 1 2 Finance Director Hanson stated the proposal before the Council was necessary to close out the 3 year for 2004. He stated that many of the transfers are for the amounts that were budgeted for, 4 but there are some differences. He noted that a transfer to a debt service fund would be paid 5 from T.I.F. District #3 instead of T.I.F. District #1 as was budgeted due to T.I.F. District #1 6 being in a deficit position. He stated the General Fund would show a surplus of between $50,000 7 and $100,000. 8 9 Council Member Stigney asked for an explanation of the paragraph regarding the general fund 10 reduction. 11 12 Finance Director Hanson remarked that the surplus of $50,000-$100,000 is an adequate fund 13 balance for year end, and it’s in the City’s better interest to leave some money in the other funds. 14 He stated that the golf course was not the only fund that benefited from a reduction; the vehicle 15 and special projects fund also had reductions in their proposed transfers. 16 17 Council Member Stigney asked whether the whole purpose was so they didn’t exceed the 50 18 percent threshold. 19 20 Finance Director Hanson stated they were trying to avoid getting back into the situation of having 21 more money in the general fund than they really need. 22 23 Council Member Stigney stated he had a problem with the $15,000 remaining in the golf course 24 fund. 25 26 MOTION/SECOND. Marty/Gunn. To waive the reading and adopt Resolution 6477 27 Approving Transfers Between Funds for the Year 2004. 28 29 Ayes-4 Nays-1 (Stigney) Motion carried. 30 31 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 32 33 A. February 28, 2005 City Council Minutes. 34 35 Council Member Gunn made a correction to page 1, line 33, “Barb Haake”. 36 37 Council Member Gunn made a correction to page 7, line 40, “Dazenski”. 38 39 Council Member Gunn made a correction to page 9, line 31, “software”. 40 41 Council Member Gunn made a correction to page 2, lines 5 and 9, “Siercks.” 42 43 Council Member Stigney made a correction to page 11, line 41, to change the word appropriate 44 to “allocate”. 45 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 16 1 Mayor Marty made a correction to page 1, line 40, to read, “informed decision until all the 2 numbers are in.” 3 4 Mayor Marty made a correction to page 2, line 32, to change “JS” to “GIS”. 5 6 MOTION/SECOND. Gunn/Thomas. To approve the February 28, 2005 City Council Minutes 7 as amended. 8 9 Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried. 10 11 11. REPORTS 12 13 A. Reports of Mayor and Council 14 15 Council Member Stigney stated that he had filled in for the Mayor at the last legislative session, 16 and there had been a discussion about MnDOT requesting money for land that was going to be 17 deeded back to the City, and that there are figures they are trying to work on, but no vote was 18 taken. He stated they will be talking more about it tomorrow. 19 20 . B. Staff 21 1. Designate Council Representative to County Road 10 Corridor Design 22 Theme Subcommittee 23 24 Director Ericson stated a City Council member representative is needed to attend meetings for 25 the County Road 10 corridor improvement program, the first of which is February 16th at 6:00. 26 27 Council Member Thomas said she would check her calendar and let him know if she could 28 attend the meeting. 29 City Administrator Ulrich informed the Council that the public hearing before the EDA regarding 30 the proposal for redevelopment of the golf course is scheduled for February 28th. He asked 31 whether they would be willing to set a special meeting on April 14th to address the Medtronic 32 golf course redevelopment proposal. 33 34 Director Ericson suggested that it be a joint meeting of the agreement with Medtronic, EDA, and 35 City Council. 36 37 Mayor Marty stated they should post it for three meetings at 6:30 p.m. 38 39 C. Reports of City Attorney 40 41 12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, April 4, 2005 at 7pm 42 Next Council Meeting: Monday, March 28 2005 at 7pm 43 Mounds View City Council March 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 17 1 13. ADJOURNMENT 2 3 The meeting adjourned at 11:50 p.m. 4 5 Transcribed and recorded by: 6 7 8 Sheree Theobald 9 Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 10