HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2003/10/13CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
Monday, October 13, 2003
7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL: Linke, Quick, Marty, Stigney, Gunn
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
5. PUBLIC INPUT:
Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give your full
name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes.
6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
A. Resolution No. 6112 Appointing a Park and Recreation Commissioner, Chairperson, and
Vice-Chairperson
7. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS
8. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Licenses for Approval
B. Set a Public Hearing for 7:05 PM, October 27, 2003, to Consider the First Reading and
Introduction of Ordinance 711, an Ordinance Establishing a Pawn Overlay District
C. Resolution No. 6107 Approving 2004 SCORE Grant
D. Resolution No. 6109 Authorizing the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the 2003
Street Improvement Project – Phase I
E. Resolution No. 6110 Authorizing the preparation of a Preliminary Feasibility Report,
Consultant Selection, and execution of a Supplemental Letter of Agreement for survey work
for the 2003 Street Improvement Project – Phase II
F. Resolution No. 6113 Adopting a Roadway Major Maintenance Financing Policy
G. Resolution No. 6115 Authorizing the execution of the State of Minnesota Grant Agreement for
a Tree Inventory / Database Grant
H. Resolution No. 6116 Approving Change Order Number 1 for the Water Tower Rehabilitation
Project Application of a complete finish coat to the bottom two courses of the tank column
I. Resolution No. 6119 Approving the Preliminary Feasibility Reports for the Manufactured
Home Park Second Access Study – Mounds View Manufactured Home Community and
Towns Edge Terrace
J. Resolution No. 6121 Ratifying the Labor Contract with Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc.
(L.E.L.S.), Local No. 204 for 2003
K. Resolution No. 6122 Ratifying the Labor Contract with the Public Works Bargaining Unit for
2003
L. Set a Public Hearing for 7:10 PM, October 27, 2003, to Consider a Conditional Use Permit for
an Over-sized Garage at 7850 Spring Lake Road
City Council Agenda
October 13, 2003
Page 2
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS
A. 7:05 P.M. Public Hearing to receive public input and pass upon Resolution 6123 Adopting a
Special Assessment Levy for Delinquent Public Utility Accounts.
B. County Road H2 Street Improvement Project – Assessment Issues
C. 7:10 P.M. Public Hearing to receive public input and pass upon Resolution 6124 Adopting a
Special Assessment Levy for the County Road H2 Street Improvement Project.
D. 7:15 P.M. Public Hearing to receive public input and pass upon Resolution 6125 Adopting a
Special Assessment Levy for Diseased Tree Removals.
E. Resolution 6126 Adopting the Assessment for the Street Repair at 7832 Bona Road
F. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 720, an Ordinance Approving a Comprehensive
Rezoning of Parcels Zoned PF, Public Facilities (ROLL CALL VOTE)
G. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 721, an ordinance Amending Chapter 1116 of the
Mounds View Zoning Code Relating to Permitted Uses in the I-1, Industrial Zoning District
(ROLL CALL VOTE)
H. Consideration of Resolution 6095, a Resolution Authorizing the Hire of Kristin Wentzlaff to the
Position of Planning Associate
I. Consider Policy Allowing Paid Advertising in Community Newsletter
J. Consideration of Resolution 6106, a Resolution Approving a Minor Subdivision of 8409 and
8419 Groveland Road
K. Consideration of Resolution 6105, a Resolution Approving a Minor Subdivision of 7886
Sunnyside Road
L. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 722, Implementing a Franchise Fee on Xcel
Energy Electric and Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View for the Year 2004.
(ROLL CALL VOTE)
M. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 719, Implementing a Franchise Fee on Center
Point Energy Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View for the Year 2004. (ROLL
CALL VOTE)
N. Consider Options for a Community Survey
O. Consideration of Resolution No. 6118 Authorizing the re-bidding of the County Road H
Sidewalk Project
P. Consideration of Resolution No. 6111 Approving Change Order Number 3 for the County Road
H2 Street Improvement Project -Installation of Infiltration Systems and Pathway Segments
along County Road 10
Q. Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 723 Amending Chapter 202 of the Mounds
View City Code pertaining to apportionment of cost associated with Roadway Major
Maintenance Projects
R. Consideration of Resolution No. 6114 Approving a Step Increase for Pete Szurek of the Parks
Division of the Public Works Department
S. Consideration of Resolution No. 6108 Authorizing Severance Payment for Gary Kardell
T. Consideration of Special Council Meeting Dates
U. Consideration of Resolution No. 6127 Establishing a Policy for Deferral of Special
Assessments by Senior Citizens or Disabled Persons.
V. Community Center Contract Compliance Update
10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. September 22, 2003
City Council Agenda
October 13, 2003
Page 3
11 REPORTS
A. Reports of Mayor and Council
B. Reports of Staff
C. Reports of City Attorney
12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, November 3, 2003
Next Council Meeting: Monday, October 27, 2003
Item No: 08A
Meeting Date:October 13, 2003
Type of Business:Consent Agenda
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 license for approval. This contractor license will
expire on December 31, 2003. Applicant has submitted appropriate fee and proof of
insurance. This company has never been licensed with the City and is considered
“new”.
Rollo’s Paving, LLC. – Asphalt - New
Staff Recommendation: Approve license application as requested.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Reviewed by City Administrator: ________
Item No. 8D
Type of Business: CA
WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing;
CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
Item Title/Subject: 2003 Street Improvement Project – Phase I
Resolution No. 6109 Authorizing the Preparation of
Plans and Specifications for the 2003 Street
Improvement Project – Phase I
Meeting Date: October 13, 2003
Background:
On October 28, 2002, City Council adopted Resolution No. 5870 authorizing the
preparation of a preliminary feasibility report and consultant selection for the
2003 Street Improvement Project. The streets to be considered for this project
are those contained in the area bounded by County Road 10 to the north and
east, County Road H2 to the south, and Pleasant View Drive to the west.
Discussion:
The City Council indicated a desire to perform this project during the 2003
construction season. Due to the time required to draft the feasibility report and
address issues, such as standard street sections and widths and assessment
policies for a neighborhood street major maintenance project, this project was re-
scheduled for construction in 2004. In addition to this project, City Council
indicated a desire to perform a Roadway Major Maintenance Project in 2004 for
the streets located south of County Road H2 and west of Silver Lake Road.
Another potential street project to be constructed in 2004 is the Woods of
Mounds View Development.
Given that these three projects may be ready for bidding on in the spring of 2004,
they therefore may be combined into one project in an effort to receive more
favorable bids. Staff thought it would be appropriate to assign them as phases of
the 2003 Street Improvement Project. The phases follow:
Phase I - Area south of Co. Rd. 10 / north of Co. Rd. H2
Phase II - Area south of Co. Rd. H2 / west of Silver Lake Road
Phase III – Woods of Mounds View Development
A draft preliminary feasibility report for this project, Phase I, has been completed
and was presented to the City Council on September 2, 2003 for review. Staff is
recommending that a neighborhood meeting be conducted to obtain feedback
regarding the draft feasibility report. In addition, Staff is also recommending
feedback from other governmental agencies, such as the County, Watershed
District, etc. prior to seeking final approval of the feasibility report. This will
ensure that all issues are addressed in the report.
It will take several weeks to conduct these meetings and collect feedback on
these issues. In order to have the City’s engineering consultant make full use of
their time and keep this project on schedule, Staff is recommending that the City
authorize the consultant to start on the preparation of the plans and
specifications for Phase I at this time.
Attached as Exhibit A is a schedule for the 2003 Street Improvement Project for
Phase I and II until the end of 2003.
Recommendation:
It is recommended the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the preparation
of plans and specifications for the 2003 Street Improvement Project – Phase I.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works Reviewed by City Administrator:___
RESOLUTION NO. 6109
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AUTHORIZE THE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR
THE 2003 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT – PHASE I
WHEREAS, on October 28, 2002, City Council adopted Resolution
No. 5870 authorizing the preparation of a preliminary feasibility report and
consultant selection for the 2003 Street Improvement Project; and
WHEREAS, the streets to be considered for this project are those
contained in the area bounded by County Road 10 to the north and east, County
Road H2 to the south, and the Pleasant View Drive to the west; and
WHEREAS, there are three street projects that may be ready for
bidding on in the spring of 2004; and
WHEREAS, it would be appropriate to assign them as phases
Phase I - Area south of Co. Rd. 10 / north of Co. Rd. H2
Phase II - Area south of Co. Rd. H2 / west of Silver Lake Road
Phase III – Woods of Mounds View Development
to the 2003 Street Improvement Project; and
WHEREAS, a draft preliminary feasibility report for this project,
Phase I, has been completed and was presented to the City Council on
September 2, 2003 for review; and
WHEREAS, in order to keep this project on schedule, it is
recommended by Staff that the City authorize the preparation of the plans and
specifications for Phase I.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows:
1. Said improvements shall hereafter be known and referred to as the
2003 Street Improvement Project – Phase I.
2. That the preparation of the construction plans and specifications for
the 2003 Street Improvement Project – Phase I is hereby
authorized.
Adopted this 13th day of October 2003.
______________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
(ATTEST) ______________________________
Kurt Ulrich
City Administrator
(SEAL)
EXHIBIT A
2003 Street Improvement Project
Project Schedule
Prepared September 26, 2003
October 2, 2003 Joe Rhein of BRAA submits documents to attach to the Staff
report for the October 6th Work Session.
October 6, 2003 Present proposed assessment policy and mock assessment
role to City Council at a Work Session Meeting.
October 8, 2003 Joe Rhein of BRAA submits letter agreement for Phase II
survey work.
October 13, 2003 City Council approves revised Assessment Ordinance. 1st
reading of revised ordinance.
October 13, 2003 City Council authorizes the preparation of plans and specs
for the 2003 SIP.
October 13, 2003 City Council authorizes the preparation of a preliminary
feasibility report and execution of letter agreement to begin
survey work on Phase II of the 2003SIP.
October 14, 2003 Notice is sent to property owners in the Phase II area.
October 16, 2003 Neighborhood Meeting notice developed.
October 17, 2003 Neighborhood Meeting notice sent.
October 20, 2003 Phase II survey work begins.
October 23, 2003 Joe Rhein of BRAA to submit draft feasibility reports (10 or
more) with financing based on the proposed assessment
policy to Desaree Crane to include in the City Council
meeting packet.
October 27, 2003 City Council approves revised Assessment Ordinance. 2nd
reading of revised ordinance.
October 27, 2003 Present draft feasibility report with financing based on the
proposed assessment policy to City Council. No action
needed from Council.
October 28, 2003 Set up meetings with other government agencies
November 6, 2003 Neighborhood Meeting.
November 3-14, 2003 Meet with other government agencies.
November 7, 2003 Meet with BRAA: Discuss the Neighborhood Meeting results
and discuss setting up and data collection for Phase II -
similar to the meeting November 1, 2002 for Phase I.
November 20 or
December 4, 2003 Joe Rhein of BRAA to submit FINAL feasibility reports (12 or
more) with financing based on the proposed assessment
policy to Desaree Crane to include in the City Council
meeting packet.
November 24 or
December 8, 2003 Present FINAL feasibility report. City Council approves
report.
December 8, 2003 BRAA continues to work on the plans and specs for Phase I
and the feasibility report for Phase II during the month of
December.
**THIS WILL BE UPDATED IN DECEMBER FOR ITEMS OCCURRING IN
2004**
Item No. 8F
Type of Business: CA
WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing;
CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
Item Title/Subject: Resolution No. 6113 Adopting a Roadway Major
Maintenance Financing Policy
Meeting Date: October 13, 2003
Background:
On February 10, 2003, Staff submitted a report outlining issues that will need to
be addressed as part of the feasibility report for the 2003 Street Improvement
Project.
There were three general issues identified that will need to be addressed as part
of this project:
Assessment Policy
Street Standards
Storm Water Introduction into the Sanitary Sewer System
On September 2, 2003, Staff submitted a draft roadway major maintenance
financing policy. This policy utilizes two methods for assessing such projects: the
“Unit Assessment Method “ which would be applied to single and twin family
properties and the “Front Footage Method” which would be applied to all other
properties. Staff was directed to determine what changes of the City’s Ordinance
would be needed to allow for such a policy.
On October 6, 2003, Staff introduced a draft revision to the City’s Ordinance.
Discussion:
Staff proposes that the unit method be utilized for low density residential property
(single family and twin homes / duplexes) for all roadway major maintenance
projects. All other property would be assessed utilizing the front footage method.
Attached, as Exhibit A, is the proposed roadway major maintenance financing
policy.
This policy is contingent on revision of the City Ordinance. The unit assessment
method is already allowed by City Ordinance (Chapter 202, Section 202.09,
Subdivision 3b). However, the ordinance also specifically states that the cost of a
Street Reconstruction be recovered by the adjusted front footage method
(Chapter 202, Section 202.09, Subdivision 2a). Making this revision would give
the City Council more flexibility in assigning assessments for roadway major
maintenance projects.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve a resolution adopting a
Roadway Major Maintenance Assessment Policy. Staff also recommends that
the City Ordinance be revised to allow for a Unit Assessment for roadway major
maintenance projects.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works Reviewed by City Administrator:___
RESOLUTION NO. 6113
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ADOPTING A ROADWAY MAJOR MAINTENANCE FINANCING POLICY
WHEREAS, on February 10, 2003, Staff submitted a report
outlining development of an assessment policy as an issue that will need to be
addressed as part of the feasibility report for the 2003 Street Improvement
Project; and
WHEREAS, the proposed policy will utilize the unit assessment
method for low-density residential property (single family and twin homes /
duplexes) and the front footage method for all other properties for roadway major
maintenance projects; and
WHEREAS, the proposed policy is contingent on revising the City
Ordinance to allow for the unit assessment method to be applied to roadway
major maintenance projects.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Mounds View City
Council does hereby approve the attached roadway major maintenance financing
policy.
Adopted this 13th day of October 2003.
______________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
(ATTEST) ______________________________
Kurt Ulrich
City Administrator
(SEAL)
EXHIBIT A
ROADWAY MAJOR MAINTENANCE FINANCING POLICY
The following policy sets forth guidelines for the financing of roadway major maintenance
projects.
I. DEFINITIONS
A. Benefited Property: Property with frontage (rear, side, or front) along a
roadway will be considered to receive benefit from any
major maintenance projects. In the low-density
residential lots, only those properties with frontage and
an existing access or permissible access by ordinance to
the roadway will be considered to receive benefit.
B. Major Maintenance: For the purpose of this policy, major maintenance will
consist of overlays, partial or total reconstruction
together with other associated infrastructure repairs,
reconstruction, and construction.
C. Minor Maintenance: For the purpose of this policy, minor maintenance shall
consist of pothole patching, crack sealing, seal coating
and minor skin overlays. Funding of these maintenance
activities are not addressed as part of this major
maintenance policy.
D. Project Cost: Included in the improvement cost to be assessed shall
be the roadway major maintenance activity cost, lateral
storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water main costs,
engineering, administrative, legal, easement acquisition,
and fiscal costs incurred to implement the
improvements.
E. Land Use Type: The classification of the land use will be based on the
property’s current land use – not on what the underlying
zoning of the property is.
F. Standard Residential Street: Street designed or intended to provide land access to
residential properties (single and multi family) as its
primary or sole function.
II. COST ALLOCATION
The total project cost for major maintenance is to be allocated in accordance with the
policy. It is the intention of this policy to allocate cost on a project basis rather than on a
street-by-street or block-by-block basis.
A. All publicly owned and maintained streets under City jurisdiction
1. Urban/Low-Density Residential Lots
a. For major maintenance reconstruction of standard residential streets,
25% percent of the project cost will be assessed to the area
benefited on a per residential lot basis. For purpose of this
assessment policy, only those residential lots with frontage and an
existing access or permissible access by ordinance to the roadway
will be considered to receive benefit.
b. For major maintenance of streets considered to be wider or built to a
higher standard than a standard residential street, the residential unit
cost will be based on the average project cost of maintaining a
standard residential street within the project area.
c. Twin homes / Duplexes will be assessed 75% per unit of the
established single family unit amount.
d. Vacant Lots. Vacant and unplatted residential properties having
frontage on the streets having major maintenance performed will be
assessed based upon the number of potential lots into which the
property could be subdivided. For purposes of this policy, the
number of potential lots will be determined by the smallest lot
allowed by zoning ordinances within the area of the improvements.
2. Commercial, Retail, Tax Exempt, Institutional, and Medium and High-
Density Residential
a. Commercial, retail, tax exempt, institutional and medium and high-
density multi-residential frontages will be assessed actual project
costs according to the following table based on the lineal footage of
streets being maintained adjacent to front, side, or rear lot sides. For
individually owned multi-family structures, this cost will be divided
equally between the individual units.
% of Cost
Land Use Type Assessed
Retail/Commercial 80%
Non-Profit/Tax Exempt 50%
Medium and High-Density Residential 1 50%
Single Family Residential 25% 2
Twin homes / Duplexes 75% of a single family, per unit
1 Three or more units
2 Based on standard residential street.
b. Unplatted or vacant commercial, retail, tax exempt, institutional
medium and high-density residential properties will be assessed
as described above based upon the land use allowed by the
ordinance.
3. Public Property. Public property will be assessed in accordance with the
above residential street policy for low-density residential lots. The
assessment will be allocated on an adjusted front foot basis over the
entire frontage.
III. ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE REPAIRS
Storm Sewer, Sanitary Sewer, Water main, Sidewalks, and Curb and Gutter:
1. The cost of lateral and main storm sewer, sidewalk / pathway, and curb
and gutter improvements, maintenance, new, and reconstruction within
the area where streets are receiving major maintenance will be included
in the project cost to be assessed at the same rate as the street portion.
2. The cost of lateral and main sanitary sewer and water main maintenance
and reconstruction within the area where streets are receiving major
maintenance will be included in the project cost to be assessed at the
same rate as the street portion.
3. The total cost of new lateral sanitary sewer and water main construction
will be assessed against the properties receiving sanitary sewer and
water service by the new construction. The total cost of new sanitary
sewer and water service connections will be assessed against the
properties making, designed to make, or intended to make the
connection.
IV. FINANCING
A. The cost of the roadway major maintenance and related utility improvements will
be assessed over a period not to exceed 10 years.
B. The project costs not funded by assessments will be funded from any funding
sources as specified by the City Council.
C. The assessment rate will be based on the project cost including the rate of
interest on bonds sold to finance the project plus a surcharge of one percent.
Adopted: Date October 13, 2003
Item No. 8I
Type of Business: CA
WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing;
CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
Item Title/Subject: Manufactured Home Park Second Access Study
Resolution No. 6119 Approving the Preliminary
Feasibility Reports for the Manufactured Home
Park Second Access Study – Mounds View
Manufactured Home Community and Towns Edge
Terrace
Meeting Date: October 13, 2003
Background:
At the November 4, 2002 Work Session, Staff presented the issue of creating a
second access to two of the three manufactured home sites in Mounds View,
Mounds View Mobile Home Park and Towns Edge Terrace. Neither site currently
complies with the City Ordinance 1110.05 subdivision 2a, “Park Site shall have at
least two (2) points of ingress and egress for vehicles.”
On January 13, 2003, the City Council approved Resolution No. 5931 authorizing
the engineering firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates (BRAA) to
provide engineering services, including municipal and traffic engineering, at
these two manufactured home parks.
Discussion:
A draft of the feasibility report for the Mounds View Manufactured Home
Community was completed and presented to the City Council for their review and
comment at the June 2, 2003 Work Session. The report for Towns Edge Terrace
Manufactured Home Community was presented to the City Council on July 7,
2003.
Final version of these reports were distributed to the City Council as part of the
October 6, 2003 Council Work Session packet.
The conclusions of the reports found the second street accesses to be physically
feasible. The necessary improvements are reasonable, with typical costs
anticipated for improvements of this kind. The reports state that the second
accesses are desirable from the standpoint or traffic volumes, traffic circulation,
traffic planning, and resident convenience.
At this time Staff is recommending approval of the preliminary feasibility reports.
What’s Next – There are several issues that will need to be addressed should
this project proceed. These include determining funding sources and, in the case
of Towns Edge Terrace, determining which second access is preferred.
Discussions on this issue are scheduled for November 3, 2003 at the Council
Work Session.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the
preliminary feasibility reports for the second access studies conducted for the
Mounds View Manufactured Home Community and Towns Edge Terrace.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works Reviewed by City Administrator:___
RESOLUTION NO. 6119
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY FEASIBILITY REPORTS FOR THE
MANUFACTURED HOME PARK SECOND ACCESS STUDY – MOUNDS VIEW
MANUFACTURED HOME COMMUNITY AND TOWNS EDGE TERRACE
WHEREAS, 0n January 13, 2003, the City Council approved
Resolution No. 5931 authorizing the engineering firm of Bonestroo, Rosene,
Anderlik, and Associates (BRAA) to provide engineering services, including
municipal and traffic engineering, at these two manufactured home parks; and
WHEREAS, a draft of the feasibility report for the Mounds View
Manufactured Home Community was completed and presented to the City
Council for their review and comment at the June 2, 2003 Work Session and the
report for Towns Edge Terrace Manufactured Home Community was presented
to the City Council on July 7, 2003; and
WHEREAS, the final versions of these reports were distributed to
the City Council as part of the October 6, 2003 Council Work Session packet;
and
WHEREAS, the conclusions of the reports found the second street
accesses to be physically feasible, and the improvements to be reasonable, with
typical costs anticipated for improvements of this kind.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Mounds View
City Council does hereby approve the preliminary feasibility reports for the
second access studies conducted for the Mounds View Manufactured Home
Community and Towns Edge Terrace.
Adopted this 13th day of October 2003.
______________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
(ATTEST) ______________________________
Kurt Ulrich
City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: 9F
Meeting Date: October 13, 2003
Type of Business: CB
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing to Consider the Second Reading and Adoption of
Ordinance 720, an Ordinance Rezoning all Parcels Currently
Zoned PF, Public Facilities; Special Planning Case SP-118-03
Introduction:
At the City Council’s July 14, 2003 meeting, the City Attorney presented a report to the
Council suggesting that the Council strongly consider a comprehensive rezoning of all
City-owned properties currently zoned PF, Public Facilities. At the attorney’s urging, staff
was directed to bring the issue to the Planning Commission for their review and
recommendation. The attorney’s report is attached for reference.
Discussion:
At the August 20, 2003 meeting of the Planning Commission, staff presented the
attorney’s findings and communicated the Council’s direction requesting the Commission
review the PF district and to recommend suitable alternative zoning districts for each of
the 17 properties. Staff prepared maps showing all of the PF-zoned parcels and provided
a map of possible rezoning scenarios.
The Planning Commission generally supported the proposed revisions in light of the
attorney’s recommendation and directed staff to draft an ordinance, resolution and final
map showing the proposed changes to the Commission to forward on the City Council.
At the Planning Commission’s meeting on September 3, 2003, the Commission approved
a resolution recommending the changes as presented herein, and recommending a
revision to the City’s Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to adjust for the
proposed changes.
The following is a list of uses on parcels presently zoned PF:
• City parks
• Wells & pump houses
• City Hall
• Water treatment facilities
• Water tower
• The Bridges Golf Course
• The Community Center.
The following table represents the proposed zoning designations for the above uses:
Reviewed by City Administrator: _______
PF Rezoning Report
Oct 13, 2003
Page 2
Land Uses Current
Zoning Proposed Zoning
City Parks PF R-1, Single Family Residential
City Wells PF R-1, Single Family Residential
City Hall PF B-3, Highway Business Commercial
Community Center PF B-3, Highway Business Commercial
Golf Course PF I-1, Industrial
Public Works Garage PF I-1, Industrial
Water Tower, Reservoir PF I-1, Industrial
Old Water Tower Site PF I-1, Industrial
Rationale:
The Planning Commission recommends the above designations after much discussion
regarding the various possibilities. City parks were designated for R-1, Single Family
Residential as most parks are completely within single-family residential districts and
“parks” is an allowed use in the R-1 district. The City has three well sites in the
community, all within single-family districts. While “Industrial” was discussed as a
potential zoning district for the wells, given their locations within residential districts and
the fact that “essential services” is a use within the single-family district, R-1 appeared
more appropriate and less likely to generate any “spot zoning” concerns.
The proposed zoning for City Hall, which is essentially just an office building, is B-3,
Highway Business Commercial. Office building s are permitted uses within the B-3
district. Community Centers are also permitted in the B-3, Highway Business district and
given the present tenants (and potential tenants) of the Center, the B-3 commercial
designation seemed appropriate. The public works garage, the water tower and reservoir
and water treatment facility, all on the City Hall campus, are industrial uses and such a
designation would be proper. Last, with regard to the Golf Course, the Commission
considered either a commercial designation or the industrial label. Based on the
surrounding properties and based on previous zoning and comp plan designations, the
Commission felt “Industrial” was the more appropriate of the two. Because golf courses
are currently only allowed in the PF district, a text amendment is necessary and such an
ordinance has been drafted for consideration.
Comprehensive Plan.
The Comp Plan Future Land Use Map (attached) designates the parcels currently zoned
PF as a mix of different classifications. Parks are designated as Natural Open Space
(OSN), Passive Open Space (OSP) or Outdoor Sport and Recreation (SRO). City wells
are designated Utility (UTL) while City Hall and the Public Works garage are designated
Institutional (IN). The Community Center is guided as Indoor Sport and Recreation (SRI)
and the site of the former water tower in the Mustang Drive industrial park is designated
Heavy Industrial (HI), probably in anticipation of a reuse by one of the adjoining
businesses on Mustang Drive.
PF Rezoning Report
October 13, 2003
Page 3
This is important because the City’s Zoning Map needs to be consistent with (or, not
inconsistent with) the City’s Future Land Use Map. To aid in evaluating whether a
property with a certain zoning designation is consistent with the future intended use, a
compatibility table is included in the Comprehensive Plan. The compatibility table
indicates that the only compatible zoning districts for OSN and SRO properties (parklands
and the golf course) are CRP and PF. Incompatibility issues arise with the other parcels
as well. Thus, the future land-use designations for the City Hall, Community Center and
the Golf Course will need to be amended.
Notification and Feedback:
The City Council held a public hearing and approved the first reading of the proposed
ordinance. As was addressed at the public hearing, Staff fielded many phone calls and
electronic messages from residents and business representatives questioning the
proposed rezonings. Most of the callers understood the rationale behind the proposed
rezonings once all of the factors were explained and once assured that the land uses
would not be changing. It should be stated again that no land use would change as a
result of this rezoning action. Parks will remain parks, City wells will remain City wells,
the golf course will remain the golf course.
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission, the City Attorney and Staff recommend Council approve the
second reading and adoption of Ordinance 720. As a reminder, ordinance adoption
requires a roll-call vote.
_____________________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
______________________________________________________________________________
SCOTT J. RIGGS
Attorney at Law
Direct Dial (612) 337-9260
Email: sriggs@kennedy-graven.com
July 14, 2003
Mr. Jim Ericson
Interim City Clerk-Administrator
City of Mounds View
2401 Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
RE: Zoning Code District Review
Dear Jim:
In light of the recent MN Supreme Court decision in the case of In the Matter of Denial of Eller
Media Company’s Applications for Outdoor Advertising Device Permits in the City of Mounds
View, Minnesota and the reasoning set forth in that case, an issue that has been discussed by the
City in the past regarding the City of Mounds View Zoning Code and the districts contained
therein now appears to warrant additional review by the City of Mounds View. Specifically, the
issue is the existence of a public facilities (PF) district in the zoning code that covers a range of
uses from public parks through wastewater treatment facilities. The PF district distinction is based
solely on ownership of a parcel of land, which has to be by the City of Mounds View, and does not
deal with the type of land use actually being made of a given parcel of land.
As the MN Supreme Court points out in its opinion, zoning deals with land uses and the City’s
authority to regulate such land uses. In the case of the PF district designation in the City of
Mounds View’s City Code, the designation exists solely for the purpose of convenience for
categorizing land owned by the City and not because of the actual use being made or the intended
use to be made of a parcel of land, which should actually be the establishing or guiding factor of a
zoning district designation. Thus, consistent with the MN Supreme Court’s reasoning in the Eller
case, it may be best to revise or entirely delete the PF district designation existing in the City’s
Code (which only applies to City-owned parcels) and to revise such districts to guide the uses
made of those parcels, e.g.: parks-residential; wastewater treatment plants-industrial; city offices-
business/commercial/industrial; golf courses-business/industrial (golf courses are a permitted use
in a business district as presently defined by the Mounds View City Code).
The revisions or elimination of the PF district would be consistent with the MN Supreme Court’s
reasoning in the Eller case in that the “label” for the use allowed in the district would actually
match the use being made of a given parcel of land, and that the “label” for a district would not be
merely determined by who owns the property (which only applies in the case of the City, as the
Mounds View City Code is presently drafted). Additionally, it could be argued that the existence
of PF district “islands” for individual parcels of land that are surrounded by the City’s other
zoning districts (which are appropriately based on land use issues) constitutes “spot zoning” as
discussed in the MN Supreme Court’s Opinion.
In any event, while over the course of the past three or four years this issue has been raised
because of the rezoning that is required every time the City acquires a parcel of land, it would
appear that the PF district designation makes little sense as a designated zoning district in a land-
use context, and that the City should strongly consider revising its zoning code to deal specifically
with zoning in the land-use context rather than in the ownership context.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have regarding this matter and the
suggestions noted herein.
Sincerely,
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED
Scott J. Riggs
Mounds View City Attorney
SJR:jms
cc: Bob Vose
ORDINANCE NO. 720
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY CODE BY DELETING
CHAPTER 1118 PERTAINING TO THE PF, PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT, AND
REZONING ALL PF DESIGNATED PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
WHEREAS, the City Attorney has recommended review of the PF (Public Facilities
District) zoning district designation in the Mounds View City Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and Planning Commission have reviewed the PF (Public
Facilities District) zoning district designation in the Mounds View City Code; and
WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council and Planning Commission have become
aware of a situation concerning parcels zoned PF (Public Facilities District) which necessitates a
comprehensive rezoning action; and
WHEREAS, only parcels owned by the City of Mounds View are zoned Public Facilities,
as stated in Section 1118.02 (Public Facilities Permitted Uses) of the Mounds View City Code;
and
WHEREAS, according to City Code Section 1118.02, only parcels owned by the City of
Mounds View may be zoned PF; and
WHEREAS, it has been brought to the City’s attention that the City’s current practice of
zoning parcels based on land ownership relative to the PF Zoning district is not consistent with
conventional zoning practices; and
WHEREAS, the City Attorney has suggested that the City rezone City-owned parcels
based upon land use rather than based upon parcel ownership; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends rezoning City-owned parcels to
zoning designations consistent with the following table and as shown on the map attached as
Exhibit A; and
Ordinance 720
Page 2
Land Uses Current Zoning Proposed Zoning
City Parks PF R-1, Single Family Residential
City Wells PF R-1, Single Family Residential
City Hall PF B-3, Highway Business Commercial
Community Center PF B-3, Highway Business Commercial
Golf Course PF I-1, Industrial
Public Works Garage PF I-1, Industrial
Water Tower, Reservoir PF I-1, Industrial
Old Water Tower Site PF I-1, Industrial
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends adoption of a
Comprehensive Plan amendment to update the Future Land Use (FLU) Map to be consistent with
the recommended rezoning actions as herein indicated; and
WHEREAS, the City Council concurs with the recommendations of the Planning
Commission; and
WHEREAS, the City Council also desires to adopt a zoning text amendment to eliminate
Chapter 1118, the PF (Public Facilities District) zoning district designation, from the Mounds
View City Code; and
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View has zoning ordinances and a zoning map with their
purpose being as outlined in Title 1100 of the Mounds View City Code governing zoning, which
may be amended pursuant to the authority and procedures outlined in Section 1125 of the Mounds
View City Code; and
WHEREAS, the procedures outlined in Section 1125 of the City Code pertaining to
amendments to the zoning ordinance have been fully satisfied, including a public hearing
conducted by the City Council on September 22, 2003 and a recommendation by the Mounds
View Planning Commission to rezone being submitted to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,
THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS:
SECTION 1: The recitals set forth above in this ordinance are incorporated into and made
a part of this ordinance as if fully set forth herein and constitute the findings of the City Council
regarding this matter.
SECTION 2: Chapter 1118 of the Mounds View Zoning Code is hereby deleted in its
entirety.
Ordinance 720
Page 3
SECTION 3: The City of Mounds View ordains that the parcels of land as set forth and
described in the table below be rezoned from PF (Public Facilities District) to the corresponding
zoning district as set forth in table attached as Exhibit B.
SECTION 4. This Ordinance becomes effective thirty (30) days after its publication in the
official City newspaper.
First read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on the 22nd day of September,
2003.
Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View the 13th day of October,
2003.
______________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Kurt Ulrich, Clerk/Administrator
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
City Attorney
1
2 3
3
4
5
6 7 8
9 10 11
12
13
14
15 16
17
18
Exhibit A.
PROPERTIES CURRENTLY ZONED PUBLIC FACILITY (PF)
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
Page 1
PIN Map
# Street Address Land Use Legal Description Proposed
Zoning
063023210116 1 2815 Ardan Avenue Groveland Park Aud. Subd. No. 89 Subj to Rds; Part of Lot 68 Desc as Fol
Com At Ne Cor Lot 68 Th S on El Sd Lot to Intersection of a
Line 10 Ft Sly of & Par to a Line Running From Pt on El Sd Lot
95.07 Ft S of Sd
R-1, Single
Family Res.
063023240066 1 2815 Ardan Avenue Groveland Park Aud. Subd. No. 89 Subj To Rds; The Fol The S 275 Ft Of Lot
68 & The N 65 Ft Of S 340 Ft Of W 218.1 Ft Of Sd Lot 68
R-1, Single
Family Res.
053023220002 2 8307 Long Lake Road Ardan Park The Sw ¼ Of The Nw ¼ Lying Swly Of Hwy (Subj To Rd &
Esmts) In Sec 5 Tn 30 Rn 23
R-1, Single
Family Res.
053023130001 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course S ½ Of Ne ¼ (Subj To Hwys & Sts) In Sec 05 Tn 30 Rn 23 I-1, Industrial
053023240011 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Laport Meadows, Lot 1, Blk 1 I-1, Industrial
053023240012 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Laport Meadows, Lot 2, Blk 1 I-1, Industrial
053023240013 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Laport Meadows, Lot 3, Blk 1, Subj to Hwy I-1, Industrial
053023240014 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Laport Meadows, Lot 4, Blk 1, Subj to Hwy I-1, Industrial
053023240025 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Laport Meadows, Lot 13, Blk 1, Subj to Hwy I-1, Industrial
053023240026 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Laport Meadows, North ½ Lot 14, Blk 1 I-1, Industrial
053023240027 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Laport Meadows, South ½ Lot 14, Blk 1, Subj to Hwy I-1, Industrial
053023240028 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Laport Meadows, Lot 15, Blk 1 I-1, Industrial
053023240029 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Laport Meadows, North 83 Ft, Lot 1, Blk 2 I-1, Industrial
053023240030 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Laport Meadows, So 80 Ft of the No 163 Ft of Lot 1, Blk 2 I-1, Industrial
053023240031 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course That Part of Lot 1, Blk 2, Laport Meadows, Lying So of the No
163 Ft, Subj to Hwy
I-1, Industrial
053023240032 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Laport Meadows, Lot 2, Blk 2, Subj to Hwy I-1, Industrial
053023240033 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Laport Meadows, Lots 2 thru 4, Blk 2, Subj to and No of Hwy. I-1, Industrial
053023210006 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course North Star Industrial Park 2nd, Outlot A I-1, Industrial
053023210005 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course North Star Industrial Park 2nd, Lot 4 Blk 1 I-1, Industrial
Exhibit B
PROPERTIES CURRENTLY ZONED PUBLIC FACILITY (PF)
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
Page 2
PIN Map
# Street Address Land Use Legal Description Proposed
Zoning
053023220004 3 8290 Coral Sea Street Golf Course Sysco, Subj to Rd & Esmts; Outlot A I-1, Industrial
063023410013 4 7901 Greenwood Dr Hillview Park Spring Lake Park Hillview, Lots 7, 8, 25 And 26 R-1, Single
Family Res.
053023310040 5 2335 Knoll Drive Greenfield Park Pinewood Terrace No. 5 Subj to Esmts; Part Ely of Extended
Wly Line of Lot 23 & W of E Line of Sw ¼ of Sec 5 Tn 30 Rn
23 of Lot 35 Blk 14
R-1, Single
Family Res.
053023310039 5 2335 Knoll Drive Greenfield Park Pinewood Terrace No. 5 Subj to Ditches N of Extended S L of
Lot 28 And W of Extended Wly L of Lot 23 of Lot 35 Blk 14
R-1, Single
Family Res.
053023310038 5 2335 Knoll Drive Greenfield Park Pinewood Terrace No. 5 Subj To Ditches Part S of Extended S
Ln of Lot 28 Blk 14 of Lot 35 Blk 14
R-1, Single
Family Res.
053023440014 6 5590 Quincy Street Oakwood Park Pinewood Terrace, Lots 13 Thru 19 Blk 1 R-1, Single
Family Res.
053023340004 7 2408 Hillview Road Well # 4 Sec 5 Tn 30 Rn 23 E 100 Ft of W 180 Ft of N 183 Ft of Nw ¼
of Se ¼ of Sw ¼ (Subj to Rd) In Sec 5 Tn 30 Rn 23
R-1, Single
Family Res.
063023330010 8 7840 Pleasant View
Drive
Lions Lakeside
Park Aud. Subd. No. 89 Subj to Flowage Esmt & Ex E 85 Ft Lot 20 R-1, Single
Family Res.
073023210015 9 7545 Groveland Road Well 6, Filtration
Plant #3 Spring Lake Park Knolls, W ½ Of Lot 9 R-1, Single
Family Res.
073023120003 10 2700 County Road I Silver View Park Registered Land Survey 360 Subj To Esmts, Tracts B, C & E R-1, Single
Family Res.
083023220042 11 2466 Bronson Drive Public Works Mounds View City Hall Addition, Lot 1 Blk 1 I-1, Industrial
083023240060 12 5394 Edgewood Drive Community
Center
Mounds View City Hall Addition, Lot 1 Blk 2 B-3, Highway
Business
083023130041 13 5324 Jackson Drive Lambert Park Lambert’s Addition Subj to Esmt The Fol Ex E 25 Ft Lot 7 and
All of Lots 8, 9 and 10 Blk 2
R-1, Single
Family Res.
083023320079 14 5214 Long Lake Road Random Park Random’s First Addition Lot 5 Blk 1 R-1, Single
Family Res.
083023320080 14 5214 Long Lake Road Random Park Random’s First Addition Lot 6 Blk 1 R-1, Single
Family Res.
083023320081 14 5214 Long Lake Road Random Park Random’s First Addition Lot 7 Blk 1 R-1, Single
Family Res.
Exhibit B.
PROPERTIES CURRENTLY ZONED PUBLIC FACILITY (PF)
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
Page 3
PIN Map
# Street Address Land Use Legal Description Proposed
Zoning
083023320082 14 5214 Long Lake Road Random Park Random’s First Addition Lot 8 Blk 1 R-1, Single
Family Res.
073023430038 15 2752 Woodcrest Drive Woodcrest Park Twelve Oaks 2nd Addition Subj to Drainage Esmt Lot 5 Blk 9 R-1, Single
Family Res.
083023330042 16 5100 Long Lake Road Well 5, Filtration
Plant #2
W 153 Ft of S 150 Ft of N ¾ of Sw ¼ (Subj To Rd) In Sec 8 Tn
30 Rn 23
R-1, Single
Family Res.
173023130001 17 0000 Mustang Drive Site of old water
tower
N 101.16 Ft Of E 164 Ft of Sw ¼ of Ne ¼ of Sec 17 Tn 30 Rn
23 I-1, Industrial
083023220042 18 2401 Highway 10 City Hall Mounds View City Hall Addition, Lot 1 Blk 1 B-3, Highway
Business
Exhibit B
Item No: 9G
Meeting Date: October 13, 2003
Type of Business: CB
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 721, an Ordinance
Amending Chapter 1116 of the Mounds View Zoning Code; Special
Planning Case SP-118-03
Introduction:
Ordinance 721 is a tandem ordinance with Ordinance 720, an ordinance rezoning all of the
properties in the City currently zoned Public Facilities. With a rezoning of the golf course and
the elimination of the PF district, it becomes necessary to amend the zoning code to add
“Golf Course“ as a use within the targeted zoning district.
Discussion:
The Planning Commission reviewed all of the options relating to potential districts
appropriate for golf courses. Other than within the PF district, golf courses are not permitted
thus an amendment is needed. Because of the zoning and land uses of parcels near the
golf course and also considering previous golf course zonings and comp plan designations, it
became apparent that the course should be rezoned to the Industrial district. At the
September 3, 2003 meeting, the Planning Commission approved a resolution recommending
approval of the proposed text amendment to Chapter 1116.
On September 22, 2003, the City Council held a public hearing and approved the first
reading and introduction of this ordinance.
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission, the City Attorney and Staff recommend approval of the second
reading and adoption of attached Ordinance 721, an ordinance amending Chapter 1116 of
the Zoning Code by adding “Golf Course” as a permitted use within the I-1, Industrial zoning
district. A roll call vote is required.
___________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
763-717-4021
Reviewed by City Administrator _________
ORDINANCE NO. 721
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1116.02 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW ZONING
CODE PERTAINING TO PERMITTED USES IN THE I-1 ZONING DISTRICT
THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS:
SECTION 1: Section 1116.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code is hereby amended
with the proposed additions underlined to read as follows:
Section 1116.02: PERMITTED USES: The following are permitted uses in an I-1 District:
Golf Course
SECTION 2. This Ordinance becomes effective thirty (30) days after its publication in the
official City newspaper.
First read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this 22nd day of
September, 2003.
Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 13th day of
October, 2003.
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Kurt Ulrich, Clerk / Administrator
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
City Attorney
Item No: 9H
Meeting Date: Oct 13, 2003
Type of Business: Council Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Resolution 6095, a Resolution
Authorizing the Hire of Kristin Prososki to the Position
of Planning Associate
Background:
On May 12, 2003, the City Council adopted Resolution 6012, a resolution authorizing staff to
advertise for the vacant planning associate position in the Community Development
Department. The position was vacated in 2002 when the former planning associate
accepted a position with another community.
Discussion:
Staff advertised the opening on the City’s website, on the league of MN Cities website, with
the StarTribune and with the Minnesota Chapter of the American Planning Association. The
anticipated starting salary for the position was advertised at $35,194. We received 60
applications for the position, of which twelve had the requisite experience, education and
training. Staff interviewed eleven of these candidates (one had already found a job) and
after an extended period of negotiations and reference checks, the position was finally
offered to Ms. Kristin Prososki. Ms. Prososki currently works for the City of Chanhassen as
their full-time planning intern and has gained considerable experience while in their employ.
Ms. Prososki has an Urban and Regional Studies degree from Minnesota State University in
Mankato.
Salary:
As the Council will recall from the May discussion, Labor Relations indicated that the salary
range for the planning associate position should be reduced consistent with the reduced
responsibilities and reduced educational and experience requirements. The 2003 maximum
salary for the position was $46,924.80. The new maximum, based upon the
recommendations of Labor Relations, is $43,993.00. Ms. Prososki has accepted the position
at Step 1 of the new range, which is equivalent to $35, 194, or, 80% of the new maximum.
Because Ms. Prososki is starting at Step 1, the City’s personnel policies state that she will
progress to Step 2 after 6 months, Step 3 after twelve months, Step 4 after twenty-four
months and finally Step 5 after thirty-six months of employment. Again, this progression is
consistent with the City’s personnel manual. All other personnel policies apply, no deviations
have been made or offered.
Starting Date:
Ms. Prososki would begin employment on Tuesday, October 21, 2003.
Reviewed by City Administrator: ________
Recommendation:
Staff recommends the City Council adopt Resolution 6095, a resolution approving the
hire of Kristin Prososki to the position of Planning Associate, effective date of October,
21, 2003, pending satisfactory background check.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
RESOLUTION NO. 6095
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPOINTING KRISTIN PROSOSKI TO THE POSITION
OF MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING ASSOCIATE
WHEREAS, upon direction from the Mounds View City Council, the Planning
Associate position was advertised; and,
WHEREAS, sixty applications were received for the position and twelve applicants
were chosen for interview; and,
WHEREAS, Ms. Prosoki’s skills and experience were determined to most closely
match the duties and responsibilities as outlined in the planning associate job description;
and,
WHEREAS, Ms. Prososki has consented to a drivers license and criminal
background check which will be performed as a condition of employment; and,
WHEREAS, Ms. Prososki will begin employment on October 21, 2003 at Step 1 of
the wage scale as adopted herein below:
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
$35,194.40 $37.394.05 $39,593.70 $41,793.35 $43,993.00
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
appoints Ms. Kristin Prososki to the position of Planning Associate with employment to
commence on October 21, 2003, subject to satisfactory background checks.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the City Council approves the salary scale for the
planning associate position as indicated herein and the starting salary of $35,194 (Step 1)
with increases in accordance with City personnel policies subject to City Council
authorization.
Adopted this 13th day of October, 2003.
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: 9J
Meeting Date: October 13, 2003
Type of Business: Council Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Minor Subdivision of 8409 and 8419
Groveland Road; Planning Case MI03-003
Introduction:
Tony & Cheryl Hoffman are property owners of adjacent lots located at 8409 and 8419
Groveland Road. The two lots are a combined 1.13 acres and are both improved with single-
family dwellings. The proposed subdivision would create one lot in between the two existing
lots, taking the south 55 feet from 8419 Groveland and the north 20 feet from 8409 Groveland
Road. The new lot would be 75 feet wide and have an area of 15,975 square feet.
A minor subdivision is a division of land less than two acres in area in which only one additional
lot is created. The lot is zoned R-1, Single Family residential and the minimum lot size is
11,000. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for low density residential.
The property owners have submitted a survey for the proposed subdivision indicating the two
existing lots and the proposed new lot. The new lot is indicated as Parcel B.
Discussion:
The Hoffmans’ properties are a combined 49,416 square feet, or, 1.13 acres. As a result of
the subdivision, only one additional lot would be created (Parcel B), leaving a 75-foot wide lot to
the north (Parcel A) and an 80-foot wide lot to the south (Parcel C). The three lots would
conform to all of the City’s minimum subdivision requirements.
As can be seen from the attached survey, the north lot line of the proposed new lot bisects an
existing shed. The applicants will either move the shed to Parcel A so that it maintains all
required setbacks or the shed will be removed from the property altogether. Also from the
survey, the subdivision would separate the garage at 8419 Groveland Road from the house,
which would be nonconforming with the Code in that an accessory building cannot be allowed
on a lot without a principal structure. To address this issue, the applicants have two options
with a third option permitted at the City’s discretion. The first option would be to demolish the
garage upon recording of the survey and deeds. This option would seem wasteful unless the
garage is old and in needing or replacement anyway. The second option would involve
relocating the garage to the northeast corner of Parcel A so that 8419 Groveland would retain a
garage. The drawbacks to this option are potentially twofold--the actual cost to relocate the
garage may exceed the value of the garage, and, the structural integrity of the building could be
compromised in the move, especially if the garage is already deteriorating. The last option that
could be considered regarding the garage could be exercised only at the City’s discretion,
which would be to allow the garage to remain on the property in a nonconforming state for an
agreed-upon period of time assuming a new home would be constructed on the lot. If this
option is chosen, the City may want to require a new garage be constructed for Parcel A either
before or at the same time Parcel B is improved.
Reviewed by City Administrator: _______
Park Dedication Requirements.
Subdivisions of land are subject to park dedication requirements. Because the subdivision is
less than 2 acres in area, the fee is 5% of the land’s market value, less the value of the
remaining land under the existing home. Rather than require an appraisal for every subdivision,
staff typically uses the assessment valuations available through Ramsey County. The
combined land value for the 1.13 acres is $94,700. On a per-square-foot basis, the value is
$1.91. Since Parcel B is 15,975 square feet, the proportional value would be $30,512.25. Five
percent of that amount, $1,525.61, is the required dedication for this subdivision. This would
need to be submitted as a condition of City subdivision approval.
Easements.
With every subdivision of land, the City requires that drainage and utility easements be
dedicated around the perimeter of the lot. The survey provided by the applicants indicates the
presence of the existing perimeter easements and also identifies the proposed easements. To
be consistent with our easement policies, the survey will need to be revised to include the
following language:
“The proposed drainage and utility easement areas as identified herein shall be dedicated to the
City of Mounds View by a separate document recorded with Ramsey County.”
Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission reviewed this request at their meeting on October 1, 2003. The
Commission unanimously recommended approval. Their resolution is attached for the
Council’s reference.
Public Notice.
While a public hearing was not required for this request, staff did send out letters to neighboring
property owners as a courtesy, informing them of the proposed minor subdivision and the
anticipated meeting dates.
Recommendation:
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve Resolution 6106,
a resolution approving a minor subdivision of 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road, with stipulations.
_____________________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
Attachments:
1. Planning Application
2. Zoning Map
3. Photographic Documentation
4. Certificate of Survey
5. Resolution 739-03
6. Resolution 6106
Zoning Map
Photographic Documentation
From this vantage point, you can see the existing homes at 8419 Groveland
Road (left) and 8409 Groveland Road (right). The driveway in between the two
homes serves 8419 Groveland, the garage for which is obscured by tree cover.
While the lot has many trees, it appears as though there is a clearing i n which a
new home could be constructed with little or no loss of existing mature trees.
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 739-03
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MINOR SUBDIVISION OF 8409
AND 8419 GROVELAND ROAD REQUESTED BY TONY AND CHERYL HOFFMAN;
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. MI03-003
WHEREAS, Property owners Tony and Cheryl Hoffman (the Applicants) have
requested approval of a minor subdivision of contiguous lots located at 8419 Groveland
Road and 8409 Groveland Road, properties zoned R -1, Single Family Residential, legally-
described as follows:
The South 100 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, Dalberg’s Sunnyside Estates
and,
Lot 1, Block 1, Dalberg’s Sunnyside Estates, except the South 100 feet thereof.
WHEREAS, the Applicants propose to subdivide the south 55 feet from 8419
Groveland Road and the north 20 feet from 8409 Groveland Road to create a 75-foot wide
buildable lot (Parcel B) fronting Groveland Road; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Applicants’ request for a
minor subdivision and has determined that it is in conformance with Chapters 1104, 1201,
and 1202 of the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the Applicants’ request for a minor
subdivision is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, the subdivision is subject to
a $1,525.61 park dedication fee which is equivalent to 5% of the new lot’s market value; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
recommends approval of the minor subdivision of 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road subject to
the following stipulations:
1. The Applicants arrange to have the survey revised as follows:
a. Title the survey “Certificate of Survey.”
b. All parcels shall meet the City’s minimum width requirement of 75 feet.
c. Five foot drainage and utility easement shall be added to either side of both
new property lines.
d. The following language shall be added: “The proposed drainage and utility
easement areas as shown herein shall be publicly dedicated to the City of
Mounds View by a separate document recorded with Ramsey County.”
Resolution 739-03
Page 2
2. The Applicants shall arrange to have a Title Commitment or Registered Property
Abstract drafted and submitted prior to the approval of the subdivision by the City
Council.
3. The Applicants shall submit the required $1,525.61 park dedication fee prior to the
City approving the deeds for recordation.
4. The Applicants shall move or remove the shed and garage associated with 8409
Groveland Road into within one year from the date of Council approval. If the
structures are relocated, they shall be brought into compliance with all applicable
codes and requirements.
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 1st day of October, 2003.
__________________________________________
Jean Miller, Acting Chairperson
ATTEST:
______________________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
(SEAL)
RESOLUTION NO. 6106
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MINOR SUBDIVISION OF 8409
AND 8419 GROVELAND ROAD REQUESTED BY TONY AND CHERYL HOFFMAN;
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. MI03-003
WHEREAS, Property owners Tony and Cheryl Hoffman have requested approval of
a minor subdivision of contiguous lots located at 8419 Groveland Road and 8409 Groveland
Road, properties zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally-described as follows:
The South 100 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, Dalberg’s Sunnyside Estates
and,
Lot 1, Block 1, Dalberg’s Sunnyside Estates, except the South 100 feet thereof.
WHEREAS, the applicants propose to subdivide the south 55 feet from 8419
Groveland Road and the north 20 feet from 8409 Groveland Road to create a combined 75-
foot wide buildable lot (Parcel B) fronting Groveland Road; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the applicants’ request for a minor
subdivision and has determined that it is in conformance with Chapters 1104, 1201, and 1202
of the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the applicants’ request for a minor subdivision is
in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, the subdivision is subject to
a $1,525.61 park dedication fee which is equivalent to 5% of the new lot’s market value; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 739-03, a resolution
recommending approval of this subdivision.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
recommends approval of the minor subdivision of 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road subject to
the following stipulations:
5. Prior to the City affixing its seal of approval on the new deeds, the applicants shall
arrange for the following:
a. The Survey shall be revised such that all parcels meet the City’s minimum
width requirement of 75 feet.
b. Language shall be added to the Survey stating “The proposed drainage and
utility easement areas as shown herein shall be dedicated to the City of
Mounds View by a separate document recorded with Ramsey County.”
c. Submit a Title Commitment or Registered Property Abstract for the City
Attorney’s review and approval.
Resolution 6106
Page 2
d. The applicants shall submit the required $1,525.61 park dedication fee.
2. The applicant shall arrange to have new deeds prepared and recorded with
Ramsey County within one year of this resolution’s adoption.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this approval shall be null and void if after one year
from the date of adoption the above conditions remain unsatisfied.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the applicants shall make arrangements to relocate
or remove the non-conforming garage and shed or otherwise bring both structures into
compliance with all applicable codes within one year of deed recordation.
Adopted this 13th day of October, 2003.
__________________________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Kurt Ulrich, City Clerk / Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: 9K
Meeting Date: October 13, 2003
Type of Business: Council Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Minor Subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside
Road; Planning Case MI03-004
Introduction:
Mike and Wendy Pedginski are applying for a minor subdivision of the lot located at 7886
Sunnyside Road. Mr. Donald Forslund is the owner of the lot and has signed the subdivision
application, as have the Pedginskis. The subject property is a corner lot located at the
southeast corner of Hillview Road and Sunnyside Road; the home was constructed in 1941.
A minor subdivision is a division of land less than two acres in area in which only one additional
lot is created. The lot is zoned R-1, Single Family residential and the minimum lot size for an
interior lot is 11,000. Corner lots require a minimum of 12,500 square feet. The
Comprehensive Plan designates this area for low density residential.
Discussion:
The Forslund property is currently 30,576 square feet, or, .7 acres. The proposed subdivision
would split off the west 104 feet of the Forslund property to create a new buildable lot fronting
Hillview Road. The area of the new lot would be 13,726 square feet leaving 16,750 square feet
for the remainder parcel, well in excess of the minimum for a corner lot. Mr. Forslund resides in
the existing home and would remain in the home after the subdivision. Both proposed lots
satisfy all zoning requirements. The applicants have submitted a Certificate of Survey for the
proposed subdivision which identifies the lot to be created as Parcel B and the remainder lot as
Parcel A.
Park Dedication Requirements.
Subdivisions of land are subject to park dedication requirements. Because the subdivision is
less than 2 acres in area, the fee is 5% of the land’s market value, less the value of the land
under the existing home. Rather than require an appraisal for every subdivision, staff typically
uses the assessment valuations available through Ramsey County. The combined land value
for the property is $53,200. On a per-square-foot basis, the value is $1.74. Since proposed
Parcel B is 13,726 square feet, its proportional value would be $23,882. Five percent of that
amount, $1,194, is the required dedication for this subdivision. This would need to be
submitted as a condition of City subdivision approval.
City Administrator: _________________
Easements.
With every subdivision of land, the City requires that drainage and utility easements be
dedicated around the perimeter of the lot. The certificate of survey provided by the applicants
however does not indicate the presence of existing or proposed easements. The survey will
need to be revised to show ten foot front and rear drainage and utility easements and five foot
drainage and utility easements on the inside of both side lot lines for Parcel B. In addition, the
following language will need to be added to the survey:
“The proposed drainage and utility easement areas as shown herein shall be dedicated
to the City of Mounds View by a separate document recorded with Ramsey County.”
Public Notice.
While a public hearing is not required for this request, staff did send out letters to neighboring
property owners as a courtesy, informing them of the proposed minor subdivision and the
anticipated meeting dates.
Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission reviewed this request at their meeting on October 1, 2003. The
Commission unanimously recommended approval. Their resolution is attached for the
Council’s reference.
Recommendation:
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of Resolution 6105, a resolution
approving a minor subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road, with stipulations.
_____________________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
Attachments:
1. Planning Application
2. Zoning Map
3. Photographic Documentation
4. Survey of Subdivision
5. Planning Commission Resolution 740-03
6. Resolution 6105
Zoning Map
Photographic Documentation
This is a view looking south at the proposed lot. There are many mature trees
in this area and effort should be made to preserve as many of the mature trees
as possible during construction.
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 740-03
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MINOR SUBDIVISION OF
7886 SUNNYSIDE ROAD; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. MI03-004
WHEREAS, Applicants Mike and Wendy Pedginski, on behalf of property owner
Donald Forslund, have requested approval of a minor subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road,
property zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally-described as follows:
Lot 104, Spring Lake Park Hill View
Ramsey County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, the applicants propose to subdivide the west 104 feet from the subject
property to create new buildable lot fronting Hillview Road; and,
WHEREAS, the applicants have submitted a Certificate of Survey for the proposed
minor subdivision indicating the new lot as Parcel B and the remainder lot as Parcel A; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the applicants’ request for a minor
subdivision and has d etermined that it is in conformance with Chapters 1104, 1201, and 1202
of the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the applicant’s request for a minor
subdivision is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, the subdivision is subject to
a $1,194 park dedication fee which is equivalent to 5% of the new lot’s market value; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
recommends approval of the minor subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road subject to the
following stipulations:
1. The applicants arrange to have the survey revised as follows:
a. Five and ten foot drainage and utility easements shall be added to Parcel B
b. The following language shall be added: “The proposed drainage and utility
easement areas as shown herein shall be publicly dedicated to the City of
Mounds View by a separate document recorded with Ramsey County.”
2. The applicants shall arrange to have a Title Commitment or Registered Property
Abstract drafted and submitted prior to the approval of the subdivision by the City
Council.
3. The applicants shall submit the required $1,194 park dedication fee prior to the City
approving the deeds for recordation.
Resolution 740-03
Page 2
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 1st day of October, 2003.
__________________________________________
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
______________________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
(SEAL)
RESOLUTION NO. 6105
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A MINOR SUBDIVISION OF 7886 SUNNYSIDE ROAD;
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. MI03-004
WHEREAS, Applicants Mike and Wendy Pedginski, on behalf of property owner
Donald Forslund, have requested approval of a minor subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road,
property zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally described as follows:
Lot 104, Spring Lake Park Hill View
Ramsey County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, the applicants propose to subdivide the west 104 feet from the subject
property to create new buildable lot fronting Hillview Road; and,
WHEREAS, the applicants have submitted a Certificate of Survey for the proposed
minor subdivision indicating the new lot as Parcel B and the remainder lot as Parcel A; and,
WHEREAS, the city Council has reviewed the applicants’ request for a minor
subdivision and has d etermined that it is in conformance with Chapters 1104, 1201, and 1202
of the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the applicant’s request for a minor subdivision is
in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, the subdivision is subject to
a $1,194 park dedication fee which is equivalent to 5% of the new lot’s market value; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 740-03, a resolution
recommending approval of this subdivision.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council approves
the minor subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road subject to the following stipulations:
1. Prior to the City affixing its seal of approval on the new deeds, the applicants shall
submit a Title Commitment or Registered Property Abstract for review and approval
by the City Attorney, and shall arrange to have the survey revised as follows:
a. Five and ten foot drainage and utility easements shall be added to Parcel B.
b. Language shall be added which states: “The proposed drainage and utility
easement areas as shown herein shall be dedicated to the City of Mounds
View by a separate document recorded with Ramsey County.”
Resolution 6105
Page 2
2. The applicants shall submit the r equired $1,194 park dedication fee prior to the City
approving the deeds for recordation.
3. The applicant shall arrange to have new deeds prepared and recorded with
Ramsey County within one year of this resolution’s adoption.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this approval shall be null and void if after one
year from the date of adoption the above conditions remain unsatisfied
Adopted this 13th day of October, 2003.
__________________________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Kurt Ulrich, City Clerk / Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No. 9N
Type of Business: CB
WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing;
CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Community Survey
Meeting Date: October 13, 2003
Background:
In March of 1988 the City of Mounds View contracted with Decision Resources,
Ltd. to perform a Community Survey. The survey covered the following nine (9)
topics: Residential Demographics, Quality of Life, Taxes and Spending, City
Services, City Government and Staff, Development and Growth, Solid Waste
Management, Parks and Recreation Issues, and City Communications.
The survey conducted by Decision Resources involved a telephone survey of
402 randomly selected residents of the City of Mounds View. A total of 112
questions were included in the survey.
In 1992, a 28-question survey was done of 251 randomly selected residents.
This survey covered such topic as a new police facility, city hall remodeling
options, wetland preservation, garbage pick-up, nuisance ordinance, and
communications. A copy of this survey’s results is attached.
In 2000, the Parks and Recreation Commission worked on developing a
Comprehensive Park Plan. At that time, the Commission felt that the City should
determine what the community wants and needs are with regard to park
amenities. On April 2, 2001, Public Works presented a staff report to the City
Council asking for their direction regarding the development of a “Comprehensive
Park Plan”. The staff report cited an option of conducting a formal public survey
of the community to determine what their current and future needs and desires
are for the City’s parks.
At the Work Session, the City Council agreed with the Parks and Recreation
Commission to create approximately 10 questions with the rationale behind each
question. In 2002, the Parks and Recreation Commission discussed and
developed questions that they would like to include in a survey. These are
attached as Exhibit A.
The Economic Development Commission is reviewed past questions included on
the survey in regard to economic development and had no changes or additions.
The Chair of the Charter Commission also requested that some questions
regarding the Charter/Charter Commission be included.
Discussion:
Staff has included in the 2003 Budget, under Central Services of the General
Fund, $7,500 to do a Community Survey (Account: 100-4160-3030).
Staff contacted Decision Resources, Ltd. to inquire details of performing a
Community Survey. Decision Resources, Ltd. has submitted a project proposal
outlining the scope of work and associated costs of a typical survey. This has
The proposal would be to perform a City Needs Assessment, pose fifty (50)
questions to 400 random Mounds View residents, write up the analysis, and
present the data. The cost would be $9,800 (an additional charge of $135 would
be assigned for each question over 50). Any over run of the budgeted amount
could be derived from a separate account. One possible account would be the
Park Dedication Fund, or the Wastewater Utility.
Staff also contacted the University of Minnesota Research Center to conduct a
similar telephone survey. The cost quoted was $17,500.
If approved, staff and the City Council could use this survey data to obtain a
better understanding of the views, values, and needs of the residents of the city.
This data can be utilized when considering expansion of City services. It is
equally, or perhaps more, valuable when Cities need to make tough budget
decisions on what items to cut and what programs to eliminate. Survey results
would be helpful for future budgets and for the development of City priorities for
2004 and beyond.
The survey could be conducted in early November or December of this year with
results available by the end of this year, or early next. This type of survey
(telephone) will provide a high response rate and reliability. The use of some
questions from 1988 and 1992 would allow the City to consider trends.
Alternatives:
Mailed or Newsletter Survey – Utilizing staff time and some temporary help
(perhaps student labor), the City could conduct a City-wide survey using our
utility billing mailing list. To mail surveys to the whole City would cost less than
$2000, plus the cost of data entry and analysis, could probably be accomplished
for less than $5000. Response rates on these type surveys are low, and
significant response bias makes these surveys unreliable. Data could not be
reliably compared to previous phone surveys. In addition to the relatively low
cost, advantages include the fact that nearly every household in the City would
have a chance to respond, it would be a plus for public relations, and big issues
of concern could be identified. The staff time is of concern and the administration
of this process would delay results an estimated 60 days.
A short newsletter survey (see attached) was conducted in 1999 and the City
received about a 35% response rate. The use of that survey to assess Internet
use and collect e-mail addresses continues to be a benefit to the City.
Information about the City is routinely e-mailed to those that have signed up their
e-mail address.
E-Mail survey – This type of survey only reaches the “connected” households
and, therefore, is not as useful as some of the other methods. However, there
may be some limited application for quick opinion surveys, particularly having to
do with web page or Internet issues. The Police Department has also developed
a fairly large crime-watch e-mail list which may have some use for quick surveys.
Recommendation:
Based on the reliability of the data and the ability to compare to prior years, it is
recommended that the Council approve contracting with Decision Resources in
2003, to conduct a survey for the community, not to exceed $9,800, pursuant to
their proposal. If approved, staff would bring back a list of a proposed fifty
questions back for Council review.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
Item No. 9Q
Type of Business: CB
WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing;
CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
Item Title/Subject: Street Assessment Ordinance
Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No.
723 Amending Chapter 202 of the Mounds View
City Code Pertaining to Street Assessment
Ordinance
Meeting Date: October 13, 2003
Background
On February 10, 2003, Staff submitted a report outlining issues that will need to
be addressed as part of the feasibility report for the 2003 Street Improvement
Project.
There were three general issues identified that will need to be addressed as part
of this project:
Assessment Policy
Street Standards
Storm Water introduction into the Sanitary Sewer System
On September 2, 2003, Staff submitted a draft roadway major maintenance
financing policy. This policy utilizes two methods for assessing for such projects:
the “Unit Assessment Method “ which would be applied to single and twin family
properties and the “Front Footage Method” which would be applied to all other
properties. Staff was directed to determine what changes of the City’s Ordinance
would be needed to allow for such a policy.
On October 6, 2003, Staff introduced a draft revision to the City’s Ordinance.
Discussion:
Staff proposes that the unit method be utilized for low density residential property
(single family and twin homes / duplexes) for all roadway major maintenance
projects. All other property would be assessed utilizing the front footage method.
The unit assessment method is already allowed by City Ordinance (Chapter 202,
Section 202.09, Subdivision 3b). However, the ordinance also specifically states
that the cost of a Street Reconstruction be recovered by the adjusted front
footage method (Chapter 202, Section 202.09, Subdivision 2a). Making this
revision would give the City Council more flexibility in assigning assessment for
roadway major maintenance projects.
Staff is proposing an alteration of the existing ordinance 202.09, subdivision 2a
and 2b to the following:
202.09: APPORTIONMENT OF COST:
Section 202.09, Subd. 2
Improvement Type and Apportionment of Cost:
a. Street Reconstruction Including Curb and Gutter: The cost of street
reconstruction shall be recovered by either the adjusted front footage
method or the unit assessment method. The front footage rate shall be
determined by dividing the project cost by the total number of adjusted front
feet in the project area. The assessments per adjusted front foot may vary
depending on the underlying zoning of a parcel. Assessments for residential
properties which are on collector or arterial streets (MSA, county road) shall
be assessed for one hundred percent (100%) of the pavement surface and
base, up to a width of twenty six (26) feet, equally divided by both sides of
the street. This amount shall not exceed fourteen dollars and sixty cents
($14.60) per front foot. (Ord. 654, 2-14-00) The City shall develop a
financing policy for assigning cost associated with street
reconstruction projects, and as required by State Statute, will conduct
the necessary Public Improvement Hearings and Assessment
Hearings.
b. Street Resurfacing: Street resurfacing is commonly known and referred
to as street overlaying whereby a new bed of road material such as
bituminous is installed over an existing paved road to a specific thickness.
Assessments shall be determined by either the unit assessment method
or the adjusted front footage method at one hundred percent (100%) to
properties on both sides of the street. A mill and overlay to an existing
paved road will be assessed by the adjusted front footage method at one
hundred percent (100%) percent to properties on both sides of the street. A
recycle and overlay to an existing paved road will be assessed by the
adjusted front footage method at one hundred percent (100%) to properties
on both sides of the street. Assessments will be based on physical project
costs plus engineering, administration costs, ROW expenditures and other
related project costs. The method of rehabilitation or resurfacing shall be
determined by the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of the combined
segments of the streets considered for the project. (Ord. 654, 2-14-00) The
City shall develop a financing policy for assigning cost associated with
street resurfacing projects, and as required by State Statute, will
conduct the necessary Public Improvement Hearings and Assessment
Hearings.
As previously stated, these alterations will give this - and future - City Councils,
more flexibility in assigning assessments for roadway major maintenance
projects.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council ordain an amendment to the Mounds
View City Code allowing a unit assessment method for roadway major
maintenance projects.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works Reviewed by City Administrator:___
ORDINANCE NO. 723
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 202 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY
CODE, MUNICIPAL FINANCES, SECTION 202.09, APPORTION OF COST,
SUBDIVISION 2a and 2b
THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 202, Municipal Finances, Section 202.09, Apportion of
Cost, Subdivision 2a and 2b of the City of Mounds View Municipal Code is
hereby amended to allow recyclable materials to be collected on a minimum of a
bi-weekly basis, with the proposed additions underlined and the proposed
deletions struck out, to read as follows:
202.09: APPORTIONMENT OF COST:
Section 202.09, Subd. 2
Subd. 2. The following are methods of street reconstruction and rehabilitation,
which will be utilized by the City of Mounds View in considering future
projects and assessments. It will be noted that the design standard for
either reconstruction or rehab will be the current design of the street section.
Projects may be constructed to higher designs if warranted and/or approved
by the City Council. (Ord. 654, 2-14-00)
Improvement Type and Apportionment of Cost:
a. Street Reconstruction Including Curb and Gutter: The cost of street
reconstruction shall be recovered by either the adjusted front footage
method or the unit assessment method. The front footage rate shall be
determined by dividing the project cost by the total number of adjusted front
feet in the project area. The assessments per adjusted front foot may vary
depending on the underlying zoning of a parcel. Assessments for residential
properties which are on collector or arterial streets (MSA, county road) shall
be assessed for one hundred percent (100%) of the pavement surface and
base, up to a width of twenty six (26) feet, equally divided by both sides of
the street. This amount shall not exceed fourteen dollars and sixty cents
($14.60) per front foot. (Ord. 654, 2-14-00) The City shall develop a
financing policy for assigning cost associated with street
reconstruction projects, and as required by State Statute, will conduct
the necessary Public Improvement Hearings and Assessment
Hearings.
Ordinance 723
Page 2
(1) Non-Collector Street Residential property owners will be assessed for
the cost of the pavement and base for the front footage side of the property,
which shall not exceed fourteen dollars and sixty cents ($14.60) per frontage
foot. This amount will be adjusted annually by resolution, in accordance with
the Engineering News Record (ENR). (Ord. 654, 2-14-00)
(2) Residents requesting Curb and Gutter, any required storm sewer and/or
installation of sidewalks/trails on a construction project will be assessed
twenty five percent (25%) of the total cost of the project additions which will
include engineering, additional removals, base and all other associated
expenses. All additional project requests shall be assessed at twenty five
percent (25%) of the total costs associated with the improvements. (Ord.
654, 2-14-00)
(3) One hundred percent (100%) of the turn back funds received from
Ramsey County will be applied to the new construction or pavement cost of
the road that was received. (Ord. 654, 2-14-00)
The remaining cost shall be recovered by means of the general ad valorem
property tax paid by the entire community or by other funds that may
become available to the City for infrastructure cost recovery. (Ord. 654, 2-
14-00)
b. Street Resurfacing: Street resurfacing is commonly known and referred
to as street overlaying whereby a new bed of road material such as
bituminous is installed over an existing paved road to a specific thickness.
Assessments shall be determined by either the unit assessment method
or the adjusted front footage method at one hundred percent (100%) to
properties on both sides of the street. A mill and overlay to an existing
paved road will be assessed by the adjusted front footage method at one
hundred percent (100%) percent to properties on both sides of the street. A
recycle and overlay to an existing paved road will be assessed by the
adjusted front footage method at one hundred percent (100%) to properties
on both sides of the street. Assessments will be based on physical project
costs plus engineering, administration costs, ROW expenditures and other
related project costs. The method of rehabilitation or resurfacing shall be
determined by the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of the combined
segments of the streets considered for the project. (Ord. 654, 2-14-00) The
City shall develop a financing policy for assigning cost associated with
street resurfacing projects, and as required by State Statute, will
conduct the necessary Public Improvement Hearings and Assessment
Hearings.
SECTION 2. This ordinance becomes effective thirty (30) days after its
publication in the official City newspaper.
Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this _____day of
___________, 2003.
Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this _____day of
___________, 2003.
____________________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST
____________________________________
Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Scott Riggs, City Attorney
Item No. 9R
Type of Business: CB
WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing;
SB: Special Order of Business CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
Item Title/Subject: Resolution No. 6114 Approving a Step Increase
for Pete Szurek of the Parks Division of the Public
Works Department
Meeting Date: October 13, 2003
Background
On March 30, 1998 Pete Szurek was hired as a Parks Seasonal Employee. He
worked in this capacity in the Parks Division for two full years – a total of 3035
hours.
On May 31, 2000, Pete Szurek was hired as a regular full-time employee in the
Storm Sewer / Surface Water Division of the Public Works Department.
On September 9, 2002, Council authorized the appointment of Mr. Szurek to the
Parks Division of the Public Works Department
Discussion
Mr. Szurek is a member of the Public Works Collective Bargaining Unit. As such,
Mr. Szurek is subject to the job classification system, as established in the Labor
Agreement with the City of Mounds View. Mr. Szurek is currently employed
at the Level C pay scale, which is $18.92 per hour. However, based on the
criteria set forth by the Labor Agreement with the Public Works Collective
Bargaining Unit, Mr. Szurek is qualified to be at the Level D pay scale, which is
$19.32 per hour. Mr. Szurek currently meets all of the requirements for Level D,
except for the length of relevant work experience. Mr. Szurek will qualify for Level
D on November 1, 2003. It should be noted that these rates are based on agreed
amounts for 2002. The Public Works Collective Bargaining Unit is currently
working with the City to update the Labor Agreement for 2003.
The Parks Foreman has met with Mr. Szurek and conducted a formal
performance review. Mr. Szurek meets or exceeds all of the job performance
requirements for his position. The Public Works Director and Parks Foreman
recommend that Mr. Szurek be approved for the step increase from Level C to
Level D in the Parks Division of the Public Works Department.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Council authorize the step increase for Pete Szurek
from Level C to Level D in the Parks Division of the Public Works Department.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
RESOLUTION NO. 6114
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A STEP INCREASE FOR PETE SZUREK
WHEREAS, Pete Szurek is a regular full-time employee who began
working full-time for the City of Mounds View on May 31, 2000; and,
WHEREAS, Mr. Szurek is a member of the Public Works Collective
Bargaining Unit, and as such, is subject to the job classification system as
established in the Labor Agreement with the City of Mounds View; and,
WHEREAS, Mr. Szurek is currently assigned to a Level C pay scale,
which is currently established at $18.92 per hour; and,
WHEREAS, Mr. Szurek qualifies for Level D pay scale, which is currently
established at $19.32 per hour; and,
WHEREAS, Mr. Szurek’s work performance has been rated satisfactory or
higher by his supervisor; and,
WHEREAS, Mr. Szurek’s supervisor recommends that the City Council
approve a wage adjustment from Level C to Level D.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City
Council does hereby approve a step increase for Pete Szurek from Level C
($18.92/hr) to Level D ($19.32/hr) effective November 1, 2003.
Adopted this 13th day of October 2003.
______________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
(ATTEST) ______________________________
Kurt Ulrich
City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No. 9S
October 13, 2003
Council Business
RESOLUTION No. 6108
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SEVERANCE
PAYMENT FOR GARY KARDELL
WHEREAS, Gary Kardell has served the City of Mounds View for 29 years; and
WHEREAS, Gary Kardell’s last day of employment with the City will be October
31, 2003; and
WHEREAS, Gary Kardell is entitled to the following benefits per the City of
Mounds View Personnel Manual, Section 4.35D Separation Compensation:
• 100% of accrued vacation time-estimated at 66.92 hours
o 66.92* hours of vacation x $19.32 per hour = $1,292.85
• Option 1: a lump sum payment of fifty percent (50%) of accrued sick leave, or
• Option 2: sixty-five percent of sick leave accrued for use toward the retiree’s
group health, dental and/or life insurance premiums for as long as the funds
are available up to the retiree’s 65th birthday. If Option 2 is elected, these
funds may be used only for the retiree’s health, dental and/or life insurance
premiums and at no time may they be taken for cash or for any other purpose.
Gary Kardell has elected Option 1 which is estimated as follows:
o 960* hours of accrued sick leave x 50% = 480 x $19.32 per hour =
$9,273.60
• Total: $1,292.85 + $9,273.60 = $10,566.45
*Payout amount may change should Mr. Kardell use any vacation or sick hours
before October 31, 2003. The hourly rate may change based on the labor agreement
contract with the City. The Finance Department will adjust accordingly.
WHEREAS, Gary Kardell is paid from the Pavement Management fund at 50%,
Snow and Ice Control fund at 30% and Sign Maintenance fund at 20%.
Reso 6108
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
does hereby approve the aforementioned provisions for Gary Kardell and directs
Staff to move these funds from their respective reserve accounts to the General
Fund for payout.
ATTEST Adopted this 13th day of October 2003
Jerry Linke, Mayor
SEAL
Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
Item No: 9T
Meeting Date: 10-13-03
Type of Business: Council Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Special Council Meeting Dates
It is request that the Council consider establishing the following Special Council Dates:
1) Special Session to Review Budget: Non General Fund Accounts
Suggested Dates: Monday, October 20, 7:00 – Off-Monday Meeting
OR
Monday, October 27th, Council work session immediately following
regular meeting
2) Special Session to review Budget: General Fund
Suggested Dates: Monday, November 17, 7:00 – Off-Monday Meeting
3) Council/Department Head Planning Session(s)
Suggested Dates: Monday, December 15, 6:00 – Off-Monday Meeting
Monday, January 19, 2004, 6:00 – Off-Meeting Monday
Saturday, January 10, 2004, 8:00AM – Sat.(?)
It is recommended that we find at least two dates. Staff would seek a facilitator for
two meetings as budgeted.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Kurt Ulrich
Item No: 9.U
Meeting Date: October 13, 2003
Type of Business: Council Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Charles Hansen, Finance Director
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Resolution 6127 Establishing a Policy for
Deferral of Special Assessments by Senior Citizens or
Disabled Persons
Minnesota Statutes Chapter 435.193 provides that a statutory or home rule charter city
making a special assessment may in its discretion defer the payment of that assessment for
any homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older or retired by virtue of a
permanent and total disability for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments. Any
city electing to defer special assessments shall adopt an ordinance or resolution establishing
standards and guidelines for determining the existence of a hardship and for determining the
existence of a disability.
The City Code, Section 202.13 also references deferred payment of special assessments by
persons age 65 or older and calls for the City Council to adopt a resolution establishing
standards and guidelines for determining the existence of a hardship.
The staff wasn’t able to find a resolution in which the City Council established these
guidelines in the past. We concluded that it would be best to start fresh with a new
resolution and establish the guidelines now.
It is recommended that the guidelines be kept fairly simple and straightforward for ease of
administration and understanding by the citizens.
I also recommend that the guidelines provide for deferral for disabled persons, since a failure
to do so could be considered discriminatory.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________
Charles Hansen, Finance Director
Reviewed by City Administrator: ________
RESOLUTION NO. 6127
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Resolution 6127 Establishing a Policy for Deferral of Special Assessments by
Senior Citizens or Disabled Persons
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 435.193 provide that a city may at its
discretion defer the payment of a special assessment for any homestead property owned
by a person 65 years of age or older or retired by virtue of a permanent and total disability
for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments; and
WHEREAS, City Code Section 202.13 also references deferred payment of special
assessments by persons age 65 or older; and
WHEREAS, Both Minnesota Statutes and City Code call for the City Council to
adopt a resolution establishing standards and guidelines for determining the existence of a
hardship.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mounds
View that the following guidelines are established for the deferral of payment of special
assessments:
1. Applicants must be age 65 or older or totally and permanently disabled as
determined by the Social Security Administration or similar authority.
2. The applicant must be the fee simple owner of the property or must be a contract
vendee for fee simple ownership. An applicant must provide either a recorded
deed or contract for deed with the application to establish ownership interest.
3. The property must be the applicant’s principal place of domicile and classified on
the City’s and the County’s real estate tax rolls as the applicants homestead.
4. All deferred special assessments shall be subject to and charged simple interest at
the prevailing interest rate applicable at the time the assessment was originally
levied. Said interest shall be payable upon the termination of the deferred status.
5. Special assessment payments deferred pursuant to the eligibility requirements set
forth by this resolution shall become payable effective upon the occurance of one
of the following events:
a) The subject property is sold, transferred, subdivided, or in any way
conveyed to another by the fee owner qualified for deferred status.
b) The death of the fee owner qualified for deferred status unless a surviving
joint tenant, tenant in common, or contract vendee is eligible for the deferral
benefit.
c) The subject property loses its homestead status for any reason.
d) The City Council determines that there is no longer a hardship to require
continuation of the deferred special assessment.
Resolution 6127
Page 2
6. An eligible applicant must file an application on or before September 15 of the year
preceding the year for which deferred status is requested in order to implement the deferral
program for said year. All deferral applications must be made on forms provided by the
City
Adopted this 13th Day of October 2003.
______________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
(ATTEST)
______________________________
Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
(SEAL)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL 1
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 2
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA 3
4
Regular Meeting 5
September 22, 2003 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: Linke, Quick, Marty, Stigney, and Gunn 16
17
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 18
19
A. Monday, September 22, 2003 City Council Agenda. 20
21
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Approve the Monday, September 22, 2003 Agenda as 22
Presented. 23
24
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 25
26
5. PUBLIC INPUT 27
28
William Werner of 2765 Sherwood Road addressed Council and asked whether anything was 29
being done to reduce the budget for 2004. 30
31
Mayor Linke indicated the City is looking at reducing several items and those discussions are 32
continuing. 33
34
Mr. Werner asked whether Staff has been given direction or target numbers to aim for. He then 35
said that the City should be living within its means and the money it has rather than going out for 36
more money on a special election. 37
38
Mayor Linke indicated that would be a choice the residents would need to make. He then said 39
that Staff knows the figures they have to live within and have already cut to those points and now 40
are looking to go down from there. 41
42
Mr. Werner indicated that it looks like to him that the City is spending the same money as it was 43
before LGA was cut. 44
45
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 2
Mayor Linke indicated that to stay even the City has to cut because of increases in costs. 1
2
Mr. Werner asked why other cities increases for the coming year were significantly lower than 3
Mounds View’s 12%. 4
5
Mayor Linke suggested they may have had more fluff they could eliminate. 6
7
Mr. Werner commented that they may have not been living off the LGA as much. 8
9
Mr. Werner indicated that St. Anthony is cutting appreciation dinners but this City does not do 10
that. He then said that employees should not expect appreciation dinners when they work for the 11
City and said he is disappointed. 12
13
6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 14
15
A. Proclamation for Acceptance of Donation of $1500 from the Twin Cities 16
North Chamber for Youth Golf. 17
18
Mayor Linke read a proclamation for Acceptance of a Donation of $1,500 from the Twin Cities 19
North Chamber for Youth Golf. He then thanked the Chamber for the work they have done for 20
the City. 21
22
B. Proclamation for Ken Manthis, Bridges Golf Course. 23
24
Mayor Linke read a Proclamation for Ken Manthis, Bridges Golf Course. He then thanked Ken 25
for the work he does for the City. 26
27
C. Resolution of Appreciation to Mike Szczepanski. 28
29
City Administrator Ulrich read the Resolution of Appreciation to Mike Szczepanski. 30
31
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Gunn. To Approve Resolution 6094, a Resolution of Appreciation 32
to Mike Szczepanski. 33
34
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 35
36
D. Presentation Regarding City Fire Inspection Program. 37
38
City Administrator Ulrich indicated he had invited the Fire Chief to this meeting to discuss the 39
special incident as well as the City’s fire inspection program in general and how it fits into the 40
budget and the community and to discuss the operation of the fire department. 41
42
Fire Chief Zikmund gave a brief history of the fire code of the City. He then gave an overview of 43
the purpose of the Code and inspections. 44
45
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 3
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that less than 5% of fire deaths occur in commercial or industrial 1
types of occupancy due to increased inspections and requirements. 2
3
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that Mounds View pays $174,000 for fire protection per year with 4
a reduction in calls resulting in a savings to the City. 5
6
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that high hazard operations are yearly inspected and low hazard 7
operations are done on a three-year cycle. 8
9
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that the fire code inspector and building code inspector is a joint 10
position for the City indicating that this type of set up works for a small city. He then said there 11
are approximately 1,000 building inspections yearly and only 50 fire inspections per year. 12
13
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that Jeremiah Anderson when he does his yearly inspections has 14
been trained to look for obvious fire code violations. 15
16
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that they have issued one citation in the last five years and that was 17
to the property owner in question. He then indicated that the manager was looking to buy the 18
operation and invited them for the fire inspection. He further explained that there were a few 19
minor issues including the sprinkler test requirement. The sprinkler contractor noted two 20
deficiencies including a missing head in the utility room and a head that had a piece of plywood 21
under it. The property owner had the option of moving the plywood or putting another head 22
below it but he refused to do so and a citation was issued and the judge issued a ruling in favor of 23
the City on the spot upon hearing the facts. 24
25
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that in five years the City has had approximately 24 serious 26
violations usually involving sprinkler issues. He then commented that the City went through a 27
period of time with spec buildings in the industrial park and the density of those sprinkler 28
systems needed to be increased at a cost of around $100,000 or more. 29
30
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that all code violations are potentially serious and noted they 31
recently received a letter thanking them for eliminating potential serious issue. 32
33
Council Member Stigney asked whether the Schwinn owner was in attendance. He then 34
indicated that he was under the impression that the owner had put in new sprinkler heads and that 35
was what he was complaining about. 36
37
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that the sprinkler contractor he hired noted two deficiencies of two 38
heads, one in the utility room and one under the plywood. He then listed the other very minor 39
items that were corrected. 40
41
Council Member Marty asked how the sprinkler system is tested without filling the business with 42
water. 43
44
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 4
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated it is a test under pressure where the system is pressurized and 1
flushed out to determine deficiencies in the system but does not use water. 2
3
Council Member Quick asked if the City inspects non-homestead R-1 property. 4
5
Kathy indicated that at this time it is not on the list of regular inspections but noted that two 6
instances have been brought to her attention and they are investigating those properties. 7
8
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated there is some difficulty in that the Code does not give a lot of 9
authority in that unless the property is over 13 units. He then said that is where the housing code 10
has to play a larger role. 11
12
7. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 13
14
A. Just and Correct Claims 15
16
Council Member Marty asked for more information on Check Number 111731 to certified labs 17
for $165.00. 18
19
Finance Director Hansen indicated it was for a case of bee repellent. 20
21
Council Member Marty asked for more information on Check Number 111767 and commented 22
that it seems the City gets motor fuels and lubricants from more than one source. 23
24
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated the fuel from Kath comes delivered to the above ground 25
storage of gas and diesel for the golf course. 26
27
Council Member Marty asked for more information on Check Number 111813 asking whether 28
the fee for the class was for an employee of the City. 29
30
Public Works Director Lee indicated that is was for the new employee in the sewer division who 31
has to get his water operator license. 32
33
Council Member Gunn asked for clarification of Check Number 111830. 34
35
Finance Director Hansen indicated the City received a building permit application and received 36
the permit fee but the permit was rescinded without any inspections done so the money was 37
refunded. 38
39
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Gunn. To Approve Just and Correct Claims as Presented. 40
41
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 42
43
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 5
8. CONSENT AGENDA 1
2
A. Licenses for Approval 3
B. Resolution 6097 Approving the Continuation of a Joint Powers Agreement with 4
Ramsey County GIS User Group 5
C. Correction to Resolution 6091 Authorizing Certification of the Proposed General 6
Fund Budget and Property Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2004 7
D. Resolution No. 6102 Declaring Cost to be Assessed, and Ordering Preparation of 8
Proposed Assessment for the County Road H2 Street Improvement Project 9
E. Executive Session in Conference Room C, Immediately Following the Meeting, to 10
Address Union Contract Negotiations 11
12
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To Approve the Consent Agenda as Presented. 13
14
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 15
16
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS 17
18
A. Community Survey 19
20
City Administrator Ulrich indicated that he would like to amend his recommendation to allow 21
staff time to research other types of survey options. He then asked for Council feedback as to 22
whether Council is interested in pursuing the community survey option noting that the surveys 23
have, in the past, provided invaluable information as to what the residents want. 24
25
City Administrator Ulrich indicated the City has a history of doing surveys but has not done one 26
since 1992. He then indicated that the City has funds budgeted for a community survey in the 27
2003 budget. 28
29
Mayor Linke asked whether questions within a question counted as part of the 50 questions. 30
31
City Administrator Ulrich indicated that questions within a question were not counted toward the 32
50. He then indicated the questions provided were a sample and noted that the actual questions 33
to be used have not been determined. 34
35
Mayor Linke indicated he would want a question regarding park and recreation programming and 36
whether to stay with the YMCA and what residents think of the programming provided versus 37
those that were provided when the City had its own park and recreation department. 38
39
Council Member Marty indicated that the community survey has been discussed a number of 40
times in the past and while the information would be nice to have he questions whether the 41
timing is appropriate due to tight budget constraints. 42
43
Council Member Gunn indicated that when she was on the park and recreation commission they 44
were working on the questions to bring to Council for discussion. She then indicated that 45
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 6
because the survey was suggested by park and recreation and there were park and recreation 1
questions there were discussions of using park dedication funds for the survey. She further 2
commented that she feels it would be appropriate to survey the community to get input from 3
those that are new to the community since the last survey was done. 4
5
Council Member Marty asked how much money is in the park dedication fund. 6
7
Finance Director Hansen indicated that his recollection is that there is $400,000 to $450,000 in 8
the park dedication fund. 9
10
Council Member Stigney commented that this was an item to be saved in the 2004 budget but 11
has just been swapped to the 2003 budget. He then said that he feels there are cheaper 12
alternatives for a survey and he is kind of surprised that this company would quote a price for the 13
survey when they refused to do a quote under the previous administration. He also said he does 14
not think this is the way to go and would suggested using Mounds View Matters or a mass 15
mailing to save money. 16
17
Council Member Stigney indicated that he thinks the question of bonding for development within 18
the parks should be put on a referendum to the voters as well as the question of whether there 19
should be a golf course or what should be done with a golf course to see what the residents want 20
to do. 21
22
Council Member Gunn indicated there would be other questions added to the survey not just park 23
and recreation questions it would cover all aspects of the City. 24
25
Council Member Stigney indicated the bottom line is the main question being asked by park and 26
recreation is would you support a bond issue for park and recreation. He then said that if it has 27
nothing to do with cost why are they asking if residents would support a bond issue. He further 28
suggested saving the cost of the survey and add it to the referendum along with the golf course 29
questions. 30
31
Mr. Werner agreed that the questions should be added to the referendum and let the residents 32
decide what they want. 33
34
Mayor Linke indicated the City could not add anything to the referendum due to timing. 35
36
Mr. Werner commented that every year the City gets into the same issue of being too late. 37
38
City Administrator Ulrich indicated the total cost for the special election is $12,000 to $14,000 39
and that is to be split between the City and the school district. 40
41
Council Member Quick commented that the only way the City can truly get a slice of the true 42
opinion is by doing a professional survey. 43
44
A resident in the audience disagreed. 45
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 7
1
Council Member Quick indicated he could back up what he says with statistics that the only way 2
to get the most accurate reading of what the community wants and feels and not what the small 3
minority wants is by doing a professional survey and that is why this company has been used in 4
the past and he supports the survey. 5
6
Naja Werner 2765 of Sherwood Road indicated she thoroughly disagrees and does not think you 7
get a representative feeling of what the community thinks when you only send questionnaires out 8
to 400 or so residents in a City of 12,700. She then said that she thinks this is wasting a lot of 9
money when all the other municipalities are cutting expenses and their tax increase is lower than 10
here. She further commented that this City seems to keep doing things that cost money and the 11
City does not have to spend the $7,500 that is budgeted for it. 12
13
Ms. Werner indicated that, as a citizen, she has objections to a lot of stupid stuff that is 14
happening here and she shakes her head and rolls her eyes in despair at the stuff that is happening 15
as it is disgusting. 16
17
Mayor Linke indicated that you do not get from a written survey what you get from an oral 18
survey because the surveyor follows up questions with another question based on how the person 19
answers the question. He also commented that the City has discovered in the past that a vast 20
majority of residents do not mail the surveys back. 21
22
Council Member Stigney indicated that the questions would need to be refined before the 23
questions go out and he does not think the phone survey is the way to go. He then said he would 24
like to refine the questions list and put something in Mounds View Matters. He further 25
commented that he hears there is a real budget crunch but he does not see it the way things are 26
happening so he is opposed to the phone survey. 27
28
Council Member Quick commented that the last time the City tried to do a survey it was on 29
moving the compost site and the City sent out a questionnaire and it turns out that the individual 30
there taking care of the compost site copied and handed out surveys to those that used it as he did 31
not want it moved and that is who the City heard from on surveys. 32
33
Council Member Stigney said that is part of the democratic process telling others what you 34
support. 35
36
Council Member Gunn indicated that a lot of people complain about the Council not listening 37
and sometimes it is hard to hear what everyone has to say all at once and a survey with questions 38
from all of the departments is a good way to hear what the people have to say. 39
40
Mayor Linke indicated there is consensus to move forward with some type of survey but would 41
like other feedback and further research into how to do the survey and formulate the questions. 42
43
Council Member Marty indicated he questions whether this is the time to do this the survey and 44
spend the money. He then commented that the surveys do provide a wealth of information and 45
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 8
he would be in favor of utilizing park dedication funds rather than spending money out of the 1
general fund. 2
3
MOTION/SECOND: Linke/Quick. To Proceed with the Preparation and Research to Find out 4
What Types of Surveys are Available and What the Costs Would Be and to Direct Staff to Refine 5
the List of Questions to be Asked. 6
7
Ayes – 4 Nays – 1(Stigney) Motion carried. 8
9
B. Police Department Quarterly Report 10
11
Mayor Linke thanked Chief Sommer for coming to the Lions with a presentation. 12
13
Chief Sommer briefly highlighted the data in the quarterly report. 14
15
Chief Sommer indicated the number one frequently occurring crime was theft or fraud. 16
17
Chief Sommer indicated Rob Schaffee, a Mounds View resident has offered to assist the police 18
department with its research on a records management program. 19
20
Chief Sommer indicated that year to date total revenue from citations is $28,440 through August. 21
22
Council Member Stigney asked how much of the $28,440 was for administrative offenses. 23
24
Chief Sommer indicated that $13,600 was administrative and the $12,413 was from Ramsey 25
County Municipal Court. 26
27
Council Member Quick asked whether the Chief had a figure on how many cars were broken into 28
over the summer. 29
30
Chief Sommer indicated he did not have a breakdown of thefts from cars but said there were 263 31
theft reports during the four-month period and a lot of them were from vehicles. 32
33
Mayor Linke asked the Chief for the figures quoted at the Lions meeting concerning officer man 34
hours. 35
36
Chief Sommer offered to do a presentation in the future if desired. He then indicated that 37
Mounds View has a ratio of police officers to population of 1.3 per 1,000 and the state average is 38
1.6 per 1,000. He then said that when it comes to the more serious crimes Mounds View has 39
close to double the crime rate per capita of New Brighton. 40
41
Mayor Linke commented that the City is looking at times when there is only one officer on duty. 42
43
Chief Sommer indicated the reason he pursued the grant for two new officers is the staffing 44
levels is such that the City only has one officer on for a portion of every day and if that officer is 45
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 9
tied up on a call then there are no officers on duty and a lot of the other times only two officers 1
are on duty. He then said that for safety reasons it is not good to have one officer working alone 2
in a city of this size. He further commented that the reason for the two officers is that crime rates 3
support having additional police services here. 4
5
Council Member Marty indicated that court citations last year were 500 but for this year so far 6
118 but traffic administrative offenses were 48 last year and this year are 362. He then said he 7
feels this is good news for the City because the City gets 100% of the fees rather than the County 8
getting a portion. 9
10
Council Member Stigney indicated a resident called him about an article in the Star Tribune that 11
said the Attorney General is looking into administrative offenses so there is some controversy on 12
that. 13
14
Mayor Linke indicated that when this City started the program many years ago it was anticipated 15
that would happen because the County is losing revenue especially since more cities have started 16
doing it. 17
18
Chief Sommer indicated that Staff has received numerous requests from other cities for the 19
policy. 20
21
Council Member Quick indicated that City Attorney Dick Meyers recommended the 22
administrative offense policy. 23
24
C. Resolution No. 6088A Approving the Contract Award for the County Road 25
H Sidewalk Project 26
27
Public Works Director Lee indicated that after speaking with the City Attorney it was determined 28
that the contract cannot be awarded on the alternate alone. He then indicated that Staff 29
recommends rejecting the bids and rebidding for spring of 2004. 30
31
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Quick. To Rescind Resolution 6088. 32
33
Ayes – 3 Nays – 2(Stigney/Marty) Motion carried. 34
35
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Approve Resolution 6088A with Option One Not to 36
Award the Contract at This Time. 37
38
Council Member Marty indicated he made a motion for option five and he thinks should stick 39
with that should go back and look at this for next year and go that route. 40
41
Council Member Gunn indicated she would like to stick with option five. 42
43
Council Member Stigney agreed and indicated that he has had several calls inquiring about it for 44
discussion tonight. 45
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 10
1
Angela Olson of 5046 Longview Drive indicated she is frustrated with this process and does not 2
feel that Council listened about using TIF because they were told it was fine to use it but now she 3
has heard there are questions. She then said that Council Member Gunn was exactly right when 4
she said that people think that Council does not listen because they feel that way. 5
6
Ms. Olson indicated that the amount of time the school patrol is out is 4.1% of the time of 7
daylight hours using an average of 12 daylight hours. She then said she is frustrated with the fact 8
that she was told by Mr. Lee to hold off on trimming the hedges only to have an inspector come 9
to her house the next day and tell her to trim them or be fined. 10
11
Ms. Olson asked that the City get it together and do things right the first time and not take six or 12
eight months to make a decision. She then said that this should not go through if there are this 13
many problems with it and asked that Council not waste time making decisions that they do not 14
know if it is okay to make. 15
16
Mayor Linke indicated that he did not agree with option one and thanked Ms. Olson for her 17
information but option one does not provide a safe way for kids to cross the street other than at 18
the school and the City is not providing them a way to get to the school before they get to that 19
point so it defeats the purpose of the guards in the first place. He then said that he would like to 20
do option three. 21
22
Ayes – 3 Nays – 2(Linke/Quick) Motion carried. 23
24
D. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 718, Implementing a Franchise 25
Fee on Xcel Energy Electric and Natural Gas Operations Within the City of 26
Mounds View for the Year 2004 27
28
Finance Director Hansen gave an overview of the Ordinance. 29
30
Council Member Quick indicated he would like to move a continuance because he would like 31
Xcel to have to post a cash bond of $50,000 for property damage done. He then commented that 32
he had damage done to his property by a contractor of Xcel coming onto his property without 33
permission and causing damage to his property. He further commented that if this was done to 34
him the way Xcel handles its tree trimming must be more widespread and he would like to 35
protect other residents by requiring the bond. 36
37
Council Member Quick indicated he thinks this is out of control because there could be serious 38
trouble if perhaps the dog got out or they got bit by a dog in a back yard or something and he 39
feels that a $50,000 would help control the situation. 40
41
City Attorney Riggs recommended reviewing the franchise to determine whether it is possible to 42
add the bonding information. 43
44
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 11
Council Member Stigney indicated there is a 20-year term on the basic franchise and asked 1
whether the City is committed to the terms of the franchise for the life of the franchise. 2
3
City Attorney Riggs indicated the City is committed to the terms but there is the ability of the 4
City to request a change. 5
6
Council Member Quick indicated that he was told by Xcel that the Public Utilities Commission 7
provides the contractor a blanket authority to come onto his property without permission and 8
asked the City Attorney whether that is legal. 9
10
City Attorney Riggs indicated that it would depend upon the type of easement granted for that 11
purpose. He then said that there is no blanket authority to do something that is inconsistent with 12
the easement authority. 13
14
There was consent to have the City Attorney review the franchise. 15
16
Finance Director Hansen indicated that he was not sure but thought there was a provision that the 17
franchise can only be changed once per year and recommended postponing approval of the 18
ordinances to allow time to review the franchise. 19
20
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Postpone Ordinances 718 and 719 to the Next Council 21
Meeting. 22
23
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 24
25
E. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 719, Implementing a Franchise 26
Fee on Reliant Energy Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds 27
View for the Year 2004 28
29
This item was postponed to the next meeting. 30
31
F. Public Hearing, First Reading and Introduction of Proposed Ordinance 720, 32
an Ordinance to Comprehensively Rezone Parcels Zoned Public Facilities 33
(PF) 34
35
Mayor Linke opened the public hearing at 8:34 p.m. 36
37
Community Development Director Ericson indicated that this proposed ordinance would rezone 38
all of the City owned parcels. He then explained that this was brought to the attention of the City 39
by the City Attorney following a recent Supreme Court decision that found the City’s zoning of 40
City-owned property to be inconsistent with conventional zoning practices. 41
42
Mayor Linke indicated he did not agree with that decision but this is what has been 43
recommended by the City’s legal counsel. 44
45
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 12
Director Ericson indicated he had received a number of calls and emails on the issue and once the 1
issue is explained to residents most understand the rationale behind the switch. He then said that 2
the one thing that people wanted to know is whether it would impact their taxes or their property 3
and whether there would be homes in the park. He further commented that there is no tax impact 4
and all the properties would be rezoned but there use is not going to change. 5
6
Director Ericson indicated the City does have the option to change a land use if it wants to but 7
had that right prior to this rezoning. He then indicated that a map of the proposed changes is 8
available on the City’s website. 9
10
Director Ericson indicated that Exhibit b has a list of properties with PIN numbers and legal 11
descriptions but it will have to be revised to show the future zoning but the map that is Exhibit A 12
shows the rezoning. 13
14
Debbie _____, the Executive Vice President of Sysco indicated they are concerned with the 15
property adjacent to their building as it is property donated to the City and the donation was 16
contingent upon a number of requirements and they would be seeking to reclaim the property by 17
quit claim deed should the use for the property change. She then said she had come to remind 18
Council of its commitment on the property and to indicate they are concerned with the changing 19
of the zoning to light industrial. 20
21
Mike Maroni of 5045 Brighton Lane indicated that the residents own all of this property as the 22
City and he is concerned that a Council could elect to sell the property at some point. He then 23
said it would be more appropriate to require such an action to have a referendum and take it to 24
the residents to determine what they want done not just the five Council people at the time. 25
26
Council Member Quick indicated that the property had these designations before it was listed as 27
public facility a few years ago. 28
29
Mr. Maroni indicated he is concerned that the City could sell the park and put single-family 30
homes there. 31
32
Council Member Stigney indicated that if this is done via ordinance the City Charter allows a 33
petition against any ordinance they do not like but another way would be to require that it go to a 34
referendum before the property could be sold. 35
36
Council Member Marty indicated the City has no intention of ever selling this property and the 37
Comprehensive Plan calls for joining all the parks with a trail system for future use. 38
39
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing at 8:45 p.m. 40
41
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Gunn. To Waive the Reading, Introduce the First Reading and 42
Approve Ordinance 720, an Ordinance to Comprehensively Rezone Parcels Zoned Public 43
Facilities. 44
45
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 13
Council Member Marty asked whether pawnshops could go into the light industrial or would that 1
need to be in the business zone. 2
3
Council Member Quick commented that the pawnshop has nothing to do with what is going on at 4
this meeting. 5
6
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 7
8
G. Public Hearing, First Reading and Introduction of Proposed Ordinance 721, 9
an Ordinance Amending Chapter 1116 Regarding Permitted Uses Within the 10
Industrial (I-1) Zoning District 11
12
Community Development Director Ericson indicated this ordinance is related to the previous 13
ordinance in that with the change of the PF zoned properties to other use districts all of the 14
proposed uses out there are allowed in the districts recommended with the exception of the golf 15
course. This Ordinance amends the Code to include golf courses as an allowed use within the I-1 16
zoning district. 17
18
Mayor Linke opened the public hearing at 8:46 p.m. 19
20
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing at 8:47 p.m. 21
22
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Gunn. To Waive the Reading, Introduce the First Reading and 23
Approve Ordinance 721, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 1116 Regarding Permitted Uses 24
Within the Industrial (I-1) Zoning District. 25
26
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 27
28
H. Resolution No. 6101 Appointing Jason Ruby to the Position of Public Service 29
Officer to the Police Department 30
31
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 6101, a 32
Resolution Appointing Jason Ruby to the Position of Public Service Officer to the Police 33
Department. 34
35
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 36
37
Council Member Marty asked how the public service officer differs from community service 38
officer. 39
40
Chief Sommer indicated that the hours and salary were changed so the position is less than half 41
time and gets no benefits. 42
43
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 14
I. Resolution 6103 Approving the Purchase of an Upgrade to the Automated 1
Water Meter Reading System 2
3
Finance Director Hansen indicated that in the mid 1990’s the City installed remote read water 4
meters in most of the houses in the City that are read over the telephone lines and, at the same 5
time, purchased a computer and software to read the meters. He then indicated that the software 6
and computer have never been upgraded and it is necessary to do so now because the software 7
program is DOS based and the company will be ceasing maintenance on that program. 8
9
Director Hansen indicated that the Resolution authorizes $3,500 for the purchase the software 10
and $1,000 for a computer to run it. He then indicated that the purchase would be funded 11
through the water fund. 12
13
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 6103, a 14
Resolution Approving the Purchase of an Upgrade to the Automated Water Meter Reading 15
System. 16
17
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 18
19
J. Request for the Appointment of an Elected Official to the Ramsey County 20
Public Safety Communications (800 MHz) Policy Committee 21
22
City Administrator Ulrich indicated that the Mayor of Falcon Heights has volunteered to 23
represent the 14 cities and one township on this Committee. 24
25
Council consented. 26
27
K. Resolution 6104 Authorizing Payment for Property Damage to Dennis 28
Hammes 29
30
City Administrator Ulrich indicated that Mr. Hammes maintains that his garage was damaged in 31
the amount of $150.00 by snow removal last winter and Staff recommends approval of a payment 32
of $150.00 to Mr. Hammes to resolve this matter. He then commented that this matter was 33
submitted to the insurance company and the claim was denied. 34
35
Council Member Marty indicated he had gone out there this winter and saw where the snow was 36
and this summer he looked at it and there is a hole in the area where the snow was blasted so he 37
would recommend approval. 38
39
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 6104, a 40
Resolution Authorizing Payment for Property Damage to Dennis Hammes. 41
42
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 43
44
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 15
10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1
2
A. City Council Minutes September 8, 2003 3
4
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Stigney. To Approve the City Council Minutes for September 8, 5
2003 as Presented. 6
7
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 8
9
11. REPORTS 10
11
A. Reports of Mayor and Council 12
13
Council Member Gunn indicated that Irondale High would be having a marching band show on 14
Saturday, September 27, 2003 starting at 5:30 p.m. and invited all to come out and support them. 15
16
Mayor Linke indicated the Bridges is having glow ball golf Friday, September 26, 2003 17
beginning at 6:30 p.m. and invited all to come out and play. Fees are $22.00 per adult golfer and 18
$17.00 per youth golfer. 19
20
B. Reports of Staff 21
22
1. Camcorder Use Policy 23
24
City Administrator Ulrich indicated that Council had requested that Staff develop a camcorder 25
use policy and that has been done and it will be adopted as an administrative policy. 26
27
2. City Priority Document 28
29
City Administrator Ulrich indicated he had brought this item forward to show Council the 30
priorities adopted and the strategies, completion dates and which Staff members will be working 31
to complete the project. 32
33
3. Employee Appreciation Breakfast 34
35
City Administrator Ulrich indicated that a breakfast has been planned in an attempt to cut down 36
on costs while still providing recognition to employees for years of service. He then indicated 37
that Council Members are invited and said Department Heads will be serving the employees. 38
39
Mayor Linke asked Staff to post the meeting. 40
41
4. Boards and Commission Dinner 42
43
Mayor Linke asked Staff to post the meeting. 44
45
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 16
5. Update on Community Center 1
2
City Administrator Ulrich indicated that Staff has been in negotiations with the existing caterer 3
over the budget but has not yet received the insurance notice, performance bond or the required 4
marketing plan. He then indicated that the City Attorney has recommended that the City allow 5
the full 30 day cure period to expire and send out a letter notifying the contractor that they are not 6
in compliance with the terms of the contract. 7
8
City Administrator Ulrich indicated there was a proposal from a competing vendor so there is 9
potential that the City could reach a negotiated agreement on the contract prior to the 30 days or 10
with a new vendor. 11
12
Mayor Linke indicated he felt it would be premature to enter into negotiations in case the 13
contractor performs. 14
15
City Administrator Ulrich indicated the City Attorney has said that there could be negotiations 16
with both the existing and new vendors but the City needs to allow the proper cure time. 17
18
City Attorney Riggs indicated the City would not be acting on any proposal but negotiating with 19
the present contractor to let them know if they are not going to comply the City is going to find 20
another vendor. 21
22
City Administrator Ulrich asked for authority to try and negotiate with the existing contractor to 23
bring back options for consideration short of termination. 24
25
There was consensus of Council to proceed with negotiations. 26
27
City Administrator Ulrich indicated he had provided an Administrator’s Digest and highlighted 28
that there would be thinning of trees at Groveland Park and noted that approximately 30 black 29
locust trees would be removed from the area next to the playground because they are rotted and 30
pose a safety hazard. The trees removed will be replaced with other plantings. 31
32
Community Development Director Ericson indicated he had attended the Ramsey County Board 33
of Commissioners meeting and Ramsey County conveyed to the City tax forfeited parcels that 34
were a part of the golf course that the City did not hold title to. 35
36
Director Ericson indicated that on the same day the HRA met and voted to adopt the maximum 37
levy for the HRA but that does not mean they will go forward or levy the maximum but they did 38
put in the process the ability to go forward. 39
40
Council Member Marty commented that he feels it is a good idea that access and authorization 41
has to be approved by the City Administrator and the Cable Coordinator. He then said he would 42
like Staff to determine what the proper battery charging procedure is for the type of batteries in 43
the camcorder in order not to compromise battery life. 44
45
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 17
Council Member Marty indicated that he had received a lot of calls on County Road H2. He then 1
said he had looked into it and they were waiting on catch basins and should be getting started 2
tomorrow. He then said that the grading on the south side is being taken down and will be 3
regarded and black dirt added before being sodded. 4
5
C. Reports of City Attorney 6
7
The City Attorney had no report. 8
9
12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, October 6, 2003 10
Next Council Meeting: Monday, October 13, 2003 11
12
13. ADJOURNMENT 13
14
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Gunn. To Adjourn to Executive Session to Address Union Contract 15
Negotiations. 16
17
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 18
19
Mayor Linke adjourned the meeting to a closed session at 9:10 p.m. 20
21
22
Transcribed and recorded by: 23
24
25
Joan Lenzmeier 26
Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 27