HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2003/10/27CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
Monday, October 27, 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. Proclamation for the Ramsey County Library.
7. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS
8. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Licenses for Approval
B. Consideration of Resolution 6122 Authorizing the Execution of Limited Use
Agreement for Judy Langner, 2337 Knoll Drive.
C. Resolution No. 6120 Authorizing the purchase of a replacement large format plotter
D. Resolution No. 6117 Approving a Contract Award for Weather Service for the 2003 –
2006 Winter Season
E. Resolution 6128 Ratifying the Appointment of Election Judges for the 2003 General
Election.
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS
A. 7:05 PM: First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 711, an Ordinance
Establishing a Pawn Overlay Zoning District
B. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 712, an ordinance Establishing
Licensing and Operating Requirements for Pawnshops
C. 7:10 PM: Public Hearing to Consider Resolution 6121 Approving a Conditional Use
Permit for an Oversized Garage at 7850 Spring Lake Road
D. Community Development Department Quarterly Report
E. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 723, an ordinance Amending Chapter
202 of the Mounds View City Code pertaining to apportionment of cost associated
with Roadway Major Maintenance Projects (ROLL CALL VOTE)
City Council Agenda
October 27, 2003
Page 2
F. Consideration of Resolution No. 6118 Authorizing the re-bidding of the County Road
H Sidewalk Project
G. Consideration of Resolution No. 6127 Establishing a Policy for Deferral of Special
Assessments by Senior Citizens or Disabled Persons.
H. 7:15 PM: Public Hearing to receive public input and pass upon Resolution 6125
Adopting a Special Assessment Levy for Diseased Tree Removals.
I. Finance Department Quarterly Report
10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. October 13, 2003 City Council Meeting.
11 REPORTS
A. Reports of Mayor and Council
B. Reports of Staff- Police Chiefs Report on the referendum.
C. Reports of City Attorney
12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, November 3, 2003
Next Council Meeting: Monday, November 10, 2003
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
P R O C L A M A T I O N
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Library system serves over 220,000 residents living
in suburban Ramsey County by providing them with a wide range of information and
community resources; and
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Library is an important art of the community and party
of the Ramsey County Library system; and
WHEREAS, five other suburban libraries located in the cities of Arden Hills,
Maplewood, Mounds View, Roseville, Shoreview, and White Bear Lake are also part of the
Ramsey County Library system; and
WHEREAS, plans are under way to explore restoring library services to the City of
North St. Paul and to make library improvements that respond to increasing community
demands and the ever changing technologies; and
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Library system continues to grow with an 18
percent increase in circulation and over 1.6 million people using the libraries in 2002, and
WHEREAS, Booker, the cuddly canine mascot of the Ramsey County Library
system, can be seen throughout Ramsey County communities spreading the joy of reading
to people of all ages at community and school events and encouraging residents to support
local libraries; and
WHEREAS, The Ramsey County Library Foundation, which supports the Ramsey
County Library system by cultivating donations and financial grants, is sponsoring the
fourth annual Taste of Books on November 15, 2003 at the Roseville Library from 7:00 –
10:00pm to highlight the efforts of Ramsey County Library employees, volunteers, and
donors to enrich our local libraries;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jerry Linke, Mayor of the City of Mounds View, do hereby
proclaim Saturday, November 15, 2003, to be
RAMSEY COUNTY LIBRARY FOUNDATION DAY in the CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
And urge all citizens of Mounds View to join the Ramsey County Library Foundation in
recognition of the Ramsey County Library system and its employees, volunteers, and
donors who have contributed to the vital and important role that libraries play in our
community life.
Jerry Linke, Mayor
(SEAL)
Item No: 08A
Meeting Date: October 27, 2003
Type of Business: CA
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Barb Benesch, Administrative Assistant
Item Title/Subject: CONTRACTOR LICENSES FOR APPROVAL
Please consider the following contractor licenses for approval. All contractor licenses will
expire on December 31, 2003. All applicants have submitted appropriate fees and proof
of insurance. Those companies that are “new” include applicants that have never been
licensed with the City or they may have been licensed with the City in the past, but were
not licensed in 2002. Those companies renewing their license were licensed, at a
minimum, in the year 2002. The type of license they are applying for follows the
company name.
AspenAir, Inc. – HVAC – New
Mike’s Heating & A/C – HVAC – New
Owens Companies, Inc. – HVAC – Renewal
Residential Concrete Specialists, LLC – Concrete/Masonry - New
S & B Geo Thermal – HVAC – New
Staff Recommendation: Approve license applications as requested.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Barbara Benesch
Item No: 8B
Meeting Date: Oct 27, 2003
Type of Business: Consent
Administrator Review : ____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Jim Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Resolution Approving a Limited
Use Agreement for a Driveway on City-Owned
Parkland
Background:
At the City Council’s July 28, 2003 meeting, Ms. Judy Langner addressed the Council under
Citizens Requests and Comments regarding her driveway, which is actually located on city-
owned parkland adjacent to her lot at 2337 Knoll Drive. The driveway has existed in its
present location for 50 years and she would like the area deeded to her to protect her right to
use the land.
The wedge of land used for the driveway is disconnected from the rest of Greenfield Park by
a drainage ditch and serves no public function. Rather than deed the wedge of land to Ms.
Langner, the Council directed staff to draft a Limited Use Agreement that would allow for the
continued use of the land in its present state.
Discussion:
After the July 28 meeting, staff began to contact surveying firms to create a legal description
for the wedge of land. Kurth Surveyors had the lowest estimate for the work and as such
were asked to begin the project. On September 30, the project was completed and a
certificate of survey was delivered to staff with the appropriate legal description to be
inserted into the Limited Use Agreement.
Recommendation:
Please review the attached Limited Use Agreement to permit the continued use of the wedge
of land for a driveway to serve the home at 2337 Knoll Drive. If there are no issues with the
Agreement, staff would recommend adoption of the attached Resolution 6122, a resolution
authorizing the execution and recording of the Agreement.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
Jim Ericson
Community Development Director
RESOLUTION 6122
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EXECUTION AND RECORDING OF A LIMITED
USE AGREEMENT TO ALLOW FOR THE CONTINUATION OF A DRIVEWAY ON
CITY-OWNED LAND ADJACENT TO 2337 KNOLL DRIVE
WHEREAS, Judy Langner is the property owner of 2337 Knoll Drive adjacent to
Greenfield Park; and,
WHEREAS, the driveway servicing 2337 Knoll Drive crosses a wedge of
Greenfield Park and has been in that location for 50 years; and,
WHEREAS, to protect her right to use her driveway and to protect the driveway
into the future, Ms. Langner has requested that the City adopt authorization that can be
recorded with Ramsey County; and,
WHEREAS, a Limited Use Agreement (attached as Exhibit 1) has been prepared
to officially grant use of the land to Ms. Langner, her heirs or assigns, for a driveway.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Mounds
View does hereby approve a Limited Use Agreement to permit a driveway on a wedge of
Greenfield Park to service the home at 2337 Knoll Drive and authorize its execution and
recordation.
Adopted this 27th day of October, 2003.
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
(SEAL)
GRANT AND ACCEPTANCE OF LIMITED USE AGREEMENT
THIS LIMITED USE AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made as of November 1,
2003, by and between the CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the
"City"), and JUDITH LANGNER (the "Resident").
RECITALS
A. The Resident is the owner of property located at 2337 Knoll Drive, legally described
as follows:
Lot 23, Block 14, Pinewood Terrace No. 5
B. The Resident desires to use a portion of City Property, which is a dedicated portion of
Greenfield Park, for the purpose of using and maintaining a driveway designed to serve the
Resident’s parcel. The legal description and drawing of the land to be used is attached as Exhibit A.
AGREEMENT
1. Offer and Acceptance of Agreement. Subject to the terms and conditions of this
Agreement, the City and the Resident agree that the Resident may use and maintain the driveway
within the area described in on Exhibit A.
2. Consideration. In consideration for the right to use and maintain the driveway, the
Resident has paid to the City one dollar ($1.00) upon execution of this Agreement. Furthermore, the
resident shall maintain the entire portion of the described area free from tall grass and noxious weed
growth, as defined in Section 606.01 of the Mounds View Municipal Code.
3. Maintenance and Repair of Driveway. The Resident, the Resident’s successors,
assigns or subsequent owners may use and maintain the driveway and shall be solely responsible for
all maintenance and repair of the driveway. The City shall have no responsibility for the maintenance
or repair of the driveway.
4. Indemnification. The resident hereby agrees to protect, defend and hold the City and
its officers, elected and appointed officials, employees, administrators, commissioners, agents, and
representatives harmless from and indemnified against any and all loss, cost, fines, charges, damage
and expenses, including without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees, consultants’ and expert
witness fees, and travel associated therewith, due to claims or demands of any kind whatsoever
(including those based on strict liability) arising out of (i) the use of all or any part of the Property,
including, without limitation, any claims for any lien imposed by law for services, labor or materials
furnished to or for the benefit of the Property, or (ii) any claim by the State of Minnesota of the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency or any other person pertaining to the violation of any permits,
orders, decrees, or demands made by said persons or with regard to the presence of any pollutant,
contaminant or hazardous waste on the Property; and (iii) or by reason of the execution of this
Agreement or the performance of this Agreement. The Resident, and the Resident’s successors or
assigns, agree to protect, defend and save the City, and its officers, agents, and employees, harmless
from all such claims, demands, damages, and causes of action and the costs, disbursements, and
EXHIBIT A.
expenses of defending the same, including but not limited to, attorneys fees, consulting engineering
services, and other technical, administrative or professional assistance. This indemnity shall be
continuing and shall survive the termination or cancellation of this Agreement. Nothing in this
Agreement shall be considered as a waiver or modification of immunity or limitation on liability to
which the City is entitled pursuant to Minn. Stat.§ 466, or otherwise.
5. Limitation of Use. The use of the area as described in Exhibit A shall be limited to
the Resident of the property.
6. Termination. The City or the Resident may terminate this Agreement at any time for
any reason, or for no reason at all, by providing 90 days written notice to the other party. Upon
termination of this Agreement, the Resident shall remove the driveway, shown on Exhibit B, and
return the property to the condition it was in prior to construction of the driveway, at the Resident’s
sole cost.
7. Assignability of Agreement. This agreement shall remain in force in perpetuity or
until terminated by either party. The Resident may not assign its rights under this Agreement to any
person other than subsequent owners of the property. The City may assign its rights under this
Agreement to any person at any time.
8. Miscellaneous Provisions.
(a) The City is entitled to recover its reasonable attorney's fees and costs
incurred drafting this Agreement and in enforcing the terms of this Agreement.
(b) Any notice, demand, or other communication under this Agreement by either
party to the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if it is dispatched by registered or
certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally; and
(i) in the case of the Resident, is addressed to or delivered personally
to the Resident at 2337 Knoll Drive, Mounds View, MN 55112 and
(ii) in the case of the City, is addressed to or delivered personally to the
City at City of Mounds View, 2401 Highway 10, Mounds, View, MN 55112,
Attn: City Administrator;
or at such other address with respect to either such party as that party may, from time to time,
designate in writing and forward to the other as provided in this Section.
(c) The City may record this Agreement and any amendments thereto in the office
of the Ramsey County Recorder or Registrar of Titles, as may be applicable. In either case,
the Resident shall pay all costs for recording and shall assist and cooperate with the City as
necessary to record this Agreement.
(d) This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Resident and the
City and supersedes any other written or oral agreements between the parties. This
Agreement can be modified only in a writing signed by the parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Resident and City have executed this limited use agreement
this ______ day of ____________, 2003.
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
By _________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
And _________________________
Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF RAMSEY )
On this ________ day of _______________, 2003, before me, a notary public within and for
Ramsey County, personally appeared Jerry Linke and Kurt Ulrich, Mayor and City Administrator,
respectively, of the City of Mounds View, Minnesota (the "City") named in the foregoing instrument;
that the seal affixed to said instrument is the seal of said City; that said instrument was signed and
sealed on behalf of said City pursuant to a resolution of its governing body; and said Mayor and City
Administrator acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said City.
_________________________
Notary Public
NOTARY STAMP OR SEAL
RESIDENT
_________________________
Judith Langner
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF __________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ___________,
2003, by resident Judith Langner.
_________________________
Notary Public
NOTARY STAMP OR SEAL
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description:
That Part of Block 14, PINEWOOD TERRACE NO. 5, Ramsey County, Minnesota, which lies
northerly of the easterly extension of the south line of Lot 28; westerly of the west line of Lot 23 and
its northerly extension thereof and easterly of the following described line:
Commencing at the northwest corner of Lot 23, Block 14, thence southerly on the
westerly line of said Lot 23, a distance of 18.0 feet, thence southwesterly deflecting
23 degrees 00 minutes to the southeasterly line of said Block 14 and the
northwesterly right of way line of Knoll Drive and there terminate.
Area Map:
Described
Area
Item No. 8C
Type of Business: CA
Administrator Review: _____
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. 6120 Approving the Purchase of a
Replacement Large Format Plotter
Meeting Date: October 27, 2003
Background:
The City currently owns one large-scale color plotter – Hewlett Packard Design
Jet 350C. This piece of equipment is used for printing all City maps; including
AutoCad, GIS maps, and drawings. This is a shared piece of equipment, used by
Public Works, Community Development and Administration.
Discussion:
This plotter was purchased in 1996, and has been fully utilized over the last eight
years. The support agreement for this plotter ran out two years ago. Hewlett
Packard has discontinued support agreements on this model due to its age and
because of the difficulty in locating replacement parts.
The plotter is no longer functioning properly. Staff has contacted a service repair
company. There are several parts needed to make the repairs. The full extent of
repairs needed will not be known until the printer is taken apart.
The replacement for this plotter is the HP Design Jet 500. The Public Works
Department solicited quotes from two companies.
A summary of the bids / quotes are as follows:
Company Total Bid Trade–In Total Cost
Copy Equipment Incorporated (CEI) $2,700.00 $250 $2,450.00
CDW G $2,475.00 $ N/A $2,475.00
The low bidder was Copy Equipment Incorporated (CEI) with a quote of $2,700
with a trade in value of $250 and tax of $159.25 – resulting in a total net cost of
$2,609.25
The City has an account with CEI for purchasing plotter and engineering
supplies. The quote to replace the plotter includes a $200.00 rebate from HP, if
purchased by October 31. It also includes delivery and set it up.
The online state contract vendor (CDWG) does not accept trade-ins. The City
would therefore be required to dispose of the old plotter at an additional cost.
The 2003 adopted budget has funds available under the capital equipment
account of the central service department (account 100-4160-7030). The
replacement of the plotter was also included in the 2004 proposed budget as a
line item under the same account in the amount of $3500.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve a contract award with Copy
Equipment Incorporated (CEI) in the estimated amount of $2,609.25 with a trade
in credit of $250 for the replacement purchase of a large format color plotter -HP
Design Jet 500.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
RESOLUTION NO. 6120
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF A REPLACEMENT LARGE FORMAT
PLOTTER
WHEREAS, the City currently owns one large-scale color plotter – Hewlett
Packard Design Jet 350C; and
WHEREAS, said plotter was purchased in 1996 and is no longer
functioning properly; and
WHEREAS, the low quote was Copy Equipment Incorporated (CEI) in the
estimated amount of $2,700.00 with a trade in credit of $250 for the replacement
purchase of a HP Design Jet 500; and
WHEREAS, the 2003 adopted budget has funds available under the
capital equipment account of the central service department (account 100-4160-
7030) and;
WHEREAS, this plotter was also included in the 2004 proposed budget as
a line item under account 100-4160-7030 in the amount of $3500 and;
WHEREAS, the City Charter, Section 7.08 gives the City Council authority
to amend the budget by resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Mounds View City
Council does hereby approve a contract award with Copy Equipment
Incorporated (CEI) in the estimated amount of $2,609.25 with a trade in credit of
$250 for the replacement purchase of a large format color plotter -HP Design Jet
500.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 2003 Budget
of the General Fund be amended to increase appropriations by $2,609.25 for the
replacement purchase of a large format color plotter -HP Design Jet 500.
Adopted this 27th day of October 2003.
______________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
(ATTEST) _______________________________
Kurt Ulrich
City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No. 8D
Type of Business: CA
Administrative Review: _____
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. 6117 Approving a Contract Award
for Weather Service for the 2003 – 2006 Winter
Seasons
Meeting Date: October 27, 2003
Background:
Annually, the City budgets for funds to provide weather service, which assists the
City in making decisions pertaining to weather related activities. Specifically, this
pertains to activities related to snow plowing and removal activities.
Discussion:
Having winter storm information is critical for proper maintenance of city streets.
Since 1996, the City has contracted with Great Lakes Weather Services to
provide the City with weather related services to assist the Public Works
Department in making decisions as to how to best maintain the drivability of City
streets during and following a snow or ice event. These decisions include: the
appropriate maintenance strategy to apply, the proper equipment to deploy, and
when to deploy it.
Last year two companies that provide the necessary weather service were
contacted to receive bids for the aforementioned service. Details on service and
fees follow:
Great Lakes Weather Services - $502 (if submitted by November 1st) for the 2003
– 2003 winter season
Meteorlogix - $89/month for a minimum of 36 months - $3204 contract amount
Great Lakes Weather Service contract began with the first storm of the year and
terminated with the last. Meteorlogix was a three-year minimum contract. Great
Lakes provides warnings in the form of a telephone call two hours prior to a
storm event. Meteorlogix provides up-to-date satellite images sent via computer.
Meteorlogix also provides many other year-round weather data parameters such
as wind direction and speed (possibly useful for summer pesticide applications).
Due to the great differenced in cost and service, this year, bids were only
obtained from Great Lakes Weather Service. Staff also believes that the services
provided by Meteorlogix are in excess of what is actually needed by the City and
the benefit does not justify the cost.
Great Lakes Weather Service is offering a three-year contract for the 2003 to
2006 winter seasons. The cost of this contract is $1500, payable in one
installment or three installments of $525, payable by November 1, of that
calendar year.
As previously mentioned, the City has used Great Lakes Weather Service since
1996 with great satisfaction. Staff is therefore recommending that Council award
a contract to Great Lakes Weather Service.
The 2003 adopted budget has $800.00 in funds allocated for professional
services in the Snow and Ice Department of the General Fund (Account No. 100-
4472-3030).
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve a contract with Great Lakes
Weather Service for the 2003 to 2006 winter seasons. The cost of this contract is
$1500, payable in one installment or three installments of $525, payable by
November 1, of that calendar year.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works Reviewed by City Administrator:___
RESOLUTION NO. 6117
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
APPROVING THE CONTRACT AWARD FOR WEATHER SERVICE FOR THE
2003 – 2006 WINTER SEASONS
WHEREAS, the City annually budgets for funds to provide weather
service, which assists the City in making decisions pertaining to weather related
activities; and
WHEREAS, having winter storm information is critical for proper
maintenance of city streets; and
WHEREAS, Great Lakes Weather Services submitted a favorable bid in
the amount $1500 for the 2003 – 2006 winter seasons; and
WHEREAS, the City has used Great Lakes Weather Service since 1996
with great satisfaction; and
WHEREAS, the 2003 adopted budget has $800 in funds allocated to
weather service reports in the General Fund (Account No. 100-4472-3030).
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Mounds View City
Council approves a contract with Great Lakes Weather Service for the 2003 to
2006 winter seasons. The cost of this contract is $1500, payable in one
installment or three installments of $525, payable by November 1, of that
calendar year.
Adopted this 27th day of October 2003.
______________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
(ATTEST) ______________________________
Kurt Ulrich
City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: 9A
Meeting Date: October 27, 2003
Type of Business: PH & CB
Administrator Review : ______
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing, First Reading and Introduction of
Ordinance 711, an Ordinance Establishing a Pawn
Overlay District
Introduction:
The City Council adopted an Interim ordinance on February 27, 2003, which directed the
Planning Commission to review the licensing and zoning implications related to pawnshops
and to recommend applicable provisions. The Planning Commission discussed this issue at
meetings in March, April and May of this year, reviewing State statues, ordinances from
adjoining communities and ordinances from communities where pawnshops currently operate.
The Commission also heard testimony from representatives of the Mounds View Police
Department who performed research of their own, discussing the potential impacts of a
pawnshop with other police departments. After significant discussion and input from interested
parties including residents and tenants from Moundsview Square, the Commission adopted a
resolution forwarding two ordinances on to the City Council for their consideration.
The City Council deliberated on the pawnshop zoning and licensing matters before sending
the zoning component back to the Commission for additional study to consider (1) an overlay
district and (2) potential additional uses to include within the overlay.
Discussion:
The Planning Commission discussed the two issues at length at their July 16th meeting and
from that discussion, many questions were raised concerning the legalities of an overlay
district. The questions were generally as follows:
1. Is there a minimum amount of land that the City can identify as an overlay district without
being unreasonably restrictive?
2. Would the City be at "risk" if the overlay district encompassed ONLY unavailable property?
(The golf course, for example)
3. Which other cities (if any) currently have a pawn overlay?
4. Some cities explicitly limit the number of pawnshops that can be sited in the City while
other communities ban them outright. Is either practice legally permissible?
5. What are the legal ramifications (outside of the scope of strict land use considerations) of
identifying multiple “unwanted” land uses within one overlay?
6. While there is some element of legal risk in everything a city does, is the City at greater risk
if it creates a "red light” district, especially if opposed by the property owners?
Pawn Overlay District
October 27, 2003
Page 2
On August 6, 2003, we received a legal opinion from the City Attorney in response to the
questions asked by the Planning Commission. The responses are as follows:
Legal Responses:
1. Is there a minimum amount to set aside? No, however the City must be reasonable.
2. Can overlay contain only unavailable land? No. “It would not be advisable for the City to
set up an overlay district containing only unavailable land in order to limit or effectively prohibit
these kinds of businesses. Such action could be deemed arbitrary and capricious. “
3. Which other cities have an overlay? Brooklyn Center and Robbinsdale are two such cities.
4. Can a city limit or ban pawnshops altogether? Probably not. Absent specific supporting
facts and reasons, pawnshops should be treated in a manner similar to other commercial
uses. “An outright ban on pawnshops would not survive a [legal] challenge.”
5. What are the ramifications of creating an overlay with multiple “unwanted” land uses?
Landowners would probably argue that the creation of a “red light” overlay is simply irrational--
that is, that such a district does not promote the public welfare and is a bad idea.
6. Is the City at greater risk if it creates a "red light” district? The creation of such a district
would likely be met with opposition from landowners in and around such district. Obviously,
City action that generates real opposition is more likely to result in litigation than less
controversial action. Therefore, yes, creating such a district would likely increase the risk of
litigation.
Location:
Two locations were identified by the City Council as potential overlay districts. The first
proposed district was that area north of Highway 10, encompassing Sysco, the golf course and
the office buildings on Coral Sea Street. The second proposed overlay was in the area south
of County Road H, south of the Townsedge Terrace manufactured home community. These
two areas are shown on the attached Exhibit 2.
The Planning Commission determined that if separation from residential areas was a primary
factor in establishing an overlay zone, the area south of County Road H would be unsuitable
location given the density of housing at the adjacent Townsedge Terrace community. (There
are approximately 240 homes in Townsedge.) Focusing their attention on the proposed
overlay north of Highway 10, the Planning Commission then considered the size of the
proposed overlay, indicating that the overlay as presented in Exhibit B was too large and would
allow for multiple pawnshops. The Commission removed Sysco and the Golf Course from the
proposed overlay, agreeing on a scaled back overlay as shown on Exhibit 3. A scaled back
overlay was also created on Mustang Drive but again that was rejected due to the proximity of
the housing.
Pawn Overlay Ordinance
October 27, 2003
Page 3
The Planning Commission concluded their review on September 3, 2003 by adopting
Resolution 737-03, a resolution recommending a pawn overlay district at the southwest corner
of Coral Sea Street and County Road J. This area north of Highway 10 was chosen as being
the more appropriate of the two overlays proposed, limited however to just the three parcels at
the southwest corner of that intersection. Additionally, the Commission by unanimous
consent felt it would not be in the City’s best interest to include other uses within the proposed
overlay.
The City Council reviewed the Planning Commission’s findings and recommendations at the
October 6, 2003 worksession. The Council agreed with the Commission and directed staff to
bring forward the overlay ordinance for first reading on October 27th. Because this is a zoning
action, a public hearing is required and staff duly notified those property owners within 350 feet
of the proposed overlay. Staff personally contacted the building owners for ZEP
Manufacturing and Bridges Leasing, the two properties included within the overlay. Neither
property owner had any significant concerns.
Recommendation:
Open the public hearing and consider all testimony and input regarding the first reading and
introduction of Ordinance 711, an ordinance establishing a pawn overlay district at the
southwest corner of Coral Sea Street and County Road J. If the first reading is approved,
second reading would be scheduled for November 10, 2003.
_____________________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
Exhibits:
1. Pawn Overlay District Map
2. Ordinance 711
ORDINANCE NO. 711
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MOUNDS VIEW CITY CODE SECTION
1102.02, PERTAINING TO DEFINITIONS, AND CREATING A NEW
CHAPTER 1118, PERTAINING TO OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS
IN THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
WHEREAS, the city of Mounds View has no land use controls of zoning regulations or
requirements pertaining to pawnshops; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has directed the Mounds View Planning Commission to conduct a
study and review the issue of an overlay zoning district as it would pertain to pawnshops; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the potential geographical areas potentially
suitable for an overlay district with the intent of maintaining adequate separation from residential and
educational facilities as well as other potentially sensitive land uses; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the possibility of including other land uses,
such as “adult” uses, tattoo and piercing shops, massage parlors, etc. within the proposed overlay zoning
district; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended the adoption of an ordinance establishing a
Pawnshop Overlay District in the city of Mounds View to be located north of Highway 10 at the
southwest corner of Coral Sea Street and County Road J as identified in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended that no other uses be included within the
Pawnshop Overlay District.
NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. AMENDMENT -- SECTION 1102.02. Section 1102.02 of the Mounds View City Code
pertaining to zoning definitions is hereby amended by inserting the bold and double underlined
language, to read as follows:
Subd. 86. PAWNBROKER: (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) , "pawnbroker" means a
person engaged in whole or in part in the business of lending money on the security of pledged
goods left in pawn, or in the business of purchasing tangible personal property to be left in pawn
on the condition that it may be redeemed or repurchased by the seller for a fixed price within a
fixed period of time.
Ordinance 711
Page 2
(b) The following are exempt from the definition of "pawnbroker": any bank regulated by
the state of Minnesota, the comptroller of the currency of the United States, the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, the board of governors of the Federal Reserve System, or
any other federal or state authority and their affiliates; any bank or savings and loan whose
deposits or accounts are eligible for insurance by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation or any successor to it and all affiliates of those banks and savings and loan
associations; any state or federally chartered credit union; any industrial loan and thrift
company or regulated lender subject to licensing and regulation by the department of
commerce.
Subd. 87. PAWNSHOP: “Pawnshop” means the location at which or premises in which a
pawnbroker regularly conducts business. A Pawnshop may only be located within a Pawnshop
Overlay District created by the city’s zoning ordinance.
[All existing subsequent subdivisions within Section 1102.02 are hereby renumbered as appropriate.]
SECTION 2. AMENDMENT--NEW CHAPTER 1118. A new Chapter 1118 in the Mounds View
City Code pertaining to a Pawnshop Overlay District within the City of Mounds View is hereby
created by inserting the language to read as follows:
CHAPTER 1118
PS, PAWNSHOP OVERLAY DISTRICT
SECTION:
1118.01: Purpose
1118.02: Permitted Uses
1118.03: Other Requirements
1118.04: District Area
1118.01: PURPOSE: The purpose of the Pawnshop Overlay District is to allow the location of a
Pawnshop as defined by Section 1102.02 of the City Code as an additional permitted use in defined
areas of certain other zoning districts within the City.
1118.02: PERMITTED USES: In addition to other uses permitted in the underlying zoning
district, a Pawnshop as defined in Section 1102.02 of the City Code.
1118.03: OTHER REQUIREMENTS: A Pawnshop must comply with all lot standards and
other requirements applicable to other permitted uses in the underlying zoning district, provided,
however, that a building containing a Pawnshop may not be located within 1,000 feet of another
building containing a Pawnshop. In addition, a Pawnshop must be licensed and operate in compliance
with the requirements provided in Chapter 516 of the City Code.
Ordinance 711
Page 2
1118.04: DISTRICT AREA: The following area is hereby established as being within the
Pawnshop Overlay District:
Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, North Star Industrial Park 2nd Addition
SECTION 3. EFFECT. 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 27th day of October, 2003.
Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this _____ day of _________, 2003.
_________________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Kurt Ulrich, Clerk / Administrator
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
City Attorney
Exhibit A.
Overlay District
Parcels: 3
Total Area: 9.2 acres
Underlying Zoning:
Industrial
Item No: 9B
Meeting Date: October 27, 2003
Type of Business: Business
Administrator Review: _____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 712, an
Ordinance Establishing Licensing and Operating
Requirements and Regulations for Pawnshops
Introduction:
The City Council adopted an Interim ordinance on February 27, 2003, which directed the
Planning Commission to review the licensing and zoning implications related to pawnshops
and to recommend applicable provisions. The Planning Commission discussed this issue at
meetings in March, April and May of this year, reviewing State statues, ordinances from
adjoining communities and ordinances from communities where pawnshops currently
operate. The Commission also heard testimony from representatives of the Mounds View
Police Department who performed research of their own, discussing the potential impacts of
a pawnshop with other police departments. After significant discussion and input from
interested parties including residents and tenants from Moundsview Square, the Planning
Commission adopted a resolution forwarding two ordinances on to the City Council for their
consideration. No changes or revisions have been made to the licensing ordinance since
last reviewed by the City Council in June of this year.
Discussion:
Ordinance 712 adds a new Chapter to the Licensing section of the Municipal Code, Title
500. The new chapter, Chapter 516, addresses all aspects of pawnshop operation and
regulation. The Council will need to adopt by a separate resolution the appropriate license
fees for a pawnshop license. Licensing fees need to reasonably relate to the impact upon
the City, thus a City cannot legitimately impose for example a $25,000 license fee simply to
discourage a certain business. The annual license fee currently proposed is $10,000. In
addition to that, the City would receive 50 cents from every reportable transaction as
currently proposed. Together, it would be intended that the collected fees would cover the
City’s added expense of overseeing and monitoring the operation, the bulk of which would be
handled by the Police Department. We have researched other cities fees and have made
inquiries with other police departments to get a sense of how much extra work is generated
with the addition of a pawnshop. Based on this research, it could be determined that a
$10,000 annual license fee should be sufficient. If a pawnshop were to locate in Mounds
View, the Council would have the authority to adjust fees if they are found to be insufficient.
Any pawnshop would be required to participate in the Automated Pawn System (APS)
program created by the City of Minneapolis. Pawnshops report every transaction into the
APS database which then allows subscribing police departments to check periodically for
merchandise which may have been reported stolen. Mounds View is a subscriber to this
system. Pawned goods are to be held for a 90 day period to both aid in the recovery and
return of any stolen merchandise and to ensure an adequate period of time for the person
pawing one’s possessions can retrieve them.
Licensing Provisions
October 27, 2003
Page 2
Prohibited Items. The Planning Commission determined that it would be in the best interest
of the City if handguns and firearms were prohibited from purchase or pawn. In addition, a
pawnshop may not accept any goods or merchandise which displays an obliterated or
altered serial number.
Suspension/Revocation: Any violation of the terms of the licensing provisions could result in
the suspension or revocation of the pawn license. The ordinance articulates a number of
prohibited acts, such as lending money on a pledge at a rate of interest higher than allowed
by law, possessing stolen goods or merchandise, selling pawned goods before the time to
redeem has expired, or accepting pawned goods or buying goods from minors.
Legal Review:
Scott Riggs from Kennedy & Graven and Tom Hughes from Hughes and Costello reviewed
the proposed licensing ordinance and found no issues of concern.
Recommendation:
After review and discussion of the issues associated with pawnshop licensing, staff and
the Planning Commission recommend the introduction and first reading of Ordinance
712, an ordinance establishing licensing and operating regulations and requirements for
pawnshops. If any changes are needed, these can be made prior to the second reading,
currently scheduled for November 10, 2003.
_____________________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
Attachment:
1. Ordinance 712
ORDINANCE NO. 712
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE INDEX AND TABLE OF CONTENTS OF THE
MOUNDS VIEW MUNICIPAL CODE, AMENDING THE TABLE OF CONTENTS OF
TITLE 500, BUSINESS LICENSE REGULATIONS, AND ADDING A NEW CHAPTER
516, ENTITLED “PAWNSHOPS”
THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS:
SECTION 1: The Mounds View Municipal Code Index is amended by
alphabetically inserting the following underlined text:
Pawnshops ………………………………………………………….………………………516
SECTION 2: The Mounds View Municipal Code Table of Contents is amended by
inserting the following underlined text:
Pawnshops ………………………………………………………….………………………516
SECTION 3: The Table of Contents for Title 500, Business License Regulations,
is amended by inserting the following underlined text:
Pawnshops ………………………………………………………….………………………516
SECTION 4: A new Chapter 516 entitled “Pawnshops” is hereby added to
Title 500, Business License Regulations:
D R A F T – REVISED 5-29-03
CHAPTER 516
PAWNSHOPS
SECTION:
516.01: Purpose
516.02: Definitions
516.03: License Required
516.04: Application for License
516.05: Investigation by Police Department
516.06: Term of License and Renewals
516.07: License Fees
516.08: Billable Transaction Fees
516.09: Bond Requirement
516.10: Ineligible Persons and Locations
516.11: General License Requirements
516.12: Alarm System Requirement
516.13: Suspension or Revocation of License
516.14: Prohibited Acts
516.15: Adoption of State Statute by Reference
516.16: Separability
516.01 PURPOSE: The City Council of the City of Mounds View finds that
pawnbroker regulation is appropriate because such activities provide an opportunity
for the commission of crimes and their concealment because such businesses have
the ability to receive and transfer stolen property easily and quickly. The City Council
also finds that consumer protection regulation of such activities is warranted
because customers of such businesses frequently seek their services during times
of desperate financial circumstances.
To help the City of Mounds View to better regulate current and future pawn
businesses, decrease and stabilize costs associated with the regulation of the pawn
industry, and increase identification of criminal activities in the pawn industry
through the timely collection and sharing of pawn transaction information, this
chapter also implements and establishes the required use of the Automated Pawn
System (APS).
516.02 DEFINITIONS: As used in this Chapter, the following words and terms
shall have the meanings as follows:
ACCEPTABLE IDENTIFICATION: Acceptable forms of identification are a current
valid Minnesota driver's license, a current valid Minnesota identification card, or a
current valid photo driver's license or identification card issued by another state or
province of Canada.
AUTOMATED PAWN SYSTEM (APS): A computerized data collection system that
mandates the collection of data and digitized images via modem for the purpose of
regulation and review of licensed pawn dealers by city officials and authorized
subscribers.
BILLABLE TRANSACTIONS: Every reportable transaction conducted by a
pawnbroker, except renewals, redemptions, or extensions of existing pawns on
items previously reported and continuously in the licensee's possession.
CONSIGNMENT: Acting as a sales agent for another, selling another person’s
goods without having to first purchase said goods.
ISSUING AUTHORITY: The City of Mounds View.
ITEM CONTAINING PRECIOUS METAL: An item made in whole or in part of metal and
containing more than one percent (1%) by weight of silver, gold or platinum.
MANAGER: A person or persons designated by the licensee to operate and
supervise the pawnshop under the provisions of this Chapter.
MINOR: Any natural person under the age of eighteen (18) years.
PAWNBROKER: A person engaged in whole or in part in the business of lending
money on the security of pledged goods left in pawn, or in the business of purchasing
tangible personal property to be left in pawn on the condition that it may be redeemed
or repurchased by the seller for a fixed price within a fixed period of time. The
following are exempt from the definition of "pawnbroker": any bank regulated by the
state of Minnesota, the comptroller of the currency of the United States, the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, the board of governors of the Federal Reserve system,
or any other federal or state authority and their affiliates; any bank or savings and loan
whose deposits or accounts are eligible for insurance by the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation or any successor to it and all affiliates of those banks and
savings and loan associations; any state or federally chartered credit union; any
industrial loan and thrift company or regulated lender subject to licensing and
regulation by the department of commerce.
PAWNSHOP: The licensed location in which a pawnbroker conducts business.
PERSON: One or more natural persons; a partnership, including a limited
partnership; a corporation, including a foreign, domestic or nonprofit corporation, a
trust, a political subdivision of the state; or any other business organization.
PRECIOUS METAL DEALER: Except as exempted by MN Statutes Section 325F.732
Subd 2, any natural person, partnership or corporation engaging in the business of
buying, selling or pawning secondhand items containing precious metal, including,
but not limited to, jewelry, watches, eating utensils, candlesticks, and religious and
decorative objects.
PRECIOUS METALS: means Silver, gold or platinum.
REDEMPTION PERIOD: The date by which an item of property that has been pawned
must be redeemed by the pledger without risk that the item will be sold. Such date
must be a day on which the pawnbroker or precious metal dealer is open for regular
business.
REPORTABLE TRANSACTION: Every transaction conducted by a pawnbroker in
which merchandise is received through a pawn or purchase, or in which a pawn is
renewed, extended, or for which a unique transaction number or identifier is
generated by their point of sale software, is reportable, except:
A. The bulk purchase of new or used merchandise from a merchant, manufacturer,
or wholesaler having an established permanent place of business, and the retail
sale of said merchandise, provided the pawnbroker must maintain a record of
such purchase which describes each item, and must mark each item in a manner
which relates it to that transaction record.
B. Retail and wholesale sales of merchandise originally received by pawn or
purchase, and for which all applicable hold and/or redemption periods have
expired.
516.03 LICENSE REQUIRED: No person shall exercise, carry on or be engaged
in the trade or business of pawnbroker within the city unless such person is
currently licensed in accordance with this chapter to be a pawnbroker. Pawnbrokers
shall also maintain and display at all times a current and valid Precious Metal Dealer
License issued by Ramsey County.
516.04 APPLICATION FOR LICENSE: Every application for license under this
chapter, whether for a natural person, partnership, corporation or other organization,
shall be made on a form supplied by the City and shall contain all information as
required on that form by law.
Subd. 1. All applications for a license under this chapter shall be signed and sworn
to under oath or affirmation by applicant. If the application is that of a natural
person, it shall be signed and sworn to by such person; if that of a
corporation, by an officer thereof; if that of a partnership, by one of the
general partners; and if that of an unincorporated association, by the manager
or managing officer thereof.
Subd. 2. Any falsification on a license application shall result in the denial of a
license.
Subd. 3. No Pawnbroker License will be issued, renewed or transferred without a
public hearing conducted by the City Council after a notice has been
published in the official City newspaper at least ten (10) days in advance of
the hearing.
516.05 INVESTIGATION BY POLICE DEPARTMENT:
Subd. 1. Investigation and Report: All applications shall be referred to the police
department for verification and investigation of the facts set forth in the
application. The police department shall make a written report and
recommendation to the City Council as to approval or denial of the license.
The City Council may order and conduct such additional investigation that it
deems necessary.
Subd. 2. Cost of Investigation: An investigation fee shall be collected with each
application for a Pawnshop license to cover the expense of any investigation needed
to assure compliance with this chapter. The investigation fee is established by
resolution of the City Council. If the investigation and verification process is
conducted outside the state of Minnesota, additional fees may be required.
Subd. 3. When a licensee places a manager in charge of the business, or if the
named manager(s) in charge of a licensed business changes, the licensee
must complete and submit the appropriate investigation application within
fourteen (14) days. The manager shall be subject to the investigation required
herein and to payment of the investigation fee required by this chapter, which
shall be paid in advance. The designation of a new manager shall not cause
the license to become invalid before a decision is rendered, provided proper
notice and application are made by the applicant. A proposed new manager
shall be referred to as the interim manager. In the event an interim manager is
rejected, the licensee shall designate another interim manager and make the
required application within fourteen (14) days of the decision. If a proposed
manager is rejected, the decision may be appealed to the city council by filing
a written notice of appeal with the city clerk/administrator within ten (10) days
after being notified of the rejection.
516.06 TERM OF LICENSE AND RENEWALS:
Subd. 1 Term: Licenses expire annually on December 31. The license fee will be
prorated in thirty (30) day increments for licenses issued after June 30.
Subd. 2. Renewal: A license under this section will not be renewed if the City
Council determines that the licensee has failed to comply with the provisions
of this chapter in a preceding license year or if there would be sufficient
grounds not to issue a license in the first instance.
516.07 LICENSE FEES: To defray administrative and other costs of processing
applications for Pawnshop licenses, a nonrefundable fee shall be paid at the time an
application is filed with the City. The minimum fee shall be established by resolution
approved by the City Council.
516.08 BILLABLE TRANSACTION FEES: Licensees shall pay a monthly
transaction fee on all billable transactions. The minimum fee shall be established by
resolution approved by the City Council. Such fee shall be due and payable within
thirty (30) days. Failure to timely pay the billable transaction fee shall constitute a
violation of this chapter.
516.09 BOND REQUIREMENT: At the time of filing an application for a license,
the applicant shall file a bond in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) with
the City. The bond, with a duly licensed surety company as surety thereon, must be
approved as to form by the city attorney. The bond must be conditioned on the
licensee observing all ordinances of the City and all laws relating to the business of
pawnbroker or precious metal dealer, and the licensee accounting for and delivering
to any person legally entitled thereto any articles which may have come into the
possession of the licensee as pawnbroker, or in lieu thereof such licensee paying
the person or persons the reasonable value thereof. The bond shall contain a
provision that it may not be canceled without thirty (30) days advance written notice
to the licensing authority.
516.10 INELIGIBLE PERSONS AND LOCATIONS:
Subd. 1. Ineligible Persons: No licenses under this chapter shall be issued to an
applicant who is a natural person, general or managing partner, manager,
proprietor or agent if such applicant:
a. Is a minor at the time the application is filed;
b. Has been convicted of any offense related to the occupation licensed or
involving moral turpitude;
c. Is not a citizen of the United States or a resident alien;
d. Is not of good moral character or repute;
e. Has misrepresented or falsified information on the license application;
f. Holds an intoxicating liquor license under this code;
g. Has had a pawnbroker or precious metal dealer license revoked elsewhere;
or
h. Other good and sufficient reason at the sole discretion of the City Council.
Subd. 2. Ineligible Locations: The following locations shall be ineligible for licenses
under this chapter:
a. No license shall be granted or renewed for operation on any property on
which taxes, assessments or other financial claims of the state, county,
school district or city are due, delinquent or unpaid.
b. No license shall be granted or renewed if the property on which the
business is to be conducted is owned or controlled by a person who is
ineligible for a license.
c. The property is not properly zoned.
d. A location within one thousand (1,000) feet of an existing pawnshop.
e. No license shall be granted for a premises in excess of 5,000 square feet.
Subd. 3. Multiple Brokers Or Dealers Prohibited: No license shall be issued for
multiple pawnbrokers at one location.
516.11 GENERAL LICENSE REQUIREMENTS:
Subd. 1. Record Keeping: All licensees shall utilize the Automated Pawn System
(APS) for the creation, maintenance, and storage of transactional records
regarding licensed activities. At the time of a receipt of an item of property,
whether purchased or pawned, the pawnbroker shall immediately record, on
computer disc or if the computer is temporarily unavailable in a book or
journal which has page numbers that are preprinted and in an indelible ink,
the following information:
a. Description Of Item: An accurate description of the item of property
including, but not limited to, any trademark, identification number, serial
number, model number, brand, brand name or other identifying mark on such
item;
b. Date And Time: The date and time the item of property was received by the
licensee, and the unique alpha and/or numeric transaction identifier that
distinguishes it from all other transactions in the licensee's records.
Transaction identifiers must be assigned consecutively;
c. Description Of Person: The name, address, residence phone number, date
of birth, and accurate description including: sex, height, weight, race, color of
eyes and color of hair of the person from whom the item of property was
received;
d. Identification Number: The identification number and state or nation of
issue from any of the following forms of identification of the person from
whom the item of property was received:
(1) A valid driver's license;
(2) A valid state or national picture identification.
e. Price: The price of the item paid and whether the item was purchased or
pawned;
f. Fees: A list of all fees and charges that the transaction may be subject to;
g. Statement: A signed statement from the person from whom the item of
property is received that there are no liens on the item, that it is not stolen and
that the person has the right to sell it.
h. Photograph or Video Recording: The licensee must take a color photograph
or color video recording of each customer involved in a billable transaction
and every item pawned or sold that does not have a unique serial or
identification number permanently engraved or affixed.
(1) Photo Provisions: The photograph taken must be at least two
inches (2") in length by two inches (2") in width and must be
maintained in such a manner that the photograph can be readily
matched and correlated with all other records of the transaction to
which they relate. Such photographs must be available to the chief of
police, or the chief's designee, upon request. The major portion of the
photograph must include an identifiable front facial close up of the
person who pawned or sold the item. Items photographed must be
accurately depicted. The licensee must inform the person that he or she
is being photographed by displaying a sign of sufficient size in a
conspicuous place on the premises.
(2) Video Provisions: If a video photograph is taken, the video
camera must zoom in on the person pawning or selling the item so as
to include an identifiable close up of that person's face. Items
photographed by video must be accurately depicted. Video
photographs must be electronically referenced by time and date so they
can be readily matched and correlated with all other records of the
transaction to which they relate. The licensee shall display a sign of
sufficient size in a conspicuous place on the premises informing
patrons that all transactions are video-recorded. The licensee must
keep the exposed videotape for four (4) months, and furnish it to the
police department upon request.
(3) Digitized Photographs: Digital images shall be provided in a format
specified by the issuing authority, electronically cross referenced to the
reportable transaction with which they are associated.
i. Renewals, Extensions And Redemptions: For renewals, extensions and
redemptions, the licensee shall provide the original transaction identifier, the
date of the current transaction, the type of transaction, interest charges
accrued, and any amount paid for the transaction or the article. When an
article of purchased or forfeited property is sold or disposed of by a licensee
the records shall contain an account of such sale with the date, the amount
for which the article was sold, and the full name, current address, and
telephone number of the person to whom sold.
Subd. 2. Inspection Of Records: The pawnbroker shall make available the
information required in subdivision 1 of this section at all reasonable times for
inspection by the police department or other representatives of the licensing
authority.
Subd. 3. Retention of Records. The pawnbroker shall retain the information
required in this section for at least five (5) years.
Subd. 4 Daily Reports To Police Are Required: The pawnbroker shall submit daily to
the police department all information required by this section regarding every
reportable transaction by transferring it from their computer to the Automated
Pawn System. All required records must be transmitted completely and
accurately after the close of business each day in accordance with standards
and procedures established by the issuing authority using procedures that
address security concerns of the licensees and the issuing authority. The
licensee must display a sign of sufficient size, in a conspicuous place in the
premises, which informs all patrons that all transactions are reported to the
police department daily.
Subd. 5. Data Transfer Failures:
a. If a licensee is unable to successfully transfer the required reports by
electronic means, the licensee must provide the police department printed
copies of all reportable transactions along with the videotape(s) for that date,
by twelve o'clock (12:00) noon the next business day;
b. If the problem is determined to be in the licensee's system and is not
corrected by the close of the first business day following the failure, the
licensee must provide the required reports and shall be charged a fifty dollar
($50.00) reporting failure penalty, daily, until the error is corrected; or
c. If the problem is determined to be outside the licensee's system, the
licensee must provide the required reports and resubmit all such transaction
electronically when the error is corrected.
d. If a licensee is unable to capture, digitize or transmit digital photographs
required by this chapter, the licensee must immediately take all required
photographs with a still camera, cross reference the photographs to the
correct transaction, and make the pictures available to the police department
upon request.
e. Regardless of the cause or origin of the technical problems that prevented
the licensee from uploading their reportable transactions, upon correction of
the problem, the licensee shall upload every reportable transaction from every
business day the problem had existed.
f. The police department may at their discretion, upon presentation of
extenuating circumstances by the licensee, delay the implementation of the
daily reporting penalty imposed by this section.
Subd. 6. Police Order To Hold Property: Whenever the police department notifies
the pawnbroker not to sell an item, the item shall not be sold or removed from
the licensed premises until authorized to be released by the police
department.
Subd. 7. Holding Period Of Pawnbrokers:
a. Any item pawned to a pawnbroker for which a report to the police is
required under this chapter shall not be sold or otherwise transferred for
ninety (90) days after the date of the pawn. However, an individual may
redeem an item pawned seventy two (72) hours after the item was received on
deposit by the pawnbroker, excluding Sundays and legal holidays.
b. Any item sold outright to a pawnbroker for which a report to the police is
required under this chapter shall not be sold or otherwise transferred for
thirty (30) days after the date of the initial purchase.
Subd. 8. Receipt: The pawnbroker shall provide a receipt to the seller or pledger
of any item of property received, which shall include:
a. The name, address and phone number of the pawnbroker or precious metal
dealer business.
b. The date on which the pawnbroker or precious metal dealer received the
item.
c. A description of the item received and amount paid to the pledger or seller
in exchange for the item pawned or sold.
d. The signature of the pawnbroker or precious metal dealer or agent.
e. The last regular business day by which the item must be redeemed by the
pledger without risk that the item will be sold and the amount necessary to
redeem the pawned item on that date.
f. The annual rate of interest charged on pawned items received.
g. The name, address, and signature of the seller or pledger.
Subd. 9. Hours Of Operation: No pawnbroker shall be open for the transaction of
business on any day of the week before eight o'clock (8:00) A.M. or after eight
o'clock (8:00) P.M.
Subd. 10. Minors: The pawnbroker shall not purchase or receive personal property
of any nature on deposit or pledge from any minor.
Subd. 11. Inspection Of Items: The pawnbroker shall at all times during the term of
the license allow the police department to enter the premises where the
pawnbroker business is located, for the purpose of inspecting such premises
and inspecting the items, wares and merchandise therein for the purpose of
locating items suspected or alleged to have been stolen or otherwise
improperly disposed of.
Subd. 12. License Display: A license issued under this chapter must be posted in a
conspicuous place in the premises for which it is used. The license issued is
only effective for the compact and contiguous space specified in the approved
license application. Any additional required county and state licenses shall
be similarly posted.
Subd. 13. Maintenance Of Order: A licensee under this chapter shall be responsible
for the conduct of the business being operated and shall maintain conditions
of order.
Subd. 14. Prohibited Goods: No licensee under this chapter shall accept any item of
property which contains an altered or obliterated serial number or "operation
identification" number or any item of property whose serial number has been
removed.
Subd. 15. Payment By Check: Payment of more than two hundred fifty dollars
($250.00) by a licensee for any article deposited, left, purchased, pledged or
pawned shall be made only by a check, draft, or other negotiable or
nonnegotiable instrument that is drawn against funds held by a financial
institution. This policy shall be posted in a conspicuous place in the
premises.
Subd. 16. Storage: All items shall be stored within the licensed premises.
Subd. 17. Prohibited Items: Licensee shall not accept for pawn or purchase or offer
for sale firearms or handguns.
Subd. 18. Signage: Licensees shall by adequate signage and separate written notice
inform persons seeking to pawn, pledge, sell, leave, or deposit articles of
property with the licensee of the foregoing requirements:
TO PAWN OR SELL PROPERTY:
• YOU MUST BE AT LEAST 18 YEARS OF AGE
• YOU MUST BE THE TRUE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY
• THE PROPERTY MUST BE FREE OF ALL CLAIMS AND LIENS
• YOU MUST PRESENT VALID PHOTO IDENTIFICATION
• VIOLATION OF ANY OF THESE REQUIREMENTS IS A CRIME.
For the purpose of this Subsection, “adequate signage” shall mean at least one
sign of not less than four (4) square feet in surface area, comprised of lettering
of not less than three-quarters (3/4) of an inch in height, posted in a
conspicuous place on the licensed premises.
Subd. 19. Disposition of Articles: When any article is sold or disposed of by the
licensee, the records shall contain an account of such sale with the date
thereof, interest and charges accrued, the amount for which the article was
sold and, in the case of items sold for more than $100.00, the name, address
and telephone number of the purchaser.
Subd. 20. Managers: In the event the Licensee places a manager or managers in
charge of the operation (subject to the requirements of Section 516.04), the
manager or managers shall work on average a minimum of 80 hours per
month during a six-month time period.
516.12 ALARM SYSTEM REQUIREMENT: An alarm system, professionally
installed and approved by the Police Chief shall be installed at the licensed
premises.
516.13 SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSES:
Subd. 1. Violation: The City Council may suspend or revoke a license issued under
this chapter upon a finding of a violation of:
a. Any of the provisions of this chapter
b. Any state statute regulating pawnbrokers or precious metal dealers
c. Any state or local law relating to moral character and repute. Any
conviction by the pawnbroker or precious metal dealer for theft, receiving
stolen property or any other crime or violation involving stolen property shall
result in the immediate suspension pending a hearing on revocation of any
license issued hereunder.
Subd. 2 Notice; Hearing: Except in the case of a suspension pending a hearing on
revocation, a revocation or suspension by the City Council shall be preceded
by written notice to the licensee and a public hearing. The written notice shall
give at least ten (10) days notice of the time and place of the hearing and shall
state the nature of the charges against the pawnbroker or precious metal
dealer. The Council may, without any notice, suspend any license pending a
hearing on revocation for a period not exceeding thirty (30) days. The notice
may be served upon the pawnbroker by United States mail addressed to the
most recent address of the business in the license application.
516.14 PROHIBITED ACTS:
Subd. 1. No pawnbroker licensed upon this chapter shall:
a. Lend money on a pledge at a rate of interest above that allowed by law;
b. Possess stolen goods;
c. Sell pledged goods before the time to redeem has expired;
d. Make a loan on a pledge to a minor or purchase property from a minor;
e. Accept consignments or sell consigned goods or items.
f. Keep, possess or operate, or permit the keeping, possession or operation
on the licensed premises of dice, slot machines, roulette wheels,
punchboards, blackjack tables or pinball machines which return coins or
slugs, chips or tokens of any kind, which are redeemable in merchandise or
cash. Gambling of any kind, except as noted herein, is prohibited. No
gambling equipment authorized under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 349, may
be kept or operated and no raffles may be conducted on the licensed
premises and/or adjoining rooms. The purchase of lottery tickets may take
place on the licensed premises as authorized by the director of the lottery
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, chapter 349A.
516.15 ADOPTION BY REFERENCE: Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 325J is
hereby adopted by reference. Wherever this chapter is more restrictive than said
statutes, this chapter will control. Wherever said statutes are more restrictive than
this chapter, said statutes shall control.
516.16 SEPARABILITY: Should any section, clause or other provision of this
chapter be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid such decision
shall not effect the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any part other than the
part so declared invalid.
SECTION 5. 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 on this 27th day of October,
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 Clerk / Administrator
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
City Attorney
Item No: 9C
Meeting Date: October 27, 2003
Type of Business: PH & CB
Administrator Review : _____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Conditional
Use Permit to Expand a Garage at 7850 Spring Lake
Road; Planning Case No. CU03-004
Introduction:
Property owners Joel and Linda Whitbeck are requesting approval of a conditional use
permit to expand their garage at 7850 Spring Lake Road. The applicants indicate that the
existing garage is too small to meet their needs and that they would like to expand upon it by
adding a third stall and a workshop off the back. The expansion would add 390 square feet
to the existing 720 square foot garage for a proposed area of 1,110 square feet. Mounds
View’s Zoning Code requires a Conditional Use Permit for any garage in excess of 952
square feet.
7850 Spring Lake Road is a larger lot—37,462 square feet—with 112 feet of frontage on
Spring Lake Road. Part of the lot extends into Spring Lake. The home is a slab-on-grade
construction and there is no basement. Photographs of the lot and the garage are attached
for the Council’s review.
Requirements:
Section 1106.03, Subd. 1: This part of the Code limits the height of an accessory building, the number
of accessory buildings and the backyard coverage ratio of accessory buildings. A Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) is required for garages exceeding 952 square feet.
Section 1106.04, Subd. 6: This part of the Code enumerates the conditions for garage exceeding
952 square feet, which are that the garage be permanent, be uniform in appearance with the home,
not exceed 35’ in width, and not exceed 1,800 square feet of total accessory building area on the lot.
Section 1125.01, Subd. 1: The Planning Commission is required to make a recommendation
considering the possible adverse effects of the requested conditional use.
Section 1125.01, Subd. 3: The City Council shall consider the advice and recommendation of the
Planning Commission and create a recordable findings of fact related to the request.
Discussion:
The request for a Conditional Use Permit to expand the existing garage by an additional 390
square feet satisfies the requirements as stated in Section 1106.03 and 1106.04, Subdivision
6 of the Mounds View Zoning Code, with the exception of the proposed width of the building
which, at 40 feet, would exceed the maximum width allowed by five feet. The applicants
claimed a hardship and requested a variance to permit the 40-foot wide garage. The
Planning Commission held a public hearing and approved the variance on October 15, 2003.
Whitbeck Council Report
October 27, 2003
Page 2
The existing two-car garage is located at the northwest corner of the lot and is partially
hidden from the road by the house. The garage is set back approximately 6 feet form the
north lot line and 16 feet from the west lot line. A third stall would be added on the south
side of the garage, which would not be visible form the street and would not encroach into
the setback. The proposed expansion on the back side of the garage would bring the
structure ten feet closer to the west lot line but still within the required minimum setback.
The Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential
areas so as to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and
residential property in general. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property, 7850
Spring Lake Road, as low-density residential. The lot is larger than most lots and one of only
seven homes that have direct access to Spring Lake. Most of the homes in this area were
built with single or small two stall garages, which by today’s standards are under-sized for
the typical multi-vehicle family.
CUP Considerations:
Chapter 1106 of the Zoning Code articulates a variety of requirements and stipulations for
garages in a single-family residential district. This request satisfies all zoning requirements,
such as square-footage, backyard coverage ratio, height, setbacks and usage, with the
exception of the width of the proposed garage, for which the Planning Commission approved
a variance.
Chapter 1125 of the Zoning Code requires that the Planning Commission review and
address any potential adverse effects relating to the request and forward a recommendation
to the City Council for their consideration. The Planning Commission concluded that there
would be no adverse effects resulting from the proposed request and as such adopted a
resolution recommending City Council approval. The Commission’s resolution, which
includes their findings of fact, is attached for the Council’s consideration. Chapter 1125 also
requires that the Council consider the relationship between the request and the
Comprehensive Plan. As stated above, the Comprehensive Plan encourages the
development and maintenance of residential areas so as to improve the quality, appearance
and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. 7850 Spring Lake
Road is designated as low-density residential and the proposed garage expansion would not
be inconsistent with the Comp Plan.
Approval Criteria:
The City Council is to review criteria relating to the request and to enter into the record
findings of fact to support the Council’s action. For an approval to be justified, the conditional
use should (1) bear no undue burden to the city’s utilities or facilities, (2) be compatible with
the surrounding properties, (3) be reasonably related to the needs of the City or to the
property, (4) be consistent with the zoning code and zoning district, (5) be consistent with the
Comprehensive plan and (6) not cause traffic hazards or congestion. This request satisfies all
identified criteria.
Whitbeck Council Report
October 27, 2003
Page 3
Recommendations:
After thorough review of the City Code requirements for garages and accessory buildings
and in consideration of the standards for approving conditional uses, this request appears to
satisfy all articulated criteria. As such, Planning Commission and staff recommend the
following motion:
“Move to Approve Resolution 6121, a resolution approving a conditional use permit
for a 1,110 square foot garage at 7850 Spring Lake Road, with stipulations as noted.”
If the City Council determines that additional information is necessary before a decision
can be rendered, a tabling or postponing motion would be in order. If for some justifiable
reason the Council should determine that denial is warranted, action should be tabled
and staff be directed to draft a resolution of denial with the findings of fact appropriate to
support such an action.
_____________________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
Attachments:
1. Application
2. Site Plan
3. Zoning Map
4. Photographic Documentation
5. Resolution 741-03
6. Resolution 6121
Site Plan
N
Spring Lake
Area of
Proposed
Expansion
Zoning Map
* Properties not indicated with a particular zoning designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential.
Photographic Documentation
View of the garage
looking to the north
from the subject
property backyard.
The shed behind
the garage would
be removed.
View of the property
looking west toward
house and existing
garage.
Note how part of the
garage is obscured
by the home—the
expansion would not
be visible from the
street.
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 741-03
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR A 40-FOOT WIDE GARAGE AND
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR
AN EXPANDED 1,110 SQUARE-FOOT GARAGE AT 7850 SPRING LAKE ROAD ;
PLANNING CASE NOs. CU03-003 & VR03-009
WHEREAS, property owners Joel and Linda Whitbeck have applied for a
variance and a conditional use permit to expand their existing 720 square foot garage
by an additional 390 square feet for a finished total of 1,110 square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the Whitbeck property, located at 7850 Spring Lake Road, is zoned
R-1, Single Family residential, and is legally described as follows:
The South 451.21 Feet of Lot 23, Auditors Subdivision No.
89, except the East 137.0 Feet of the South 339.21 thereof;
Ramsey County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code conditionally allows garages in
excess of 952 square feet in area with a maximum accessory building area not to
exceed 1,800 square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code restricts the width of oversized
garages to 35 feet or less; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed expanded garage would be 1,110 square feet, thus
necessitating application of a conditional use permit; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed garage would be 40 feet in width, five feet beyond that
which is allowed for an oversized garage, necessitating application of a variance; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents
regarding this proposal:
a. Planning Application
b. Zoning Map
c. Proposed Site Plan
d. Location Map
e. Photographic documentation
f. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing
regarding the variance and conditional use permit requests on Wednesday, October 15,
2003.
Resolution 741-03
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission makes the following findings of fact related to the conditional use permit
request:
1. Other than the width, the proposed oversized 1,110 square foot garage
satisfies the dimensional requirements as outlined in Chapters 1104 and 1106
the Zoning Code.
2. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan in that the Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas so as to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general; and, 3. The proposed garage would not be out of place given the character and geography of the surrounding area involved and the size of the subject property which is able to accommodate such a structure; and,
4. The proposed garage would not depreciate the neighborhood.
5. The applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that a need exists for the
proposed oversized garage.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission makes the following findings of fact related to the variance request:
1. Relating to exceptional circumstances, the applicants have sufficient room for
the expansion however are limited by the Code to adding only five feet because the
existing garage is already 30 feet wide—the minimum needed for a new garage stall
is ten feet.
2. The intent of the width limitation is to minimize the visual impact of a garage—in
this case, the expanded garage would satisfy the spirit and intent of the
requirement, thus the literal interpretation creates an unnecessary hardship.
3. The special circumstances or conditions do not result form the applicants in that
the Whitbecks are simply attempting to compensate for their home’s lack of a
basement by adding onto the garage. In addition, the Whitbecks drafted the garage
expansion plans so as to preserve a mature Oak tree behind the garage.
4. Granting the variance would not confer upon the applicants any special privilege
in that the variance would not be required were it not for the secondary addition
which does not increase the garage width. The Whitbecks’ situation is unique in this
regard.
5. The requested five-foot variance is the minimum amount necessary to alleviate
the Whitbecks’ hardship. Economic conditions do not enter into the need for a
variance in this case.
Resolution 741-03
Page 3
6. The variance requested would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of the
Code or to other properties in the vicinity. As stated above, the spirit and intent of
the Code is preserved and the garage expansion should not impact adjoining
property owners in any way.
7. Granting the variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent properties, would not increase the congestion of the public streets, would
not increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety and would not diminish
or impair property values within the neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission unconditionally approves the requested variance for a 40-foot wide garage
and recommends approval of the conditional use permit for the 1,110 square foot garage,
with conditions as follows:
1. The garage shall not be used for commercial purposes, living space or other
uses not allowed within the R-1 Single-Family Residential district or by the Zoning
Code. Should the use change for which the permit was granted; the conditional use
permit shall be considered null and void.
2. The garage expansion shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform
appearance with the existing garage.
BE IT FURTHER FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval
of the minutes.
Adopted this 15th day of October, 2003.
_____________________________________
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
____________________________________
James Ericson, Community Dev. Director
(SEAL)
RESOLUTION NO. 6121
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 1,110 SQUARE
FOOT GARAGE AT 7850 SPRING LAKE ROAD;
PLANNING CASE NO. CU03-003
WHEREAS, property owners Joel and Linda Whitbeck have applied for a
conditional use permit to expand their existing 720 square foot garage by an additional
390 square feet for a finished total of 1,110 square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the Whitbeck property, located at 7850 Spring Lake Road, is zoned
R-1, Single Family residential, and is legally described as follows:
The South 451.21 Feet of Lot 23, Auditors Subdivision No.
89, except the East 137.0 Feet of the South 339.21 thereof;
Ramsey County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code conditionally allows garages in
excess of 952 square feet in area with a maximum accessory building area not to
exceed 1,800 square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council has reviewed the following
documents regarding this proposal:
a. Planning Application
b. Zoning Map
c. Proposed Site Plan
d. Location Map
e. Photographic documentation
f. Planning Commission Resolution 741-03
g. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council held a duly noticed public hearing
regarding the conditional use permit request on Monday, October 27, 2003; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code requires that the City Council consider
the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and shall consider the
relationship between the proposed conditional use and the Comprehensive plan and
consider the impacts of the use supported by findings of relevant fact.
Resolution 6121
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
makes the following findings of fact related to the conditional use permit request:
1. The proposed 1,110 square foot garage satisfies the dimensional
requirements as outlined in Chapters 1104 and 1106 the Zoning Code.
2. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan in that the Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas so as to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. 3. The proposed garage would not be out of place given the character and geography of the surrounding area involved and the size of the subject property which is able to accommodate such a structure.
4. The proposed garage would not depreciate the neighborhood, would not
cause an undue burden on city facilities or utilities and would not cause
congestion or pose a traffic hazard.
5. The Whitbecks have sufficiently demonstrated that a need exists for the
proposed expanded garage.
6. The Mounds View Planning Commission held a public hearing and adopted a
resolution in support of the conditional use permit request on October 15, 2003.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View City
Council approves the conditional use permit for a 1,110 square foot garage at 7850 Spring
Lake Road, with conditions as follows:
1. The garage shall not be used for commercial purposes, living space or other
uses not allowed within the R-1, Single-Family Residential district or by the Zoning
Code. Should the use change for which the permit was granted; the conditional use
permit shall be considered null and void.
2. The garage expansion shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform
appearance with the existing garage.
Adopted this 27th day of October, 2003.
_____________________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Kurt Ulrich, City Clerk / Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: 9D
Meeting Date: October 27, 2003
Type of Business: Report
Administrator Review : _____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Community Development Quarterly Report
Date of Report: October 27, 2003
Community Development Quarterly Report
~ A Nine Month Review ~
Department Snapshot
Budget. Expenditures for 2003, through the end of the third quarter, total $206,594, which
represents 58% of the 2003 Community Development budget. This level of spending is less
than what one would expect to see after three quarters however a personnel vacancy
coupled with a reduction in non-essential spending put us at about $20,000 less than the
same point last year.
Revenues. The department has been busy this year with building permit activity. At
$160,000 in permit revenue after just three quarters, the amount already exceeds projections
for all of 2003 by $40,000 and we are on a pace to eclipse the 2002 figures, which was also
a busy year. Not included with the permit revenues are contractors licenses and license
check fees, which together add an additional $8,000 to the community development revenue
stream
Planning Activity. Looking at the first three quarters, the department processed 23 planning
applications, down slightly from the year before. Considering we were without a planner for
the first three quarters this year and my administrative role the first two quarters, it seemed
just as busy if not busier that the year before. The amount of planning fees collected thus far
totals $4,400. Much of the planning activity undertaken this year has been of the “special”
planning variety, such as drafting a pawnshop ordinance and licensing program. Hundreds
of staff hours have been invested into the creation of licensing and zoning requirements and
we are close to being complete. Another special planning case of note is the comprehensive
rezoning of the PF district.
Personnel. As the Council knows, the Community Development Department has been
without the services of a planning associate since November of 2002. We are pleased to
announce that our new planning associate’s first day of work was last week on October 21,
2003. Kristin Prososki worked for the City of Chanhassen prior to Mounds View and holds a
degree in urban and regional studies from Mankato State University.
Permit Review
The first three quarters of 2003 have been busier than what we projected, busier than last
year at this same time. As can be seen from the attached 2002 / 2003 comparison sheet,
the department has issued 738 permits this year, which is about 6% higher than last year’s
figure. More than 1,000 permit inspections have been performed already this year. In terms
of level of service, the residents and the contractors often indicate their appreciation for the
quick turn-around time on permit review and issuance, with many permits being issued at the
time of application. We have worked hard to continue to be responsive to requests for
inspections, offering next-day inspection service in most cases. We are able to offer this
level of service in spite of personnel vacancies and the volume of permits by working
together as a team and by utilizing specialized inspection software.
County Road 10 Redevelopment Project
Greg Lee, Kurt Ulrich and I have met to discuss the next steps for the County Road 10
Redevelopment project. Greg will be putting together a request for proposals that will be
sent to area consultants who have the capacity and ability to survey the corridor and to
analyze the results to identify and assess any locations which may need supplemental
engineering to address drainage or topography issues as well as to identify any obstructions
and/or impediments which would necessitate obtaining temporary construction or permanent
corridor easements. I will be working to acquire an easement for the City upon which to
locate a City gateway-entry sign. Relatively inexpensive to construct, a City gateway sign
would alert motorists that they are now in Mounds View and could be the first of several
visual enhancements to an otherwise drab corridor.
Trailway Issues
The Council will be pleased to learn that the perpetually flooded Walgreens trail has been
relocated and elevated to a point where flooding should no longer be an issue. Also of note
is that the Mermaid trail, which had dead-ended into a rather large tree, has recently been
completed to the Woodale / County Road 10 intersection. Both of these projects were
accomplished via council-approved change-orders to the County Road H2 project. The
County Road H2 trailway has also been installed, which is one more step toward a
completed H2 project. Staff investigated the possibility of extending the theater trail south
along County Road 10 through the Jake’s parcel as part of the H2 project, however the
preliminary engineer’s report indicated drainage issues which would need to be addressed
before moving forward. Look for that trail to be extended next year.
Walgreens Billboard
The Council may have noticed that the landscaped monument base was recently installed
under the billboard. This was supposed to have been completed last year however the wet
summer flooded the area under the billboard and prevented any work from being done. The
monument base will function as two-tiered planter, however the plantings, which will include
low maintenance flowering shrubs and a backdrop of evergreens, will not be installed until
next spring.
Golf Course Billboards
One of the most important issues facing the City relates to the placement of billboards on the
Golf Course. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of MnDot, overturning the Court of Appeals’
decision that the permits for the billboards should have been issued by the Commissioner of
Transportation. I will be meeting with Clear Channel Outdoor this week to ascertain what the
next step will be and will report back to the Council as to any updates or courses of action
which may necessitate City involvement.
TIF Audit
On May 14, 2003, the City and the State of Minnesota reached an agreement to settle the
State Auditor’s findings of non-compliance concerning the City’s TIF program. As you will
recall, the Office of the State Auditor (OSA) conducted tax increment financing (TIF) legal
compliance audit of the EDA’s TIF districts in early of 2001. In July of that year the OSA sent
a letter indicating four findings of noncompliance. The first three findings were that
properties purchased by the EDA were not identified by PIN number in the TIF plan. The last
finding related to the City’s inability to produce copies of letters that had been sent to the
School Board and County board in conjunction with the formation of the three original TIF
districts. The City disputed all four findings and responded in writing with the assistance of
Jim O’Meara. In November of that year, the OSA referred the matter to the Ramsey County
Attorney. After the county attorney took no action on the matter, in December of 2002 the
Auditor forwarded the issue to the Office of the Attorney General (OAG). With the
assistance of Jim O’Meara, a settlement was reached with the OAG in which the City agreed
it would include with future TIF plans a description of properties within the districts it intended
to acquire, and that the City would not create any new tax increment finance districts or add
to any existing districts for a period of three months. No financial penalties resulted from the
negotiated settlement.
Economic Development
Aaron continues to be proactive in his tireless promotion of the City and the various
development opportunities here. Through his efforts the Velmeir Development Company
has signed an agreement to develop the vacant Amoco site and we are already in receipt of
a planning application. Aaron has also been instrumental in the reuse of the former
Community Ed space at the Community Center and has been assisting with the negotiations
related to the banquet facility. Other development opportunities are on the horizon due in
part to Aaron’s marketing and promotional efforts. Aaron has met with the owner and
management team of Moundsview Square in an effort to engage in a dialogue designed to
encourage reinvestment and potential redevelopment of the mall and reuse of the former
Hardee’s building.
The Woods of Mounds View
Aaron continues to work with ProCraft Homes in their effort to create an upscale housing
subdivision south of County Road H2. Negotiations are ongoing between the developer and
the property owners however the process has taken more time and is not as far along as we
had anticipated when the project was initiated earlier this year.
Planning Commission Activity
As mentioned on the first page of this report, the Planning Commission has acted on 23
planning applications and held countless discussions regarding pawnshop issues and other
generalized planning topics. In addition, the City Council had asked the Planning
Commission to review and comment on some possible code amendments which are
addressed in the Council’s 2003 Priorities document.
Here is a summary of the Planning Commission activity thus far:
1. Considered a request to restrict parking along the east side of Greenfield Avenue, south
of County Road I. (Four meetings)
2. Denied a variance to allow a reduction in the number of parking spaces required for a six-
unit multiple dwelling rental property (Two meetings)
3. Recommended approval of a text amendment regarding Chapter 1111 of the Zoning
Code pertaining to the R-O district
4. Recommended approval of a minor subdivision for a zero-lot line subdivision at 7656
Silver Lake Road
5. Considered code amendments pertaining to pawnshops (Eight meetings)
6. Approved a variance to allow a reduced front yard setback for a new home at 7741 Long
Lake Road
7. Recommended approval of a development review request to expand a business at 2865
County Highway 10
8. Recommended approval of a PUD amendment for the parcel located at 2442 County
Highway 10
9. Considered possible amendments to the Zoning Code relating to expansions of multi
family complexes (Two meetings)
10. Recommended approval of a conditional use permit for an oversized garage at 7988
Edgewood Drive
11. Recommended approval of development reviews for projects at 2436 and 2442 County
Highway 10 (Two meetings)
12. Approved a variance for a reduced garage setback at 7375 Pleasant View Drive
13. Recommended approval of the acquisition of a parcel on County Road H2
14. Recommended approval of a CUP for an oversized garage at 5220 Edgewood Drive
15. Denied a variance request for a parking lot setback at 2402 County Road I
16. Approved a variance to allow a reduced front yard setback for a home expansion at 2229
County Road H2
17. Recommended approval of a minor subdivision at 8430 Knollwood Drive
18. Approved a variance for Abbey Carpet for additional wall signage at 2214 - 2222 County
Highway 10
19. Considered changes to the PF zoning district to correct zoning Inconsistencies (two
meetings)
20. Reviewed Council-suggested code revisions regarding minimum home footprints,
commercial drive-thrus, life-cycle housing amendments and a comprehensive zoning
revision
21. Approved a front yard setback variance for 2434 Hillview Road
Council Suggested Code Revisions
The City Council asked the Planning Commission to review and comment on four possible
code amendments which are included as priorities in the 2003 City of Mounds View Work
Priorities digest.
1. Increase the minimum square footage requirements for a single-family home.
PC Response: The Planning Commission was opposed to making a change relative to
the minimum square footages for a home, their rationale being that homes constructed in
the last few years have been larger and more expensive than the homes built in the
1950s through the 1980s, thus an increase was not needed. Additionally, the minimum
footprint does allow for a moderately sized home and the Commission did not want to
discourage affordable housing, even if the community already has a sufficient quantity of
affordable housing.
2. Amend the City Code to support and encourage life-cycle housing and upper-end
condominiums.
PC Response: The Commission agreed with the Council on this suggestion and staff
was directed to bring back some options to consider. There was some discussion
regarding this in that the code amendment adopted last year which removed the CUP
requirement for townhomes was a step in the right direction.
3. Amend the City Code to restrict or prohibit fast-food drive-thrus.
PC Response: The Planning Commission was opposed to this amendment because the
Planning Commission and Council review commercial developments through the
development review process and drive-thrus should be addressed on a case-by-case
basis rather than outright prohibition.
4. Amend Zoning Code with regard to permitted uses.
PC Response: The Commission again agreed with the City Council, acknowledging the
difficulties presented by the way the zoning code addresses permitted uses. A code
revision of this magnitude will take some time to review and would more than likely
necessitate enlisting the aid of either the City Attorney or a consultant to assist with the
process.
Nuisance and Housing Code Violations and Inspections Program
Jeremiah continues to be very active in this arena, taking some proactive steps but for the
most part addressing complaints on a reactive basis. As can be seen on the 2002 / 2003
comparison sheet, 83 new nuisance code cases have been addressed with many requiring
substantial follow up, some ending up in the court system for ultimate resolution. Housing
inspections increased this year with 406 inspections having been completed in comparison
to 364 inspections at this time last year. In addition to these, Jeremiah also conducted 95
HRA / Section 8 inspections for which the City received a $1,570 reimbursement.
Some other activities above and beyond the typical day to day work include assessing
homes within the Mounds View Manufactured home community in association with the
Mounds View Manufactured Home park revitalization program; working with the Housing
Resource Center staff in the administration of the Mounds View rehab incentive program and
the Ramsey County deferred loan program.
Building Inspections / Fire Marshalling Activities
Kathi Osmonson has been very active this year with building inspections and fire
marshalling. As mentioned earlier in this report, Kathi has performed more than 1,000
inspections this year and completed 50 fire inspections. All City buildings were inspected
and violations were identified and are slated for correction. A few fire inspections have
resulted in controversy and Kathi has unfairly come under attack. As the Fire Marshal, Kathi
is responsible for ensuring that buildings are safe and that violations, especially violations
that compromise or put at risk the safety of the public, are corrected. The Fire Marshal
reports to the Fire Chief, who is a strong advocate for proactive code enforcement as a
means to reduce fires, building loss and loss of life. The proactive enforcement has resulted
in decreasing fire calls and decreasing losses when fires do occur.
A representative from the State of Minnesota Building Codes and Standards Division
recently performed a needs assessment audit to review the City’s practices and procedures
and to evaluate the City’s current staffing for inspections. The initial response was positive, it
was mentioned that the City has exemplary procedures and is well organized however plan
storage and filing was identified as needing improvement. Staff will work on this through the
rest of this year. It was noted that for the number of permits processed and inspections
requested, additional assistance would be recommended. With the new planning associate
on board, more of Jeremiah’s time can be spent assisting with building related inspections.
During the peak months of June, July and August, we will plan on having an intern provide
some temporary assistance to keep us running smoothly.
Kathi worked on the second annual safety camp this summer and by all accounts it was a
success. The camp was open to children from Mounds View, New Brighton and Spring Lake
Park and involved the participation of a variety of City staff members, trained professionals in
the fields of safety and representatives from the YMCA. Other activities of note include
participation on the state’s building code advisory committee and contribution to the Juvenile
Firesetter Task Force as an assessor and instructor.
Continuing Education
Continuing education and training is important to ensure staff remains knowledgeable in the
various facets of their position and allows for the broadening of their skill-set which is a
benefit to the community. An example of some of the training opportunities staff attended
include:
• MN Chapter of the International Association of Arson Investigators annual training
conference. Studied advanced arson investigation (Jeremiah).
• Point of sale/truth in housing conference sponsored by MN Society of Housing
Inspectors (Jeremiah)
• Firefighter II Certification through MN Fire Service Certification Board (Jeremiah).
• National Fire Academy class, emergency response to terrorism-basic concepts
(Jeremiah).
• Housing Inspection Technology Certificate through North Hennepin Community College
(Jeremiah).
• MN Association of Housing Code Officials fall training, “Verbal Judo and Effectively
Interacting with Individuals in Crisis.” (Jeremiah.)
• MN Association of Housing Code Officials Spring Training conducted at 3016 County
Rd H2. The house was a “test house” for municipal housing inspectors working for
Cities throughout the State of MN (Jeremiah.)
• Home Inspector certification through the National Association of Certified Home
Inspectors. Must achieve 75% minimum score on written test to achieve certified status.
(Jeremiah.)
• International Code Council Code hearings in Nashville, TN as a representative of
Mounds View and as President of the Minnesota Association of Housing Code Officials.
(Jeremiah.)
• Permit Works building permit software user group meetings (Barb.)
• Minnesota Building Permit Technicians Association training sessions (Barb.)
• League of MN Cities annual conference in St. Cloud (Jim.)
• International Code Council Code hearings in Nashville, TN as a representative of the
Association of Minnesota Building Officials (Kathi.)
• State of MN Building Codes and Standards training sessions (Kathi.)
• 10,000 Lakes Chapter of International Code Council seminars (Kathi.)
• Minnesota Development Conference sponsored by the Economic Development
Association of Minnesota (Aaron.)
• New urbanism / Mixed Use Development seminar (Aaron.)
• Polluted Land Redevelopment seminar sponsored by the Department of Employment
and Economic Development (Aaron.)
• Met Council Livable Communities Act grant workshop (Aaron.)
• 2003 Public Finance Seminar sponsored by Ehlers and Associates (Aaron.)
• Met Council practicum – Reinventing Suburban Strip Malls (Aaron.)
_____________________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
763-717-4021
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
2002/2003 1st through 3rd Quarter
Comparisons
2002 2003
Planning Applications
CUP
Development Review
Lot Combination
Interim Use Permit
Major Subdivision
Minor Subdivision
Planned Unit Development
Planned Unit Development Amendment
Rezoning
Vacation
Variance
Wetland Alteration Permit
Text Amendment
28
1
7
0
0
1
3
0
0
5
0
11
0
0
23
4
5
0
0
1
4
0
1
0
0
7
0
1
Building Permits
New Single Family-Detached
New Single Family-Attached
New Two-Family
New Multi-Family
New Commercial
332
3
0
2
1
0
368
2
0
0
0
0
Zoning Permits (sheds under 120 SF, driveways, fences,
platforms, signs)
120 122
HVAC Permits 150 137
Plumbing Permits 52 71
Sewer/Water Permits 43 30
Fire Department Permits 1 10
Street Opening Permits 4 2
HRA Inspections 94 91
Code Violations/Complaints (this number
reflects complaints and pro-active code enforcement)
98 83
Housing Inspections 364 406
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
2003 QUARTERLY REPORT FOR
JULY, AUGUST & SEPTEMBER
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
TOTAL
TOTAL
3RD
QUARTER
2002
BUILDING PERMITS 44 37 54 135 143
Single Family 0 0 0 0 2
Multi-Family 0 0 0 0 1
New Commercial 0 0 0 0 0
FIRE PERMITS 1 1 1 3 0
ZONING (sheds
under 120 SF,
driveways, fences
and signs)
25 19 15 59 50
HVAC 20 14 13 47 70
PLUMBING 11 8 7 26 21
SEWER/WATER 4 0 4 8 18
STREET OPENING 0 0 0 0 3
HRA INSPECTIONS 10 9 12 31 45
PLANNING
APPLICATIONS
(report attached)
3 1 5 9 14
HOUSING CODE
INSPECTIONS 125 28 60 213 212
OTHER CODE
VIOLATION
INSPECTIONS
12 8 14 34 39
Item No. 9E
Type of Business: CB
Administrator Review: _____
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
Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No.
723 Amending Chapter 202 of the Mounds View
City Code Pertaining to Street Assessment
Ordinance
Meeting Date: October 27, 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
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. 9F
Type of Business: CB
Administrator Review: ______
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. 6118 Rejecting all current bids,
Authorizing to Re-advertise for Bids, and
Establishing a Bid Date for the County Road H
Sidewalk Project
Meeting Date: October 27, 2003
Background:
Bids for the County Road H Sidewalk Project were received at 10:00 a.m. on
Thursday, September 4, 2003 at City Hall.
On September 22, 2003 Staff presented the original four options for awarding the
contract for the Council’s consideration. These are summarized below:
Option 1 – Do Not Award a Contract.
Option 2 - $149,877.50 construction cost / $187,350 estimated project cost.
Award the contract for just the Base Bid - segment from Edgewood Drive to
Knollwood Drive.
Option 3 - $383,914.60 construction cost / $480,000 estimated project cost.
Award the contract for Base Bid and the Alternate – entire segment, from
Edgewood Drive to West City Limits.
Option 4 - $257,000 construction cost / $322,000 estimated project cost.
Award the contract for just the segment from Edgewood Drive to Knollwood
Drive. Add in the segment from Knollwood Drive to the West City Limits as a
change order but delete the portion where the sidewalk crosses Spring Creek.
The City Council indicated that they wished to redefine the scope of the project
from Silver Lake Road to the West City Limits; therefore the City Council selected
Option 1 - Do Not Award a Contract.
This item was placed on the October 13, 2003 City Council agenda, but was
postponed for discussion until October 27, 2003 due to the absence of a City
Council member.
Discussion:
Since the construction season is near its end, the project will be re-advertised
and re-bid and become a 2004 construction project.
Reject the Bids – Because the contract was not awarded, the Council should
officially reject the bids received on September 4, 2003.
Re-bidding the Project – At the Council Work Session on October 6, 2003, the
City Council indicated a desire to re-bid this project for 2004. Staff is looking for
direction as to what segments for the project the City Council wishes to re-bid.
Staff recommends that there be three distinct and separate bidding options one
of which can be award independently of the other:
BID OPTION A – Segment from Edgewood Drive to Silver Lake Road.
BID OPTION B – Segment from Silver Lake Road to the West City Limits.
BID OPTION C – Segment from Edgewood Drive to the West City Limits.
Bids will be received for all three of these options, if that is what the City Council
wishes. The City Council can then determine what bid option they would like to
award.
At a prior meeting, the City Council made a suggestion to bid the crossing of
Spring Creek with different options – i.e. bid sheet pilings versus a bridge. The
City’s engineering consultant looked at the bridge option. It was determined that
a bridge would require the condemnation of a portion of the property to the west
of Spring Creek. The owner of this property has already indicated that any
trespass onto his property will be responded with legal action against the City.
Bid Date – A January 8, 2004, 10:00 a.m. bid date will provide ample time to
provide the required notification to contractors, as per state statute. This will then
be brought to the City Council on January 26, 2004 to award the contract.
Should the City Council approve Resolution No. 6118, this information along with
the anticipated date to award the contract (January 26, 2004) will be sent to
owners property between County Road H and County Road H2.
Recommendation:
It is recommended the City Council adopt a resolution rejecting all current bids,
authorizing Staff to re-advertise for bids, and establish a bid date for the County
Road H Sidewalk Project.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works Reviewed by City Administrator:___
RESOLUTION NO. 6118
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
REJECTING ALL CURRENT BIDS, AUTHORIZING TO RE-ADVERTISE FOR
BIDS, AND ESTABLISHING A BID DATE FOR THE COUNTY ROAD H
SIDEWALK PROJECT
WHEREAS, said plans have been prepared in accordance with City
standards and the preliminary engineering report.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota as follows:
1. That the bids for the County Road H Sidewalk Project received on
September 4, 2003 are hereby rejected.
2. That a date to receive bids for said improvements is hereby
established on January 8, 2004 at 10:00 a.m.
3. That the Deputy Clerk is hereby directed to cause to be published
in The Focus paper and in the Construction Bulletin, at least three
(3) weeks before the date for opening of bids, a notice to bidders
for the construction of said improvements as required by law.
Adopted this 27th day of October 2003.
______________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
(ATTEST) ______________________________
Kurt Ulrich
City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: 9G
Meeting Date: October 27, 2003
Type of Business: Council Business
Administrator Review: _____
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
a person 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.
This item was first considered by the City Council at the October 13, 2003. The draft at that
meeting had no income or wealth qualifications. It only required that the applicant be age 65
or older or that the applicant have been judged permanently and totally disabled by the
Social Security Administration or similar authority.
The City Council instructed me to come back with some qualifications based on income or
wealth. Obvious approaches to this task include something based upon the assessed value
of the home or something based upon adjusted gross income.
Assessed values are readily available from Ramsey County. The applicant’s home value
could be compared to a benchmark that would be some percentage of the median value
home in Mounds View. If the applicant’s home value is below the benchmark, they qualify.
I don’t recommend this approach because I can readily foresee the case of a disabled
person, who has lost their job and has no income, has spent their savings on medical bills,
but who has a home that has an assessed value above the benchmark. This describes
hardship as clearly as any example I can think of, yet the applicant would be denied the
deferral of the assessment.
Other approaches involving adjusted gross income are more promising. A few variations of
this are in use in other cities. I recommend the simplest one that I came across, which is the
one in use in the City of White Bear Lake.
That policy reads in part: “A hardship shall be deemed to exist when the average annual
payment for all assessments levied against the subject property exceeds one (1%) percent
of the adjusted gross income of the applicant as evidenced by the applicant’s most recent
federal income tax return.”
The applicant would be required to submit a copy of their most recent federal tax return.
Adjusted gross income is line 34 on the standard Form 1040, line 21 on Form 1040A, and
line 4 of Form 1040EZ.
This is the simplest approach because the only information needed is the assessment, which
we already have, and the federal tax return, which the applicant provides.
This issue gained prominence because of the appearance before the City Council of Lucille
Steenberg, who was concerned about her assessment for a diseased tree. Her first year
payment on this assessment should be no more that $180.00. If we use White Bear Lake’s
example of one (1%) percent of the adjusted gross income as our benchmark, then Ms.
Steenberg’s adjusted gross income would need to be less than $18,000 in order to qualify for
a hardship. I have no idea if her income is above or below that level.
The City Council could adopt something less than one (1%) percent, for instance one half of
one (0.5%) percent, as the benchmark. That would make it easier for applicants to qualify.
Ms. Steenberg’s adjusted gross income would then need to be less than $36,000.
If you make the benchmark so low that anyone could qualify, then why not just go with my
original proposal and don’t have an income or wealth qualification?
The attached resolution incorporates the 1% of adjusted gross income as the benchmark.
This may be modified by the City Council at the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________
Charles Hansen, Finance Director
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 for public improvement projects and diseased tree removals:
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. A hardship shall be deemed to exist when the average annual payment for all
assessments levied against the subject property exceeds one (1%) percent of the
adjusted gross income of the applicant as evidenced by the applicant’s most recent
federal income tax return.
Resolution 6127
Page 2
6. Special assessment payments deferred pursuant to the eligibility requirements set
forth by this resolution shall become payable effective upon the occurrence 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.
7. An eligible applicant must file an application along with a copy of their federal
income tax return for the most recent year and proof of ownership within 30 days of
the original certification of the assessment in the year it is assessed, or in
subsequent years, by 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 27th Day of October 2003.
______________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
(ATTEST)
______________________________
Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: 9H
Meeting Date: October 27, 2003
Type of Business: Council Business
Administrator Review _____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Charles Hansen, Finance Director
Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing to receive Public Input and pass upon
Resolution 6125 Adopting a Special Assessment Levy for
Diseased Tree Removals
A public hearing is scheduled for 7:15 P.M. to receive public input regarding the proposed
assessment of diseased tree removal accounts.
A legal notice of this public hearing was published in the September 24, 2003 edition of the
New Brighton-Mounds View Bulletin. Individual notices of the meeting were sent by first
class mail to the affected property owners on September 29, 2003.
Attached is the full roll of assessment notices that were sent out. These are accounts for
trees that were removed between October 2000 and April 2003. The property owners have
been invoiced multiple times and two of the four have made partial payments.
These two owners have either stopped making payments or are making them at such a slow
rate that it would take many years to pay off the balance.
Long informal payment agreements leave the City at risk in the event that the owner should
sell the property or die. In these events it would be difficult to then establish that the amount
owed is a lien against the property.
Some of the property owners may pay the amount due by 4:30 P.M. on Monday, October 27,
2003 in order to avoid the $25.00 administrative fee. Others will pay after the roll is certified
Monday night, but before the roll is forwarded to Ramsey County. In that case, they will pay
the total due, including the administrative fee.
Owners may prepay the assessment between October 28, 2003 and November 27, 2003
without paying additional interest. After that, interest at the rate of 4.5% will accrue from
October 23, 2003 through the payment date. This interest rate was set by the City Council in
Resolution 6082.
On December 1, 2003, we will forward the assessment roll, minus any prepayments, to
Ramsey County for collection with the 2004 property taxes.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________
Charles Hansen, Finance Director
RESOLUTION NO. 6125
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Resolution 6125 Adopting a Special Assessments Levy for Diseased Tree
Removals
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice given as required by law, the City Council has
met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for diseased
tree removals.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mounds
View that:
1. Such proposed assessment roll, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a
part hereof, is accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the
lands named therein, and each tract of land therein is hereby found to be benefited
by the removal of diseased trees in the amount of the assessment levied against it.
2. The assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable in equal annual
installments over a period of three (3) years, the first of the installments to be
payable on or before the first Monday in January 2004, and shall bear interest at
the rate of four and one half (4.5) percent per annum from October 28, 2003. To
the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from October
28, 2003 through December 31, 2004. To each subsequent installment when due
shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of
the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, with
interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no
interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the
adoption of this resolution; and the owner may, at any time thereafter, pay to the
City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment, with interest from the date of
adoption of this resolution through the date of payment, such payment must be
made before November 26th, or interest will be charged through December of the
succeeding year.
4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the
County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county, and such
assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other
municipal taxes.
Adopted this 27th 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
October 13, 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
Mayor Linke indicated he would like to handle all of the items requiring the City Attorney and 20
then excuse him from the meeting in an attempt to keep legal costs down. 21
22
City Administrator Ulrich indicated he would like the attorney to comment on Item 9V as well as 23
Items L and M concerning the franchise fee. 24
25
A. Monday, October 13, 2003 City Council Agenda. 26
27
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Gunn. To Approve the Monday, October 13, 2003 Agenda as 28
Amended. 29
30
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 31
32
5. PUBLIC INPUT 33
34
Michele Sandback of 2356 Sherwood Road requested an update on the soundwall and where it 35
fell on the list of priorities for the City. 36
37
Mayor Linke indicated that Council had prioritized issues but said he did not have the list in front 38
of him. 39
40
Public Works Director Lee indicated the City Council authorized the feasibility study and Staff 41
met with the County and MNDOT to discuss issues and is now setting up a meeting with the 42
Watershed District and will put together a draft for the first part of December. 43
44
City Administrator Ulrich indicated he would provide Ms. Sandback with the priority document. 45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 2
1
Council Member Marty reiterated that the City is working on a plan for the berming. He then 2
said he has been discussing the matter with Staff. 3
4
Deb Ward of 5046 Long Lake Road indicated that she was at this meeting to set the record 5
straight on erroneous information provided by former Mayor Sonterre concerning the sidewalk 6
on H. She then reminded Council that Mr. Sonterre had said that the County was coming 7
through with a nine-foot sidewalk if the City did not put one in but she has verified through the 8
County that those statements are false. 9
10
Greg Ways from Roberts Sports Bar 2400 County Road H2 addressed Council and asked why he 11
had not been notified of the proceedings concerning the Community Center since he is intimately 12
involved. 13
14
Mayor Linke apologized for the mistake and agreed that Mr. Ways was deeply involved and 15
should have been notified. He then indicated that there would be no action at this meeting only a 16
discussion concerning contract compliance. 17
18
Council Member Marty indicated that one of the things that was discussed was if there is a 19
change of vendor the City would need to send out requests for proposals and that would need to 20
be posted. 21
22
Mitchell Dvorak of 2100 Buckingham Lane indicated he had come to the meeting to notify the 23
City that the association members have expired terms of office and should not be representing 24
anyone within the park. 25
26
6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 27
28
A. Resolution No. 6112 Appointing a Park and Recreation Commissioner, 29
Chairperson, and Vice Chairperson 30
31
Mayor Linke read Resolution 6112. 32
33
Council Member Marty thanked the Mayor for including all the applications and then said that all 34
the applicants were good but he felt there was another candidate that would be better qualified 35
than the one presented for approval by the Mayor. 36
37
Council Member Stigney asked if Mayor Linke interviewed the candidates. 38
39
Mayor Lin ke indicated he made his recommendation strictly based upon the resumes. 40
41
Council Member Stigney indicated that he also felt that the second candidate has more 42
experience. 43
44
Council Member Gunn indicated that she agreed with Council Members Marty and Stigney. 45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 3
1
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Linke. To Approve Resolution No. 6112 Appointing a Park and 2
Recreation Commissioner, Chairperson, and Vice Chairperson. 3
4
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Amend the Resolution to Name Shari Kunza to the 5
Park and Recreation Committee. 6
7
Mayor Linke indicated he disagrees with Council. He then said he spent a lot of time on this and 8
he feels his recommendation would be the best person for the Commission. 9
10
Ayes – 3 Nays – 2(Quick/Linke) Motion carried. 11
12
Ayes – 3 Nays – 2(Quick/Linke) Motion carried. 13
14
7. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 15
16
A. Just and Correct Claims 17
18
Council Member Marty asked for clarification on Check Number 111849. 19
20
Mayor Linke indicated that it was a refund of a deposit. 21
22
Council Member Marty asked for clarification on Check Number111832. 23
24
Finance Director Hansen indicated that the check was for an ad run for the banquet center. He 25
then explained that the bill was split among the City, the banquet center and Roberts. 26
27
Council Member Marty asked for clarification on Check Number 11859. 28
29
Finance Director Hansen indicated it was for an ad for the banquet center. 30
31
Council Member Marty asked for clarification on Check Number 111939 to Nextel for cell 32
phones. He then commented that one cell phone seemed to be much higher than the others. 33
34
Finance Director Hansen indicated that the cell phone charges are billed by departments and the 35
larger one is for the police department and there are a number of telephones. 36
37
Finance Director Hansen indicated that Check 111909 for ice cream for national night out would 38
be reimbursed by the Lions by the donation already received. He then indicated that Staff brings 39
all donations to the Council’s attention on the off chance it would be something that the City 40
does not want to accept. 41
42
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Approve Just and Correct Claims as Presented. 43
44
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 4
1
8. CONSENT AGENDA 2
3
A. Licenses for Approval 4
B. Set a Public Hearing for 7:05 p.m., October 27, 2003, to Consider the First 5
Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 711, an Ordinance Establishing a Pawn 6
Overlay District 7
C. Resolution No. 6107 Approving 2004 SCORE Grant 8
D. Resolution No. 6109 Authorizing the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for 9
the 2003 Street Improvement Project – Phase I 10
E. Resolution No. 6110 Authorizing the Preparation of a Preliminary Feasibility 11
Report, Consultant Selection, and execution of a Supplemental Letter of 12
Agreement for Survey Work for the 2003 Street Improvement Project – Phase II 13
F. Resolution No. 6113, Adopting a Roadway Major Maintenance Financing Policy 14
G. Resolution No. 6115, Authorizing the Execution of the State of Minnesota Grant 15
Agreement for a Tree Inventory/Database Grant 16
H. Resolution No. 6116, Approving Change Order Number 1 for the Water Tower 17
Rehabilitation Project Application of a Complete Finish Coat to the Bottom Two 18
Courses of the Tank Column 19
I. Resolution No. 6119, Approving the Preliminary Feasibility Reports for the 20
Manufactured Home Park Second Access Study – Mounds View Manufactured 21
Home Community and Towns Edge Terrace 22
J. Resolution No. 6121 Ratifying the Labor Contract with Law Enforcement Labor 23
Services, Inc. (L.E.L.S), Local No. 204 for 2003 24
K. Resolution No. 6122 Ratifying the Labor Contract with the Public Works 25
Bargaining Unit for 2003 26
L. Set a Public Hearing for 7:10 p.m. October 27, 2003, to Consider a Conditional 27
Use Permit for an Over-sized Garage at 7850 Spring Lake Road 28
29
Council Member Gunn requested that Item G be removed for discussion. 30
31
Council Member Stigney requested that Item F be removed for discussion. 32
33
Council Member Marty requested that Item C be removed for discussion. 34
35
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Approve Consent Agenda Items A, B, D, E, H, I, J, K 36
and L as Presented. 37
38
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 39
40
Council Member Marty asked whether going to one recycler would reduce costs and provide 41
more accountability. 42
43
Public Works Director Lee indicated the dollar amount for the SCORE grant would not change. 44
He then said that the matter would be on the November 3, 2003 work session for discussion. 45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 5
1
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Gunn. To Approve Consent Agenda Item C as Presented. 2
3
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 4
5
Council Member Stigney indicated he disagreed with the policy as proposed because it would 6
change how the City assesses for street improvements to a unit basis rather than per front 7
footage. He then said that he does not feel it is fair to make those with smaller lots pay the same 8
as those with larger lots. 9
10
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn. To Approve Consent Agenda Item F as Presented. 11
12
Council Member Marty indicated that Council has been told that this method seems to be more 13
equitable for individual homeowners. 14
15
Public Works Director Lee indicated that for a neighborhood reconstruction you make the 16
assumption that all houses are of the same dollar value and mostly the same size and the City’s 17
ordinance states that the per unit method is advantageous with the same dollar amount. 18
19
Council Member Marty indicated the City has had an issue with corner lots and how to handle 20
the assessments. He then asked if people with double lots that could be subdivided are charged 21
for one unit or two. 22
23
Public Works Director Lee indicated that, if there are two lots, the residents are charged for two 24
even if there is only one house on the lot. 25
26
Council Member Stigney reiterated that he feels the benefit is to those residents with the larger 27
lots and it is not a fair deal for everyone. He then said that there are variations in the lot sizes in 28
his neighborhood. 29
30
Public Works Director Lee indicated that the formula also assumes that all single family 31
residences generate the same amount of traffic and that is another reason to treat them the same. 32
33
Ayes – 4 Nays – 1(Stigney) Motion carried. 34
35
Council Member Gunn asked where the City’s portion of the matching grant would come from. 36
37
Public Works Director Lee indicated the funds would come out of the forestry budget. 38
39
Council Member Gunn asked what the funds would normally be used for. 40
41
Public Works Director Lee indicated that in the past the City has gotten a grant for oak wilt 42
control but that is not available to the City anymore. 43
44
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Gunn. To Approve Consent Agenda Item G as Presented. 45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 6
1
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 2
3
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS 4
5
A. Public Hearing to Receive Public Input and Pass Upon Resolution 6123 6
Adopting a Special Assessment Levy for Delinquent Public Utility Accounts. 7
8
Mayor Linke opened the public hearing at 7:45 p.m. 9
10
Finance Director Hansen indicated the City’s previous policy was to engage in water utility 11
shutoffs to collect delinquent accounts but that has been changed and the City assesses the 12
amount to the property tax for collection. He then indicated that those on the list to be certified 13
were delinquent as of May 31, 2003 and Staff has made numerous attempts to collect the 14
outstanding amounts. 15
16
Council Member Quick asked whether there were so many in arrears when the City used to shut 17
the water off. 18
19
Finance Director Hansen indicated he was not sure but said he would guess that to a large extent 20
it is the same people. 21
22
Council Member Quick indicated that he does not approve of the policy change as he thinks 23
shutting the water off gets their attention much faster. He then said it would be nice if people 24
could pay their bills. 25
26
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. 27
28
Council Member Quick asked that the list of names be read. 29
30
Finance Director Hansen pointed out that the City would be adding a $25.00 administrative fee to 31
the outstanding amount. He then said that the reason he suggested the policy change is because it 32
is an efficient means of collecting and it avoids the severe impact of going without water but 33
collects for the City in an efficient manner. 34
35
Mayor Linke indicated that one of the delinquent accounts is a business that is over $1,300 after 36
adding the administrative costs. 37
38
Council Member Quick asked whether the City is 100% sure that it will get the money. 39
40
Finance Director Hansen indicated that nothing is 100% but this method has a high rate of 41
success. 42
43
Council Member Quick indicated he would like the list read but if Council does not agree that is 44
fine. 45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 7
1
Council Member Stigney suggested Staff look into whether the City could withhold renewal of 2
licenses for failure to pay utilities. He then said it may be possible to collect the business 3
delinquencies a different way rather than through assessing. 4
5
Finance Director Hansen cautioned the Council against making subjective determinations on 6
ways to collect different accounts. 7
8
Council Member Stigney asked if Sam’s has contacted the City. 9
10
Finance Director Hansen indicated that the utility billing person handles that type of matter. 11
12
Council Member Stigney suggested Staff look into the matter a little further. He then said that 13
some people may be legitimately strapped for cash but there are some that may be abusing. 14
15
City Administrator Ulrich indicated Staff would cross check the list with the business licenses to 16
see if there is any leverage with issuing the licenses. He then said it would be his 17
recommendation to approve as it is consistent with current policy and Staff can look at different 18
policies for businesses if Council desires. 19
20
Council agreed not to read the list. 21
22
A resident asked how long the people have been delinquent. 23
24
Finance Director Hansen indicated that this list was delinquent as of May 31, 2003. 25
26
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Waive the Reading and approve Resolution 6123, a 27
Resolution Adopting a Special Assessment Levy for Delinquent Public Utility Accounts. 28
29
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 30
31
B. County Road H2 Street Improvement Project – Assessment Issues 32
33
Public Works Director Lee indicated there have been three main issues with this project. The 34
first is the increase in the assessment amounts from what was communicated when the feasibility 35
report came out and that was due to an increase in the water main installation cost. The second 36
issue is that there are five properties with rear yard frontage and one with side yard frontage and 37
they are included in the 2003 street improvement project proposed for 2004 so the issue is how to 38
deal with these properties. The third issue is interest on the project that has not been completed. 39
He then indicated that Council does have the right to assess for the project at any time and some 40
communities do assess prior to the commencement of the project. 41
42
Mayor Linke asked whether the engineer’s estimate was way off or how the water main cost 43
ended up double. 44
45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 8
Public Works Director Lee indicated the main issue is that the bids were almost twice as much as 1
expected. He then said that it is up to the discretion of the bidders. 2
3
Mayor Linke indicated that Staff recommends that the City pay for the increased costs to be 4
funded through the City’s municipal state aid account. 5
6
Council Member Stigney asked if there is any way the City could prevent this type of thing from 7
happening in the future. 8
9
Public Works Director Lee indicated that in terms of bidding the City is at the mercy of whatever 10
bids are received. He then commented that under the new policy the amount would have been 11
lumped into total project costs and divided among the property owners. 12
13
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Approve the Staff Recommendation. 14
15
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 16
17
Mayor Linke indicated that Staff recommends certifying the assessment roll as proposed and 18
when residents are assessed as part of the 2003 street improvement project those assessments 19
should be reduced by the amount of the County Road H2 project. 20
21
Council Member Marty indicated that not all the side streets would be done in 2004 or 2005 and 22
he wants to make sure that they get credit in the future. 23
24
Public Works Director Lee indicated that records would be kept and Council at the time could 25
determine how to handle the assessment. 26
27
Council indicated that they would like it made known to future Councils that they would like 28
those residents to receive credit for the H2 assessment amounts. 29
30
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Gunn. To Approve the Staff Recommendation. 31
32
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 33
34
Mayor Linke indicated that Staff recommends holding the assessment hearing on October 13, 35
2003 as proposed. 36
37
Dave Vinkstra of 3000 County Road H2 asked when the contractor gets paid. He then asked if 38
there was any relationship between that and the assessment date because he would be opposed to 39
paying for delays excuses and a mess. 40
41
Blaine Fyksen of 3048 County Road H2 asked if there was a final project termination date on the 42
H2 project. 43
44
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 9
Public Works Director Lee indicated the original termination date was changed because the City 1
did not have the power poles down. 2
3
Mr. Fyksen indicated that he has had silt fence in his yard for 13 months or so and he does not 4
see a termination date on this project. He further commented that they have been told that the 5
project would be done soon for the last six to eight months and he has not seen more than four 6
workers at a time out on the site. 7
8
Public Works Director Lee indicated that he has had discussions with the contractor and they 9
have begun today to finish the project and have made a commitment to stay on it until it is 10
complete and they are shooting for the end of the construction year, mid-November. 11
12
Mike Maroni of 5045 Brighton Lane asked if the contractors have been paid for any part. 13
14
Mayor Linke indicated that they are paid for the different phases of construction as they are 15
finished. 16
17
Mr. Maroni recommended not paying any more until the project is completed. 18
19
Council Member Marty indicated he has received a number of calls on this. He then said the 20
residents are exasperated because the project is not being completed and they only see a few guys 21
out on the site at a time. He then asked when the contractor is going to have a full crew on this 22
project and really get going on getting it completed. 23
24
Public Works Director Lee indicated it was his understanding that they would have a full crew 25
there today to begin working on finishing the project. 26
27
Council Member Marty suggested that these delays be considered when this contractor puts in 28
any future bids. 29
30
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn. To Approve the Staff Recommendation. 31
32
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 33
34
C. Public Hearing to Receive Public Input and Pass Upon Resolution 6124 35
Adopting a Special Assessment Levy for the County Road H2 Street 36
Improvement Project 37
38
Mayor Linke opened the public hearing at 8:10 p.m. 39
40
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing at 8:12 p.m. 41
42
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 6124, a 43
Resolution Adopting a Special Assessment Levy for the County Road H2 Street Improvement 44
Project. 45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 10
1
Council Member Stigney asked whether all residents were aware that they have until 4:30 p.m. 2
on October 13, 2003 to pay and avoid the $25.00 administrative fee. 3
4
Public Works Director Lee indicated that the notices were sent out at least 14 days prior to this 5
meeting explaining the legal rights and how to avoid any additional charges or interest accruing. 6
7
Council Member Gunn indicated the Resolution contained erroneous references to tree removals. 8
9
Finance Director Hansen indicated he was helping Mr. Lee and copied a Resolution but did not 10
change that portion of it. He then apologized for the confusion. 11
12
Public Works Director Lee indicated that Staff would amend the language of the Resolution and 13
insert the assessment roll originally included in the feasibility report. 14
15
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Stigney. To Amend Resolution 6124 to Correct the Language as 16
Discussed. 17
18
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 19
20
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 21
22
D. Public Hearing and to Receive Input and Pass Upon Resolution 6125 23
Adopting a Special Assessment Levy for Diseased Tree Removals 24
25
Mayor Linke opened the public hearing at 8:16 p.m. 26
27
Finance Director Hansen indicated that every year the City forester removes diseased trees and 28
owners are contacted by the forester and given the opportunity to take care of the tree themselves 29
or have the City do so and have the amount charged to them. This resolution would adopt special 30
assessments for the outstanding diseased tree removal costs that have not been paid. 31
32
Jeff Steinberg 2200 Oakwood Drive indicated that his mother owns the property and has been 33
making payments to the City toward the outstanding balance. He then said that his mother has 34
been making consistent payments and, if this is approved, there is the addition of a $25.00 35
administrative fee which he feels is large in relation to the small dollar amount and the 4.5% 36
interest. 37
38
Finance Director Hansen indicated that at the time this was prepared there had been some months 39
without payments but the resident has now brought in two checks for $10.00 to get back into 40
payment. He then said that this is for trees taken down in the year 2000 and, if things keep going 41
this way, it would be 2007 before the bill was paid off. He further commented that it would be 42
difficult or impossible to force a new owner to finish the payments unless it is certified to the 43
property taxes. 44
45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 11
Mayor Linke suggested that the policy to be discussed later in the meeting may have an impact 1
on this item. 2
3
Finance Director Hansen indicated that Council needed to consider what types of assessments the 4
policy would be applied to. 5
6
Mr. Steinberg indicated he has not seen his mother’s finances but she has made assertions that 7
she was not given proper credit for payments. He then said he would appreciate it if a deferral 8
could be given for this matter. 9
10
Lucille indicated that in July she wrote a check for $20.00 and was only given credit for $20.00. 11
She then said that she has a fixed income and would like to continue with her payment 12
arrangement as agreed to by the City. 13
14
Lucille indicated that she has been making payments of $10.00 per month but she is on social 15
security and will be 82 next month which makes it hard for her to get out of the house to mail or 16
deliver the payments but she would always make up for it the next month. She then said that she 17
has not been evading in any way and would hope that she would not have to pay 4.5% interest 18
because it has been her intention from the start to make her payments until she is paid in full. 19
20
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing at 8:30 p.m. 21
22
Finance Director Hansen indicated that Minnesota Statutes and the City’s Charter allow deferrals 23
on assessments to those 65 and older and to those that are disabled. He then said it is possible 24
that the City adopted guidelines to follow but Staff could not find them and has brought this 25
policy forward to update it. 26
27
Finance Director Hansen indicated Staff would like to keep the guidelines simple and 28
straightforward to ease in administration. He then recommended setting the guidelines of age 65 29
or older or totally and permanently disabled as determined by the Social Security Administration 30
or other appropriate authority. He went on to list the other recommended guidelines for the 31
policy. 32
33
Finance Director Hansen suggested that Council include a guideline for what types of deferrals 34
will be considered. 35
36
Mayor Linke suggested that assessments that would be generated by the City such as public 37
improvements, tree removals and similar items be listed for deferral but not such things as public 38
utilities. 39
40
Finance Director Hansen asked if weed-cutting assessments should be included. 41
42
Council Member Stigney suggested amending the policy to read for deferral of payment of 43
special assessments for public improvements and diseased tree removals. 44
45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 12
Council Member Marty commented that Item 6 indicates residents must file an application for 1
deferral before September 15 for the year in which the deferral is provided. 2
3
Finance Director Hansen indicated that September 15 was suggested to provide enough time for 4
Staff to provide the information to the County to make their deadline but noted in these cases this 5
is being done after that date so applications will be accepted. 6
7
Council Member Stigney asked what the standard would be that Council would use to determine 8
if a hardship exists. He then asked if Minnesota Statutes lists hardship criteria. He further 9
commented that age 65 to him is not a hardship alone. 10
11
Finance Director Hansen indicated that some cities have income limits and others have some 12
kind of limit on the value of the property. 13
14
Mayor Linke asked what guidelines the City uses now to set payment arrangements. 15
16
Finance Director Hansen indicated he would want something that recognized the ability to pay 17
but also got the bill paid in a reasonable time period. He then indicated that Staff had said that 18
$10.00 per month was not reasonable but suggestions for larger amounts were rejected. 19
20
Finance Director Hansen indicated that for any future case he would not recommend payment 21
periods that long for the removal of a diseased tree. 22
23
Council Member Marty left the room at 8:47 p.m. 24
25
Council Member Stigney indicated he would like Staff to review Minnesota Statutes to see what 26
it lists for criteria. 27
28
Finance Director Hansen indicated that Statue Statute does not list anything and leaves it up to 29
the City Council to define. 30
31
Council Member Stigney indicated he would recommend that the City use a guideline to 32
determine income based on the guidelines and the ability to pay. 33
34
Council Member Marty returned at 8:50 p.m. 35
36
Mayor Linke suggested the Finance Department determine the resident’s ability to pay. 37
38
Finance Director Hansen indicated that, in his opinion, Lucille has the ability to pay and Council 39
feels she does not. 40
41
City Administrator Ulrich indicated that one of the goals should be to keep it simple for 42
administrative purposes. He then said that he would look into income qualification information 43
through the County and report back. 44
45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 13
Finance Director Hansen indicated there are reporting deadlines to get the information to Ramsey 1
County and the City has to allow 30 days for payment without interest to elapse. 2
3
Mayor Linke asked what that deadline would be. 4
5
Council Member Gunn indicated it was November 26, 2003 for improvement projects. 6
7
Finance Director Hansen indicated that he was not sure whether the diseased tree deadline was 8
November 26 or December 31. 9
10
Council Member Marty left the meeting at 8:53 p.m. 11
12
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Gunn. To Postpone Items D and U. 13
14
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 15
16
Mayor Linke asked for assistance from Staff to determine qualifications for payment. 17
18
Council Member Quick asked for a five-minute break. 19
20
Council recessed at 8:54 p.m. 21
22
Council reconvened at 9:03 p.m. 23
24
Mayor Linke indicated that Council Member Marty had to leave the meeting due to a family 25
emergency. 26
27
E. Resolution 6126 Adopting the Assessment for the Street Repair at 7832 Bona 28
Road 29
30
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 6126, a 31
Resolution Adopting the Assessment for the Street Repair at 7832 Bona Road. 32
33
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 34
35
F. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 720, an Ordinance Approving a 36
Comprehensive Rezoning of Parcels Zoned PF (Public Facilities) 37
38
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Stigney. To Waive the Reading, Approve the Second Reading, and 39
Adopt Ordinance 720, an Ordinance Approving a Comprehensive Rezoning of Parcels Zoned PF 40
(Public Facilities). 41
42
ROLL CALL: Linke/Quick/Stigney/Gunn 43
44
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 14
1
2
G. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 721, an Ordinance Amending 3
Chapter 1116 of the Mounds View Zoning Code Relating to Permitted Uses 4
in the I-1 Zone. 5
6
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Stigney. To Waive the Reading, Approve the Second Reading and 7
Adopt Ordinance 721, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 1116 of the Mounds View Zoning Code 8
Relating to Permitted Uses in the I-1 Zone. 9
10
ROLL CALL: Linke/Quick/Stigney/Gunn. 11
12
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 13
14
H. Consideration of Resolution 6095, a Resolution Authorizing the Hire of 15
Kristin Prososki to the Position of Planning Associate. 16
17
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 6095, a 18
Resolution Authorizing the Hire of Kristin Prososki to the Position of Planning Associate. 19
20
Council Member Stigney asked that Resolution 6095 be read. 21
22
Community Development Director Ericson read Resolution 6095. 23
24
Richard Sonterre indicated that he would respectfully request that this item and all other items on 25
the agenda be tabled as he would imagine that Council Member Marty has a stake and opinion in 26
all issues and he is offended that Council would single out one single item that is more important 27
than any other. 28
29
Mr. Sonterre indicated that he would like every remaining item on the agenda tabled. 30
31
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 32
33
I. Consider Policy Allowing Paid Advertising in Community Newsletter 34
35
City Administrator Ulrich indicated there was a policy in 1997 but it has been inactive for some 36
time and this would be a reconsideration of and a modernization of the policy. 37
38
Council asked that this be added to the work session for discussion. 39
40
J. Consideration of Resolution 6106, a Resolution Approving a Minor 41
Subdivision of 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road. 42
43
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Stigney. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 6106, a 44
Resolution Approving a Minor Subdivision of 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road. 45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 15
1
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 2
3
K. Consideration of Resolution 6105, a Resolution Approving a Minor 4
Subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road. 5
6
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 6105, a 7
Resolution Approving a Minor Subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road. 8
9
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 10
11
L. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 722, an Ordinance 12
Implementing a Franchise Fee on Xcel Energy Electric and Natural Gas 13
Operations Within the City of Mounds View for the Year 2004. 14
15
City Administrator Ulrich indicated that at a previous meeting Council had requested that Staff 16
get an opinion from the City Attorney on damage to people’s property and how to handle that if it 17
is done by the franchise holders and how that could be bonded as part of the franchise agreement. 18
19
City Attorney Riggs indicated that it is his opinion that there is already a mechanism under 20
Chapter 910 of the City’s Code to require a performance bond outside of the franchise and the 21
franchise does not appear to conflict with the Ordinance. 22
23
City Attorney Riggs indicated that Council could, in a motion form, direct Staff to pursue that 24
option. 25
26
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn. To Direct Staff to Pursue the Recommendation of the City 27
Attorney with Regard to the Bonding for Franchise Holders. 28
29
Ayes- 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 30
31
Council Member Marty was present for this vote as this occurred at the start of Council Business. 32
33
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Stigney. To Waive the Reading, Approve the Second Reading, and 34
Adopt Ordinance 722, an Ordinance Implementing a Franchise Fee on Xcel Energy Electric and 35
Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View for the Year 2004. 36
37
Council Member Stigney indicated that this is a continuation of the 4% franchise tax on Excel 38
electric and natural gas for the year 2004. 39
40
ROLL CALL: Linke/Quick/Stigney/Gunn. 41
42
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 43
44
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 16
M. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 719, an Ordinance 1
Implementing a Franchise Fee on Center Point Energy Electric and Natural 2
Gas Operations Within the City of Mounds View for the Year 2004. 3
4
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Stigney. To Waive the Reading, Approve the Second Reading, and 5
Adopt Ordinance 719, an Ordinance Implementing a Franchise Fee on Center Point Energy 6
Electric and Natural Gas Operations within the City of Mounds View for the Year 2004. 7
8
Mayor Linke indicated that this would continue the 4% franchise fee on Center Point Energy 9
electric and natural gas for the year 2004. 10
11
ROLL CALL: Linke/Quick/Stigney/Gunn. 12
13
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 14
15
N. Consider Options for a Community Survey 16
17
Mayor Linke suggested moving this item to the work session. 18
19
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Stigney. To Postpone this Item to the Work Session. 20
21
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 22
23
24
O. Consideration of Resolution 6118, a Resolution Authorizing the RE-bidding 25
of the County Road H Sidewalk Project 26
27
Public Works Director Lee indicated that on September 22, 2003 Council voted not to award the 28
contract but did indicate a willingness to do the project in the spring. He then indicated that the 29
City would need to officially reject the bids and authorize Staff to bid the project for next spring. 30
He also asked for direction on how to structure the bids and to set the bid date. He further 31
indicated that Staff would recommend a bid date of January 8, 2004 for this project. 32
33
Council Member Stigney indicated he would like to postpone this to the next Council meeting 34
because Council Member Marty should be a part of the discussion and he had to leave 35
unexpectedly. 36
37
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Gunn. To Postpone Resolution 6118 to the Next Meeting. 38
39
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 40
41
Mayor Linke apologized to those residents that were at the meeting to discuss this item but 42
indicated that Council Member Marty should be part of the discussion. 43
44
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 17
P. Consideration of Resolution 6111, a Resolution Approving Change Order 1
Number 3 for the County Road H2 Street Improvement Project – Installation 2
of Infiltration Systems and Pathway Segments along County Highway 10. 3
4
Mayor Linke asked if it was possible to bill Rice Creek Watershed for this experimental process 5
they required. 6
7
Public Works Director Lee indicated that the City does have a grant application into the 8
Watershed District for $40,000 for a partial reimbursement of the costs but the matter has been 9
tabled until the project is 100% completed. 10
11
Mayor Linke indicated he did not approve of the way Rice Creek Watershed District is using the 12
City as a guinea pig and charging for the experiment. 13
14
Public Works Director Lee indicated the City had the option to prevent any observations on these 15
devices and not allow access to them and then they would be of no value to the watershed 16
district. 17
18
Council Member Stigney questioned whether there is some way that Rice Creek and the City 19
could work out a better agreement or if it would be a waste of time. 20
21
Public Works Director Lee indicated that Staff had tried once and it did not work. He then 22
explained that the original cost participation was 75% but that was denied and the amount was 23
reduced. 24
25
Mayor Linke asked what the basis for this experimental retention area was. 26
27
Public Works Director Lee indicated it is a combination of wanting to see what happens and a 28
need in the area. He then said they looked at where it was possible to do infiltration basins to 29
look at treating as much water on H2 as possible. There was no room on the north side because 30
of the pathway and one way was to do infiltration devices under the pathway. He further 31
commented that these are treating 0.59 acres of water at a cost of close to $100,000 so there is a 32
question of cost benefit and it is an experimental device. 33
34
Mayor Linke commented that the City has to spend $60,000 because they said so. 35
36
Public Works Director Lee indicated the City may also incur additional risk and costs should the 37
devices fail. 38
39
Council Member Quick asked where the devices would be buried. 40
41
Public Works Director Lee indicated that both are installed and here is one located to the east of 42
Scotland Green Court and the second is east of Silver Lake Road between Silver Lake Road and 43
Park View Drive. 44
45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 18
Council Member Quick commented that these devices look similar to what was discussed for 1
Spring Lake Road a few years ago. He then said that there was a resident at the time claiming 2
that they were very bad. He further commented that this seems to be unfair to force the City to 3
pay for a costly experiment. 4
5
Council Member Gunn asked what happens if this experiment fails and who has to fix the 6
damage and remove them. 7
8
Public Works Director Lee indicated the City takes on the risk for installing it and there is no 9
recourse to the watershed district. 10
11
Mayor Linke suggested a motion to notify Rice Creek Watershed District that the City deems this 12
to be experimental and that, if their experiment fails and causes the City of Mounds View to 13
expend dollars to repair this, the City expects them to pay for the bill. 14
15
Community Development Director Ericson indicated he had attended a meeting with Steve 16
Hobbs and Mr. Hobbs had expressed a willingness to come to a Council meeting. He then said it 17
may be a good idea to invite him to discuss the concerns the City has. 18
19
Mike Maroni of 5045 Brighton Lane asked if this is the same Watershed District that put a pond 20
right next to the parking lot at an elementary school so the kids could walk through it and 21
potentially fall through the ice in winter. He then said it boggles his mind that these people can 22
dictate how the City spends its money. 23
24
Council Member Stigney indicated that by approving this resolution the City is saying it will pay 25
for this project using City MSA funds. He then asked if it would make more sense to wait until 26
after the City discusses the matter with the Watershed representative. 27
28
Mayor Linke indicated the contractor has already done the work and he is asking to get paid for it 29
so he does not feel it would be right to withhold payment to him for work done and authorized by 30
the City. 31
32
Council Member Quick indicated he would rather postpone payment so that the City’s options 33
are not limited. 34
35
Mayor Linke commented that this should have been done first but the City already authorized the 36
work. 37
38
Council Member Quick commented that the City did not know Rice Creek was going to pull the 39
funding. 40
41
Public Works Director Lee recommended that the Council go ahead with the rest of the items so 42
as not to delay the project any farther. 43
44
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 19
Mr. Maroni indicated that he agreed with Mayor Linke that the City should send them a bill for 1
$100,000 immediately and ask for payment and put an acknowledgement in there that if this 2
experimental system fails they have to cover the costs. 3
4
Mayor Linke indicated he would recommend paying it because the City authorized the work. 5
6
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 6111, a 7
Resolution Approving Change Order Number 3 for the County Road H2 Street Improvement 8
Project – Installation of Infiltration Systems and Pathway Segments. 9
10
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 11
12
Q. Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 723, an Ordinance 13
Amending Chapter 202 of the Mounds View City Code Pertaining to 14
Apportionment of Cost Associated with Roadway Major Maintenance 15
Projects. 16
17
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Quick To Waive the Reading, Introduce the First Reading and 18
Approve Ordinance No. 723, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 202 of the Mounds View City 19
Code Pertaining to Apportionment of Cost Associated with Roadway Major Maintenance 20
Projects. 21
22
Council Member Stigney indicated that he opposes this method of assessment as he thinks it 23
penalizes those with small lots to offset the costs for those with larger lots. 24
25
Ayes – 3 Nays – 1(Stigney) Motion carried. 26
27
R. Consideration of Resolution No. 6114, a Resolution Approving a Step 28
Increase for Pete Szurek of the Parks Division of the Public Works 29
Department. 30
31
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 6114, a 32
Resolution Approving a Step Increase for Pete Szurek of the Parks Division of the Public Works 33
Department. 34
35
Council Member Stigney requested that Resolution 6114 be read. 36
37
Public Works Director Lee read Resolution 6114. 38
39
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 40
41
S. Consideration of Resolution 6108, a Resolution Authorizing Severance 42
Payment for Gary Kardell 43
44
Mayor Linke read Resolution 6108. 45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 20
1
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Stigney. To Approve Resolution 6108, a Resolution Authorizing 2
Severance Payment for Gary Kardell. 3
4
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 5
6
T. Consideration of Special Council Meeting Dates 7
8
City Administrator Ulrich indicated that the Council needed to set special Council meeting dates. 9
He then recommended setting either Monday, October 27, 2003 for a non-general fund account 10
discussion or Monday, October 20, 2003. 11
12
Consent to set October 20, 2003 unless Council Member Marty had a scheduling issue. 13
14
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Stigney. To Set Monday, October 20, 2003, and November 17, 15
2003 as Special Council Meeting Dates. 16
17
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 18
19
U. Consideration of Resolution No. 6127, a Resolution Establishing a Policy for 20
Deferral of Special Assessments by Senior Citizens or Disabled Persons. 21
22
This item was discussed earlier in the meeting. 23
24
V. Community Center Contract Compliance Update 25
26
City Administrator Ulrich indicated the 30-day period to comply with the provisions of the 27
contract had expired but the City has been negotiating with the contractor and does not 28
recommend any action at this time. He further explained that there are some issues that need to 29
be resolved but Staff has been working with the contractor and the City Attorney and there is a 30
draft form of a settlement agreement and Staff would like a bit more time to finish negotiations. 31
32
City Administrator Ulrich indicated that the proper insurance information has been received and 33
the City received today a letter from the contractor’s attorney indicating they do not feel the 34
bonding provision is required by the contract. 35
36
City Attorney Riggs agreed with the comments of the City Administrator and said it would be 37
best to meet with the contractor and their attorney to discuss whether settlement is a viable 38
option. If not, Staff will be before Council with a recommendation as to how to proceed. 39
40
Mayor Linke indicated the City should look at the contract with Roberts to see how that ties in 41
and how it works. 42
43
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 21
Council Member Marty indicated that Staffing Plus sets up and breaks down after the events so 1
they should be notified as well. He then commented that he feels this letter from the attorney on 2
the bonding is just a way to buy more time. 3
4
City Attorney Riggs indicated that he feels it would be best to discuss the matter with them. He 5
then said that he does not agree with the interpretation brought up in that letter but would like to 6
pursue negotiations to see if the settlement is a viable option rather than terminating the contract 7
or litigation. 8
9
Council Member Stigney indicated the settlement agreement lists and effective date of January 1, 10
2004 and he would be concerned with leaving this contractor in place at the Community Center 11
un-bonded until that time. 12
13
City Attorney Riggs indicated that Page 2, number 6 requires that the performance bond be paid 14
and posted. He then said that this is just a draft agreement for discussion purposes. 15
16
Council Member Stigney indicated he would want the bond posted immediately. 17
18
Council Member Marty agreed. 19
20
Council Member Marty asked whether there would be time for requests for proposals if the City 21
terminates the contract in order to have someone new over there the first of the year. 22
23
City Administrator Ulrich asked the City Attorney to comment on whether it is wise to do both 24
things concurrently. 25
26
City Attorney Riggs indicated that the direction they are seeking at this time is to sit down and 27
discuss this with the vendor and their attorney to determine whether this is a viable option. 28
29
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To Direct the City Attorney to Meet with the Contractor to 30
Discuss this Matter. 31
32
Council Member Stigney indicated he would like to set some timeframe on this because it could 33
go on forever and they have no bond. 34
35
City Attorney Riggs indicated that this meeting should happen immediately as soon as it can be 36
scheduled. He then said he just learned of the letter from the vendor’s attorney today and it 37
would be appropriate to respond immediately. 38
39
Council Member Marty suggested within the next week and a half. 40
41
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 42
43
The City Attorney left at 7:22 p.m. 44
45
Mounds View City Council October 13, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 22
10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1
2
A. City Council Minutes October 13, 2003 3
4
Council Member Stigney indicated that Council Member Marty would like to have a future 5
discussion on the comment on Page 4, Line 4 at a work session. 6
7
Council Member Marty submitted the following changes in writing prior to leaving the meeting: 8
Page 5, Line 40 after that insert “he had brought up the community survey for a number of years 9
and”. On Page 9, Line 39 after thinks insert Council, after that insert and. On Page 14, Line 34 10
after the insert City’s. On Page 16, Line 20 after comply add a comma. 11
12
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Gunn. To Approve the City Council Minutes for September 22, 13
2003 as Presented. 14
15
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 16
17
11. REPORTS 18
19
A. Reports of Mayor and Council 20
21
None. 22
23
B. Reports of Staff 24
25
City Administrator Ulrich indicated that the appreciation dinner for Boards and Commissions 26
would be cancelled due to lack of turn out. 27
28
C. Reports of City Attorney 29
30
None. 31
32
12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, November 3, 2003 33
Next Council Meeting: Monday, October 27, 2003 34
35
13. ADJOURNMENT 36
37
Mayor Linke adjourned the meeting at 9:55 p.m. 38
39
40
Transcribed and recorded by: 41
42
43
Joan Lenzmeier 44
Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 45