Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2002/05/06 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW WORKSESSION AGENDA MONDAY, May 6, 2002 6:00 PM CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL: Sonterre, Quick, Marty, Stigney, Thomas Items Discussed Per Consensus _______ 1. Trunk Highway (TH) 10 Noise Abatement Issue - Lee _______ 2. Silver Lake Woods Condominium Street and Utility Maintenance Issue – Lee/Riggs _______ 3. Festival Agreement – Miller/Riggs _______ 4. Creative Kids Child Care Center Lease Request – Miller/Riggs _______ 5. County Road 10 Reconstruction and Revitalization Plan Update – Lee / Ericson _______ 6. Board and Commission Position Descriptions - Reed _______ 7. Fire Department Issues- Fireworks Regulations-Zikmund _______________________________________________________________________ 8. Next Council Work Session: June 3, 2002 Next Council Meeting: May 13. 2002 Item No. 01 Type of Business: WK 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: Trunk Highway 10 (TH 10) Noise Abatement Issue Update Report Meeting Date: May 6, 2002 Background Meeting with Mn/DOT On February 14, 2002, Public Works Director Greg Lee, Community Development Director Jim Ericson, and resident Michele Sandback met with representatives from MnDOT to discuss the TH 10 Noise Abatement Issue. Based on this meeting with Mn/DOT, two distinct options were evident: Option 1: Install Wall as Required by Law – Staff Recommended Option 2: Construct required wall to the east – Mn/DOT Proposal Option 1: Install Wall as Required by Law – Staff Recommended Under this option, the City would direct Mn/DOT to install a Noise Wall starting at the point where it currently terminates and extend it approximately 1200 feet to the east. It would terminate at the point where the three eastbound lanes reduce to two lanes; the point where the creek crosses TH 10 and where the chain link fence on the south side of TH 10 has a jog in it. The wall would be constructed by Mn/DOT and completely at Mn/DOT’s expense, regardless of the project cost. Option 2: Construct Wall to the East (City Built) – Mn/DOT Proposal Under this option, Mn/DOT would enter into a joint powers agreement with the City of Mounds View and allocate a total of $300,000 to be used to fund a noise wall. As part of the joint powers agreement, the City would be the project administrator and would need to hire an engineering consultant. This “city” consultant would design a noise wall at a location along the TH 10 corridor specified by the City. This location would need to be approved by Mn/DOT. The “city” consultant would develop plans and specifications for the wall with the help of Mn/DOT. The plans and specification would then be sent to Mn/DOT for approval. The City would then advertise for bids and award a contract. The City would be responsible for administering the construction, including inspection. Upon completion of the wall, Mn/DOT would review it and, if they find it acceptable, require the City to dedicate it to them. Mn/DOT would then be responsible for future maintenance. Option 3: Construct Wall to the East (Mn/DOT built) – City Council Proposal On April 1, 2002, this issue was brought before the Council for discussion. After Discussion of Options 1 and 2, the City Council proposed a third option - Option 3. This option would be the same as option 2, with the exception that Mn/DOT would be the project administrator and build the wall according to their specification and at their expense. Discussion To bring resolution to this issue, Council requested that this issue be discussed at the next Work Session Meeting on May 6th. Council also requested that staff invite Frank Pafko, the Mn/DOT Area Representative, and any other Mn/DOT representatives involved with this issue. Mr. Pafko will be attending the Work Session meeting and provide Mn/DOT’s comments on Option 3. The Council also requested that staff invite state legislators, as they may be influential in securing funding or overcoming any legislative obstacles. Staff has contacted and invited: State Senator Satveer Chaudhary, State Senator Don Betzold, State Representative Geri Evans, and State Representative Connie Bernardy. On April 15, 2002, staff met with the City’s Legal Council, Scott Riggs, to discuss several legal issues affecting the Public Works Department, one of which was the noise wall issue. Staff questioned the legality of both Options 2 and 3 and, therefore, sought legal counsel. The firm of Kennedy and Graven will be addressing this issue. As of this date, a full report could not be produced. Additional research and data from Mn/DOT is needed. Scott Riggs will be in attendance at the Council Workshop and may have an update at that time. It has been some time since the City has held a neighborhood meeting pertaining to this issue. Staff would like direction from Council as to whether (and possibly when) a meeting should be held. This meeting could be held prior to or after the City Council takes official action on this matter. Recommendation: Staff is looking for direction from the City Council pertaining to this matter. Specifically, staff is looking for Council input on which option to pursue and whether (and possibly when) the City should hold a neighborhood meeting regarding this issue. Respectfully Submitted, Greg Lee, Director of Public Works Item No. 02 Type of Business: WK 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: Silver Lake Woods Condominium Street and Utility Maintenance Issue Meeting Date: May 6, 2002 Background / History The issue of maintenance of streets and utilities in the Silver Lake Woods Condominium Development has been discussed and debated on numerous occasions since 1992. This area includes the streets platted as Lake Court Drive and Lake Court Circle including the water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer contained therein. These infrastructure items were installed privately by the developer in 1982. In recent months, the City received a proposed resolution from members of the Silver Lake Woods Condominium Association that would require the City to be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of the private streets and the utilities under these streets. Attached is a copy of this resolution. Discussion In an effort to fully address this request and to finally formalize the City’s position on this matter, staff proceeded by performing a detailed review of all City files and documents relevant to this development. Attached is a summary of this review. In 1982, the City approved this development and the construction of the private streets and utilities. The City has strict ordinances pertaining to the setbacks from roadway right-of-way. The City does not inspect nor approve the quality of items installed privately nor the workmanship of such items. City records do not indicate why the developer requested that these items be private. However, it can be speculated that it was done for the same reasons many developers today request Cities to allow them to construct private streets throughout the metropolitan area. These include, but are not limited to the ability to: • Bypass City ordinances and reduce the setbacks and therefore increase the density and profits. • Bypass the public improvement statutes (Chapter 429) and therefore reduce the time required to publicly contract. • Reduce costs by not adhering to a City standard. • Reduce engineering cost by eliminating the requirement to provide record plans of construction. A few years after the development was completed, the City started to plow these streets, although not required to. Staff was unable to ascertain why the City elected to do so. In 1992, the homeowners association sought to formalize this City practice for plowing the streets by drafting a maintenance agreement. In the original draft agreement, the City was to agree to snowplow, patch limited potholes, and seal coat. Homeowners agreed to be responsible for all long-term maintenance including: repaving, resurfacing, overlays, and major improvements. The draft agreement contained language that was more favorable to the City as a whole. It stated such things as: The City has “no legal responsibility to provide any services enumerated herein”, “Said services are being provided gratuitously”, “This agreement can be canceled by either party”, the City “is in no way bound in equity or at law to maintain said Outlot A”, and “The City expressly denies any legal responsibility to said property.” A final Maintenance Agreement was executed on May 24, 1993. This final version was drafted by the Association’s legal counsel. Attached is a copy. What began as a document to memorialize the City’s good will practice, which was “provided gratuitously” turned into a document that stripped the City of rights it originally had and made these services an obligation to all taxpayers of the City. Staff wants to make this point clear to the Council. It is, however, a mute point since the Homeowners Association’s legal counsel drafted the agreement in such a mannor as to make it impossible for the City to rescind the agreement on its own. The 1993 Agreement did not discuss maintenance utilities such as watermain, sanitary sewer, or storm sewer. In 1999, several storm sewer catch basins were in need of repair. This was the genesis for discussions of maintenance responsibilities for the utilities associated with the Silver Lake Woods Development. These have been discussed and disputed for the past three years. Staff and the Homeowners Association seek resolution of this issue. City Private Street Policy At this point, Council has yet to make a formal resolution on this matter. The only document of record is the 1993 Maintenance Agreement. Staff would like to point out that this is not a unique situation Mounds View faces. Nearly every metropolitan City has dealt with or will need to deal with the issue of private streets. To address the request by the Silver Lake Woods Condominium Association and similar requests in the future, staff recommends that the City develop a private street policy which addresses the maintenance of such streets. The City of Mounds View has numerous private streets. Some have utilities located under them and some do not. Some are contained within easements and some are on privately owned land. Examples of such private streets are: Landmark Circle, Scotland Court, Knoll Green, North Ridge Village, and streets in Colonial Village, and Towns Edge Terrace to name a few. As land values increase and developable land decreases, staff speculates the use of private streets by developers, as a method to increase density, will undoubtedly increase. Staff has developed a draft Private Street Maintenance Policy. Attached is a copy of this draft policy for Council’s review and consideration. The goal of this policy is to allow property owners that reside on a private streets to have the opportunity to convert them to public streets, if feasible, and do so in a manner that respects the best interests of the City as a whole and that does not create an additional tax burden to other property owners in Mounds View. This policy is silent on the issue of utilities. At a future date, staff will address the issue of ownership of utilities by presenting Council with a draft policy. Staff’s proposed policy will require that all water and sanitary sewer mains be owned, operated, and maintained by the City. The proposed policy will also require that trunk storm sewer systems including those that convey water from more than one private source be owned, operated, and maintained by the City. This ownership and maintenance concept is essential to ensure public health and safety. Other related policies staff will be presenting to Council to address in the near future: Residential Private Streets (in what situations will the City allow them), Construction of public and private facilities (publicly construct pubic facilities), and street design standards (what does Mounds View want its streets to look like). Applying the Draft Policy to the Silver Lake Woods Condominium Development Roadways - Staff recognizes that the City must adhere to the 1993 Maintenance Agreement terms of maintenance of the private streets, whereby the City plows and performs the minor maintenance and the Homeowners Association performs the major maintenance. Staff recommends that the City does not take ownership and full maintenance responsibilities for the streets at this time. If, at some time in the future, the Association wants to dedicate the roadways to the City, the conditions of the policy must be met. Notable points are as follows:  The roadway must be completely reconstructed –The Association must petition for Public Improvements.  The Association must execute the necessary documents and provide the necessary security to ensure full payment by the Association for 100% of the work performed.  The Association must grant to the City any right-of-way and easements as deemed necessary by the City.  The Association must pay for any and all cost borne by the City to bring these streets to City standards Options – The Council could allow the Condominium Association to dedicate the streets to the City without meeting the requirements of the draft agreement. Staff strongly discourages this option. It is most likely not in the City’s overall best interest to take over streets that are nearing the end of their useful life. These streets are twenty years old. The life cycle of a roadway is 25 to 35 years, depending on numerous factors (construction, soil, weather, traffic volumes…) In addition, this would set a precedent whereby the City would be obligated to take over all private street in their current condition should it be requested. NOTE: There is a minimum of 3.75 miles of private streets in Mounds View; most are nearing the end of their life cycle. The cost to bring these streets to a City standard via reconstruction would cost the City over $3,000,000. The cost of the Silver Lake Woods streets alone is $350,000. Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities - Staff recommends that the Association dedicate these utilities to the City and that the City maintain them just as any other public utility. From a public safety standpoint, staff believes that it is in the City’s best interest that these utilities are owned and maintained by the City. The City has been maintaining these utilities for the last twenty years, so this doesn’t represent an additional cost to the City. These facilities have a life cycle of about 60 to 100+ years. Conditions to this follow:  The Association must grant to the City any easements as deemed necessary by the City.  The Association must pay any and all cost borne by the City to dedicate these utilities to the City.  The Association can transfer ownership immediately. Transfer financial responsibility for repairs must be done over a period of time. Example: first five years- 100% Association cost for repairs, second five years 50/ 50 split in repair costs. After 10 years 100% City Cost. Options – This proposal is consistent with the Condominium Association proposal. There may be debate on the details of how ownership and maintenance responsibilities are transferred. Storm Sewer - There are two types of storm sewer facilities on this property between which staff would like to differentiate. The first type is any pipe or facility that conveys water from an off site location. Staff will refer to such items as “trunk facilities.” The second type of storm water facility is any facility such as a pipe or catch basin that conveys water from only this site. Staff will refer to such items as “lateral facilities.” Staff recommends that the Association dedicate all trunk storm water facilities to the City and that the City maintain them just as any other public storm water facility. From a storm water management standpoint, staff believes that it is in the City’s best interest that these facilities be owned and maintained by the City. Conditions to this follow:  The Association must grant to the City any easements as deemed necessary by the City.  The Association must pay any and all cost borne by the City to dedicate these utilities to the City  The Association can transfer ownership immediately. Transfer financial responsibility for repairs must be done over a period of time. Example: first five years- 100% Association cost for repairs, second five years 50/ 50 split in repair costs. After 10 years 100% City Cost. For lateral storm water facilities, staff recommends that they be viewed as private structures to be maintained privately. Since these serve only private property, it should be pointed out that, should the streets become public and the Association dedicated the necessary right-of-way in the future, these storm water facilities could become public following the same requirements as the streets. Options – This proposal in regards to trunk storm sewer facilities is consistent with the Condominium Association proposal. There is the option to allow the Condominium Association to dedicate the lateral storm sewer facilities. However, similar to streets, staff strongly discourages this option in that it would set a precedent whereby the City would be obligated to take over all lateral storm sewer facilities in their current condition should it be requested. Recommendation: Staff is looking for direction from the City Council pertaining to this matter. Specifically, staff is looking for Council input on whether the Council is interested in developing a Private Street Policy and then applying this policy to the Silver Lake Woods Condominium Development. Respectfully Submitted, Greg Lee, Director of Public Works March 15, 2002 SILVER LAKE WOODS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION SUMMARY The following is a review summary preformed by Greg Lee, Public Works Director for the City of Mounds View. There is an issues pertaining to the Silver Lake Woods Condominium Association regarding repair and maintenance responsibility of roadways and utilities within that development. This was done utilizing the City of Mounds View files. Additional review will be made of minutes and recordings of Council meetings referenced herein. The City’s attorney will also be consulted. The purpose of this review was to get the Public Work Director familiar with this issue so he can provide direction and assistance so it can come to resolution. November 12, 1981 Letter from the City Administrator to Dan Boxrud of SEH. Authorization was given to have the contractor to proceed with this project. December 3, 1982 Letter from the Public Works Director to the Fire Chief, discussing addresses and street names. States that Lake Court Drive area is private and therefore not subject to the City’s street name system. March 30, 1990 Declaration of Easement is recorded (Document No. 0922339). Article I – Definitions Article II - Grants easement over Outlot A (40 foot wide property on which Lake Court Drive and Lake Court Circle are constructed on) to the “units” and “lots” Article III- Grants easement over Outlot A to the City Article IV – Transfers maintenance responsibilities from the “Declarant” (Marvin H. Anderson Construction Co.) to the Association, discusses allocation of expenses Article V – Insurance Article VI – Construction Article VII – may dedicate with in five years an easement in or fee title to Outlot A to the City. No Date, 1992 Non-executed Agreement between the City and the Homeowners Association. City agrees to snowplow, limited patching of potholes, seal coating. Homeowners agree to be responsible for all long-term maintenance including: repaving, resurfacing, overlays, and major improvements. The City has “no legal responsibility “ to provide any services enumerated herein. Said services are being provided gratuitously. This agreement can be canceled by either party. City is not bound to maintain Outlot A. The City denies any legal responsibility to Outlot A. May 14, 1992 Letter from Mark a. Karney (attorney) to Ric Mintor stating he has not heard back form the Silver Lake Woods Association as to how to proceed. September 9, 1992 Hand written notes: Cliff Ash of the Silver Lake Woods Association would like the City to take over the streets. Discussed City’s concern with liabilities and problems with the streets, as they exist. Homeowners Association concerns: City ownership of streets, how to finance “heavy” maintenance in the future, how City ordinance covers Lake Court Drive and Lake Court Circle. October 8, 1992 Fax from Corrine Heine (Holmes, Graven, Chartered) to Ric Minetor. Draft Agreement. Very similar to draft 1992 agreement: City agrees to snowplow, limited patching of potholes, seal coating. Homeowners agree to be responsible for all long-term maintenance including: repaving, resurfacing, overlays, and major improvements. October 9, 1992 Memo from Ric Minetor, Public Works Director, to Jim Thompson, City Attorney. Stated that he met with the Silver Lake Woods Homeowners Association President, Cliff Ash, and a few board members. They felt the agreement was basically good. They did want a few changes: City will finance repair through special assessments if allowed by state law, and termination notice to be one year. October 26, 1992 Letter from James J. Thompson (City Attorney) to Ric Mintor. Enclosed a revised agreement. Added provision to reflect the possibility that the project would be special assessed. Added language that the City would require the work to be done if the homeowners chose not to do so. Changed termination clause to one year. November 16, 1992 Letter from James J. Thompson (City Attorney) to Ric Mintor. Enclosed a revised agreement. Revised it to recognize the existence of the declaration of easements. December 28, 1992 Letter from James J. Thompson (City Attorney) to Ric Mintor. Enclosed a copy of a letter from the Association’s attorney and their suggested changes to Paragraph 2 and 5. May 11, 1993 Letter from David B. Eide (Attorney for the Association) to James J. Thompson (City Attorney). Enclosed three copies of the Agreement. It is Mr. Eide’s understanding that this matter is on the May 24th agenda. May 12, 1993 Letter from James J. Thompson (City Attorney) to Ric Mintor. Enclosed three copies of the Agreement. It is Mr.Thompson’s understanding that the City Council will consider the agreement at the May 24th meeting. May 24, 1993 Copy of the executed Agreement. May 25, 1993 Letter from James J. Thompson (City Attorney) to Paul Harrington (City Planner). Enclosed three copies of the revised page 2. Insert these pages into the City’s agreements before the City signs them. May 27, 1993 Letter from James J. Thompson (City Attorney) to Paul Harrington (City Planner). Discussed the changes to page 2. Because the changes were minor, the Association’s attorney does not believe that the homeowner’s association needs to approve the modification. October 19, 1995 Letter from Gene Wagner (President of the Homeowner’s Association) to the City. They had an “Open Forum” meeting. They discussed issue of Highway 10 over-pass at Long Lake Road. They are NOT in support of this project. July 27, 1999 Fax from Steve Havel (F. M. Frattalone Excavating & Grading Inc.) to Tim Pittman. This is a proposal to do catch basin repair in the amount of $750.00. Alternative 1, add $300 for replacing an extra curb and raise grade. Alternative 2, add $85 for mortaring catch basin across street. September 13, 1999 Staff Report (Work Session- September 20, 1999)) on the Silver Lake Woods Condominium Street Maintenance Agreement. Question as to whether it applies to utilities. September 14, 1999 Letter from Michael Berke (President of the Homeowner’s Association) to Chuck Whiting of the City. Wants to discuss the repair of two storm sewer drains at the next Council Work Session. Contends City is responsible for all underground utilities including storm sewer. September 21, 1999 Letter from Chuck Whiting to Robert C. Long (City Attorney). Council reviewed the interpretation of the agreement at the September 20th Council Work Session. Council requests Mr. Long’s review of the agreement. January 24, 2000 Fax letter from Scott J. Riggs (City Attorney) to David B. Eide (Association’s Attorney). Discusses his interpretation of the 1993 agreement as it related to the storm sewer catch basins and underlying utilities. Needs easements or dedication to perform any more extensive maintenance of underlying utilities. He states that an assessment of the condition of the road and utilities would be needed in order to facilitate the possibility of the transference of further obligations to the City. February 1, 2000 Fax letter from Scott J. Riggs (City Attorney) to Chuck Whiting. Enclosed is a letter form David B. Eide (Attorney for the Association) to Scott J. Riggs (City Attorney). The letter states the Associations position in that they will abide with the 1993 Agreement by being responsible for major maintenance, but does not have responsibility for the storm sewer system or catch basins. March 8, 2000 Fax letter from Scott J. Riggs (City Attorney) to Chuck Whiting. Enclosed is a letter dated March 6, 2002 from David B. Eide (Attorney for the Association) to Scott J. Riggs (City Attorney). The letter states David B. Eide has not heard back form Scott Riggs. March 9, 2000 A letter from Scott J. Riggs (City Attorney) to David B. Eide (Attorney for the Association). The letter states this matter will be reviewed at the April 3, 2000 work session. March 29, 2000 Staff Report for the April 3, 2000, Work Session meeting from Mike Ulrich. No easements or dedications were recorded. If Association wants the City to maintain the utilities an easement needs to be dedicated. Also an inspection needs to be performed – any necessary repairs will be paid by the Association prior to the City taking them over. May 19, 2000 A letter from David B. Eide (Attorney for the Association) to Scott J. Riggs (City Attorney). The letter states David B. Eide understands that the City has completed its inspection of the utilities beneath the streets owned by the Association. May 25, 2000 Fax letter from Scott J. Riggs (City Attorney) to Mike Ulrich. Enclosed is a letter form Scott J. Riggs (City Attorney).to Mike Ulrich. The letter states “please find the following correspondence form David B. Eide...” No letter was attached. August 16, 2000 A proposal from Steve Havel (F. M. Frattalone Excavating & Grading Inc.) to Cliff Ash (representing the Homeowners Association) to regrout and repair the two catch basins in the amount of $1,500.00. November 21, 2000 Email from Mike Berke to Kathleen Miller. Requested to be on the next Council Work Session agenda. Gave Kathleen an update on the catch basin repair issue. Wants the City to take over the streets and utilities. August 16, 2001 “Proposed Resolution Of Members Silver Lake Woods Condominium Association”. Dedicated the streets and utilities to the City. It is the City’s responsibility to repair and replace streets and utilities. February 4, 2002 Greg Lee, Public Works Director calls Mike Berke and left a message that he was going to address the issue but would take some time. February 4, 2002 Mike Berke called Greg Lee back and stated that this was discussed by Council and informally approved in October. However, no official action was taken. February 28, 2002 Greg Lee, Public Works Director email Mike Berke informs him he is still working on getting up to speed on this issue. February 28, 2002 Mike Berke emails Greg Lee back and expresses his frustration regarding this matter. April 4, 2002 Mike Berke emails Greg Lee inquiring as to the status of this issue. Greg Lee email back and informs Mr. Berke that this issue has been placed on the May 6, 2002 Council Work Session Agenda. Public Works PRIVATE STREET MAINTENANCE POLICY Purpose Periodically, the City receives requests to take over ownership and maintenance of private residential streets. The purpose of this policy is to define and standardize the City’s position on accepting private residential streets for ownership and maintenance. Policy For a private residential street to be accepted for ownership and maintenance by the City of Mounds View, it must meet the City’s current minimum design guidelines for street width, street cross sectional design, street right-of-way and building setback requirements. The following criteria reflect the City’s current design standards. (NOTE - all reference to street width is from back of curb to back of curb) Street Design • Streets must be a minimum of 30' wide, streets less than 34' wide shall have parking restricted to one side. • Streets must have concrete curb and gutters which meet City design standards. • Streets must be constructed to the same design cross section and load bearing strength as a City street. • Streets must be inspected by City personnel during construction to verify that proper design, materials and construction techniques are utilized. This excludes many of the existing private streets in the City. However, when these streets reach the end of their service life and need to be reconstructed, the private owners may elect to reconstruct them to City design standards under City inspection. • Streets may not have guest parking areas directly fronting on them. • The boulevard area of any one street may not have driveway coverage greater than 35%. • Streets must have direct access to other publicly owned and maintained roadways. Right-of-Way/Easements/Setbacks • A minimum 50' right-of-way centered on the street will need to be provided over all street and boulevard areas maintained by the City. If the street is wider than 30' additional right-of-way will be required. The streets will then be open to the general public for traffic movement and the boulevard areas will be subject to the installation of private utilities. • Streets must have a 10' boulevard area behind the curb line devoid of all trees and structures, with the exception of mail boxes. Utility boxes, transformers and pedestals must be outside the aforementioned 10' boulevard area. • Maintenance of any existing sidewalks in the boulevard areas shall remain the responsibility of the applicant. • A minimum 25' setback must be provided from the street right-of-way to any buildings. This generally equals a 35' setback from the back of curb to any building. • Drainage and utility easements will need to be provided over all storm sewer lines proposed to be maintained by the City which lie outside of the street right-of-way.. • All costs associated with preparing the necessary easements and right-of-way documents shall be the applicant’s responsibility. Private Utilities • If a street meets all of the aforementioned criteria, storm sewer systems lying within the street area may be accepted for maintenance provided they meet City design standards. If a street is considered for ownership and maintenance by the City, the storm sewer system within the street will be evaluated for capacity and it will be inspected to determine its condition. If the capacity, design or condition of the system does not meet City criteria, the system will need to be reconstructed as necessary prior to acceptance of the street and storm sewer for ownership and maintenance by the City. Snow Storage • If a street is accepted for ownership and maintenance by the City, these snow removal guidelines must be followed. Streets and the 10' boulevard area may not be used by private snow removal contractors to pile snow. Only the snow from the driveway lying within the 10' boulevard area may be stored on the boulevard area. Private street owners should note that homeowners associations normally have their streets and driveways plowed at the same time by a single contractor. Splitting up this process between the City and a private contractor may create a situation where driveways are plowed before the streets, City crews would then push snow into driveways which had just been cleared. Parking • All pre-existing parking requirements for a development shall remain in effect if the streets are accepted for ownership and maintenance by the City. If said parking requirements can not be met because of restricted parking on or along a city street, the street will not be accepted for city ownership and maintenance. Not withstanding the eligibility of an applicant to satisfy all items listed in this policy, the City Council reserves the right to deny an application for City ownership and maintenance of private streets based on factors where a denial is in the best interest of the City. City Administrator Date Effective Date: 5/06/2002 Revision Date: Item No. 07 Type of Business: WK WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor, City Council and City Administrator From: Nyle Zikmund, Fire Chief Item Title/Subject: Fire Department Issues-Fireworks Regulations Meeting Date: May 6, 2002 Background: The Minnesota Legislature passed a bill signed into law by Governor Ventura legalizing a subset of 1.4g fireworks. This law took effect Tuesday April 30, 2002 and allows year round sales and use of “ground based” 1.4g fireworks. These are best defined as sparklers, fountains, cones, spinners and so on. Anything that shoots a projectile is still illegal as well as anything that explodes. However, the ground based products can have a “report.” Additionally, any kind of firecracker is still illegal. Fireworks have been illegal in Minnesota since 1941. Opposition to the bill came from all fire service and public safety groups as well as the League of Cities, medical community, and environmental groups. Issues: The fire department has several issues we would like to present to council for feedback and action if desirable. They include: 1. Sales of product in accordance with model state and national codes. 2. Storage of product in accordance with model state and national codes. 3. Illegal sales to minors. 4. Use of product by minors. 5. Enforcement of law. Discussion: The State Fire Marshal has posted information on use, sales, and regulation on their web site. Copies are included. A primary issue in the discussion is the quantity of product allowed with no national model code yet adopted for retail outlets. Given this we looked to other sections of the code as well as explosive regulations by ATF to guide us. We hope to have further information by the workshop or council meeting. The Fire Department is recommending and proposing the adoption of fire regulations to address the issues outlined. The Minnesota Uniform Fire Code which is adopted by the State and enforced at the local level provides for the promulgation of regulations more restrictive than the fire code except when it impacts the building code. Examples of this include our recreational burning regulation, hydrant spacing regulation, and access road regulation. All of these are adopted at the administrative level of the fire department in accordance with the fire code. Each of the three cities as subsequently adopted a portion of all of these by ordinance. We would propose and recommend a similar path. Due to the time issues involved the fire regulation allows almost immediate action in addressing the issue as opposed to an ordinance which takes several weeks to process. Recommendations: 1. Limit the time of sale period to not more than four weeks around the Fourth of July. 2. Permit all retail sales. 3. Limit the number of stand alone dedicated outlets to not more than three or four. 4. Impose a permit fee to cover the cost of plan review, initial inspection, ongoing compliance inspection, law enforcement compliance, and confiscation disposal costs. 5. Limit the quantity of product allowed in any structure with threshold limits dependent upon level of fire protection. Example: A sprinklered building would be allowed to have a larger quantity of product for sale and restock than a non -sprinklered building. Summary: While the legislature legalized only a portion of consumer fireworks, they still pose a significant danger to citizens and property as well as emergency responders. To ensure adequate public safety for all residents an appropriate amount of regulation must accompany sales and use. Given the timing of the law, a fire department regulation can address the issue in a more immediate fashion, however, adopting that regulation by ordinance will provide the optimum situation. _____________________________ Nyle Zikmund, Fire Chief