Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packets - 1982/12/06
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL Agenda Session December 6, 1982 7:00 p.m. 1. Consideration of proposal from Spring Lake Park regarding signalization of Pleasant View Drive/Highway 10 intersection. 2. Discussion of Northwest Suburban Youth Service Bureau (material provided in ll/l/82 packet). 3. Discussion of future Cable TV issues with Jerry Skelly. 4. Consideration of staff memorandum regarding capital improvements proposal for Anoka County/Blaine Airport. 5. Consideration of staff memorandum regarding purchase of one ton dump truck. 6. Consideration of staff memorandum regarding Waste Management Board's preliminary identification of Fridley Site A for Hazardous Waste Processing Facility. 7. Consideration of staff memorandum regarding 1982 City Newsletter r Bids. I S. Consideration of staff memorandum regarding CSO Position. 9, Analysis of 1982 General Fund Budget. 10. Review of Surface Water Drainage Management and Development Control Ordinance. 11, Warming House Update. 12. Discussion of 1983 Contract for John C. Johnson. 13. Discussion of MSA needs and Five Year Plan (material will be handed out Monday). 14. Discussion of new maintenance person selection process and recommendation. 15. Discussion of Dalberg-Hanson rezoning, variance, and subdivision fee refund. 16. Review of Municipal Code Chapter 39 Entitled "Signs and Billboards" MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Clerk-Administrat DATE: November 30, 1982 SUBJECT: ANOKA/BLAINE AIRPORT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Attached is a copy of a letter received by this office from the Metropolitan Council regarding an application for federal funding from the Federal Aviation Administration for the installation of runway identification lights on Runway 35 at the Anoka/Blaine Airport. The Metropolitan Council has requested that we advise them of our position with respect to the proposed project and its effects upon our community or any additional information we might require prior to our taking a formal position on this project. It would appear from the information received that the proposed project has no relationship to an independent landing system or the upgrading of the airport to intermediate status. It would appear, however, that the proposed project is in contradiction to Metropolitan Airports Commission plans for this runway which call for the abandonment of the southerly 1,000 feet of this runway, thus, making the runway and identification lights not in conformance with the Metropolitan Airports Commission plans for the shortening of the runway. Also, the runway identification lights are synchronized, flashing lights to provide quick location for the end of the runway for pilots using that runway and could possibly cause some visual discomfort for residents bordering the southern end of the airport. Staff would request Council direction in this matter. DFP/pf Attachment J FF. ilh.tihrrinw I liub,gl tilrrrl. Saint 1':nd. ,11u1:\Ilgn,�ynal\�Luildinl;• NovemL•er 24, 1982 To 1tom Tt ?'.ay Concern: rX.: US Departnent of Transportation Pe\icral Lviation Adninistration Install Ruuorn;r Znd 16ent?ficati.on Lights, Runway 35 Anoka - Blaine F_irport .eteive6 11/22/62 .., tropolitan Cotmci.l Peferral Me 110. 10u54-1 I.e 41 t Rti(:CiU.f) CITY 6f MOUNDS VIEW The Me tropolitan Council has -received an application for federal funds to accomplish tr,a above refere"c�\i o_a�act: The fedar a procedures for review of these applications recare tide auy potentially affected 1-nics of government. neighborhood or;an_- zations, grc-a s, and human rights commissions be notified of the project and given an opportunity to comment. The interest of your community groups shoula be expressed by means of a letter describing the effect the project might have on your community or the type of additional information you would like to receive. Upon receipt of a notice of your interest, if any. it is incumbent upon the Metropolitan Council to arrange a conference oath the applicant for the benefit of all Interested parties. If you desire to review the application, coolies are on file at the Metropolitan Council and in the offices of the applicant. Sincerely, METPQPOLiT:LCOUNCIL Sohn P.ut�ord IF Referral Coordinator JR/ch cc: Thonas llarre.n, t,dministrator, E.tate P; 0; Clenrin,, ',louse r:etronolitan Council Di3trict 13 Ali Allel1,g Cwalol 1,1 1' nrdiu,,b• 161. 1'lanniin: dud Ilru•I,gnnrnl of III,- Twill Arrn 11,mpri.ing: \n,•i.., l'.,u,lc 1';vlfcrrl'�n�n1y I1:11: •!,1'•m, P, II,•un,q,iu 1',nn,t\ IFnu.,•v 1'nuutc Srultl'mnn•; V,:n1, il,l' I I'll l ln, lily US.Deponmenl of Uonsponation Federal Aviation Administration Metropolitan Council Metro Square Building 7th and Robert Streets St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Gentlemen: I'I"':'� /a9S�/ /• Gieal Laves neg,on 2300 East Devon Avenue �-.. Des Ptalnes. wmo's 60018 Enclosed is our environmental assessment notification for our proposed installation of Runway End Identification Lights to serve Runway 35 at Anoka County -Blaine Airport, Minneapolis, Minnesota. This assessment notification is being submitted in accordance with Circular No. A-95 Revised. The project is "Direct Federal Development" by this agency. Sincerely, 7Gil/� ilr(/J � dward J. Phillips Manager, Airway Facilities Division Enclosures E IM ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NOTIFICATION Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Great Lakes Region Airway Facilities Division 2300 East Devon Avenue Des Plaines, Illinois 60018 Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota Anoka County -Blaine Airport, Runway 35 Project Description: The Federal Aviation Administration proposes to install Runway End Identification Lights (REIL) to serve the referenced runway. The REIL consists of two synchronized flashing lights located near the rumeoy threshold to provide rapid and positive identification of the approach end of a runway. The lights are located•40 feet from the runway edge and in line with the existing runway threshold lights. Program: This project is fully and directly Federally funded from the Facilities and Equipment portion of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund established by the Airport and Airway Development Act of 1970. Project Start: Planned construction start is June 1983. Point of Contact: Mr. Rick Murphy, AGL-425.1 Telephone: (312) 694-7593, f COMP01 LOCATIONS: REIL Runway 35 Anoka County -Blaine Airport Minneapolis Minnesota I REIL 0 m J 0 i i f � s TO: Mayor & Council FROM: Clerk -Administrator Pauley Finance Director Brager DATR: December 2, 1902 RE: POLICY RE USE OF REVENUE SHARING FUNDS Consideration of bids received for a dump truck was on the agenda of the November 22, 1982 Council meeting. The Finance Director recommended that, due to the uncertainty of the receipt of scheduled December State Aid payments and a possible reduction of 1983 State Aid payments, the purchase of the dump truck with Revenue Sharing funds be deferred until the State notifies the City of the amount of aids we can expect to receive. It was further suggested that Revenue Sharing funds could be transferred to the General Fund to offset reductions in State Aids. Subsequently consideration of the dump truck bids was deferred. The Finance Director does not recommend that Revenue Sharing funds be used to offset possible reductions in State Aids. It is, however, an option and should be discussed along with other more viable options. Deferral of the purchase of the dump truck with Revenue Sharing funds and the possibility of the subsequent use of Revenue Sharing monies to offset Dossible reductions of State Aids raises the issue of Council policy regarding the use of Revenue Sharing funds. Since an issue of policy has been raised it is staff's feeling that Council should be presented with all the options available regarding the uses of Revenue Sharing funds. Since the beginning of the Revenue Sharing program, Revenue Sharing funds have been budgeted and used for purchases of equipment and other capital expenditures. The funds have not been used to reduce normal city operating expenditures (most of which are budgeted in the General Fund) in the past. The reasoning was not to develop a reliance on a source of funding which has an uncertain future to pay for recurring operating expenses. This goal was successful in the sense that the City has not developed a reliance on Revenue Sharing funds to finance operating expenses of the General Fund. The City has, however, developed a reliance upon Revenue Sharing funds for the purchase of new and replacement of existing equipment for departments budgeted in the General Fund. This includes park equipment and vehicles, police equipment and vP}l;nlnc inspcctic:.a vehicles, maintenance garage equipment and tools, City Hall equipment and the annual sealcoat program. With the Revenue Sharing due to end after next year we must find another source of funding for these items. December 2, 1982 Page 2 Due to the likely end of or significant reduction in the Revenue Sharing program an option would be to purchase budgeted Revenue Sharing items regardless of the possibility of reductions in State Aids. Equipment purchased with Revenue Sharing funds budgeted for 1983 will result in the City having, as a whole, equipment in good condition. Having the present equipment in good condition would allow a year or perhaps two to begin setting aside General Fund money for future replacement of equipment. This option also advocates the policy that current General Fund expenditures should be financed solely from current General Fund revenues. This option further advocates the policy that any temporary transfer of other funds to the General Fund to offset revenue shortfalls is only a temporary solution. The problem may be a continuing one and may be faced again in the next fiscal year. The option of a transfer of money from the Revenue Sharing Fund to the General Fund to offset •revenue shortfalls is viable only if the problem faced is of a temporary nature and will not occur again in future fiscal periods. If the problem does affect future fiscal periods a transfer from other funds is only a "band aid" approach. It would be much better financial management to face the problem now and resolve it. Of the two options regarding use of Revenue Sharing funds, staff would recommend using Revenue Sharing funds to finance current General Fund operations only after all other options to adjust for a possible revenue shortfall were exhausted and as a last resort. The recommendation to defer the purchase of the dump truck and mention of the possibility of the use of Revenue Sharing funds was made only so that that option would be available to the Council. Should the Council adopt the policy that the General Fund's operations be financed solely from General Fund revenue sources, without reliance upon other revenue sources, then staff would recommend that the dump truck, as well as 1983 budgeted revenue sharing items, be purchased. This would allow some time for the City to begin setting aside money for replacement of equipment used in General Fund operations. Staff requests Council's direction in this matter. DB/ds MEMO TO: Mayor and Ci FROM: Clerk-Admini DATE: November 30, SUBJECT: WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD PRELIMINARY AREA FOR WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY - FRIDLEY (SITE A) Attached please find a packet of material supplied by the Minnesota Waste Management Board regarding the process for identifying preliminary areas for hazardous waste processing facilities, and maps showing those areas identified in the Metro Region and Fridley Sites A and B. You will note that the Fridley Site A encompasses a large area running from Highway 10 south along University Avenue to 73rd and west along 73rd Avenue to the Mounds View City border. Also attached is a packet of material supplied by the City of Fridley regarding the position taken by the City of Fridl--!y with respect to the identification of hazardous waste processing facility sites in their city. The City of Mounds View should be particularly concerned about the site identified as Fridley Site A which abutts our westerly border on Pleasant View Drive from County Road H-2 to County Road H. This site, or at least part of it, appears to be in nonconformance with the factors for selection of Metro proposed areas as outlined by the Waste Management Board and included on a sheet in your packet of material. This listing indicates that the Waste Manage- ment Board prefers areas: 1) "that avoid residential areas (either by having a large industrial area, scattered residential development, or other development or open space between residential and industrial development)." 2) "that offer some protection over that designed into a facility" to the areas, soils, and aquifer conditions. 3) "which have conditions which would protect wells and water supply." 4) "which would avoid natural parks and historic sites." With respect to Fridley Site A it can be easily stated that all of these factors are not complied with by at least part of that site, namely, the area running east to west from University Avenue to the Mounds View border. It is staff's position that these factors are not complied with because the area dirPrtty Avenue +o the nor" of 7 ...... Iu iv�rti,c aa� is entirely residential development, Rice Creek runs directly south of the site which ultimately runs into the Mississippi River and provides a large source of water for the Metropolitan Area, and the Rice Creek area provides a major natural area and park to all of the communities it runs through, including the City of Fridley. -2- Taking these factors into consideration and the position previously taken by the City of Fridley as outlined in their Resolution No. 100-1982 adopted on November 15, 1982, staff would recommend that the Mounds View City Council go on record supporting the position taken by the City of Fridley opposing Fridley Site A and recommending an alternate site in the City of Fridley as identified by the City of Fridley. Also, staff would recommend that the City of Mounds View temper our opposition to this site as well as the other sites we have previously voiced opposition to by indicating to the Waste Management Board that we are not opposing the location of hazardous waste transfer or processing sites in the Metropolitan Area and, in particular, near the City of Mounds View, but that we are strongly recommending that they make a greater effort to evaluate each of the sites they have identified in a preliminary manner prior to making them public as it would appear that the three sites in or near the City of Mounds View are unacceptable for a number of reasons, all of which are listed in their factors for consideration. With that tempering of our position, we would come off as being more reasonable in the position we are taking on the Fridley site and have taken on the other sites in the past, and would more likely have a greater impact upon the decision -making process of the Waste Manage- ment Board. Staff would request Council direction in this matter in order that an appropriate response might be provided as soon as possible. DFP/pf Attachments MINNESOTA WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD �reliminary Areae for Pr0CAQQin o^..... ..............g C;1;4: u%.uILIVO 9/23/82 Metro Region a w LL a }Z Za Z mt OJ U0 Z LU CC ww (j)2 1 u MINNESOTA WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD PRELIMINARY AREAS FOR PROCESSING FACILITIES METRO SEARCH 9/23/82 WASHINGTON CO. Woodbury Hugo (A)* Hugo (B)* St. Paul Park Cottage Grove* Forest Lake DAKO,TA CO. Hastings Inver -Grove Heights* Lakeville Rosemount* Burnsville South St.Paul (Volunteered - 10127182) ANOKA CO. Fridley (A) Fridley (B) Blaine Ramsey* RAMSEY CO. St. Paul (A) St. Paul (B) Roseville Shoreview SCOTT CO, J I10 ROPEF* Savage* APPROXIMATE ACREAGE 120 120 110 330 9006;�s1.4 sq. mi.) 400 460 610 720 1780(�1.6 sq.mi.) 45 720(::�,l.5 sq.mi.) 460 1280(p2 sq.mi.) 1880 (�3 sq.mi.) 420 580 260 i72u11s sq.mi.j 640(K1 sq.mi.) HENNEPIN CO. Maple Grove Plymouth Eden Prairie Minnetonka Minneapolis (A) Minneapolis (B) Minneapolis (C) *Denotes Incineration, Chemical Treatment, Transfer -Storage nneration Unmarked denotes Chemical Treatment, and Transfer -Storage only APPROXIMATE ACREAGE 480 1280(62 sq.mi.) 100 180 1200H .8 sq.mi. 520 520 W MINNESOTA WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD Preliminary Areas for Processing Facilities 9/23/82 Metro Region NORTH A Fridley (site A) 16«-T_,06 Denotes Incineration, Chemical, Transfer -Storage Operation Unmarked denotes Chemical 8 Transfer -Storage only MINNESOTA WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD Preliminary Areas for Processing Facilities 9/23'__ Metro Region WAU NORTH ♦ Fridley (Site B) ❑' i;... t; ' I a 7 n -• tv` �� n.' I 9C La 1) '�I.�'If\ s "j:. ' n nccl Y IM1,.LI_�\1��1 N •���) '1 ��Iif 11 ~ II t r•,H J O Y W 1 �•' W _ I NA ANOCO NOKA CO. 71 WMAPOLIS Denotes Incineration, Chernk . Transfer -Storage Opel Unmarked denotesChemirl•1.. flulNfor-StorayN.mly qq /.4rilln �l)a tl1I1 a -•.'��`�'I� N.M.. 0� .Il.rl l� YCII � : 'I. nI�MNII r.r^ .dYYI� F II? ., I1� I�. ...ir• + I f I �1. IYhr I Jj'�fI 7 Ili it 1! I u�,,",�:7f • y� rr[I'L1I/ CM��r.1. h''•al l I ' II11.1 tl .Y. COLUMN NCIONTS July 12,1982 CRITERIA FOR IDENTIFICATION OF PRELIMINARY AREAS INVENTORY OF PROCESSING AREAS (METRO SEARCH) CHEMICAL TREATMENT AND TRANSFER/STORAGE MANDATORY— .Avoid shore lands, flWdplains and protected wetlands. Area must be planned or zoned for industry. • Area must have city sewer service available or access to receiving stream within I mile. Area must be within 2 miles of a 9-ton industrial route. OPTIONAL -- I. Prefer existing or planned compatible industrial development (i.e., chemical related, manufacturing, plating, oil storage, etc.) 2. Prefer close access to major roadways: a. within 2 miles of an interstate exit b. within I mile of a major 2-lane or 4-lane 9-ton industrial route. 3. Prefer areas which provide buffer from major residential developments. 4. P'refer soil and aquifer conditions that offer natural protection over that designed into the facility. INCINERATION MANDATORY— • Avoid shorelands, floodplains and protected wetlands. • Avoid oreos which are planned or zoned for light industry. • Area must have city sewer service available or access to receiving stream within I mile. -Area must be within 2 miles of a 9-ton industrial route. • Area must provide a buffer from major residential developments. OPTIONAL — I. Prefer existing r, planned compatible industrial development (i.e., chemical related, manufacturing, plating, oil storage, etc.) 2. Prefer close access to major roadways: a. within 2 miles of an interstate exit L/ b. within I mile of a major 2-lane or 4-lane 9-ton industrial route. 3. Prefer soil and aquifer conditions that offer natural protection over that designed into the facility. 11/04/82 Metro Phone: MINNESOTA Toll Free: (612)536-0816 WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD 1-800-652-974'_ 123 Thorson uilding 7323 58th Avenue North Crystal, Minnesota 55428 FACTORS FOR SELECTION OF METRO "PROPOSED AREAS" Existing industrial development Planned industrial development Availability of sewer (or receiving stream) and water supply Transportation access - prefer manufacturing and storage industries and industries using hazardous materials. - prefer areas planned for industrial development. - prefer areas which are served by city water and sewer (or have access to receiving stream). - prefer areas which have nearest access to major transportation routes. Proximity to residential - prefer areas that avoid residential development areas (either by having a large in- dustrial area, scattered residential development, or other development or open space between residential and industrial development). Soil & aquifer conditions- prefer conditions that offer some protection over that designed into a facility. Protection of city wells - prefer areas which have conditions or water supply intake which would protect wells and water supply. Proximity to natural - prefer areas which avoid natural areas, parks, historic parks and historic site's. sites 1 10/19/82 Metro phone: MINNESOTA Toll free: (612) 536-0816 WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD 1-800-652-9747 7323 58th Avenue North Crystal, Minnesota 55428 "The Inventory of Preferred Areas for Hazardous Waste Processing Facilities" On April 22, 1982 the Waste Management Board announced its first "Inventory of Preferred Areas" for hazardous waste processing facilities. The inventory includes eight areas in or near eight Minnesota communities outside the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. In these areas the Board will encourage private developers to select sites and establish facilities for the incineration, treatment or temporary storage of hazardous wastes. On the same date, the Board voted to continue the search for preferred areas in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Because the Metro Area generates an estimated two-thirds of the state's hazardous wastes, the Board expressed concern that an insufficient number of areas had been identified in the Metro Area during the original search. The Law Minnesota Statute 115A, called the Waste Management Act of 1980, sets up proce- dures for managing hazardous wastes in the state. Among other things, the Act created the Waste Management Board. The Board consists of eight part- time citizen members appointed by the Governor to four-year terms, one from each of Minnesota's Congressional Districts,and a full-time chairperson, also appointed by the Governor. The Board is responsible for three main activities involving hazardous wastes: - Development of a hazardous waste management plan Development of an inventory of preferred areas for hazardous waste processing facilities - Siting of at least one hazardous waste disposal facility (1982 amendments to the Act allow the Board to select either a land -disposal or retriev- able storage facility) The Minnesota Legislature, in the Waste Management Act, clearly emphasized the importance of finding alternatives to the land disposal of hazardous wastes. The Board also has frequently expressed its support of efforts to minimize the amount of hazardous wastes requiring disposal. One of the main ways to reduce the amount of hazardous wastes requiring disposal is to process, or treat, those wastes. To encourage treatment of hazardous wastes,the Board is required to identify an Inventory of Preferred Areas for processing facilities. This inventory ' must include at least three areas suitable for transfer/storage facilities, three areas for chemical processing facilities and three areas for incineration facilities. These areas may be up to 10 square miles in size. However, since a processing facility is generally located on a 1-10 acre site, specific sites would have to be selected before development could occur. The Board will not select specific sites for processing facilities, nor will it develop processing facilities. However, if a private developer selects a site for a processing facility within one of the preferred areas, the Board is able to offer the developer aid in obtaining approvals for the development. The inventory is not exclusionary. A developer can still develop any site in the state for a hazardous waste processing facility, if the necessary local and state permits can be obtained. However, only within a preferred area can the Board assist the developer in obtaining approvals. Finally, there is no guarantee that processing facilities will be developed in the preferred areas. Although the Board encourages the development of facili- ties to serve the hazardous waste needs of the state, the Board cannot require that development of these facilities occur. Even if development of some facilities occurs, it is very unlikely that development will occur in all the preferred areas identified by the Board. Processing Facilities r ) Hazardous waste processing facilities are designed to recycle, reduce, neutralize, destroy or temporarily store industrial wastes. With the rising cost of raw materials, increased government regulation, and concern for the environment, many industries are looking for ways to recycle, reduce or destroy their wastes. Some large companies can afford to install equipment to process their waste products but smaller companies must look to comercial waste processing firms. These commercial waste processing firms provide facilities where these wastes -- which are currently being generated in Minnesota and, in some cases, are not being properly handled -- can be recycled, reduced or destroyed. A processing facility is an industrial -type facility and would involve no long-term disposal of wastes. Considering Minnesota's waste stream, the processing facilities most likely to develop in this state may include transfer/storage facilites (a warehouse -type operation where wastes are collected, aggregated and shipped on to other locations); oil or solvent recycling; aqueous treatment; or small-scale, specialized types of incinerators. Development of Facilities Before a waste processing facility can be constructed and begin operation, the proposal must undergo extensive review. The following are some of the steps involved in pre -construction review, - As any company interested in new development would do, the waste manage- ment firm would conduct market surveys to evaluate the availability of specific hazardous wastes and investigate other issues such as transportation access, land availability, etc. Z Before a company can apply for a Pollution Control Agency (PCA) permit it must undergo review of its technical and financial competen- cy and its past history of operating hazardous waste facilities by the Waste Management Board. If the company passes the review by the Board, it can then apply for its.PCA permits. The PCA will evaluate the proposal from an environ- mental perspective looking specifically at the facility's effect on the environment. The PCA permit may include provisions concerning proper handling and safety measures, storage requirements, primary and secondary containment features, monitoring and inspection procedures, proper closure of the facility, and loading and inspection of the wastes. In most cases, the company will be required to complete an environmen- tal report (possibly a full Environmental Impact Statement), which will contain a detailed study of possible environmental impacts resulting from the project. Approvals from the local governing body are required. These approvals may involve review of the project's compliance with zoning ordinances, land use plans and capitol improvement plans. Concerns such as building setback, height of building, curb cut, transportation routes, sewer and water hook-up, fire codes and landscaping requirements may be examined at this time. If local approval is denied, the waste management firm may appeal that decision to the Board through a process called Supplementary Review. This six-month process involves mediation, public hearings, and appointment of six local citizens to sit as temporary members of the Waste Management Board to decide on that particular issue. This process is designed to reach an agreement between the firm and community that is acceptable to both parties. The entire process of research, review and approvals would probably take 1- 3 years. Selection of Preferred Areas On November 10, 1980, the Board notified officials representing all local governments in Minnesota that the entire state was being searched for suitable areas for hazardous waste management facilities. The Board recognzied that widespread public involvement should be a central element in the siting process. Consequently citizens throughout the state were asked to participate and make recommendations regarding the development of siting criteria and the collection of data concerning each area. The Board began the process by holding over 60 meetings across the state to acquaint citizens with the issue of hazardous waste management and to ask for advice on what criteria the Board should use in selecting hazardous waste management sites. Based on the recommendations from the public, the suggestions of technical consultants, staff, and others, and taking into account specific legal require- ments included in the Waste Management Act, the Board developed selection criteria and identified 60 "preliminary areas" across the state to study for possible inclusion on the inventory. Recognizing that some companies in the state might already be planning to develop processing facilities, or that existing facilities could be converted to process hazardous wastes, the Board advertised that it would consider sites volunteered by local governments or private firms. Eleven sites were volun- teered before the July 1, 1981 deadline. During the summer of 1981 the Board held public meetings in or near the identi- fied preliminary areas. The Board also collected information about the areas (such as land use, transportation access, natural features, etc.) from state agencies, local governments, and site inspections. Using the information gathered from the public meetings and the various other sources, the Board evaluated the 71 areas (60 preliminary areas plus 11 volunteered areas) and selected 18 "proposed areas." Formal public hearings were held on the proposed areas within the affected communities (November and December 1981). Based on the information contained in the hearing records, the Board then selected the eight preferred areas outside the seven -county Metro Area and voted to continue the search within the Metropolitan Area (April 1982). Continued Metro Search The Board's reexamination of the 7-county Metropolitan Area began with the April 1982 decision. The Board Identified search criteria which concentrated on finding industrial areas with compatible land use, adequate transportation access and urban services. Using this criteria, on September 23, 1982 the Board identified 28 preliminary -- or search -- areas within the Metropolitan Area. The continued search will follow the same basic process as was used before. Additional information on each of the preliminary areas will be gathered and public meetings for the affected communities will be held. Information for each of the preliminary areas will be presented to the Board and, in December 1982 the Board will select "proposed areas" from the group of preliminary areas. Formal public hearings will be conducted for each of the proposed areas. Based on the information gathered through this process, the Board will finally select the "preferred areas" in the Metropolitan Area by early Summer 1982. 9 ID/8/a2 MINNESOTA'S HAZARDOUS WASTES The amount of hazardous waste generated varies constantly, depending on production levels at manufacturing plants, and changes in product lines and manufacturing methods. Current estimates are based on two sources: disclosures submitted by waste generators to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Metropolitan Counties under the State hazardous waste rules, and an estimate based on industry -specific information gathered in other states. From these sources, we estimate that approximately 200,000 tons per year of hazardous wastes are generated in Minnesota --and as much as 3/4 of this comes from the seven -county Metro area. However, no one company is responsible for a significant portion of the waste stream, and over 2500 waste generators have been identified by the regulatory program. The wastes generated in Minnesota can be divided into a number of categories based on their physical and chemical characteristics. The principal categories of wastes we generate are: 1) HEAVY METALS AND INORGANIC RESIDUALS. This is the largest category, and reflects the predominance of the electronic, primary metal, and fabricated metal product industries in Minnesota. What are the wastes? They include spent electroplating and etching baths, rinse waters from electroplating, sludges from these operations, and other acid and alkaline solutions used in the manufacture of metal products. Why are theZ hazardous? Certain metals commonly used in these industries chromium, cadmium, nickel) are toxic. If they are placed in a sanitary landfill, they can contaminate groundwater. If they are sewered, as many wastes currently are, they can disrupt sewage treatment plant operations and contaminate the sludge from these plants, making this sludge harder to dispose of safely. Some plating operations use toxic "complexing agents" such as cyanide or sulfide. Acidic and alkaline solutions are corrosive. How should these materials be handled? Chemical treatment of these wastes is relatively easy and is a well -established procedure. Cyanides can be readily destroyed (many generators do this on -site). Toxic metals can be precipitated (converted to solid compounds) and separated from wastewater, which can then be sewered. The resulting precipitate may require disposal in a secure landfill. Acids and bases are easily neutralized. What facilities does Minnesota need? The need for treatment facilities is perhaps most acute in this category of wastes. Currently, many of these wastes are ser;ered, but pretreatment regulations which are taking effect will result in the need for facilities to treat the wastes. Anaqueous treatment plant which provides neutralization, cyanide destruction, chromium reduction, and metal precipitation is one of the most effective ways to handle these wastes. Residues from this facility could require secure landfill at another location. A metal recovery plant which recovers metals from wastewaters for reuse i aTso possible --the Twin Cities Metal Finishers Association is studying the feasibility of such a facility. (over) -2- 2) SOLVENTS. Solvents of varying types are used by many varied I industries for cleaning and manufacturing purposes. What are these wastes? Common solvents include chlorinated chlorine -containing compounds such as 1,1,1-trichloroethane ("trichlor"), perchloroethylene ("pert"), and freon; and non -chlorinated compounds including methylethyl ketone, acetone, and alcohols. - Why are they hazardous? Chlorinated solvents are not flammable, but they are somewhat toxic, and when placed in a landfill they migrate easily, causing groundwater contamination. Non - chlorinated solvents are less toxic, but tend to be quite flammable. - How should these wastes be handled? Solvents can be readily recycled as long as they are not too contaminated. Non - chlorinated solvents can also be blended with fuel oil and burned. Those solvents which can't be recycled or blended with fuel can be burnt in a commercial incinerator. - What facilities does Minnesota need? Currently, many Twin Cities firms ship their waste solvents to a solvent recycler in Wisconsin. A transfer station for aggregating these wastes into suitable truckloads or for blending prior to shipment would be useful. In the future, there could be the need in this area for a local solvent refin_in_g facility. In addition, there may be the market for a igl uidinjection incinerator. 3. OILS AND GREASES. These wastes are generated by refineries which Produce Petro eum products, service industries such as auto repair shops and gasoline stations, and a broad spectrum of manufacturing industries which use machinery requiring lubrication or hydraulic equipment. - What are these wastes? They include waste motor oil, cutting oils, hydraulic oil, and residues from oil tanks. Why are they hazardous? Although not highly toxic, when improperly disposed these wastes can be washed away by rainfall and pollute surface waters. Used engine oils contain heavy metals, and so oil can be a source of heavy metal pollution of surface and ground waters. Traditional methods of disposal such as snraarl;n,, ,al or. roads fur dust control are falling into disfavor because of the potential for pollution from runoff. How should these wastes be handled? Oils should be recycled for reuse, as a lubricant, burnt to recover their heating values or blended with asphalt to make paving material. Oily residues not suitable for other uses can be landfarmed--that is, spread on the surface of the soil to allow biodegradation. r -3- - What facilities does Minnesota need? Most facilities to manage waste oils and greases are in place. There could be some interest in a oil rerefinery utilizing up-to-date technology. Transfer stations wou a useful regional or central collection sites. 4) PAINT AND ORGANIC RESIDUES, ORGANIC SLUDGES AND STILL BOTTOMS (NO OIL), and ORGANIC AND OILY RESIDUES. These are the major groupings of organic wastes other than lube oils), and they have been aggregated here because these wastes can be managed in similar ways. These diverse wastes are generated by industries which recycle their own solvents on -site or by commercial solvent redistillers, industries which manufacture products requiring painting or gluing, chemical manufacturers, and refineries. - What are these wastes? They include still bottoms (the residue remaining after solvents are purified by distillation), paint spray booth residues, some refinery wastes, industrial wastewater treatment sludges, adhesives, and miscellaneous by-products of chemical manufacturing. - Why are they hazardous? Depending on the individual waste, these materials may be flammable or toxic. Some organic compounds are themselves quite toxic; these compounds, fortunately, do not make ' up a signficant portion of the state's wastes. However, many organic wastes, such as paint wastes or refinery wastes, contain toxic metals. How should they be handled? Most of these materials are not recoverab a for rl — ease, However, nearly all organic wastes can be effectively destroyed through incineration, Certain selected wastes can be solidified for landfill or landfarmed, - What facilities does Minnesota need? A signficant portion of the wastes generated in Minnesota should be destroyed through incineration. However, a hazardous waste incinerator often represents a very large investment ($10 - 20 million), and economies of scale dictate that units capable of burning relatively large volumes of waste be constructed. Minnesota probably doesn't produce the volumes of waste necessary to supply a high cost rotary kiln incinerator, so for the near future a transfer station to aggregate wastes for shipments to incineration facilities ies in the upper Midwest is most likely. Small, more specialized types of incinerators could conceivably be developed if there is a need for a specific kind of unit. In addition, recent developments in the field of wet air oxidation may lead to development of facilities which don't require large inputs of waste to operate economically (wet air oxidation is a variation of incineration which does not require extremely high temperatures to achieve destruction of wastes). (over) -4- 5) PCBs AND PCB WASTES. Although the amounts of PCB wastes being disposed of is insignficant when compared to the overall waste stream (approximately 0.1%), this waste becomes important for two reasons: first, it is a highly controversial material; and second, because of recent EPA regulations limiting future use of the material, a large quantity of PCB -containing materials which would not otherwise have been removed from service must be disposed of over the next seven years. - What are these wastes? Mostly,PCB-contaminated wastes are oils from electrical equipment, where PCB has been used for years due to its superior heat -transfer properties. Many industries and couvnercial establishments own electrical equipment and will have to dispose of the oils. Why are they hazardous? PCB is not highly toxic. However, it is one of the most environmentally persistent compounds. When released into the environment, PCB tends to concentrate to potentially toxic levels in the food chain. In addition, some laboratory tests indicate that PCB may be carcinogenic; other studies dispute these findings. PCB should be handled carefully, but it is not as dangerous a substance to store and transport as some news reports would have us believe. How should these wastes be managed? Because of the potential for groundwater pollution, PCBs should be destroyed rather than landfilled whenever possible. The chemical stability of PCB makes it difficult to destroy the compound, but there are newly developed chemical treatment methods which destroy most (not all of the PCB in dielectric fluid, thus permitting reuse of the fluid; and incineration of PCB at high temperature destroys virtually all PCB. Existing utility boilers can be used to incinerate dilute PCB wastes, but specially equipped rotary kiln incinerators are needed for concentrated wastes. What facilities does Minnesota need? Because PCB destruction is a temporary problem PCBs are no longer being manufactured), stationary facilities used exclusively for PCB treatment may not be economically attractive investments. Mobile chemical rocess- ing units serving large areas are currently operating, but it remains to be seen if they can take care of demand for the service. Additionally, there are two rotary kiln incinerators currently approved to incinerate PCBs in other states, with a third company planning to apply for approval. Development of a PCB incinerator in Minnesota is unlikely in the near future because of the complex permitting requirements. Out of state shipments of PCBs could be consolidated at a transfer station. 3/26/81 CMINNESOTA WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD Types of Wastes Generated During Production of Consumer Goods THE PRODUCTS WE USE COMPONENT TYPICAL WASTE TYPE OF HAZARD Electrical Products printed circuit cyanides toxic boards - televisions metal sludges toxic - micro -wave ovens caustics corrosive - radios (chromic acid) - stereos - toasters wire acids corrosive - blenders solvents flammable & toxic - typewriters oil toxic Textile -Mill Products: - all clothing dyes waste organic compounds toxic waste water treatment toxic sludge - leather chromium shavings toxic synthetics material solvents flammable & toxic waste organic compounds toxic metals (catalysts) toxic Paper and Allied Products - newspapers paper waste water treatment toxic sludges - magazines organic by-products toxic - books black liquor corrosive - pamphlets ink solvents flammable - brochures & toxic waste ink toxic oils Luxic Lumber, Wood Products, Wood Treating chromium toxic lead toxic - wood furnitures creosote toxic fencing oils toxic �J caustics corrosive sediment sludge toxic pigments toxic THE PRODUCTS WE USE COMPONENT TYPICAL WASTE TYPE OF HAZ Automobiles,Trucks Tractors trim,bumpers acids metal sludges corrosive toxic engine heat treating wastes toxic & body (oils salt solutions) paint sludges reactive toxic solvents flammable & toxic Petroleum Products - gasoline waste petroleum toxic - oil by-products - diesel fuel acid sludges corrosive - asphalt & toxic Aqricultural Chemicals - pesticides solvents flammable herbicides & toxic waste organic compounds toxic - insecticides sludges toxic Instruments,Related Products - computers ferric chloride - digital watches & clocks acids corrosive - medical diagnostic equipment xylene corrosive flammable & toxic methylene chloride toxic . alcohols flammable acetone flammable cadmium toxic nickel toxic zinc toxic Stone,Clav,Glass Products - pottery solvents flammable - knick-knacks & toxic - mirrors oil & grease toxic 11 �HE PRODUCTS WE USE Furniture and Fixtures - lamps - chrome furniture - brass furniture Food Industries - bottled beverages - prepared household foods - vegetable oil extraction - beet sugar extraction Medicines Plastic Products `(� Mininq - utilization of heavy machinery - ore extraction process Primary Metal industries - foundries - pipe - wire TYPICAL WASTE TYPE OF HAZARD metals toxic acids corrosive sclvents flammable & toxic lime sludge corrosive hexane solvent flammable used laboratory oils toxic organic solvents flammable and residues & toxic heavy metals toxic (mercury,zinc,etc.) organic chlorine compounds solvents (mineral spirits) flammable & toxic paint sludge toxic petroleum products toxic alkaline sludge corrosive mercury toxic oils toxic waste water treatment toxic sludge leach residue toxic (chromium,lead,arsenic) coking operation sludge toxic solvents flammable (alcohols,acetone, & toxic trichloroethylene) paint wastes (benezene, toxic lead,nickel,chromium) caustics corrosive -3- THE PRODUCTS WE USE Public Utilities 6 Services - phone, electric power, gas Universities Colleges Laboratories - laboratory wastes - power plant wastes TYPICAL WASTE oil solvents P.C.B.'s gas/water sludge oil/water sludge acid solution metal plating (chromium,nickel, cadmium) formaldehyde alcohols acetone paint residues contain- ing heavy metals petroleum products TYPE OF HAi. toxic flammable 6 toxic toxic toxic toxic corrosive toxic flammable b toxic flammable flammable toxic toxic 11 10/11/82 SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION OF INVENTORY OF PREFERRED AREAS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE PROCESSING FACILITIES METRO AREA July 8, 1982 Board selects siting criteria July/August Staff applies criteria to metro area September 23 Board announces preliminary areas September/October Staff gathers data on preliminary areas (state agency involvement) October Orientation sessions for local government officials and their staffs. November h Board identifies selection factors Mid -November Public information meetings December 16 Factors applied; WMB selects proposed areas January 1983 PCA suitability reports, WMB staff gathers additional data Late January Hearing notice issued February Staff prepares testimony for hearings March Hearings April Hearing records close May Hearing Examiner reports and staff reports prepared June 1983 Board identifies selection factors and selects preferred areas. CITY OF FRIDLEY 1481 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E.. FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 16432 TELEPHONE 1112)171.7110 November 18, 1982 Waste Management Board 123 Thorsen Building 7223 - 50th Avenue North Crystal, M01 55428 Attn: Ms. Kathy Moore Re: Hazardous Waste Sites Dear Ms. Moore: Thank you for the presentation you made to the City Council on Ilonday, November 15, 1982. The information and the slides you showed assisted in expanding the knowledge and awareness of hazardous waste processing and storage facilities being considered for siting within the City of Fridley. The attached resolution was passed by the City Council at the Special Meeting that evening. It deals with their concerns about the preliminary criteria used by the Waste Management Board in identifying hazardous waste processing sites, the metropolitan municipal water intake systeru, the ground water acquifer and the recommendation to expand existing hazardous waste processing facilities within the metropolitan area. We strongly suggest the staff and Board weigh the impact of identifying a site within the designated area based upon the information submitted in our October 27t1i and November loth correspondence. Because of the environmental impact associated with locating a hazardous waste processing plant within the City of Fridley, the City Council opposes such an action. If a hazardous waste processing site must be located within the City of Fridley, the location that presents the least environmental impact is an area located west of East River road and south of the Minneapolis Water Intake identified as Lots 37, 39 and 40 of Auditor's Subdivision No. 39, South h of Section 34, Township 30, Range 24 as a possible site for consideration. iThis land was Yo^ri`ginall .�LongQ_ _.. G vy !Md itriil and'&FAiMCbyJhil;North.;SUR_rr&G Sanitary Sewer District! 1l::-SX51 ee absoibed°by a Haste Manegement Beard and then the Metropolitan? Wsae Control•Commfition.�'.eitfoi"titiii♦.aite: was prepared to handle Naste;'ii-f rbelow-the S ^' aq�„ �,(7lneavolie'and City of Fridley municipal water iystems, Masan effective road system and availability of sewer intercepter and; hFAii.--is.'oloier.to tha..metropolitan area hazardous waste generators and/ the -majority, of .,out-of.the 100 year flood plain, it Appears to ? �tiafy ie"condirMi azardoui wute processing site. Waste Management Board Attn: Ms. Kathy !bore Re: Hazardous Waste Sites November 18, 1982 In my letter of Hovember 10, 1982, site 9 abould indicating this area is immediately adjacent to park recently acquired with metro funds. Please information previously submitted. Sincerely yours, HN G. FLORA irector of Public Works JGF/mh ENC: 3 Page 2 have included a statement the Anoka Oounty regional add this fact to the e STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF ANOKA ss CITY OF FRIDLEY 1, the undersigned, being the duly qualified City Clerk of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract from the Minutes of a Council meeting of the City Council of said City held November 15, 1982 , with the original thereof not yet adopted by the City Council, but reviewed by myself and on file in my office, and the same is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the same relates to: RESOLUTION NO. 100 - 1982 RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE SITING OF A HAZARDOUS WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY IN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY WITNESS MY NAND as City Clerk of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, and the seal of said City this 16th day of November, 1982 C. ,S, yVf" .,r, (SEAL) SIDNEYC. 1NMAN CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY S'I.IPLEY A. I PALA DEPUTY CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY RESaVTI0F; No. 100 - 1982 RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE SITING OF A HAZARDOUS WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY IN THE cnT OF FRWM WHEREAS, the preliminary criteria used in selecting hazardous waste processing sites required existing sewer, water and street facilities; and WHEREAS, all zoned land uses within the metropolitan area plan for utilities and access availability; and WHEREAS, the preliminary criteria used resulted in omitting suitable sites from further oonsideration; and WHEREAS, existing hazardous waste processing facility sites were not included in the preliminary criteria; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Waste Management Board has designated two areas for Possible hazardous waste processing facility development in the City; and WHEREAS, these areas are located near the water intake systems of both the City of St. Paul and Minneapolis; and WHEREAS, the areas are located close or next to the City's 13 wells that serve a population of over 30,000 people; and WHEREAS, there exists in the City unusually porous soil and a high water table. FOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley that the preliminary analysis of possible hazardous waste processing sites were misconceived; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley that the Waste Management Board is enceura(ied to oramaearrkp�uQo..�a.e .. e: _,. PASSED MID ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 15TH DAY OF NWM1BER, 19a2. WILLIAM J. NEE - MAYOR A71WT: SONEY C. ITM - CITY CLERK VV8112 MINNESOTA WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD _ Preliminary Areas for Processing Facilities 9n3/8, Metro Region NORTH A Fridley (site e) G&- 6 5 G JYX�IM •Ir• X XII YI..1• •1• X Y01 X 1�• •�1XX I� EMX 1a1 I I• Y�TI1� • Denotes incineration, Chemical, Transfer-Sloroge Unmarked denotes Chemical d Transfer•StoraOe t �® CITY OF FRIDLEY 9421 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA $5102 TELEPHONE 1112)571.2150 November 10, 1982 1 Waste Management Board 123 Thorson Building 7323 - 58th Avenue North Crystal, MN 55426 Attn: Sharon Decker Re: Hazardous Waste Sites Dear Ms. Decker, The staff appreciated meeting with you on Tuesday November 9, 1982 and discussing the procedures and criteria being utilized by the Waste Management Board in Identifying possible hazardous waste processing sites. At that meeting I provided you city sap sheets from our Comprehensive Plan pertaining to the Water Supply System, Parks, Ground Water Recharge, Wetlands and Natural Resources. I hope these will assist you in analyzing the proposed sites in Fridley. The following is being submitted to provide additional information specifically addressing the vacant heavy industrial properties within the Board's designated zones identified in my letter of October 27, 1982. (See attached map) 1. This site is within an identified Tax Increment District established because of the extremely poor soil conditions and high water table. This area Is bordered on the north by a Nature Center, proposed high density residential development and commercial property; and on the West and east by single family residential housing. The watershed throughout this area passes through the nature center and Springbrook Creek into the Mississippi River above the City of St. Paul Water Works. The western boundary use is limited by two high voltage electric transmission corridors. 2. This site Is bounded on the West by residential housing and on the east by commercial businesses. The western boundry use Is limited by two high voltage electric transmission corridors. The watershed in this area enters Stonybrook Creek and then the Mississippi River directly above the City of St. Paul Water Works. 3. This site borders A Single famly housing development on the north, commercial development on the west and a city park and Regional Trail (walk, bike, water) system on the south. It 1e within 350 feet of two of the city's shallow wells and water filtration plant. A. This site is bordered on the north by a single family housing development and on the South by a oity park and Regional Trail (walk, bike, water) system. It is within 750 feet of one city water well and 1250 feet from two city shallow wells and a water filtration plant. (Page 2) 5. This site is bordered by residential housing on the north and east and commercial businesses on the vest. It is within 1300 feet of Spring Lake (the City of Spring Lake Park and Fridley recreational waterbody). - 6. This alto is extremely narrow and is surrounded on three sides by I residential developments. The adjacent street (Ashton Avenue) 13 a reduced capacity street accesaed only through local residential streets. 7. These two locations abut residential developments and are provided access only through residential neighborhoods. 8. This site abuts single family housing on the north, and multiple family housing on the west plus the Regional Islands of Peace Park and Trail (walk, bike) system. 9• Thess sites are adjacent to the elty'S municipal water well number 13. The surface water drainage in this area flows directly into the Mississippi River above the Minneapolis Water Works. 10. This site abuts a residential area and has limited access through residential neighborhoods of Fridley and Columbia Heights. The watershed from this area also enters the Mississippi River above the Minneapolis Water Works. All of the other property included within the Waste Management Board's two preliminary sites in the City of Fridley are either in use or zoned other than Heavy Industrial. Request you include the above information in your site evaluation analysis and incorporate the soil, geologic and aquafer data associated with this region plus consider the potable water and regional park system Impacts a hazardous waste processing facility would have in this residential environment. May I again suggest that the Waste Management Board reopen its area Of investigation to include all Heavy Industrial zoned land within the Metropolitan area without regard to existing availibility of sewer, water and streets to determine those preliminary locations which should be included in the hazardous waste processing facility consideration. I would further suggest that primary consideration be given to utilizing or expanding existing sources of hazardous waste processing facilities to include incentives to sub -contract or initiate the services to the metropolitan area or type of waste processed. The City is extremely interested in the Board's developments and analysis of Information involved with the hazardous waste processing location task and would appreciate being kept informed on the data distributed and decisions made on this issue. If I can be of any further assistance in this study please feel free to contact me at 571-3450 ext. 159. Sincerely,errely X r� John 0. Flora Director of Public Works JOF/mc r• J 1 ,I I CITY OF FRIDLEY 5171 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N,E., FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 66177 TELEPHONE (611I571•3450 October 27, 1982 Waste Management Board 123 Thorson Community Center 7323 58th Avenue North Crystal, Minnesota 55428 -WIVii PC, i. Win. Re: Hazardous Waste Selection Factors Dear Sir: letterThis Tresponse and received October25threquestin g response ur rbyaNovember ted b1, 1982. Initially your criteria for identifying preliminary areas had a major flaw ie: All sites considered by the Board had to be within developed areas as determined by availability of city sewer and 9 ton road access. These two out of four mandatory criteria result in eliminating all open area sites within the Metropolitan area which do not have city services in place. Accordingly many potential sites are eliminated from consideration. Within the communities Land Use Plans, identification of industrial zones automatically imply that services are or will be provided. Therefore, these areas should be included in the preliminary search. The following criteria are submitted for initial siting factors: 1. Avoid shore land, flood plains and protected wetlands. 2. Avoid municipal potable water production sites within a five mile radius. 3. Vacant industrial zoned property. 4. Proximity to Inter and Intra State Highway system. The following criteria are suggested for selection factors in deter- mining proposed areas: 1. Vacant heavy industrial zone. These areas are normally sequenced after higher class zones thereby providing a greater buffer from residential areas and are within larger city services and traffic systems. 2. Proximity to railroad siding and/or Interstate Highway systems. Bulk transport of processed materials is best handled by the rail- road system. 3. Proximity to residential development. Regardless of the operations and safeguards the location of a highly sensitive hazardous waste processing plant should not be close to residen- tial areas, public schools or recreational areas. .2- 4. Aquifer conditions. Geologic water bearingconditions ust b stratumsarenotexposedwto potential contamination, ed to insure the various al TI heMississippi River must also be considered as it provides municipal water I for St. Paul, Minneapolis and down stream communities. 5. Soil conditions. Geologic conditions must be reviewed to determine ground penetration PossClayiandiores. solidhis area ceme tuoussrockswouldble sanandbe desireablegtocPreventeground Penetration and possible ground water contamination. 6. Uses and Land Use. Areas of hazardous waste generation should be identified and sites within close proximity should be considered to reduce road hauling and Potential exposure and accident possibilities. On the other end, prox- imity to authorized hazardous waste disposal sites should be considered to provide easier and rapid transport and disposal of processed material. 1. Community type. Consideration should be given to the type of community adjacent to proposed sites. Selection of potential sites adjacent to or within bedroom communities should be avoided. The preliminary realistic forconsideration since established within Fridley anumberof theprot pertieswithin nthe r site areas A and B are parks or have structures constructed on them. A revised map was submitted to the board but apparently not utilized. Attach ed is a city map identifying those vacant heavy industrial areas within our Comprehensive Plan. The City Council is quite concerned about the criteria and require- ments associated with the selection of Hazardous Waste Sites. Accordingly we have scheduled is presentation by the Waste Management Board at the Fridley Civic Center on November 15, 1982 at 8:30 P.M. After the meeting we will present any other comments or items pertaining to the selection factors and specific information concerning the preliminary areas. Sincerely, /John G. Flora Director of Public Works JGF/mc Enclosures ram, u-v CITY OF- FR©LEY 6031 UNIVLR S I I Y AVI.N11L N.V. FII IDLE Y. MRI Nf S0 TA 55432 i IIf PNON E. ,612:571.3450 November 29, 1982 Mr. Don Pauley Clerk i 2401 Highway #10 . Moundsview, MN 51112 Subject: Hazardous Waste Processing Site ~ Dear Mr. Pauley: On September 23, 1982, the Minnesota Waste Management Board identified twc areas within the City of Fridley as preliminary hazardous waste processinc sites. Prior to this notice, the City was not consulted or specific information diseminated in regards to the Board's study. As a means of identifying preliminary hazardous waste processing sites, the Waste Management Board used four manditory criteria: avoidance of shorelands and flood plains, industrial zoning, presence of sewer service and availability of 9 ton roads. The last two mandatory criteria resulted in eliminating from �- consideration all industrial zoned property which did not have municipal service. Accordingly the area of search was reduced and limited only to existing developed property. 73e areas identified within the City of Fridley are directly involved with the surface water run-off into the Mississippi River above the St. Paul and Minneapolis municipal water intake systems and within close proximity to the City's municipal water wells. %lie potential contamination of the metropolitan water systems as a result of a hazardous waste accident requires the immediate elimination of the areas in the City. Based upon the diminished area of search, the misconceived criteria, the significant health impact and the failure to aggresively pursue existing on - site processing facilities, the City opposed the siting of hazardous waste processing facilities within the corporate limits by Resolution #100-1982. Request you support the City of Fridley Resolution in opposition to locating hazardous waste processing facilities within the City limits. Sincerely, A��h.. NASIM M. MMHI City Manager 1 Enclosure MEMO TO: The Mounds View City Council FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Director Parks, Recreation and Forestry DATE: November 29, 1982 RE: 1982 City Newsletter bids Staff reviewed five bid proposals on Wednesday, November 24, 1982 regarding the printing of the 1982 City Newsletter. The bids ranged from a low of $7,371 to a high of $3,984. Staff has enclosed a complete listing of the five bid proposals that were submitted which outlines the bid price per page, total bid price, half tones, art reduction and additional artwork costs as proposed. Based on the low bid proposal of $7,371 or $47.50 per page, staff would recommend that the 1982 City Newsletter bid be awarded to Bolger Publications for the bid amount of $7,371. It should be noted that the 1982 bids were extremely favorable and actually show a reduction of approximately seven percent from our 1981 bids. In addition, it should be noted that Bolger Publications did provide the City's printing work in 1981 and the City was very pleased with their work product. Should you have any questions regarding staff's proposal on this issue, feel free to contact myself directly at extension 441, to review either the bid specifications or to discuss the five bid proposals I have submitted. BKA/sll CITY OF I•. JS ViEP7 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, Minnesota 55112 1-612-784-3055 CITY NEWSLETTER BID OPENING Wednesday, November 24, 1982 10:30 a.m. • Firm Name Bid Bond Bid Price/Page Total Bid Price Half Tones/ Photographs Art Reduction Additional Artwork Sexton Printing Cert. Ck. #16429 $53.50/pg. @ 24 $51.61/pg. @ 36 $8,277.96 $9.00 $4.50 $26.00 Metro Printin Inc. Cert. Ck. #23858 $55.00/pg. $8,580.00 $7.00 $5.00 $22.00 Bolger Publications Cert. Ck. #23943 $47.50/pg. $7,371.00 $6.50 $4.00 $50.00/hr. Mounds View Printing No bond $48.00/pg. $7,488.00 $6.50 $2.00 $8.50/hr. Monotrade Ins. Ck. #6407 $57.60 $8,984.00 $10.00 $5.00 $55.00/hr. i M MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council Wetlands Committee FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development DATE: December 2, 1982 SUBJECT: SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE Attached is a draft copy of the Surface Water Management Ordinance. Please note that the ordinance has not been assigned a chapter number at this time due to the fact that the numerical system for property and land section of the Code Book has reached capacity and a chapter number will have to be assigned: 1) either out of sequence, or 2) require renumbering of all sections of the Code from Chapter 50 on. This ordinance is for review and comment, and it is recommended that it be scheduled for first reading at the December 13, 1982 meeting, with the second reading on December 27, 1982. This section has been referred to the City Attorney for review and comment and, hopefully, that information will be available at the Council Meeting on Monday. If you have any questions please contact me. JCJ/pf Attachment CHAPTER SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CONTROL ORDINANCE _.01 Findings of Fact and Purpose. Subdivision 1. Findings of Fact. (a) The public interest necessitates sound land use development as land is a limited and irreplaceable resource and the land within the municipality is a resource to be developed in a manner which will result in minimum damage to the quality of life and to property and threat to health and reductions of private and public economic loss caused by drainage problems. (b) The existing drainage system in Mounds View in general adequately meets the needs of the City. However, the storm drainage system will not in the future provide adequate or proper drainage in those areas of the City subject to substantial residential, commercial or indus- trial development unless the large increase in storm water runoff that is known to result from such development is properly controlled and regulated. The consequence of not restricting such increase in runoff would be to sub- ject a major portion of the lands of the City to high water tables, drainage probleui5, sLurm water flooding by heavy rains, inadequate drainage facilities, causing erosion, damage to property disruption of residential, commercial and governmental services, unsanitary conditions and inter- 2 ruption of transportation, all of which would be deteri- mental to the health, safety, welfare and property of affected residents of the City. Subdivision 2. Purposes. (a) To reduce or eliminate storm water and drainage damages and minimize storm water runoff through land development management measures stressing storm water retention or detention. (b) To guide and control new development of lands within the City in ways that will be consistent with the zoning laws and Comprehensive Development Plan in force at the time of the development, consistent with the requirements of Rice Creek Watershed District, Municipal Code, Minn. State Statutes, and other regulatory agencies and consistent with sound economic policies as such policies affect property owners and the proponents of new developments; and to require proponents of new developments to adopt sound develop- ment plans and proposals that will forward the productive use of their property and will cause no economic burden both as to storm waters or drainage, on the owners of abutting or adjoining properties, or affected properties, or adjoining properties, or affected properties, or on the property owners of the City at tarrte. 02 General Provisions. Subdivision 2. Applicability. The requirements adopted herein shall apply to all development proposals that are subject to the provisions of Chapter 59.07 of the Municipal Code. n 3 Subdivision 2. Required Facilities. The City may, at its sole discretion, require storm sewers, retention or detention basins or any other type of drainage improve- ments that are required for any development proposal. Subdivision 3. Performance Guarantee. Whenever privately owned and maintained drainage improvements shall be required for a development by the City, the developer shall provide a seven year maintenance/performance guarantee to assure proper maintenance and operation of such improvements. In such cases, the developer shall also hold the City harmless for any defects in design, construction or operation. Subdivision 4. Financial Responsibility. Drainage facility improvements required for any development proposal shall be the financial responsibility of the developer. 03 Design Standards. Storm sewer systems required for any development shall be constructed to at least a five year frequency storm design, retention basins shall be constructed to retain at least hundred year storm while allowing at a maximum, only that rate of runoff from the property in its undeveloped state resulting from a five year storm frequency. 04 Definitions. Subdivision 1. Five, Fifty and One Hundred Year Storm. It shall be as determined by U.S. Weather Bureau Technical Paper Nos. AO ant! 49 and shall. b.. - the 2A henr rainfall event viihh a nrnhabil- ity of reoccurrence of once in five, fifty or one hundred years. Subdivision 2. Retention Basin. It shall be an area designated to store the surface water drainage from the adjoining drainage basin with no outlet to downstream areas. 4 Subdivision 3. Detention Basin. It shall be an area designated to restrict and temporarily store -- surface water drainage from the adjoining drainage basin. 06 Responsibility. Neither the issuance of a permit nor compliance with the condi- tions thereof, nor with the provisions of this Chapter, shall relieve any person from any responsibility otherwise imposed by law for damages to persons or property; nor shall the issuance of any permit hereunder serve to impose any liability on the municipality or its officers or employees for injury or damage to person or property. A permit issued pursuant to this Chapter shall not relieve the permittee of the responsibility of complying with any other requirements estab- lished by law, regulation or ordinance. _.07 Penalty. Any person who violates the provision of this Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Each day during which said violation exists is a separate offense. Any violation of this Chapter is a public nuisance and may be enjoined by civil action. Costs of any civil enforcement shall be assessed against the party so enjoined. Any person who, in violation of this Chapter, alters, changes, or modifies any wetlands shall restore such wetlands to their original condition. •VU JCYG14L1Yi bY• If any part of this Chapter is held to be unconstitutional or otherwise illegal, the remainder of this Chapter shall be deemed and held to be valid and remain in force and effect as if such portion had not been included herein. If this Chapter or any provision herein is held to be inappli- cable to any person, property or work, such holding shall not affect 5 the applicability hereof to any other person's property or work. _.05 Variance and Appeals. Subdivision 1. Processing of Application. An application for variances or appeals shall be processed according to the procedures specified in Chapter 40 of the Municipal Code. Subdivision 2. Restrictions on Granting Variances. No variance may be granted which would allow any use that is prohibited in the zoning district in which the property is located or which would: (a) Result in incompatible land uses or which would be detrimental to the protection of surface and ground water supplies. (b) Increase the financial burdens imposed on the community ' through increasing floods and overflow of water onto land areas within this City or onto land areas adjacent to Rice Creek. (c) Be not in keeping with land use plans and planning objec- tives for the City or which would increase or cause danger to life or property. Subdivision 4. Required Supporting Data. No permit or variance shall be issued unless the applicant, in support of his application, shall submit engineering data, surveys, site plans and other information as the City may require in order to determine the effects of such development on the affected land and water area. MEMO TO: Mounds View City Council FROM: Bruce K. Anderson, Dire Parks, Recreation and o DATE: November 2, 1982 RE: Warming house update As you are aware, the three warming house buildings have been purchased and delivered to the City of Mounds View from Ernst House Movers. During the past six weeks, we have been dealing with a myriad of issues that the relocation of the buildings have required such as footings, location of utility wires, elec- trical wiring and a variety of building modifications. As of December 2, 1982, we have completed the following projects related to the buildings: 1. All three buildings have been permanently set and anchored to footings at each of the park locations. 2. The building at Hillview and Groveland Park have been completely wired and are ready for operation. 3. The electric or utility trench has been completed at Woodcrest with wiring scheduled to be completed by Friday, December 3. 4. We have taken three light fixtures from Greenfield Park and relocated them on a new utility pole at Groveland Park which will greatly improve our lighting at Groveland Park and that project should be completed by Monday, December 6, 1982. 5. We have completed the footings at Groveland Park completely with both ends boxed in. 6. We have rewired the furnaces at Hillview and Groveland Parks to conform with the single phase wiring system that is avail- able at each park site. 7. We have upgraded each of the electrical systems from a 100 amp service to a 200 amp service at each of the three building sites. Additional projects that are yet to be completed include the following: 1. The final wiring of Woodcrest Park. 2. The final grading and foundation work to be completed at Wood - crest Park. 3. The final skirting and completion of the temporary footings at Hillview Park. 4. The interior needs to be completed with insulation and paneling -2- 4. (cont'd) to be installed at all three building sites. r 5. The buildings need to be cleaned out from an interior stand- point and matting and benches need to be installed at each of the sites. 6. We need to look at some type of window modification to insure that the vandalism is kept to a minimum as each of the build- ings currently have glass windows. As you are aware, the City Council allocated $24,000 for the completion and installation of the three building sites. Our expenditures to date are as follows: 1. Purchase of three buildings including the moving . . . . $15,000.00 2. Three footings completed as per bid proposal . . . . . . 4,900.00 3. We have completed roofing the buildings and doing the minor building modifications that were necessary as per the existing contract having expended 82 hours of a proposed 100 hour contract at a future projected total of 1,850.00 4. Purchase of shingles from Smith Lumber at a cost of . . 900.00 5. Total expenditures to date are . . . . . . . . . . . . . $22,650.00 As indicated in the staff memo, we are in the process of completing the electrical work which appears will be exceeding the remaining $1,350'V° ' that staff budgeted for this project. Although we are not aware of the final contract price for the electrical work but it appears to be somewhere between $3,000 and $4,000, which will mean a cost overrun between $1,500 - $2,000 on the project. Staff would envision that the remaining budget overrun would be also assessed to the Park and Recreation Activity Fund which will appea- to have a $10,000 - $15,000 surplus in 1982. staff will be on hand to review any progress we may have had in the next two days regarding the park shelter buildings but wanted to keep the council advised of our progress to date on the construction and completion of the park shelter buildings. Should you have any questions, feel free to contact myself directly at 784-3055, extension 141. BKA/s11 J MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development DATE: December 2, 1982 V/T SUBJECT: JOHN JOHNSON'S 1983 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT Attached is a rough draft of proposed 1983 contract. The contract provides for a basic service level at an average of 20 hours per week. The basic service level would cover the routine departmental activities and preparation for and attendance at regular Council and Planning Commission meetings. The services would be funded from the Sewer, Water, General and Storm Water Management (SWM) funds as follows: Sewer 25% (260 hrs.) Water 25% (260 hrs.) SWM and General 50% (520 hrs.) Specific projects would include such items as review of plats, rezonings, conditional use permits, wetland alteration permits, improvements projects, site plans and special studies such as treat- ment plant study, street maintenance study and MSA studies. These (^ services would be funded through administrative charges to the applicants or sources designated at the time the study is authorized. As in the current amended contract, the fee for regularly scheduled City Council and Planning Commission meetings would be at a flat fee of 595.00 (2 hours). If you have any questions, please contact me. JCJ/bc Attachment ROUGH DRAFT 6601 - 15th Avenue N. Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55428 (612/566-6158) December 2, 1982 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Mounds View 2401 Highway N10 Mounds View, Minnesota 55112 Ladies and Gentlemen: I propose to render professional services to the City of Mounds View, Minnesota for the calendar year 1983 described generally as follows: 1. Provide professional services on a part time basis as described in the position accountability write-up for Director of Public Works/Community Development dated October 1981 or as amended. (See attached exhibit A) 2. Provide professional services on specific projects or tasks as defined by the City Council or Clerk -Administrator. It is agreed that the professional services described in item 1 above shall be provided based on an average of 20 hours per week for 52 weeks or a maximum of 1040 hours. It is further agreed that professional services described in item 2 above shall be based on specific direction from the City Council and/or Clerk -Administrator. A manhour pool of 210 hours (5 months at 10 hours per week) shall be designated for use on specific projects or tasks. The iae for the above described services shall be $22.50 per hour 'billable at least once a month. The fee does not include the various support services such as clerical, technical, reproduction printing, and job related transportation which will be furnished by the City of Mounds View. This fee does not include any sales tax that maybe levied by the State of Minnesota. Honorable Mayor and City Council Page 2 December 2, 1982 This agreement may be terminated by either party upon 30 days written notice in the event of substantial failure by the other party to perform in accordance with the terms hereof through no faulty of the terminating party. This agreement represents the entire understanding between myself and the City of Mounds View with respect to the professional services to be rendered and may only be modified in writing signed by both parties. If this agreement satisfactorily sets forth your understanding of the arrangement between us, then please sign the enclosed copy of this letter in the space provided and return one copy to me. Very truly yours, John C. Johnson, P.E. JCJ/cj Attachments Accepted this day of 1982 by the City of Mounds View, Minnesota by ATTEST Eq r X. POSITION ACCOUNTABILITY WRITE-UP Position Title Director Public Works/ Date October, 1981 Community Development Departnent Public Works/Community Development Accountable to Clerk -Administrator Primary Objective of Position To provide overall planning and direction to a comprehensive public works, inspection and zoning program that will ensure sound physical plant development, maintenance and service to the public consistent with City policy and with Federal and State regulations. To provide overall direction of Staff support for programs and planning related to development of the City. major Areas of Accountability Plans, directs and coordinates a comprehensive public works, 1 inspection and zoning program designed and implemented to assure the required services are being provided at a high quality level, on a sound business basis consistent with City policy and Federal and State regulations. --- Participates with the Clerk -Administrator and other City officials in preparing overall policy and direction for recommendation to the City Council where such policy affects the public works, inspection and zoning programs. --- Administers policies of the Department so as to provide fair and impartial services. --- Investigates citizen complaints related to the building and zoning activity of the City with the goal of resolving issues in the best interest of all concerned. --- Consults with the City Attorney as required to review and assure proper legal requirements are being met in all building and zoning activities, or to initiate legal action to ensure code conformance. --- Provides expert testimony in court cases as required, acting on behalf of the City. Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by X --- Oversees and directs the effective enforcement and w interpretation of all State or local building and �. housing codes and ordinances as established or adopted by the City. --- Oversees and direCLS the inspection function in a manner which will help facilitate good community relations and understanding of the need for established codes and ordinances. --- Oversees and directs the interpretation and enforcement Of the zoning code in a manucr which will ensure com- pliance with policies established by the City. Performs as staff liaison with the City Planning Commission and 2 presents reports with related documentation and/or recommendations relative to future planning and development of the City. --- Reviews proposed development applications, site plans, and zoning issues for compliance with code requirements and identifies what changes need to be made to ensure compliance. --- Prepares cost estimates for private development improve- ments for use in determining the bonding amounts that ` will be required for development agreements. --- Ilas prepared information packets and other related materials prior to Planning Commission meetings and ensures such information is distributed to all Commission members in sufficient time for their review. Is responsible for the calculation of assessment reapportion- 3 ments based on established procedures to ensure an accurate and equitable division and reapportioning of such assessments. Prepares and submits a sound and documented budget and controls 4 expenditures within approved budgetary limitations. Provides professional engineering counsel to the Clerk-Adminis- 5 trator and City Council on projects and programs as re- quested with the objective of developing sound and inno- vative programs, with alternatives, which can be shown to meet the needs of the community most effectively. --- Directs the maintenance of appropriate engineering files, records and maps for ready reference when needed. --- Establishes design and maintenance standards for all engineering projects to assure the desired level of performance and utilization. Drafts resolutions, ordinances and ordinance revisions for the consideration and action of the City Council. --- Provides specific documentation and justification for 1 all resolutions, ordinances and revisions. Continually reviews existing codes and ordinances for consis- tency and case of interpretation and recommends modifica- tions wherever necessary. Reviews availability of Federal, State or other funds for public 8 works use in the City and determines the appropriateness of applying for such funds. --- Makes recommendations to the City Council relative to applications for such funds to support programs that can be shown to benefit the City. Plans and details projects in a manner which identifies results 9 to be achieved, related costs and what, if any, outside contractors will be needed to complete part or all of the approved or proposed projects, Cunsults with uuLside engineering firms, planning agencies and others 10 concerned to coordinate their work within the general parameters set down by the City Council. Maintains cooperative working relationship with nearby communi- 11 ties which encourage suggestions and/or guidance which would be helpful to planning the public works activities of the City. Attends Planning Commission and City Council meetings in order 12 to provide the most accurate information on cases under review or provide guidance and assistance with information on future planning and development. Keeps the Clerk -Administrator informed of all matters which 13 need immediate attention or are required to effectively manage overall City operations. Assumes other responsibili;:ies as apparent or as delegated. 14 Other Performance Measurements --- Staff support for the Planning Commission and City Council is provided in such a manner to keep members fully informed and up-to-date on future development which can be shown to be in the best interest of the City. --- Objectives and priorities set for the Department are being achieved as planned, --- A positive and favorable public image is being maintained in the City relating to Public Works and Community Development, r ,L . --- A favorable climate exists within Public; Works which motivates personnel to work up to their potential in implementing the ( various projects and services being provided to the public. --- Citizen complaints and/or inquiries are dealt with in a fair and equitable manner, and resolution is based, whenever possible, on all interests to be considered. --- Legal action is recommended only when circumstances dictate it is the last resort to otherwise satisfactory resolution of a case being considered. 1jj!! risibility for Work of Others Provides direct supervision over --- Secretary Public Works Superintendent Engineerinq/Planning Technician Building Inspector Electrical Inspector Through the Public Works Superintendent has indirect responsibility for overall supervision of all personnel in Public Works. l,.r l I 0 �J y ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SUPERVISION Participates in decisions relating to the selection, pro- motion, transfer, discipline or termination of all assigned personnel. Orients assigned personnel to City and Department policies and procedures, and clearly communicates the duties and responsibilities assigned so personnel may proceed with certainty in performance of their positions. Evaluates continually the demonstrated performance of the Department and assigned personnel as the basis for counsel and guidance, designed to stimulate improved performance and prepare employees for additional opportunities as may become available. Creates a working climate in which assigned personnel are encouraged to develop and achieve their full potential, and demonstrates by personal example the desired standards of conduct and work performance. MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development ✓ DATE: December 2, 1982 SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT ON SELECTION PROCESS OF NEW MAINTENANCE PERSON As previously reported to the Council, advertisements were made in the New Brighton Bulletin, the Minneapolis Star and Tribune, and the St. Paul Dispatch for a Public Works maintenance person. Sixty applications were received for the position. These applications were reviewed by staff and the list narrowed to 15 prospects. The 15 propsects' references were then checked and, based on the reference checks, the list was narrowed to seven people who were contacted for interviews. Of the seven people contacted, six people made appoint- ments and were interviewed. After the interview process, which included John Johnson, Bruce Anderson, and Gary Kardell, the individuals' qualifications based on interview, reference checks, and their applica- tion were evaluated and ranked. ,. As a result of the above selection process, Mr. Tim Pitman, a Mounds View resident, is being recommended by staff to the City Council for consideration for the Public Works maintenance person position. Mr. Pitman's qualifications in the areas of mechanical and technical skills, his residency within Mounds View, and his strong references and career objectives make him highly qualified to serve in our Maintenance Department. Mr. Pitman also has had past experience prior to his two and a half years in the army in working in our Maintenance Department as a part-time employee during the summer months. The staff requests the Council place this item on the December 13th Agenda for consideration and direction. JCJ/pf r L, MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development DATE: December 2, 1982 SUBJECT: DALBERG-HANSON REFUND Attached is a copy of the memo received from Frank Rampel indicating that the Planning Commission, at their December 1, 1982 meeting, recommended that fees be refunded to Mr. Dalberg and Mr. Hanson for applications for a rezoning, variance, and subdivision appliu.Ation. It is staff's position that a certain number of these fees can in fact be refunded but that monies be retained to cover the costs incurred by staff through the application process to date. It can be noted that no public hearings were held as a result of these applications and so that the only costs incurred would be that of staff time reviewing and preparing the applications for Planning Commission review and action. Your direction on processing of fee refunds would be appreciated. JCJ/pf Attachment A f C MEMO TO: Director of Public Works/Community Development John Johnson FROM: Engineering/Planning Technician Frank Kampel PI DATE: December 2, 1982 \II SUBJECT: APPLICATION REFUNDS The Planning Commission, at their December 1st regular meeting, recommended that the City refund both the unused refundable fees and also the base fees for two applications which were withdrawn by the applicants. The two applications, the first by Mr. Sam Dalberg, was for a rezoning and a variance on each of his two lots where he intends to construct duplexes. The second, by Mr. Glenn Hanson, was for a minor subdivision, rezoning, and variance. The following fees were submitted for each of the above applications. DALBERG APPLICATION Base fee (non-refundable on Additional fees planning application) Public Hearing Rezoning $50.00 Notices $40.00 Variance $100.00 Staff/Consultant Reviews $100.00 TOTAL $290.00 HANSON APPLICATION Base fee (non-refundable on Additional fees planning application) Public Hearing Minor Notices $40.00 Subdivision $75.00 Staff/Consultant Rezoning $50.00 Reviews $50.00 Variance $50.00 TOTAL $265.00 The only time I have spent on these applications is in the preparation of planning reports for each plus a trip to the Ramsey County Court House to look at County Recorder records regarding Mr. Dalberg's request. Time spent at the Recorder's office was approximately two hours. -z- The applications were withdrawn because the concensus of the Planning Commission members was that approval to their requests would not be received. Mr. Dalberg has stated that he does intend to resubmit another application, altering the request somewhat. Please advise both myself and the Finance Director of the Council's decision. FJK/pf 4� * /6 MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 66-82 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE AMENDING OF CHAPTER 39 ENTITLED, "SIGNS AND BILLBOARDS" WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Charter requires that the City's ordinances be reviewed at least once every two (2) years; and WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has met and reviewed Chapter 39 entitled, "Signs and Billboards"; and WHEREAS, a major modification being recommended is a subdivision which outlines signs allowed in various zoning districts; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends to the City Council the adoption of Chapter 39 entitled, "Signs and Billboards", a draft of which is being attached to this resolution. Adopted this 3rd day of November, 1982. ATTEST: (SEAL) Chairman Public Works/Community Development Director 2nd Draft 1 2 00, CHAPTER 39 39.01 SIGNS AND BILLBOARDS 39.01 Definitions. The following terms have the meanings ascribed to themin this section: (1) "Sign" means a display board, billboard, screen, structure, projection or part thereof, used to announce, de- clare, demonstrate, display or otherwise advertise and attract the attention of the public. (2) "Sign, Advertising" means a sign, the primary func- tion of which is to direct attention to a product, service or activity that is sold or offered either elsewhere or upon the premises where such sign is located, or to which it is affixed. (3) "Sign, Directional" means a sign for the purpose of making specific commercial, industrial, or public and semi- public locations known and to assist in finding these locations on the property which the sign is located. (4) "Sign, Identification" means a sign, the primary function of which is to identify a residential, commercial, industrial, or public or semi-public use located upon the pre- mises where such sign is located, or to which such sign is affixed. Signs identifying commercial uses may call attention to the product, service or activity that is sold or offered upon the premises. Signs identifying industrial uses may call attention to the product, goods or material which is produced, processed, assembled or stored upon the premises. (5) "Billboard" means an advertising sign located off the premises where the advertised product is sold or offered. It is usually but not necessarily owned by an advertising company. (6) "Business occupant" means an individual or group of individuals owninq, renting or leasing a building or part {6}(7) "Sign, Illuminated" means any illuminated sign on which the artificial light is maintained stationary and/or constant in intensity and color at all times when such sign is in use. J3}(8) "Sign, Flashing" means any illuminated sign on which the artificial light is not maintained stationary and/or constant in intensity and color at all times when such sign is in use. 39.01 0*0) "Ground Sign" means a detached sign erected upon or supported by the ground and not attached to any building. ig}(10) "Projecting Sign" means a sign other than a wall sign suspended from or supported by a building or struc- ture and projecting out therefrom. {10}(11) "Roof Sign" means a sign erected upon or above the roof or parapet wall of a building or structure. {}l}(12) "Wall Sign" means a sign attached to or erected against the wall of a building or structure with the exposed face of the sign in a plane approximately parallel to the face of said wall. i12H U) "Pedestal Sign" is a ground sign erected upon a single post or shaft, or upon two posts or shafts that merge or touch at the base, or which are not more than 15 feet apart, center of shaft to center of shaft, with the display portion mounted on top thereof at least 7 feet above the surface of the street adjacent to the property on which the sign is located. No such sign shall have a sign area of more than 340 square feet on each side. Such sign may advertise only business located on the premises. No business property shall have more than one pedestal sign adjacent to each street upon which such business property abuts; provided that on each street frontage of more than 100 feet one additional pedestal sign may be established and maintained on such street frontage if such additional pedestal sign (a) is located on a single pole, (b) does not exceed 28 square feet in area on any side and does not have more than two sides, (c) is not more than 4 feet in width or 7 feet in height on the sign face, (d) is located at least 7 feet above the surface of the street. In lieu of one additional pedestal sign, two separate signs may be located on the same pole, but such two signs combined shall not exceed, in area or dimensions, the limitations applicable to a single additional pedestal sign. No pedestal sign shall be so designed as to have both (a) moving parrs, and (b) moving or blinking lights. In addition to the pedestal signs permitted by the fore- going provisions of this subdivision, a sign advertising a public telephone may be located in the area ahead of the build- ing 3ctback line on the strucL'uie in which such public Lelepluwne is located. i13}(14) "Business Sign" means a sign that states the proper name of the business, organization or institution located on the premises on which the sign is located. iIW 15) "Sign Area" means that area of a sign within the marginTlines of the surface, which bears the announcement, name, advertisement or other message; or in the case of letters, figures or symbols attached directly to any part of a building the area which is included in the smallest rectangle which can be made to circumscribe each letter, figure or symbol displayed thereon. 39.01 ilS}(16) "Temporary Ground Sign" means a sign which rests upon the ground, which is of either "A" frame or "T" construction constructed of metal or other noncombustible materials, and so designed as to be readily movable. No such sign shall exceed 12 square feet in area on each side. 39.02 Building Permits Required. It is unlawful to install, construct, erect, alter, revise, reconstruct or re- locate any outdoor sign or structure, as defined in 39.01, in the Municipality without first obtaining a permit therefore as required by this chapter except as provided in 39.03 of this chapter. 39.03 Exce ti�ons. Permits need not be obtained (but the other provisions of this section shall be observed) for the following types of signs: (1) A sign not exceeding ten square feet in area, per- taining only to the sale, rental or lease of the premises upon which displayed. (2) A sign on residential property stating only the name of the occupant, which sign shall not exceed two (2) square feet in area. (3) A sign on property on which a public, charitable or religious institution is located, stating the name and nature of the occupancy and information as to the conditions of use or occupancy, or a sign on such property used by the institu- tion as a bulletin board, which sign shall not exceed 10 square feet in area. (4) A wall sign advertising the business located in the building upon which displayed, where such sign is erected by the owner or proprieter of the business located therein. (5) An electioneering sign as provided for in Chapter 39.20, Subdivision 22, Electioneering Signs. (254) 39:94--eemp�ianee-With-Bening-Regntat#ens:--A4�-signs shai�-eomp�p-Nsth-the-appiieab�e-Eening-regnintions-ef-the-Mnni- eipalitp---He-sign-exeeeding-10- square- tee e-in-area-pnrzai;,,-,y te-the-se1e;-rental-or-lease-ef-the-premises-shall-be-located er-maintained-en-enp-residential-er-mn�tip�e-residence-prepartp er-on-any-property-for-whieh-a-mnitiple-residence-permit-has been -obtained-withou t-speeiai-temporary-permission-ef-the eennei3: 39-85 39.04 Licensing of Sign Installers. No person shall engage in tFe_ usiness o erecting signs, nor shall be entitled to receive a permit to erect a sign in connection with such business unless he first is licensed by the Municipality to do —� so. 39.05 39796 39.05 Application and Pee. A license may be granted by the Council upon written application to the Clerk Administrator in such form as required by the Clerk -Administrator and accompanied by an annual license fee ef-Twenty-Fear-Bel4ars 4S24Tg8} as established by resolution passed -bp of the.City Council 39T64 39.06 Revocation and Renewal. A license may be terminated and renewal thereof may be denied by the Council for cause after notice to the licensee and reasonable opportunity for the licensee to be heard on the question of such termina- tion. Cause shall include any repeated or persistent violation of the requirements of this chapter. 39708--Bend-Re airementT--Ne-lieense-shall-take-effect anti-the-iieensee- as-fs�e -with-the-E�erk-n-bend-with-a eerperate-snretp7-in-farm-approved-by-the-atterneyT-in-the-sum ef-¢};BAB;-cenditiened-that-the-}ieensee-wi}}-pnp-n}}-permit fees-required-bp-this-port;-wi��-pnp-enp-fines-imposed-open him-far-vie}ration-thereof;-wi��-eonferm-to-n��-of-the-previsions ef-this-part;-and-indemnify-and-held-the-lSanieipa�itp7-its officers; -agents; -and -employees -harmless -from -any -damage -or e�aim-resa�ting-from-er-rented-te-the-ereetien-er-maintennnee of-nap-sign-in-the-Mnnieipa}itp-bp-the-�ieenseeT 39.07 firm or th- ss on account of any one ance in the amount of not less one person, and, su Sect to an amount not less than 39769 39.08 Duration of License. Licenses shall be issued on an annual basis, with the license year running from July 1 through the following June 30th. 49T}8 39.09 Application for Permits. Application for permits sha be made upon forms provided by the inspeettan Clerk -Administrator and shall include the following informa (1) The name, address and telephone number of the applicant. (2) The location of the building, structure or lot to which, or upon which, the sign is to be placed. (3) The position of the sign or other advertising structure in relation to nearby buildings,structures and strer' or highways if necessary. 39.'10 (4) Two blueprints or ink drawings of the plans and@ specifications and method of construction and attachment to the building or ground. (5) A copy of the stress sheets and calculations may be required by the inspector, on larger signs, showing that the structure is designed for dead load and wind pressure in any direction in the amount required by this part and any other applicable law. (6) The name of the person, firm, corporation, or other organization erecting the stucture, if not the applicant; or the name of the person, firm, corporation or other organization on whose property the structure is to be located, if not the applicant. (7) The written consent of the owner of the property, if not the applicant. (8) A statement as to whether the sign will be'illuminated or not. (9) A statement as to whether any electric lights.on the, sign will be "moving" or blinking. (10) A statement as to whether the sign will be single- (' faced, double-faced or multi -faced. (11) A statement as to whether or not the copy on the sign will be changeable. (12) A statement as to whether or not the copy on.the sign, will relate only to the business or activity conducted on the ' premises on which the sign is to be located. R 39.10 99711 Permit Fees. The application for a permit shall be accompanied by the required permit fee as more *fully set out in Chapter 59 of this Code. The fees provided therein are in addition to any electrical and building permit fees required by this Code. 39.11 39712 Waiver of Fees. The Council may in its discretion waive the fee requ—fired by this part where the signs are to be erected by civic or religious organizations. 39TI5 39.12 Maintenance of Premises.Premises on which ground signs are located shall e maintained free of weeds and debris, and where landscaping was part of the original sign permit, such landscaping shall be maintained in the manner provided in such permit. (214) 39.13 39:16--Beleted--J214} 39:14--Beleted--4214} 3916--Beleted--J21* 39:19 39.13 Traffic Regulation and Siyn Location. Compliance w th the following regulations relative to traffic control is required: (1) No moving or flashing sign shall be located or maintained within 50 feet of an intersection at which traffic semaphores are located. I (2) No sign shall be designed, located or maintained so as to be likely to obscure or conceal or cause confusion as to any traffic control sign or device. (3) No sign shall be located or maintained on or over any public street or highway right of way unless specifically per- mitted by the zoning regulations of the Municipality. (4) There shall be no use of revolving beacons, zip flashers, flashing signs or similar devices that would distract automobile traffic as to constitute a safety hazard. The illumination of any sign located near a residential district shall be diffused or indirect and located so as not to direct light on residences. No flashing sign shall be located in such close proximity to residences or residential property as to constitute a nuisance to persons residing on such property by reason of flashing of the lights in such sign. (5) The sign shall be located or maintained so as not to interfere with the ability of drivers or pedestrians to see any crossroad or crosswalk. 39.14 39:20 Construction, Design, Location and Maintenance of Signs. Subdivision 1. All Signs; Construction, Design, Location and Maintenance. Every sign shall conform to the standards of this part whether or not a permit therefor is required, and nothing contained herein shall be construed as modifying or repealing any of the provisions of this Code relating to zoning. No sign shall be so located as to obscure or tend to obscure any existing sign. The following additional requirements are Lu be observed: (1) Each ground sign shall be securely built, constructed and erected on the ground. Temporary ground sign shall be so designed that they are not readily overturned. (2) No sign structure shall be attached or placed upon any building in such a manner as to obstruct any fire escape, or any window or door, nor shall any sign structure be attached to a fire escape. 39.14 (3) No sign erected before the passage of this part shall be rebuilt, altered, or removed to a new location without be- ing brought into compliance with the requirements of this part. (4) No swinging sign shall hereafter be erected or hung on or attached to any building within the Municipality, and every such sign so erected, hung, or attached prior to the passage of this part which is deemed unsafe by the ehiefbuilding inspector shall be immediately removed by the owner thereof; or changed to conform with the requirements of this part when so ordered by the building inspector. (5) Where portions of a sign are subject to different classification, each portion shall meet the requirements of its classification. (6) Each sign requiring a permit shall have an identifying number to be provided by the inspector, which number shall be posted on the exterior surface of the sign structure in a loca- tion where such information will be readily visible after the sign is constructed. (7) All signs and sign structures shall be maintained in a safe condition and in a state of good repa_r at all times. No sign shall display matter that has been deemed obscene by a court of competent jurisdiction. (8) Each sign shall be used and maintained only in the manner permitted and subject to the conditions imposed at the time the permit therefor was granted. 5nbdiv#lion-�---6rennd-Si ns---Ne-gronnd-Sign;-signboardT or-billbeard-shall-exeee - - set-in- height•- above- the- average gronnd-level-ef-that-pert-ef-the-street-toward-whisk-it-fusser nor-shall-sneh-straetnre-exeeed-65-feet-in-length-{inelading the-base-thereof}-unless-e-speeial-permit-therefore-has-been grouted-as-hereinafter-provided:--£verp-groand-sign;-signbanrd er-billboard-exeept-tempernry-ground-signs-shall-Have-a-spnee e£-at-1east -P-feet- between- the -•lower -edge- thereof -and-the-gronndT whieh-spaee-shall-net-be-elesed-in-any-manner- 6sbdivisien-3T--Gpeeial-Permits:--She-eeaneil-may- grant- a speeial-permit-for-e-groan -stgnT-s}gnbeardT-er-billboard-ex- eeed#ng-65-feet-in-lengthT-bat-only-if-ik-finds-kHnk-eaeH 9true tare-{l}-will-net-be-lighted-er-illuminated- in -sue h-a-manner as-te-ereate-a-peblie-naisaneet-{2}-will-be-leeated-en-eemmersial er-industrial-preperty-end-at-least-3e0-feet-from-the-street er-highway-whieh-is-€aeest-{3}-will-net-be-faeed-toward-any-res- idenees-er-residential-property-and-wili-net-be-within-29B-feet ef-any-residential-properties;-{4}-will-net-unduly-ebetraet visibilitp-ef-neighboring-properties;-{5}-will-net-ndvereely nffeek-the-value-ef-eny-adjaeent-preperky- 39.14 Subdivision-4---Speeinl-Permits---Heighk:--the-Eenneil '"� may-grant-a-special-perm:t-fer-a-ground-s3gnT-signboard7er billboard-exeeediag-33-feek-in-height;-bnk-enlp-if-it-finds that-sneh-sbraetare-{l}_if_}seated-en-property-adjaeent-te-a federal-freeway;-will-not-exeeed-35-feet-in-height-er-the-high- est-part-ef-any-building-lessted-en-the-same-premiseeT-whish- ever-is-higher;-{P}-if-not-leeated-ndjeeent-ko-e-federal-freewnpT will-vat-exceed-in-heiggb-khe-biggest-part-ef-any-building heated-en-khe-same-premises;-{3}-will-be-heated-en-properly aened-prepertp;-{5}-wil}-net_anduly-ebstrnek-visibility-from neighboring-properties;-{6}-will-nek-edverselp-affect-khe-valve ef-any-adjaeent-property.---ff-tqe-sign-fer-wgieh-the-special permit- is-issued-is-a-doable-€aced-sign-bhe-Eenneil-may-permit the-sign-te-gave-screening-standing-nek-mere-than-lB-feet-ebeve tqe-€ace-af-bhe-signT-in-addibien-be-bqe-maximum-elevations hereinbefere-specified;-provided-Chet-sash-screening-most-eon- sist-ef-a-plain-metal-sur€aee-bearing-ne-advertising-matterT lettering-er-writing- Subdivision-5---eenditions-far-Speeial-Permit.---The-Eenneil may-attach-senditiens-ta-any-sash-speexa}-perm}t:--Ne-saeq-per- mit-shall-be-fer-e-period-ef-mere-thnn-fine-pours---At-the-end ef-the-permit-ponied;-the-sign-shall-net-be-retrained-an-kqe premises-but-shall-be-removed-bp-the-prepertp-owner-unless-a-new epee ial-permit-therefere-has-been-granted.---The-applieant-fer any- sneh-strue tare-shall-deseribe-the -sign;-signbeardT-or-bile beerdT-in-detailT-including-insofar-as-passible-the-eepp-be-b�. used -the reon;-and- she h-sign-shall-be-eonstraeted-and-maintninea during-the-permit-period;-in-aeeerdanee-with-and-subject-to-the applieatian-ef-anp-special-conditions-imposed-bp-bhe-Eeaneil: Subdivision.-67 Subdivision 2. Additional Conditions. The following additions con itions shall e o serve (1) No ground sign (except temporary ground signs), sign- board or billboard shall approach at any point nearer than 3 feet to any building unless such sign is placed parallel to the side of the building; nor shall any such sign be placed within 6 feet of the side of any lot, nor nearer than 15 feet to any street line where there is no established or customary building line, nor within 25 feet of any street corner right of way. Whenever the established or customary uniform building line upon the street where such ground sign is to be erected is more than 15 feet from the street or property line, then such sign shall not approach nearer the street than the estahli.chod cr customary uniform building line. (2) The owner, lessee, or occupant of the land on which the ground sign is located, and the owner of the sign, shall keep the property on which the sign is located free of long grass, weeds or other rank growth, rubbish or debris. 39.14 (3) All parts of ground signs, other than temporary ground signs, shall be designed for wind pressure of not less than 30 pounds per square foot, and ground signs of wood con- struction shall have all members which extend into the ground protected from decay by treatment with a preservative approved by the chief inspector. (4) No permit shall be granted for the location of any ground sign having a sign area of more than 40 square feet, within 100 feet of any single-family residence; provided that the Council may grant a special permit herefor if the owner of such residence gives his written consent thereto. (5) Pedestal signs permitted by the zoning regulations of the Municipality and by this chapter may be located adjacent to the right of way of a street or highway, but no part thereof shall extend over such right of way. (6) No sign shall exceed 35 feet in height. Subdivision-g- Subdivision 3. Clearance of Signs From Conductors. The minimum clearance of any sign from unprotected electrical conductors (whether poles or other installations) shall not be less than 36 inches for conductors carrying not over 600 volts, and 48 inches for conductors carrying more than 600 volts. Subd€vision-87 Subdivision 4. Signs Along Freeways. Except as otherwise provided n this chapter signs located on property adjacent to any freeway within the Municipality (including Interstate Highway 35W) shall be business signs advertising businesses being conducted on the premises on which the signs are located. No "traveling" or changing -message signs shall be located so as to face any freeway or be visible from the freeway. The provisions of this subdivision, however, shall not be constructed to render illegal or non -conforming any signs which are legally located along any such freeway at the time of adoption of this provision; any billboard legally located along any such freeway at the time of adoption of this provision may be replaced, subject to compliance with the other provisions of this part, either in the same location or at another location along any such freeway provided that such alternate location is first approved by the Council. 6ebdiv#siep-9r--Saee€a€-semmereia}-Hsesr--€a-addikies-ke aparkmeRk-esmpfext-a-miss}T-ressaeraak,-aesp�aafT-er-sgeppia eeater- }eeaked-en-preperky-having-freatage•en-a-freeway-may have-direst€esai-sagas-en-ekha�-pseperty-abHkkapg-upea-a-€sa way- i€-the-Benaei}-graxts-spee€a}-permike-there€er.--The Eenaei}-eha}}-grant-sash-a-epee€a}-perm€k-€€-}k-dekesmtaes {}}-that-the-sign-is-direekiena}-en}Yr-{2}-that-the-business sign-en-the-premises-being-advertised-is-no-mere-khan-88-sqn 39.14 feet -in -sign -area --13}-that-there-is-ne-ether-sueh-direetieaa; — sign-ea-the-same-side-ef-the-€reeway-within-150G-€eett-4*-ph it-is-flak-prnekienbie-ke-give-the-same-direekienai-in€ermakien sa€eiy-by-ether-means-saeh-ae-a-iarger-sign-er-a-redueed-sek- baek-er-greater-bniiding-height-far-the-aekiviky-er-use-in- veivedt-{5}-that-the-desiga-e€-the-siga-aAd-€he-ietker$ag-khere- ef-wili-be-simple-and-easily-rea6: Snbdivision-iO:--Appiieetian-far-Pernik:--�Phe-ap@iieakion €er-sueh-a-speeiai-permit--e kal - e-aeeempanied-by-sueh-Wer- mation-as-ko-establish-the-eendikiens-neeessary-€er-the granting-theree€T Subdivisiefl-��:--Pnbiie-Hearing:--Ne-saeh-@ermik-shall-be granted-nniess-the-a@@iieank-has-given-a��-private-preperky ewaers-within-599-feet-ef-the-prepesed-direekiena�-siga-written notiee-ef-the-date;-time-a!sd-plaee-at-whieh-the-eeanell-sha}} held-e-hearing-en-the-gaeskien-ef-grnnting-saeh-e-permit- Subdivision-12: Subdivision 5. oj Prection Signs; wi Construction and Design. The follong standards shall be maintained for all pr0 3ection signs: (1) All portions of projection signs shall be designed for a wind pressure of not less than 30 pounds per square foot. (2) Such signs shall not project over public street rig: of way, but may project over sidewalks located on private walk-. No such sign shall be less than 12 feet above the level of the sidewalk; provided that such signs which do not exceed four square feet, and which do not project more than two feet over the sidewalk may be eight or more feet above the sidewalk. No projection sign shall project beyond a curb line nor more than eight feet over any private sidewalk. (3) There shall be no more than two feet of space between the inner edge of any such sign and the face of the wall from which it projects, nor shall the outer edge of the sign be more than eight feet from the face of the wall. (4) The building or structure from which any such sign projects and all attachments or fastenings must be so constructed as to safely resist the dead load and the wind load added by the attached sign. (5) All such signs shall be of non-combustible materials or of not less than one hour fire resistive construction. 6abdivisien-137 Subdivision 6. Roof Signs: Construction and Desi n. The followingT standards shall a maintaine for a roo signs: (1) No roof sign shall be located nearer than five feet from the outside wall toward which it faces, nor exceed 25 feet in height above the roof level of the building unless constructed integral with the building or structure, nor shall 39.14 r it project beyond the edge of said roof in any direction. For the purposes of this subdivision, lights attached to the sign structure and lights attached to the building and beamed toward the sign structure shall be considered part of the sign structure. (2) Every such sign shall be either metal, metal clad, incombustible, open wire or open metal sign, except that such sign may have letters, figures, characters, or borders of wood if such borders do not exceed four inches in width, and such wooden letters, figures or characters do not cover more than 25% of the area of such sign, provided that in place of sheet metal, substitution may be made of the following materials; tempered pressed wood or other similar materials approved by the building inspector, having equal properties as to strength, fire and moisture resistance. (3) No such sign shall be so placed as to prevent free passage of person from one part of the roof to another. (4) The building or structure upon which such sign is placed, and all attachments or fastenings must be so constructed as to safely resist the dead load and the wind load added by the attached sign, and in such a manner as not to cause damage to the building or structure on which such sign is placed. (5) No roof sign shall be more than 65 feet in length nor shall it extend more than 25 feet above the surface of the roof of the building on which it is located. No roof sign shall extend more than 45 feet above the average ground level of that part of the street toward which it faces. Subdivision-14: Subdivision 7. Wall Signs; Construction and Design. The follow ni g standards shall be maintained for all wal signs: (1) No wall sign shall have a projection over a private sidewalk or an established building line of more than 12 inches. (2) The materials, construction and attachment of any such sign shalt meet the same standards and requireme:its as roof signs. Subdivision-�5- Subdivision B. Banners and Temporary Signs. The following standards shall be maintained for all banners and temporary signs: (1) Temporary signs and banners attached to any building and constructed of canvas, plastic material, cloth or other combustible material with or without framework, shall be strongly constructed and shall be securely attached to their supports. Tney snail oe removed (including all framework and supports) as soon as damaged or torn and in no case later than 60 days after erection. 39.14 (2) Temporary signs of combustible material shall not be larger than 120 square feet in area for each 20 feet of building frontage. There shall not be more than one temporary sign on any building frontage. (3) No temporary sign of combustible construction shall project over public property or right of way, but may extend a maximum of six inches from the face of the building. (4) Temporary signs of combustible construction shall not be hung so as to cover either partially or completely any door, window, or opening required for ventilation. (5) No roof sign of combustible material and no temporary ground sign shall be located on any multiple -residence, commer- cial or industrial property in the city without first obtaining a special permit therefor from the Council. If the Council determines to grant an application for a special permit for any such temporary sign or bannering, or any such temporary ground sign, it may impose conditions upon the granting thereof, and it shall be unlawful to locate or maintain any such sign or bannering for a longer period or in a different manner than that specified in the special permit. No such special permit shall be for a period of more than 60 days. No such special permit shall be granted, however, where such temporary signs or banners are prohibited by other provisions of this Code. Subdivision-16: Subdivision 9. Truck Signs. The followino standards shall be maintained tor true signs: igns: (1) All signs posted upon any truck, or semi -trailer body, or other mobile device shall be subject to the regulations of this chapter and section. Subdivision-197 Subdivision 10. Application of Other Provisions of this Section n. Temporary ground signs as defined in 39.01 e} (9), shall comply with the provisions of subdivi- sion 15 8 herein. Subdivision-18: Subdivision 11. Approval of Sign Permit Applications. Upon presentation of application, permit fee, plans and specifications and other required information, the sign construction permit shall be issued by the Clerk, except as provided in subdivision 19 12 of this chapter. Subdivision-19: Subdivision 12. Special Approval from Council. In the case of aapplication for a sign requiring a special permit, or which will be illuminated, or moving, or of unusual height, size, design, or location, the Clerk shall refer such sign to the Council for approval. No permit for any such sign, so referred, shall be issued without first obtaining the approval of the Council. 0 39.14 Subdivision-26:--variance-from-Terms-of-Apprevai-Pro- hibited---Ne-sign-shaii-be-ereeted;-used-or-mnH Ined-in-a manner-at-varianee-from-the-provisions -of -this-eede-of-dif- erent-from-that- approved- by- the-eeunei}r--No-bedding-er eleetrieai-permit- for -a-sign-shall-be-granted-until- the- sign permit-has-been-appreve87 Subdivision-217 Subdivision 13. Future Permits. A per- mit shall not be issued for any new bil oar or advertising sign located of the premises where the advertised product is sold, if such billboard or sign would be within 300 feet of any other such billboard or sign already in existence. Any bill- board destroyed by an act of God may be rebuilt within 30 days, if the construction of same would comply with this subdivision. Subdivision-22: Subdivision 14. Electioneering Signs. The following regulations shall apply to all campaign signs for political candidates or issues: (1) No more than one electioneering sign shall be erected per candidate of issue along each street frontage of any parcel of land. (2) Electioneering signs shall not exceed 12 square feet and not exceed four feet in height above the ground except, where such signs are located no closer than 150 feet to the property line of a residential dwelling, the maximum size shall be 32 square feet and the maximum height above the ground shall be six feet. (3) Electioneering signs may be displayed from the last day of candidacy filing or 30 days before an election, whichever is earlier. (4) All electioneering signs must be removed no later than five days after an election except that after a primary election signs for the winning primary candidates need not be removed until after the ensuing general election. (254) 15. cinnc Allowed by District. The fol (1) R-1 Single Family Residential District. on res address the name or (c) A sign, as allowed in Chapter 4U.10, Subdivision C(3), ons. (d) Signs as allowed in Subdivision 14. (2) R-2 Single and Two Family Residential District. (a) Signs as allowed in Subdivision 15(1). (3) R-3 Medium Density Residential District. (a) Signs as allowed in Subdivision 15(1). (4) R-4 High Density Residential District. (a) Signs as allowed in Subdivision 15(1). Direction signs for office, model (5) R-0 Residential Office District. (a) Signs as allowed in Subdivision 15(4). (6) B-1 Neighborhood Business District. 1.1 c;nnc nnr Pxceedinc 100 square feet total as (b) Temporary signs as allowed by City Council. (7) B-2 Limited Business District. not exceeding 100 square feet as (b) Temporary signs as allowed by City Council. (8) B-3 Highway Business District. (a) Signs as allowed in Subdivision 15(7). (9) B-4 Regional Business District. (a) Signs as allowed in Subdivision 15(7). (10) I-1 Light Industrial District. (a) Signs as allowed in Subdivision 15(7). (11) I-2 Heavy Industrial District. (a) Signs as allowed in Subdivision 15(7). W (12) B-3 Hi hwa Business District, B-4 Business District, I-1 Light Industria Distr Heavy Industrial District may have besides th eet signage per usiness occupant one_ eg nera �; nor PY�.aaeina 3 0 square feet. Only one 39.14 I-2 39.15 39721 Penalties. Any person, firm or corporation found violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. r_ PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting yr November 22 1982 UNAPPRiq�;,;F Mounds View City Hall L :::: 2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Mounds View City Council was called to order by 1. Call to Order Mayor McCarty at 7:32 PM. MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilmembers Blanchard, Hodges, 2. Roll Call Fors un an Mayor McCarty. It was noted Councilmember Doty was absent. ALSO PRESENT: Acting City Attorney Karney, Clerk/ inistrator Pauley and Public Works/Community Development Director Johnson. Motion/Second: Hodges/Blanchard to approve the 3. Approval of November 8, 1982 minutes as presented. Minutes: / f 2 ayes 0 nays 2 abstentions November 8, 198 Mayor McCarty and Councilmember Forslund abstained Motion Carried from the vote as they had not been present at the November S meeting. There were no residents requests or comments from 4. Residents Re - the floor. quests and Comments from t' Floor Clerk/Administrator Pauley corrected Item H, to 5. Approval of read "Be it resolved that the replacement of Consent Agenda approximately 50 Corad water meters presently in service in residential units south of Highway 10 is hereby authorized.....". Mayor McCarty asked that Item D be revised to include a 30 day notice of cancellation for the City due to the fact that the cost could be considerably hi.aher than what is planned. Mayor McCarty asked that Item E be removed for reading. `Mayor McCarty stated he was concerned with the Staff memo that accompanied Item G, which specified a cost of living increase, as the City does not have Mounds View City Councils 1 t' y,�;3 „� d)u `r F', , November 22, 1982 Regular Meeting i V 1� I I U V L U Page Two ------------------------------------------------------------------------ cost of living increases, rather merit increases. Motion/Second: Forslund/Hodges to approve the consent agenda, minus Item E, and waive the reading of the resolutions. 4 ayes 0 nays Clerk/Administrator Pauley read Resolution No. 1508, in appreciation to Ken Breske. Motion/Second: Blanchard/Forslund to approve Reso- ution o. 08 in appreciation of Ken Breske. 4 ayes 0 nays It was noted that Mr. Breske had been a very valued member of the Planning Commission and that he would be missed. Mayor McCarty closed the regular meeting and opened the public hearing at 7:41 PM. Motion Carried Motion Carried Finance Director Brager gave a presentation of the 6. Public Hee ' , projected 1983 income statements for the water Sewer and zr utilities and sewer utilities, and also gave examples Budgets and of how much revenue could be earned by raising the Rates rates various levels. Mayor McCarty closed the public hearing and reopened the regular meeting at 7:50 PM. Finance Director Brager answered questions from the Council regarding the proposed budget. Mayor McCarty pointed out the high percentage of the sc::cr charga which goes to the Mwcc, and stated it would be separated on bills in the future. He also recommended tabling any action on the budget or rate increases, in light of the State's financial crisis. Motion/Second: McCarty/Forslund to table indefinitely any rate increase in the utility funds. 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Finance Director Brager recommended to the Council that they place a freeze on any type of capital purchases, until the State financial crisis is solved. November 22 1982 Mounds View City Council - -- , !",, t m Regular Meetings Page Three --------------------- _J__L ai.�__iJ_.1------------------ Motion/Second: Blanchard/Hodges to adopt Ordinance 7. Second Reading No. 3Z4, amending the municipal code of Mounds and Adoption of View by amending Chapter 41 entitled, "Specific Ord. No. 324 An Rezonings", and waive the reading of the resolution. Ordinance Amend ing the Municip Councilmember Blanchard - aye Code of Mounds Councilmember Hodges - aye View by Amendin Councilmember Forslund - aye Chapter 41 Enti Mayor McCarty - aye tled "Specific Rezonings" Motion Carried Motion/Second: Forslund/Blanchard to adopt Ordinance 8. Second Reading No. 322 amending the municipal code of Mounds View and Adoption of by amending Chapter 40.02, Zoning, Rules and Defi- Ord. No. 322 nitions, and 40.10, Zoning, R-1 Single Family Amending the residential district, and waive the reading of Municipal Code the resolution. Mounds View by Amending Chapte Councilmember Blanchard - aye 40.02, Zoning, Councilmember Hodges - aye Rules and Defi- Councilmember Forslund - aye nitions, and 40 Mayor McCarty - aye Zoning, R-1 Sin Family Residen- tial District Motion Carried Motion/Second: Hodges/Forslund to adopt Ordinance 9. Second Reading No. 255 amending the municipal code of Mounds View and Adoption of by amending Chapter 41 entitled "Specific Ord. No. 325 An Rezoning" and waive the reading of the resolu- Ordinance Amend tion. ing the Municip Code of Mounds Councilmember Blanchard - aye View by Amendin Councilmember Hodges - aye Chapter 41 Enti Councilmember Forslund - aye tled "Specific Mayor McCarty - aye Rezoning" Mot-nn Carried Motion/Second: McCarty/Hodges to approve and 10. Second Reading a op�nance No, 326 amending the municipal code and Adoption of of Mounds View by amending Chapter 107, entitled Ord. No. 326 An "Bingo", and waive the reading of the resolution. Ordinance Amend ing the Municip. Councilmember Blanchard - aye Code of Mounds Councilmember Hodges - aye View by Amending Councilmember Forslund - aye Chapter 107, Mayor McCarty - aye Entitled "Bingo' Motion Carried 1 � r�. � p".n �fyGG� Mounds View City Counci jNAPP"b November 22, 1982. Regular Meeting �+ --- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Page Four Clerk/AdministraLor Pauley informed the Council 11. Discussion" 1 there is a possible site in Fridley, which Staff Memo. fum borders on Mounds View, from University Avenue Regarding Snure- down 73rdand that staff will provide a full report view Disposal on this site. Site Motion/Second: McCarty/Forslund to authorize Staff to send a Letter to the University of Minnesota and to the City of Shoreview, indicating Mounds View's support of their position opposing the identi- fication of Lhe Shoreview site as a hazardous waste transfer site by the State of Minnesota Waste Management Board. 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Director Johnson asked for Council approval for the 12. Discussion of advertisement of bids, by invitation, for work on Staff Memorandum Well No. 5 Regarding the Approval of Wate Motion/Second: McCarty/Blanchard to authorize Well No. 5 Ser- Staff to invite bids from Layne Minnesota Co., vice and Repair Keys Well Drilling Co, Bergerson-Caswell Inc. and Specifications Tri-State Drilling & Equipment Co., for well maintenance work, to be paid from the water fund. 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Cari Director Johnson reported they are ready to move 13. Discussion of into Phase 2 of the water treatment study, and Staff Memorandum reviewed his memo of November 22, addressed to Regarding the the Council, and explained what the testing Second Phase of will accomplish. Water Treatment Study Recommenda- Motion/Second: Hodges/Blanchard to move on with tion Phase Z testing of Wells No, 5, 6 and 4, with the funds of approximately $4100 to come from the water fund. 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Director Johnson pointed out that action on this 14. Discussion of item will require the Council to give considera•• Staff Memorandum tion to Ordinances 301 and 305, and recommended Regarding Letter discussing it further at an agenda session or from Dynamic Wetlands Committee meeting. Designers Clerk/Administrator Pauley reported that, per the request of Dynamic Designers, the City has refunded all money paid to date, and also rescinded all ij approvals. Mounds View City Council ! i' ' 'R: r�—r7) November 22, 1982 Regular.• Meeting8lid�d �F 4 �� f'+.; a �� Page F.Ve t s !: -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Motion/Second: McCarty/Blanchard to direct Staff totonotify Dynamic Designers that upon payment of all applicable fees, they can make application to the Planning Commission for consideration of their proposal, as it relates to Ordinance No. 48. 4 ayes 0 nays Motion/Second: McCarty/Hodges to table action on t is item, per the recommendation of the Finance Wrorhnr. 4 ayes 0 nays Mayor McCarty stated he has reservations with the hold -harmless agreement and questioned whether the City is fully protected in the event of a lawsuit. Attorney Karney stated there is no specification of indemnification, and it is not clear that defense costs on the part of the City would be covered. Motion/Second: McCarty/Forslund to table any art er action on the Golden Gloves Boxing Program until the applicants present the City with a con- tract of protection for litigation that is accepta- ble to the City Attorney. 4 ayes 0 nays Park and Recreation Director Anderson pointed out the City's involvement in the program is minimal, and the program has been very well received to date, with 58 young men participating. He asked for clarification from the Council on what specific action should be taken until the contract is pre- sented to the City and approved. It was the con- sensus of the Council that Park Director Anderson and Attorney Karney could sit down and reword the contract and have it signed by the next day. Director Johnson reported he had received a letter from MnDOT regarding the MSA program. He stated he is under the gun to complete the MSA study for a five year construction program, by the end of 1982. He added he will be working on it in December, and that it will be flexible so that the City can make changes later on. Director Johnson questioned if there would be a Motion Carried 15. Discussion of Staff Memoranda Regarding 1982 One Ton Dump Truck Bid Open:: Motion Carried 16. Discussion of Staff Memorandu: Regarding Golde: Gloves Boxing Program Motion Carried 17. Report of Public Works/Community Development Director P��F Mounds View City Counci o. Regular Meeting ---------------------------------------------------- Wetlands Committee meeting on November 29. Motion/Seed: McCarty/Forslund to have a special work session on November 29, beginning at 7 PM, to deal with the surface water management plan, and to have Representative Knuth meet with the Council. 4 ayes 0 nays Director Johnson reported 75 applications have been received for the opening in the Maintenance Department, and they are proceeding with interviewing, but would like the assurance of the Council that the position will still be filled. Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated he does not anti- cipate any action required before the December 6 agenda session, at which time he and Finance Director Brager feel they will have a better picture for the Council of the budget situation. Mayor McCarty stated the Maintenance Department will have to set priorities to make due, and for example, would have to put maintenance work before recreation work. He suggested asking the different recreation groups for their help. Gary Kardell stated that the Maintenance Department is going to be short handed for the next six weeks due to holidays and vacations. Attorney Karney had no report. Councilmember Blanchard had no report. Councilmember Hodges reported he had attended the Youth Services Bureau meeting and reported on the highlights. He gave some results of the question- nairs sent out to employers from the summer job program. Councilmember Hodges reported he had attended the Ramsey County League meeting, at which the legisla- tive agenda of Ramsey County was discussed. Councilmember Forslund had no report. Mayor McCarty asked that everyone review the arti- cle in the Administrative Newsletter regarding the Anoka County Airport. He stated he has unconfirmed information that the City should prepare for another battle on the airport issue. He stated an umbrella group is being formed to field information through the process, and will serve as a clearing house for November 22, 1982, Page Six ----------------- i Motion Carried I's 18, Report of Attorney 19. Report of Councilmembers 11 Mounds View City Council �: "'� November 22, 1982 Regular Meeting Page Seven action by other groups, and named those interested in being on the committee, with an orientation .neeting set for December 2. Motion/Second: McCarty/Blanchard that the Council authorize Mayor McCarty. to initially coordinate the efforts of this committee. 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Motion/Second: McCarty/Hodges to authorize staff to send letters of invitation to those interested individuals, notifying them of the meeting at 7 PM on December 2. 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Mayor McCarty asked the status of the Mounds View Estates. Clerk/Administrator Pauley replied that he had received a report, but had not had an opportunity to review it. Director Johnson added the Planning Commission had discussed the parking at their meeting last week and would be taking the issue up again after the first of the year. Mayor McCarty reported the City had received a check for $25 from TOPS, for their appreciation 1 for the use of City Hall. Clerk/Administrator Pauley reviewed the airport 20. Report of issue and stated he would be keeping the Council Administrator updated. Clerk/Administrator Pauley asked if the Council would authorize, as they had in the past, an expenditure from the pop fund for a Christmas gift for City employees. The Council gave their permission. Clerk/Administrator Pauley informed the Council of his discussions with the City of New Brighton, regarding the acquisition of the New Brighton trunk sewer by the MWCC. Motion/Second: McCarty/Forslund to authorize the Clerk Administrator to send a letter to the Metropolitan Council advising that the City is withdrawing its opposition to the acquisition and putting them on notice of our intention to seek legislative changes to MWCC operating rules. 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried �lerk/Administrator Pauley reported he had received a call from the police union representative. He indicated that the union request for contract settlement is in excess of the budget and that he rejected the request. Mounds View City Counci` 'Y (.�''c`' "�� �•11 � V � November 22, 1982. Page Eight Regular Meeting e�,y ----------------------------------------------7------------------------- clerk/Administrator Pauley reported he is working with New Brighton and White Bear Lake on the word processor request forms, and would like to have bids by the end of the year. Motion/Second: McCarty/Hodges to authorize Clerk/Administrator Pauley to send out requests for proposals, to be sent out to suppliers in the area, when the specifications are completed, for all three cities. 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Clerk/Administrator Pauley reported a petition had been received for a street light at 3017 Bronson, and NSP has advised the location is acceptable, and there are funds for the light. Motion/Second: McCarty/Hodges to authorize Staff to install a street light on the pole between 3017 Bronson and 3033 Bronson, pursuant to receipt of the petition. 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Clerk/Administrator Pauley reported he had received a call from Dan Boxrud regarding the Long Lake Road ditch, with the bonding underwriter negotiating with the original subcontractor, to have him come back and finish the job. Clerk/Administrator Pauley reported he hopes to have the 1982 long term financial plan ready for the December 6 agenda session. Clerk/Administrator Pauley presented the Council with a copy of an article regarding the State's budget problems, and reviewed Staff's progress in working on the budget, as well as revenue and expense projections. Jerry Linke asked about the status of the signal Spring Lake Park has requested. Mayor McCarty replied that it is on hold at this time, and that it should be made clear to Spring Lake Park what Mounds View's position is, so as to not give them false hope. Motion/Second: McCarty/Blanchard to inform Spring La a Par that Mounds View has no reason, at this time, to join in the construction of a light at Pleasant View and Highway 10. 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Caro Mounds View City Council Regular Meeting - November 22, 1982 ------------------------ ` ,s Page Nine Motion/Second: Forslund/Hodges to adjourn the meeting at :26 PM. 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Respectfully submitted, Donald F. Pauley Clerk/Administrator