HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 1986/07/07C;TY OF MOUNDS VIEW
_'TY C(AINCIL
July 7, 1986
6:00 p.m. Executive Session
1. Airpoti I.awsuit
7:00 p.m. Auenda Session
I. Conlinued Discussion of Walkway and Fencing on
gale/Yost. Property
2. Discussion Regarding Feasibility of Controlling
Croundwater Level in Ardan/North Drainage Disrrirtq
3. Report from Public Works/Cnmmunily Development Ditector
and Fire Inspector Regarding Fire Inspection Program
A. C'onsidetat.ion of Ctaff M^morardu:r and Resolution
Regarding Off -Sale Liquor Licenses
'i. Consideration of Plannina Commission. Report and Staff
Response Regarding Wuornos Study
6. Discussion of Storage Sheri Location at 2910 Oakwood
Drive, James and Nancy noyles
7. Consideration of Final Draft Scomonic Development Plan
B. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Renewal
of Janitorial Services Contract
9. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Proposed
Staffing Requests
10. Consideration of First Draft of 1987 general, Water,
and Sewer Budgets
11. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Letter
to Ken Weltzin About the Intersection of County Road I
and highway 10
Petitions for Storm Sewer Improvements
11. Staff Presentation of Greenfield i'ark Playground
Equipment
C
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
r
1� j
�2�June
Regular MeetingVI
23, 1986
L Mounds
View City Hall
2401 llwy. 10, Mounds
View, MN 55112
-----------------------------------------------------------
The Mounds View City Council was called to order by
1. Call to Order
Mayor Linke at 7:00 PM on Monday, June 23, 1986.
The Pledge of Allegiance was said.
2. Pledge of
Allegiance
MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilmembers Quick, Haake,
3. Roll Call
Hankner, Blanchard and Mayor Linke.
ALSO PRESENT: City Attorney Meyers, Clerk/
Administrator Pauley and Public Works/Community
Development Director Thatcher.
— Motion/Second: Haake/Blanchard to approve the June
4. Approval of
), 1986 minutes as corrected.
Minutes:
June 9, 19R6
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Alice Frits, 8072 Wng Lake Road, asked if the City 5. Residents
screens people who go door to door soliciting funds. Requests And
C.nnments from
Clerk/Administrator nauley replied there is a City
the Floor
ordinance governing this, and solicitors must
register with the City, and they are given an I.D.
card, and if they cannot produce that card, they are
not licensed in Mounds View and the Police Department
should be called. He added that a background check is
dune on the individual through the police computer,
before the I.D. card is given.
Mrs. Frits stated she had recently been solicited by
a young couple who represented the group "Clean Air".
- stated that to tte best of
his knowledge, they are nuL
added that if they state they are a charitable or non-
profit organization, a check could be done with the State.
k.
Mounds View City Cuuncill , r�. + June 23, 1986
Regular Meeting { } 3Vi Page Two
_V_I_----------- a __________________________
Paul Reinertson, 2741 Ardan Avenue, stated he has a
water problem and asked what the Council plans on
doing about it.
Councilmember Ilaake asked if Mr. Reinertson had
attended the meeting at Abiding Saviour Church
and heard what was discussed.
Mr. Reinertson replied he had, but he wants something
done now. He added the problem is with the storm
sewer, which plugs up and backs up, and he is tired of
it and he wants his problem cleared up and given to
someone else for awhile.
Councilmember Ilaake explained that at the meeting,
a presentation was made of the coat. of the work that
would need to be done, possibl., :volutions, and how
it might be financed. She added that it is antici-
pated the cveL fur just the Ardan Avenue area wcu;d
be about $500,000, which the City does not have.
Mr. Reinertson repeated that he didn't care, someone
else could have the problem now. He stated that the
water gets 4-5' deep in his back yard, and he could
float a boat back there. He stated they have been
flooded in their basement many times, and had just
replaced all the carpet before being flooded this it
past weekend.
Mayor Linke stated the City is looking into possible
solutions, and he asked when the culvert was put in.
Mr. Reinertson replied it was 8 or 9 year, ago, and
it does not do any good.
Director Thatcher explained what Mr. Reinertson has
is a 5 to 6' reinforced concrete pipe that is out of
the ground for a catch basin. He stated he does not
know why it was installed or the purpose for it there.
He added the problem in that area is the storm sewers
downstream are undersized and there is not enough of
a holding area. Ile stated there is no funding source
for the $500,000 improvement, of which the figure
comes from the John Johnson study.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated he believed the
sleeve was put in in 1977, as a result of a recom-
mendation of a task force, comprised of citizens.
Director Thatcher stated that removing the sleeve
would not solve the problem, and the only way to
handle the problem is to find a funding source. 4
I Mounds View City Council `I,`(_ r, t ( L June 23, 1986
Regular Meeting u f Page Three
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- qrs. Reinertson stated that at a meeting 3 or 4
,,are ago it was decided that no more buildinq would
oe allowed in that area until the problem was solved.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained that was the
wetlands moritorium, and how that came about.
Councilmember lianknnr explained that once the
wetlands and flood plain ordinances were adopted,
the moritorium was lifted.
Attorney Meyers suggested the City could create a
special tax district and tax the residents of that
area, fie stated 300 acres could be split out.
Director Thatcher stated that a 20,000 square foot
lot would be assessed less than $100 per year for 15
years.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated he has given the
"'GrIDaLii)u �,n how to petition LUL iwpcuvements to
the residents who asked for it.
Mr. Reinertson stated he was told secona-handedly
that the City was gninq to install check valves.
lerk/Administrator Pauley replied that that is not
the City's plan. fie added that the holding pond
by Groveland will remain, and some of the lots there
will not be allowed to be developed.
Mr. Reinertson stated he feels it is the City's fault
that he has this problem, and he wants the City to
take care of it.
Attorney Meyers stated that under Chapter 444, they
would have to prepare an ordinance and held public
hearings in order to establish a tax improvement
district. He added they could declare the whole
City a tax district and assess everyone evenly.
The Council directed Attorney Meyers to research
the possibility of declaring the City a tax
district, and the procedures to be followed.
Mrs. Reinertson asked why building permits were given
out for homes in areas where the water is so high.
Mayor Linke replied that if they meet all the Code
requireme,iLs, the City cannot arbitrarily deny a
permit to build.
L-owicilmember Haake pointed out the wale, table has
risen since many of the homes were buiit.
Mounds View City Council ! June 23, 1986
Regular Meeting�� ��/ ►; II Q V 0----Page Four
------------- -----" ------------
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained that all the
enqineerinq studies that have previously been done •
are available at City Hall for review.
Mayor Linke directed Director Thatcher to look into
removing the sleeves.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reviewed the basic require-
ments to be eligible for flood insurance.
Motion/Second: Quick/Hankner to approve the consent 6. Approval of
aye; ate, as presented, and waive the reading of the Consent Agenda
resolutions.
5 ayes 0 nays Motic Carried
Director Thatcher reviewed the proposal of Mary 7. Co^9id0PeLiun of
Nndercon Homes to construct six unit townhouses in Resolution No.
lieu of the previously planned eight unit condo- 2022
minium structures. He stated the Planning Commission
has reviewed this and recommends approval contingent
upon approval from the majority of the home owners
association.
Marlin Grant, of Mary Anderson Homes, state;4. they had •
met with the condominium residents last Tuesday, and
16 out of 17 who were present signed the agreement to
change the remaining condominium land to townhouses.
He stated there were no negative comments what so
ever, and the one person who did not sign the agreement
chose not to because he did not sign things of this
nature in general.
Judith Maekel stared it was her husband who did not
sign, and while she had not been at the meeting herself,
she was concerned with what the ramifications could be.
She added she has nothing against what they are planning
to do, but she is confused.
Councilmember I!aake explained that the developer car.
only construct condominium units or townhouses there,
and nothing else.
Attorney Meyers advised Mrs. Maekel to have her attorney
review the association bylaws if she had any questions,
do it is not the City's responsibility or authority to
do so.
Mrs. Maekel stated she was concerned that there were
not as many street lights in place as she felt them= •
should be.
Mounds view City council 1 June 23, 1986
Regular Meeting U I VI'%I I i U V Page Five
----------------------------------------------------___.--------------
Ow�rector Thatcher explained that Mary Anderson has
,rned on all the street lights they can at this time,
as NSP will not install a transformer for street
lights only, but they wait until a building is
constructed. Ile added that Kraus Anderson is working
on getting one Installed, which is being herd up by
a question on an easement.
Motion/Second: Haake/Quick to adopt Resolution No.
262 , approving Mary Anderson's request to construct
townhouses instead of condominiums in the area of
Lake Court Drive, and waive the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Director Thatcher explained that Ronald Richardson 8. Consideration of
is proposing to construct a self-service car wrash on Development
Highway 10, and he has provided an amendment to his Agreement
letter of credit. No. 86-74
Attorney Meyers ctate(l ha is not pronared at this time
to make a decision, as he just received the amendment
earlier in the day. He stated he had spoken with
Mr. Richardson's banker and told him the letter of
redit should be redone to be one document. He
! ated the Council could approve the development
agreement, subject to the final approval of the letter
of credit.
Motion/Second: Linke/Quick to approve Development
Agreement No. 86-74, subject to the City Attorney's
final approval of the letter of credit.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mayor Linke explained that all the requirements have
been met for this proposal.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley read proposed Resolution 9. Consideration
No. 2024, commending Rita Docker for her service of Resolution
to the City. No. 2024
Motion/Second: Blanchard/Haake to adopt Resolution
No. 24, commending Rita Docken for outstanding
service as Energy/Solid Waste Coordinator.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
irector Thatcher had no report. 10. Report of Public
Works/Community
Development Dir.
.� + June 23, 1986
Mounds View City Council } page Six
Regular Meeting ------------ -'---------
_______________
----------------------
11. Report of
Attorney Meyers had no report. Attorney
Councilmember Quick asked if the residential office
building across from Crown Auto has satisfied it's
development agreement with the city, as he had
noticed a for sale sign on the property.
Director Thatcher replied the City is holding
$11,000 security on this, and he will send them a
letter, asking them to finish the work.
Councilmember flaake had no report.
-�-��• Hankner rennrted she had attended a
meeting with MAC earlier in the day to continue
negotiations on the lawsuit, and things are going
smoothly. She asked that an executive session he
set soon, to discuss the matter.
It was agreed that an executive session would be held
before the next agenda session.
Motion/Second: Linke/Quick to set an executive
session for discussion on the airport i55u-m and
lawsuit for 6 PM on Monday, July 7, 1986.
5 ayes 0 nays
Councilmember Blanchard had no report.
Mayor Linke reported he had attended the League
of Minnesota Cities convention in Duluth last
week, with Clerk/Administrator Pauley, and he
planned on putting some of the information
together to present to the Council.
Clerk/Administrator pauley reported he would be
submitting reports to the Council with some of
the recommendations he came back with from the
League of Minnesota Cities convention.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reported that at a
June 9 meeting, Ramsey County adopted a resolution
authorizing the chairperson to pursue forming a
committee to .esolve the issue of the Ramsey
County suburban court consolidation.
Mayor Linke stated he has requested to be a
member of that committee.
12. Reports of
councilmembere:
Councilmember
Quick
Councilmember
Haake
Councilmember
v=knc
Motion Carried
Councilmember
Blanchard
Mayor Links
13. Report of
Clerk/Administ
a
Mounds View City Council I June 23, 1986
Regular Meeting 11! Page Seven
11 �f--�---�_.ttr�-�---------------
/4ayor I,inke adjourned the meeting at 8:14 PM. 14. Adjournment
1 Respectfully submitted,
Donald F. Pauley
Clerk/Administrator
f
L
MEMO To: Director of Public Works/Community Development
Clerk -Administrator
Mayor and City Council
�► FROM: Public Works Foreman/Buildinq Inspector
DATE: July 3, 1986
SUB,)F.CT: FIRE INSPECTION PROGRAM
The City Council, on June 24, 1985, adopted Resolution No. 394
which amended Chapter 63, Fire Code, by creating a subdivision
which created a Fire Inspector. The subdivision was prompted by
the Fire Department's direction of providing more frequent and
thorough fire inspections for the three cities it serves. The
City of Mounds View was faced with either providing additional
monies to the File Department Budget and/or providing their own
Fire inspector position to carry out a reasonable program of fire
inspections. In order to save the City the expenditure for fire
inspection services from the Fire Department, we decided to
create our own program to hopefully meet their needs. Therefore,
in October of 1985 memos were written laying o„t a rare
inspection program for the City for the ending year 1985 and
1986. The schedule turned out to be too ambitious with regard to
existing staff due to a number of other City projects and other
items which could all be labeled under tho headina of "shortage
of manpower".
To date, the liquor establishments of the City have been
inspected a minimum of two times, and some of them three or four
times with work orders being completed. Also, staff has just
about completed establishing new occupant loads for the liquor
establishments and those will he posted by the end of the month.
Two churches have been inspected and appriximately 250 housing
units have also been inspected.
This memo is intended to put into perspective our short comings
from previous memos of expectations and to make something more
workahle for the future. Staff has met with Fire Chief
Faqerstrom and he, by his own admission, understands our manpower
shortage and thought that our plans were too ambitious to start
with. In this meeting, the discussion included the cities of
Blaine and Spring Lake Park, of which he also serves. In the
case of Spring Lake Park, no inspections ar• being done
whatsoever by the Fire Department or the Spring Lake Park City
staff as no funds were allocated by the Fire Department or given
by the City of Spring Lake Park. The City of Blaine presently
has a combination Zoning Code Enforcer and Fire Inspector. Thie
person is working joirtly with the Blaine Community Development
Department and Fire Department to conduct inspections in both
thnse areas. With regard to the City of Mounds View, our
discussion evolved around either the need for additional Mounds
View staff to conduct Fire Inspections as laid out and/or
changing the program or possibly releasing the inspection program
hack to the Fire Department.
-1-
The Fire Department has in existence a permit fee schedule for
various types of activities or uses which allow an annual permit •
fee. These fees range between $7.50 and $50.00. Some of the
acitivites included are malls and shopping centers covered, motor
vehicle repair garages, places of assembly, and places performing
welding and cutting activities and using calcium carbide and
acetylene. This current permit fee schedule comes under the
requirements of the Uniform Fire Code. Since the Fire Department
sees fit to improve the inspection program of the cities it is
involved with, and since it is our belief they wish to have a
more direct input on the inspection services, i believe there is
already in existence a permit fee schedule which would allow them
to collect monies and conduct the inspections. I further believe
that with minor ordinance changes we could facilitate a means of
additional fee collection for them if it were needed.
The City of Mounds View has approxi-aLeiy 90 commercial and
industrial huFs'ncsses which should have some type of fire
inspection service. I would propose that the City adopt Chapter
63, Fire Code, a provision to allow the Fire Department to
establish fire inspection fees for commercial and industrial
uses. That in turn, these fees would provide inspection services
fcr those areas. The ordinance amendment could allow the
revisions of these fees from time to time by recommendation of
the Fire Department and resolution adoption by the City Council.
This type of annual license nr fee would he similar to that of
the liquor license but would be collected by the Fire Department
to provide fire inspection services. I have discussed this
matter with Attorney Meyer and, to his knowledge and research,
there are no state laws or other municipal ordinances that would
prohibit us from allowing the Fire Department to collect such
fees for inspection service.
Please note that the fee or license requirement recommended at
this point is only for commercial and industrial activity. The
City is currently collecting annual license fees for apartments
and rental units. Therefore, we would continue to inspect
apartment units as we are collecting monies for that purpose.
Mounds View staff would also provide the fire inspection service
for churches and schools as their number is very limited and very
unlikely to increase to any extent.
In suimx ry, existing Mounds View staff has been unable to meet
the goals and objectives set out in earlier memorandums for fire
inspection and housing programs. As you are aware, many of us
where many different hats, and depending on the need of a various
hat, the short coming can easily occur. Secondly, and again
rightfully so, the increased need for fire inspections is a
proper issue for both the City and Fire Department to be looking
- 3 -
ONq at. The problem that can occur with such a program is lack of
manpower or funding, as in this case. i believe the possibili-
ties for such funding have been outlined in this memo. Lastly,
it takes away the competition or potential ownership problems of
the program that may have been occurring. the City's legal
advise indiC.ates that this is a definite possible avenue for the
City to adopt with the only downside reaction being Lhat of an
additional fee for commercial or industrial activities.
Staff recommends that the Council direct us to further study this
issue and set up a possible fee schedule in coordination with the
Fire Department.
It y-,-.;, Lave any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Thank you.
SAR/bac
Jim
V
P,
MEMO To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCI
FROM: CLERK-ADMINISTRATOR
DATF: JUNE 30, 1986 0 e
SUBJECT: OFF-SALF, LIQUOR LICENSE FEES
On September 23, 1985 the City Council adopted Resr,:ution
No. 1917 Establishinq Various Fees and Charges for City
services. One of the fees set by this resolution was a $220
license fee for off -sale intoxicating liquor licensees. We
havo been advised by the State of Minnesota Liquor Control
Commission that the maximum fee for such a license
established by State Statutes is $200. Therefore, it will
be necessary for the Council to adopt a resolution, copy
attached, amending Resolution No. 1917 and setting the fee
at $200 per year as well as authorizing the refund of the
excess $20.00 fee to the City's three off -sale intoxicating
liquor licensees.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend Council adopt
Resolution No. 2025 and by Consent Agenda authorize the
refund of $20.00 in liquor license fees to Budget Liquor,
6 R Liquor, and Simons Liquor.
DFP/mjs
Attachment:
RESOLUTION N77. 2025
C11'Y OF MOONOS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSF.Y
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1917 ESTAHLtSHING
VARIOUS FEES AND
(SEAL) Mayor
ATTEST: Clerk -Administrator
j
I
MEMO 90: MAYOR AND (:I'IY (fgINr II,
FROM:
r
DA1'F.;
Em
('I.1'RR-ADMINISTRATOR AND DIRFCTOR OF PIINLIC WC
COMMONITY DFVFLOPMF.NT DIRFCI'OR
,IIINF: 10, 19R6 NAim 1
6
SIm yr : STAFF RFSPONSF '1'0 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT ON
W11ORN01; STUDY
After reviewing thr Planning rommission t'epnrt and Resolution
No. 166-96, which prerede this memnrand•Im, Starf felt it
appropriate to providr A response to these Incuwwnts in order I.o
prnvido an overall perapertive And clarify the facto upon which
anme Comments or conclusions of the Planning Commission ware
based.
The Planning Commission's Resolution tin, 166-86 recommends theL
the Woornos Report he neither adopted nor implemented. Thin
recommnndatinn is based upnn four findings listed in the
resolution with the first of Lheae being, "...contains
inaccuraries and incnnsistences in data;". As the Planning
Cnmmission did not see fit, to invite Mr. Wunroos to any of their
mertings when reviewing his report Si.dff wishes to aadress each
of Lhe statements made in their report which seem to have
resulted in this conclusion.
1. "The Planning Cnmmissicn contends that our present
/r difficulties are related to the fact. that the
II Comprehensive Plan was never implemented in these
planning districts, and further, that the reluctance of
previous councils to implement the Plan indicate that
there are still many unresolved conflicts in opinion and
planning philosophy."
The fact that the rernmmendatinns of the Comprehensive
Plan have not been fully implemented in Planning
Uislrict.s 6 and 12 are a dirert result of the fact that
the City Cnuncil at the time of the rnmprehencive
Rezoninqs to implement the recommendations of the
rnmprehensive Plan, was reluctant to "down zone"
property and potentially become involved in the issue of
taking land by means of zoning. Any differences of
opinion as to how the area should he developed and/or
planninq philosophies, were voiced after the
romprnhonsive Reznninos occurred and had no impact upon
the decision of the Cnunr.il not to rezone at that time.
2. "Prnperty along Ilighway 10 appears to he suitable for
residential Ilses as well as commercial uses".
The Wunrnns Report's rerommendations relating to
rlevnlnp;nent were as follows:
I
MAYnR AND CITY CUIINCIL
PAGE TW)
,IUNF 30, 1986
1. The noise levels generated by highway
traffic indicate that residential
development not take place within
250 to 300 feet of the Hiqhway 10
roadway.
2. exposure of highway fronLage
properties to substantial traffic
volumes of llighway 10 indicate a
potential of success for commercial
activities within the study area."
To try to make an issue of the fact that a single
family home has been constructed along Highway 10 and
conclude that it is also suitable for residential use
misses the point. +then planning the development of the
community, the City mvst make a decision as to what an
area is "most suitable" for. of course s,me people
may find it suitable for something other thin that
which we anticipate, but others won't and we will then
have A partially developed area or we will get a mix of
uses not to dissimilar to thet which seems to be
occurring along Trunk Highway 10 at this time.
Ay desianatina the area for those uses felt to be
"most" suitable, the City should be able to avoid the I
problems inherent with mixed and incompatible uses and
truly plan for sound aesthetically pleasing
development.
3. "The residents of this community have expressed that
they do not want to develop frontage roads.'
The Planning Commission correctly concludes that the
residents of Districts 6 and 12 have expressed a desire
for no frontage roads. A careful evaluation of the
Wuronos Report, however, reveals that in the case of
the four sights specifically addressed, only one, site
A, can he said to have a proposal for a frontage road.
In the case of the other three sites B, C, and D, a
sinqle access point to a shared parking area is
recommended.
For all four sites, the report recommends buffering
from adjacent properties and Trunk Highway 10 using
.earth berms, planting?, and possible fencing."
Such prnpnsals would make this development signifi-
cantly different from the frontaqe roads along
Central and University Avenues which are given as
examples of undesireable development by the Planning
Commission.
4. "The City has not been successful in its attempt tv
estahlish a development district."
r►
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL.
PAGF: THREE
3UNE 30, 1986
This conclusion seems to allude to the decision of the
City Council to not assist in the development of the
tax increment district at the intersection cf Trunk
Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road through the use of
condemnation. The fact is that a development district
AS proposed by the Wuornns Report is not antirely
similar to a tax increment district and, therefc.re, the
conclusion of the Planning Commission has no basis in
fact. A development district is a geographic
area established by the Comprehensive Plan and znninq
ordinance that limits development to the types of uses
determined to be desireahle and establishing
deveinpment/performance standards upon which all
development proposals are judged. The designation and
enforcement of a development district does not require
that the City assemble the land and/or condemn property
to assemble the site, but simply establishes a more
restrictive guide for development of an area other than
that currently available through a standard
Comprehensive Plan or zoning code.
5. "Architectural Review Boards primarily serve to protect
and/or preserve architectural themes within a community
L or district. The City of Mounds View has not
established an architectural theme, and may not care
to do so; we rely on our standards of development to
control structures erected in Mounds View."
Unfortunately, the City's development standards do not
address the issue of archi_ec'_ure and in the case of
development along Trunk Highway 10, the ^:ty may find it
to he in our best interest to regulate all aspects of
the development including architecture. The establish-
ment of an Architecture Review Board does not require
that the City legislate certain architectural themes
within all or part of the community but simply sOt forth
quidelines for the types of architecture considered
to be most acceptatle and desireable by the community
for the area involved.
The second finding of the Planning Commission charges
that the Wuornos Report, "...supports its findinqs on selected
goals and policy;". Although no specific detail is given in the
Planning Commission Report with respecL to this finding, it would
seem upon reviewing the Wuornos Report that it addresses the
issues involved as directed by the City when the study was
initially authorized.
Finding number three of the Planning Commission states that the
Wuornos Report, "...does not address adjacent areas impacted by
the study area;". A careful review n' thepuornoslDeport tants tclearly
reveals that great efforts were taken by h
MAYOR AND CITY "OUNC11,
PAGE. FOUR
JUNE 30, 1986
K
address the concerns of the City that any development occurring
along Highway 10 not have a negative impact upon residential
properties immediately adjacent to that development. Their
recommendations include the installation of buffering between, any
commercial development along Highway 10 and the residential
properties to mitigate any negative impacts that might result
from the commercial development.
The fourth and f inal finding of the Planning
t offer a Commission
states
that the Wuornns Report, "...
ve
solutions;". Mr. Wuornns and his associates were charged to
perform a study of Planning Districts 6 and 12 and specifically
that area fronting upon Highway 10 and recommend appropriate land
uses and development controls in those areas. It would appear
from the conclusion contained in the mornos Report that it waS
their professional opinion that no acceptahle alternative
solutions were available.
The Planning Commission in their report does reach the following
conclusions as a result of the information and recommendations
contained in the Study and their discussions.
1. "Development controls must be reviewed and strengthened
to minimize impacts created by more intense land uses
adjacent to residential property." During the past two
years it has been generally agreed upon by all parties
involved, i.e., City Council, Planning Commission and
Staff that a comprehensive review and update of the
Comprehensive Plan is in order. In recent months it
has, in fact, become clear as noted by the Planning
Commission, that all of the City's development controls
;Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, Subdivision Code,
etc.) are in need of an update based upon current
conditions. This update will require the expenditure of
funds to employ consultants having the expertise not
available on the Staff to coordinate this effort.
2. "Traffic circulation and access to commercial property
must be controlled to facilitate safe and convenient
access that does not impact adjacent residential uses."
As can be noted in the Wuornns Report, great emphasis
has been placed on the buffering of commercial uses from
Adjacent property.
3. "Current zoning uses listed under our present various
commercial zones may he too broad in scope to contrcl."
Not only may our various commercial zones he too broad,
some of the uses may he considered to be altogether
undesireable and these uses should be eliminated from
the code as part of the overall review recommended in 11 `
above.
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
PAGE FIVE
11JNF 30, 1986
RECOMMENDATION: staff would recommend consideration of the
following actions by the City Council.
Establishment of development districts along thnne
sections of Planning District 6 and 12 fronting on Trunk
Highway 10 to restrict development to those uses
determined to be desireable by the Planning Commission
and City Council.
2. Establishment of an Architecture Review Roard and/or
architectural guidelines as part of the legislation
designatinq the development districts, which may be
enforced by the Planninq Commission as part of the
City's development review process.
3. Programming of the review and comprehensive updating of
the City's Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, Subdivision
Code, and other development controls by means of
ect:hlishinq derdlines, budgeting fiinda. wnd securing
qualified consulting assistance.
DFP/mjs
r
LW
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 166-86
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE PLANNING,
STUDY, "HIGHWAY FRONTAGE., PLANNING, DISTRICTS 6 AND 12, CITY
OF MOUNDS VIEW, DECEMBER 1985", R. L. WOORNOS AND ASSOCIATES
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View contracted R. L. Wuornos
and Associates to complete the referenced study; and
WHEREAS, the study has been completed and forwarded by the
City Council to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has completed an intense
review of the study; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the study:
I. contains inarrurraries and inronnistancies in data;
2. supports its findings on selected goals and policies;
3. does not address adjacent areas impacted by the study
area; and
1. does not offer alternative solutions;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View
Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that the
Wuornos Study be neither adopted nor implemented:
BE IT FVRTHFR RESOLVED that the Planning Commission
forwards the Study and this resolution to the City Council prior
to approval of the minutes.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Adopted this Oth day of June, 1986.
C—iia rrmin
Frrectnror—P C Worts%
Community Development
Va.
2l May 1986
REPORT ON STUDY PY R.L. WUORNOS AND ASSOCIATES
PROM, MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
(O, MOUNDC VIEW CITY COUNCIL
[he subJect study was commissioned by the City Council
to analyze the Highway 10 frontage property, to evaluate the
opportunities and contraints for development and to recommend
appropriate land uses and development controls for these
frontage properties, which are located in the Planning
Districts 6 and 12, The Planning CommissiOn reviewed the
study, both subjectively and objectively, to evaluate the
facts as presented and the conclusions and recommendations of
the planning consultant. The purpose of this report is to
suRmar ize our conclusions regarding the study and to advise
the Council of our future actions. This report will not
attempt to edit or critique the study -- the Commission is
reporting findings after a thorough review of the Planning
Study.__Ili ghway_ Frontage_PlAnn.ing_Distrtcta_6 & 1Y1 Clty__of
Mounds View,_ pKeslbK _1195► R.L. Muo►nos and Associates,
Ubran and Regional Research and Planning, Mlnneapoli►, MN.
The study states that the inconsistencies between the
ordinance tmapr and actual
land uses have created the dilemma that the city now faces
along the Highway 10 corridor. The Planning Commission
contends that our present difficulties are related to the
fact that the Comprehensive Plan was never Implemented in
these planning districts, and 4urther, that the reluctance of
previous Councils to implement the plan indicates that there
are still many unresolved conflicts In opinion and planning
philosophy. We believe that the resolution of these
conflicts will resolve the inconsistencies between the
Comprehensive Plan and the zoning map, because we will have
arrived at a compromise plan that will be implemented.
The recommendations of the study are based on several
premisesu 1) Property along a highway corridor is suitable
for only commercial uses. 2) Frontage roads will serve the
commercial properties. 3) The city will be ahle to use the
planning tool of development districts to provide high
quality develoment. 4) The establishment of an architectural
review hoard will enable the City to effectively administer
the standards of development. The Commission finds that
these premises do not necessarily reflect the reality of the
community's desires for development or ability to control
development by the tools listed) 1) Property along Highway
10 appears to be suitable for residential uses as well as
commercial uses. The "surprise" house built at 2923 Highway
10 is a very recent lesson that people will build their homes
in areas they choose, not necessarily where we expect them to
build. 2) The residents of this community have expressed
that they do not want to develop frontage rososf c„e
frontage roads along Central and Jnlversity Avenues are
frequently held up as examples of undesirable development.
3) The City lies not been succeseful to its attempt to
establish a development district. We fesl that the City
Owould rather not enforce Its policies through condemnation
and that the City is not in the real estate business
(buying/selling formerly privately owned property). 4)
Architectural review boards primarily serve to protr.t and/or
preserve certain architectural themes within a community or
district. The City of Mounds View has not established an
architectural theme, and may not care to do sol we rely on
our standards of development to control structures erected in
Mounds View.
In reviewing the study, it became very evident to the
Commission that a philosophy of develpment should be used to
establish the final recommendatiors fcr ali planning
districts within the City. Goals and policies that are
rclear-cut and substantiated by sound planning rationale
should dictate appropriate land uses. Avoiding the problem
has forced the City to impose the cu-rant building
moratorium, but the moratorium has also provided the time
necessary for both the Commission and the Council to deal
with the issue. The Commission feels that the R.L. Wuornos
study further points out our difficulties in dealing with the
issues and does not provide any alternative direction for our
consideration. Gleaned from the study, however, the following
recommendations do have significant wluse 1) Development
controls must be reviewed and strengthened to minimize
impacts created by more intense land uses adjacent to
residential property. 2) Traffic circulation and access to
commercial property must be controlled to facilitate safe and
con veni ant access that does not impact the adjacent
residential uses. 31 The current zoning uses listed under
our present various commercial zones may be too broad in
scope to control.
The Commission plans to continue its study 'if districts
6 and 12 and will mate specific site recommendations as well
as pertinent Chapter 40 updating. We welcome the City
Council Membersquestions, concerns and participation in
this process.
GOALS
Planning Commission recommendation
for land use in moratorium area -
fullr written report to Council
Specific rezoning recommendations
Specific Chapter 40 recommendations
Continue the Comp. Plan update
mm2
brW&J
TIME FRAME
Early AuQ.
Early Aug.
September
Aug. - Jan.
e)
j
fir, 9)
MEMO To: Mayor and Council r/
FROM: Finance Director -Treasurer Rraqer
DATE: ,June 26, 1986
RR: RENF.wAI. OF JANITORIAL SERVICES CONTRACT
The Janitorial Services Contract is presently up for renewal.
Contract Cleaninq Services, our present service, has proposed an
increase in their monthly fee to $530 from the present rate of
$490 per month. This is an increase of approximately 89 over the
pievlous rate because of increased wages and insurance costs.
I have checked with various City staff members and all are
satisfied with the service that has been provided during the past
year. Recalling the experience that we had with the previous
service and keepinq in mind the positive experience we have had
with the present. service I recommend that the Janitorial Services
Contract he renewed at $530 per month for a pc�lcd cf one year.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the proposal of Contract Cleaning
Services in the amount of $530 per month for janitorial services
for the City Mall Building and authorize the Mayor and
Clerk -Administrator to enter into said contract.
DR/ds
LV
MFMO 1u; Clerk -Administrator and City Council
OOW FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development
DAI'Et ,IONt; No 1986
SIKIECT: COIINTY ROAD I AND HIGHWAY IU INTERSECTION
Attached please find my letter to Ken Weltzin of Ramsey County
dated .Iune 16, 1996, requesting that two lanes be painted on
eastbound County Road I at its intersection with Highway 10.
I called Mr. Weltzin on ,June 24, 1986, to delay the work
requested at the nnbiect intersection until we have had a chance
to discuss this issue further. lie said that they would wait
until they received another letter to start the work at County
Road I and Hiqhway 10.
The letter was sent because staff has received numerous phone
calls from residents that drive from west to east through the
intersection (as opposed to those that frequently turn right)
stating that they narrowly avoided an accident with another car
also driving west to east. The near accidents occur because the
eastbound twn lanes must funnel into one lane at the intersec-
tion. The traffic hazard will be eliminated when County Road 1,
east of Highway IU, is widened to four lanes. one solution to
this problem is to paint lines for two lanes on the east hound
• section of County Road I and label the left lane "left turn only"
and the right lane "through and right turn only".
If twr, lanes are painted and marked as indicated, another problem
is created. The unmarked existing surface of east bound County
Road I at the intersection of Highway 10 is wide enough to accom-
modate three vehicles while the signal light is red. The stopped
vehicle farthest to the right always turns right. Thus, an
unofficial right turn lane is created. If two lanes are painted
and the right lane is marked "through and right turn only", the
driver that turned right will need to wait longer than if the
lines are not painted.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) does not allow
a right turn lane at the intersection of Highway 10 and County
Road I like the one at the interesection of Highway 10 and Long
Lake Road because the angle of the intersection of County Road I
to Highway 10 is approximately 90 degrees and the angle of the
intersection of Highway 10 and Long Lake Road is approximately /5
degrees. If the angle of intersection is less than 90 degrees,
MnDOT considers approving a right turn lane similar to the right
Lutn lane at Long Lake Road and Highway 10.
Ramsey County and MnDOT have determined that a full right turn
lane (approximately 200 feet long) is not needed at the inter-
section of County Road 1 and Highway IU at the present time.
Ramsey County and MnDOT approved Lhe construction plans of County
Road I without the right turn lane in 1984.
Staff requests direction on this issue.
SWT/bac
Cif of vow VQ�
�/ InMf1r (nl.wt. YINNHe,e
H01 1g111,W1. 10
MryUNOS V.Pw M1NN l/, 1I
116 W1%
rune 18, 1986 y
Ken Welt.zin
Director And County Engineer
Ramsey County
Depat lment of Public Works
167 Court House
St. Paul, MN 55102
RE; CrnINTY ROAD 1 AND IIIGIIWAY 10 INTERSECTION
AND COUNTY ROAD I AND QUINCY STREET INTERSECTION
Dear Mr. Weltzin:
I respectfully request that you paint lines for two lanes on the
east bound section of County Road I at Iiighvsy 10. 1 also request
that you make the left lane A left turn only lane and that the
right lane be a through and right turn only lane.
MAity I"esitlenLN have COtltArled the City of Mounds View indirAtiny
that their is An extremely long wait At the south hound Quincy
Street intersection with County Road 1. Would you please check to
see if the loop detectors are working properly.
If you have Any questions, please feet free to call.
Sincerely,
cl'rY OF MOUNDS VIEW
SleVen w. Thatcher, P.F.
Directrrr of Public. Works/Community Development
SWT/hAc
CC: MAynr and City CounriI
Clerk -Administrator Parsley
MEMO 'Irti (1 erk-Administrator and City Council
�a FROM i 01rertor of Pubiic Works/Community Dsvelopmen //j
7 UA'It:s JIINF 10, 1986 /{`
SUBJEC3r NWHESTS AND PF.I'ITIONS FOR S'R)RM SEWER IMPRUVF.Mt:N'IS
I. WORK REpULSTED
Attarherl please find the foliowinq written rerplests for
storm sewer work(
I. Petition from residents near Eastwood Road and Arden
Avenue received Ray 5, 1986 (Attachment No. I ) .
2. Letr.-r from Joseph P. Weaver received June 6, 1986
(Attachment No. 2).
3. Letter from Dnuq and Kay Weseman received May 14,
1986 (Attachment No. 3).
4. Petition from residents near 8439 Knollwood Drive
received May 12, 1986 (Attachment No. 4).
Mr. and Mr. Reinhardt at 2741 Ardan Avenue requested at the
last Council meetinq that the City remove the approximate 4
font diameter and 5 foot high green concrete pipe from
their back yard.
H . PURPOSE
The purpose of this memo is to solicit direction and City
policy on storm sewer improvement requests and petitions.
III. BACKGROUND
The location of the work requests are indicated in Attach-
ment. Nn. 5.
1. Work Re ueat No. 1 (Attachment No. 1) - There is A storm
water stet on pon nn the C arbonneau Subdivision which
is located northwest of the intersection of Arden Avenue
and Eastwood Road. Tne detention pond was approved for
construction by a previous council. The pond presently
holds water for long periods of time because the proper-
ly nizcd ... •lct pipe !F plugged ;:r Wag oov..- ir,stalle:.
Staff could not locate the outlet pipe. Staff is
presently trying to located Mr. Charbonneau to have him
install the outlet pipe. The City has approximately
$1,000 worth of security from Mr. Charbonneau. If he
1 does not install the outlet pipe soon, the security will
be used to install the properly sized outlet pipe.
- 2 -
2. Work Request No. 2 (Attachment No. 2) - Joseph P. Weaver
requests that the City improve t -e rainage ditch in the
hack of their yard because ponninq water almost flowed
into th#•ir basement through their back door this
Apr 1na. Mr. Weaver also indicrted that other neighbors
in the area are willing to sign this petition also.
Staff ir presently detPrmin(nq if the City has an
easement over Mr. Harstad's property. An easement over
Mr. Harstad's property is necessary in order to
constnurt a drainage ditch which f!ows to the east.
Iiavinq storm water flow to the east is the only way that
water can flow without installing storm sewer pipe.
J. Work Request No. 3 (Attachment No. 3) - Doug and Kay
WPaeman request that they solve the pondiiq water
problem that is by the nutlet to the storm sewer that
runs between 7551 and 7807 Bona Road. The ditch problem
next to their house is a symptom of a larger ditch
problem. The larger problem is that the bottom of the
ditch through the wetland to the east of their house has
silted in such that it is higher than the elevation of
the invert (bottom inside) of the storm sewer pipe. The l ,
City is in the process of securing grant funds from the
Rice Creek Watershed District to clean the ditch to the
wetland. The estimated construction cost of this
project is $60,000.
The other area of concern is the erosion on the ditch
banks in the ditch between the two houses. My opinion
is that the storm sewer should be extended to the east
because the banks of the ditch are ton steep to handle
the large flow of storm water. Another way to handle
the steep bank problem is to install retaining walls.
The entire project depends of receiving adequate funding
from Rice Creek Watershed District.
4. Work Re uest No. ! (Attachment No. 4) - Four property
owners located near 3 Kno wood Drive have requested
that the City solve the water ponding problem. There
hack yards hold water for several days after heavy rain
falls. :hey barrow one of the City's two pumps to
remove the watet d[tei la ge ;tnrrs.
In order to solve the prohlem, a properly sized storm
sewer inlet and approrimrtely 160 feet of pipe need to
he installed. staff originally thought that the pipe
could he installed by hand/shovel digging a trench for
the pipe. However, the water table is high and
continues to
r'
-3-
stay hiqh in the area which means hand/shovel digginq
the trpnrh is virtually impnasihle. The City's ground
water dewaterinq equipment is adequate for repairinq
pipes but not for installing 160 feet of pipe.
Ubvioumly, the other way to install the pipe is to
utilize a back hoe. if a backhoe is used, several trees
and a fence must he removed. The estimated cost of
inatallinq pipe utilizinq a hackhoe is $5,000. Before
additional details are discussed, overall impacts should
he reviewed.
To my letter to Dan Naugen dated May 27, 1986
(Attachment No. 3-2), 1 state that we would he qlad to
do the work but I do not state who would or should pay
for the work. What policy should the City have for
paying for storm sewer improvements?
The property owners signed a letter stating that they
understand the benefits as well as the risks involved in
installing the pipe (Attachment No.3-3). The risk. is
that storm water may come not the end of the plop
hecausn the City's existing storm sewer system in the
area may be undersized. The storm water exiting the
hr,'posed inlet pipe could cause localized flooding more
severe than they have at the present time.
Is the letter they provide adequate to protect the City
if the pipe is installed and if there is property
damage? Their letter does not state any specific risks.
Attorney Meyers states that releases r,f thin, type do not
relieve the City of liability for damages.
By installing this pipe, there may be additional
flooding or ponding down stream. Do the property owners
down stream understand the risks? By installing this
pipe are we just shift the problem to some place else in
the drainaqe basin?
Most cities construct all the needed storm sewer
improvements in a drainaqe basin at the same time. The
reasons for this are as follows:
1. All impacts are known prior to construction - All
the prohlems can he corrected at one time and no
area will be flooded because of the improvements.
2. Economies of Scale - A larger project solvinq many
problems at once is less expensive to construct than
snlvinq one problem at a time.
Larger cities make sure thAt the down stream pipes are
adequate to handle the flow from any proposed pipes
prior to installing the proposed pipes. As long as the
downstream pipes have adequate Capacity, the proposed
pipes can be installed.
Smaller improvement projects could he implemented
starting at the most downstream point and subsequent
projects could he constructed by working upstream. This
type of program must he hased on A comprehensive storm
sewer improvement plan for the drainage basin.
5. Nork Re uest No. 5 - Mr. and Mrs. Reinhardt, 2741 Ardan
Avenue, at the last Council meeting, requested that the
City remove the existing concrete pipe sleeves from the
top of the storm sewer inlet.
will removing the existing concrete pipe reduce tte
quantity of ponded water?
TV. SUMMARY
1. Staff requests direction and policy on storm sewer
improvement requests and petitions. C
2. What policy should the City have for improvements to
storm sewers when the down stream pipes may be
inadequate?
What policy should the City have for paying for
requested or petitioned storm sewer improvements?
4. If a large project to repair all of the storm sewer
problems in a drainage district cannot be funded, it
may be possible to correct the problems over several
years by correcting the downstream problems first.
SWT/bac
11
A
We lt.e undersigned petition that the holding pond located
adjacent to n2SO Eastwood Road; on the north side of Arden
Avenue, west nirle of Rastwood Road and the east side of
Sunnyatde Rmfl he properly drained. The pond is both a
health and safety hazzard.
NAME _ _ ---ADDRESS PHONE
76
Qr..t 17711 ..rA.".. waCn1c//,r,e,,eef1 71Y/Sl91
«�..-��, �s� r3 Fps;raven 19� 78yJ: 99
woj Pel
'AD-5-53'2
Lui
fL' 7iQf• - J 111—
%.gtrv►q/5& PY ')3o,1
_ r' .. 4 Lo �. i �j�'r(.i ti'• r..ii ! ��.y. gyp,
,
• .. !h. Ir c�Llt-� t C�si. ' 3 ��l ��_ ),i'7 ^ cf'� del
1-1
GATEWAY 1 TO ?It[
MAY 19, I9R(1
Richard Nelson
8260 EARiwnnd RoAd
Mounds ViPw, MN 55432
cif� of wandsiQw
neMalI MINT♦ MINMl IOTA
24AI 111n„WAV 10
41h11Nnt V I! W, wINN !l,17
ilil0lt
RFt STORM WATER RFTFNTION POND DIRFC'rl.y SOUTH
OF 8250 I:AS'I'M)OD ROAD
DeAr Mr. NPlsnn:
This letlar in in resnnnAR to your petition that we received on
MAY 5, 1906, And nur phone conversation. I hove no problem with
Ynu And/or your nPlohtx»s Pxcsvatlnq A trench to drain the
retention ry,nd directly south of $250 FAstwood Road. The trench
should hP PxcavAted directly south or the catch basin (storm sewer
Inlet) in the bAck yard of 8250 FAstwood Road.
if ynu ,In not PxrAVAte this In the near future, city crews will
PxcAvate. the nrPA And inatali A pipe to drain the retention pond
this summer.
If you have Any questions, p1PasP feel free to call.
Sincerely,
CI'ry of MOIINUS VIEW
S1.Pven M. Thatcher, n.F,.
Director nr PnIIiIr Works/('ommunity DPvelopment
SWT/Aar
cet Clerk-AdminlottrAtor P& O PY
fl0
l. In r,
�Ifr, rM1VV, IL if
✓ r
/l N�)r Ai nlVyc cal r)RO n n i j / _
ii'A
t 1-2
1.
June 3, 1986
Steven W. Thatcher, P. E.
Director of public Works/Cnwunity Devolopemert
City of Mounds View
2401 Highway In
Mounds View, MN 55112
near Steve:
1 am writing this letter as follow-up to our conversations over the past
few weeks about the drainage problem on the east end of Louisa Ave. I
own the property at 2613 Louisa and have received several complaints
from the people renting that property about standing water in the back
yard. Examination of the problem has led me to the conclusion that the
situation is at least heing compounded by landscaping done by the people
at 2617 Louisa. It appears that in the process of sodding the back
yard, they have blocked the drainage ditch which should carry the water
away from the Louisa residences and into the Wild Area which borders
Long Lake Rd.
The properties along Louisa have had a history of water problems since
the subdivision was built in the early 1970's. The situation was never
satisfactory until the drainge into the Wild Area was improved several
years ago. Since then, things have been fine until this spring, I
believe the water is being backed up by the recent landscaping changes
made by my neighbor, however, an inspection of the ditch running behind
the Louisa properties may indicate that a clean-up of the area may be
in order.
I would appreciate your prompt attention to this
in my yard is being damaged by the standing water
Increased rain may cause flooding in my basement.
further help, please call me at 854-7101 during t
night.
Sincerely
( oseph P. Weaver
505 Belvidere Ln,
Edina, MN 55435
,- I i It r,
fn. rn i/,t/i/
matter since the grass
and I'm afraid that
If I can be of
he day or 920-1489 at
I
2 - 1
Cif�of UOU0 s iew 1
.A4\ir fl,IlN,r MINNHO,n
)4,11 IIIIl I1W Av 111
VPI INM VI/W MINN 66I12
,Al ,Mq4
Mule h, 19Hfi
Mr. ,I„aeph P. Weaver
4505 pelvidore IAne
Edina, MN 55475
Dear Mr. Weaver:
Thank, you for your let tor dAted .inne 1, 1gB6,
We will he investigating thin situation And we
will he in touch with you in Approximately two
weeke,
Sinreroly,
I
CITY OF MOUNDSVVJEEWW
;R/oven W.
Thatcher
nirertnr
of Public Works
SWT/rr
rr: Mayor And City Council
r'lerk-Administrator
2 - 2
R
9 MAY 1996
I ily of Mnnnllavl nw \\1�� ofP. 1•1
l lnrsor Ab l e MAvnl And Cf l y I'oonr I I Mparllpl q r
rhea I"I let Iq In requpsf that an appr nprl Ate Act oil
snarl to cl"An till flip dr AlrlAgp ditch that runs betwppn 77"1 And
78u7 polls• RrlAd. Thp sltflAtion was viewed in the sprinq of 19q!
by flip 110)11ndSvl Pw I:ity Fnornopr who compl Ptpd a study and cost
At, aI)afa ill fopai rl ng t1,p If tr11 It was v►rhally proposed thAt
A roll vrlt his, II-0 Allod to carry thn wAtpr into that water shed
A)PA rAthpr 1IIAn to rely on the ditch. Aq a result of thisi
s t. Oil v, I IIor Amp Appnr Pot that it wuold hp Pr.onrmicAl to
tngtAII A Iulvrrt tAther 1.IIAir to contInup cIPAnIPq nut th►
(Iflrl- Of poi Indic inter vAlq And continue repAirino erosion
dAmari,s to bnr dot I nq or op Pt I I eq.
I.Agt (All IhP city mAinf PnAorp dwpartmwnt drove A becl,-how no
clllr lAwli And (Illri rltit that ditch II outlet
which cleAned coot sump
of thr
r.nrlimnut
in flip nppninq. This sobgegnpntly
increaspd
t.f)p 14AI-I
fifth,
Arid thpietty arcrier-Atpd
the cnntinnpd erosion
to no'
nI tip".
No i nvi t o volt in romp ntlt
And view riot only flip
sever"
-1"gln,,
dAmatin tit rinr yard hilt also
the IArlin holPq left
by the
bar I 1.1r".
Isis, bpIIsolve flip current
ditch Ia A safety
hAr AI d
to Ill" yrnuro
chi 1tir Pit of Ihp Ar PA
which appm
partiurlarily Attracted to flip apvpral #opt of standinq wAfpr
Alter A rittirmAl raiof&I I. The ditch also rleposltq IArgw amount%
n( oArhApP IhAk floats up thr(luoh it, which seems to be An
Added ganil Al inn prohl Pm.
It IIAa hrF'n Aiigopgf P11 t hAt flip ownpr s of the bor der i ng
fsopp-tipq male a IArgP pprsonAl contribution 111500 Pach1 fnr
rleArlinq tip flip difrh. lisp propprty Paaement already granted
by the rpgpPrfivp IAn(fnwnPrs It^% rpmovrd over 3I1 tlsablp loot of
our vat d In hoop fII all of Molindsvipw in its droinAoe systpm.
11 the city Is in true financial disparity thus larllnq the
!rinds to act nil this mAtlet-, than wp propose that An asspaampnf
bat Ir.irrd on All the prripertips fhAt bpnpfit from uelnq thla
swompnt n( (I-- drainage systpm to share equitably in the
nprpssary cnst of maintaining It.
[Isis efluAlion has cnntinumd for Its second yper now end Yip
1,101,11H apprpriAlP something concrete, being done About it.
Rprsp►ctfully,
,61 Anri KI&IU)J-Urr1AA-
11ouq and 1 Ay WPsemen
Tplephnnel 786-5600.
.1
3 - 1
s4 0
cif�ofvoun�
nAMa r M1141 Y MINN{ 4ni n
74", Illn.ly/AY In
01,11Ne4 VIF* MINN 44112
IF4.M44
MAY 21, 19R6
A. .1. Cardinal, Sr., PrnsI(lent
Rice Creek Wnlershed nistrirt
3585 6exingtnn Avenue North
Suito 1'17
Arden Ilills, MN 55112
RE! .IUDICIAI. DITCH NO. I - nRAN(li Nil. 5
REPAIR To ORIGINAL CROSS rr:r"rION AND PROFILE,
CITY PROJECT NU. 86-6
Oear Mr. Cardinal:
We propose repai rInq nrAnrh No, r, of .lurlirial Ditch No. 1 to its
original miss sort Inn and prof l le as a City project (At tar hymen
No. I). 'rhp repair work is needed because the ditch has Filled in
such that storm sewer notlets do not drain and road culverts are
hplow the hottnm of the ditch. If the dit.rh is not cleaned,
property damage may occur.
Under Reparat^ cover, I am suhmitting plan sheets 14, 32, 13, and
'14 of Al for this ditch prepared by Comstock and Davis, Inr. In
May, 1964. 'rhe propnsed prniert will repair the ditch to its
nriginal cross section Anil profile. Excess excavation will be
disposed of at an approved fill site.
The estimated cnn0 ructinn cost of this project iR $60,000. The
City of Mnnnds View can HOW a maximum of $30,000 for this
project. The City does not want. to utilize the petitioning
process or assess thin project.
10 it appropriate to ask Rire Cr.tpk Waterchod District to fund a
portion of this project? If yes, will you fund the rest of the
project?
If ynn have any qupations or nerd AdIlit.innal information, please
feel free In rail,
Sinrerely,
CITY OF MDIINDS VIEW
Steven W. Thatcher, P.E.
J
Director n► puWlie Work s/Cnmmunil.y Opvelopment
SKI'/har
cr) rl^rk-A,IminiRtralnr Pa1tl^y
polo Wi l 1pnhring, t;. A. Illrknrk a Annnriatpa 3
2
cif of MouesVi P
�� n.Y!It'N �.11, u1HNt{n�n
)•Inl lllnlny�r III
Yn1lHllt Vir W, 41NM x41p
r 11A M14t
!Iny Jl, 14A6
Dollq Wngnlnnll
7807 Mona Road
MounJg View, MN 1,5432
RF: YOUR LF.111:1f IlUrn MAY 9, 1986
OPar Mr. Wr.gnman:
Thank y,ln for your letter da!erl May 9, 1986. Per nur phone
ronvergnlion, flip ditch pinhlpm next to your hrnrgp is a gymptnm of
A larger (IIIrh 1, roll lPill. The larger problem I that the hoItom of
Ihp dilrh Ihronuh the wetland to the rant of ylnlr house has siltpd
in gurh drat it is higher than the elevalinn of Lhe invert of the
storm gnwpr pipe. The City in in the proresq of securing grant
fundq from Aire Creak Watershed Ditrict to clean the ditch through
flip wolland. 1'11e estimated congUurtinn cost of this project is
$611,n11n.
Thp olher area of roncern is flip erosion on the ditch hanks in the
ditch Irplwenn your hnuso and 7751 Rona Road. My opinion is that
flip storm snwer should be extended to the pagi. hpcauge the hanks
of the dil.cll ate too steep to handle the large flow of storm
water.
The entire project depends on receiving adequate funding from Rice
Creek Watershed District. I may have an answer from Rice Creek
Watershed Iriglrict in one or Iwo months. Then again, it may take
longer 1-o get the fundinu arranged.
If yrnt have any quentionq. please feel frpe to call.
Sincerely,
CITY OF IM IIINU:: VIt:
� I ,%vt2
Stteven W. Thalrilel, P.F.
t 0iractnr of i,iiblic Wurkq/t'nmmwliit.y Devnlnpmpnt
SWT/hal•
CC Mayot and Clly rnur.ril
Clerk-Adminialrator Pauley
3 - 3
••\1.\Its \ h 1H'. I�h
a.. ...rn. In.rr o.0 •. .,Iola
r.. r II 11 .Ir11.•. M.I' � 11 .
1 I . II ..II . 1 . .. ...• .
Jump 2, 1986
Mr. Steven Thntrlter
City of µNixie View
24n] tliglwny In
Kxuxla View, MJ , 5112
Dear Steve!
or
Ir..
tj
rr
e•.i i
T IIAve ckxe A fair Amwnit of reavlrrh to rPar"Wl to your cpteatlon
regArdinq tJe Stationry Authority to Alper or retwir judiriAl ditch
tttmher I or Any ntler ditches within ttn City of ttntnxls View. I heIleve
T have An nnew,r to your quentiou rtgArfling the Statutory Authority And
T IMP Alan pier,nresl a form letter which I would mggPat only AA A
criicblinP for y,t in prelharing ycnr letter to the Watershed District.
in my 11dnhxt tan ttirr Creet, Wnlerslxrl Dlsttrict (whichh was fnrmPd in
1g72) is rPatvnail,lo fir tie rar.air aryl Ijk er f 4'Ainlol Ajt, n. ri
1. It is Alan try opinion fret tjte W.iterstecl District is responsible for
Any 11Ability resulting from injuries rattaed by the ]Ado of rPtwir on
that rlitrh. Ikwrwer, there is no direct I.vglaoP within MinnesotA
Statutes wdflrh irj., such liAbi Iity on the WAterrherl District AM I
Irlleve this rear"mibility Is by implicatirn drawn from the duties of
the WAIPrPhRl District to maintain Aral alter ditches.
Minnesota Statute Section 112.42 prrvides that our Watershed District
wi l l he rngrrgpd of mmagers whn wi I i ioe elected to run the Watershed
District plan. PurmlAnt to Mim,esntA Statute Section 112.13, these
mtnagers Imp rorlain poses alxl duties. I have enclosed a copy of this
ShAtutP for ycnr infntmttinn. PurahAnt to SUN. 3 rf that Statute, they
hlwh the duty six] power to clean, pnslnx•t, rrtwir, or Alter ditches
within their jnriarliction. 1 believe turn+ant to this Statute then the
WAtershtwl District is re."iglble for the upkeep of judicial ditch
tntmloer 1.
71x, prrver prnrekire wah:d he to hrinq the problem with the ditch to the
Attrntion of the mrxarers atxl regtest that they mike improvenehts. They
In turn will regitest the County ricwrri for the neressnry futxis to nwke
tle 1rq,rcrvexxrnla pursuant to M1nnPontA Statute Sectlao 473.RR3. If the
Inrrowmnhts Ara• AmPpted, the cost of these imlrmrs"LR will he
app,rtirt"l ihrosxtixAtt Uve the CuNrtj.
The AttArirxl letter As T ltrllcated Is only A gui&lion. Certainly there
Is Ix, Al+n•In1 1er1A1 form that this letter has to take to he effective.
All that 1 W11111 rerprirP from A lsgnl srmxllaint is tiwt the letter
sperifirAlly Atale tle proiolmm tat Pxlst, the locluion of the prxi,lmm
,,40
3 - 4
Mr. clrvm llotrir+r
,rule 2, 190A
I'mm 2
within the oily, nlrl rrrprst tlrat the wAtPrAlrrl District make the
iM+rnv.amntR AR Tllckly All "0111P. Yral slwulrl Alsrt M AMAre that if
Or Jnt,oafv"itA IInAl1vP A RUh4,tAoHA1 Amnmt of cvgt, thAt A petitirm
MY IMP to In filal p11rMiftllt to M1niMnntA Ctstule iSeOtirn 112.47 whidl
1s mentirrwrl mrlor Gdrl. 1 of Minn. $jAt. Gr. 112.41 Poc)rwerl. 1 (in
not lletimm Ilot llr init+rlsim nlR whiril we Are reTlesting will fell
within Owl trrplirmralt to petitirm the lmrd.
1f Yal "I Any furtirr help, or hAve Any POrr rplPRtirnA in this
INAM, StMM p1eAM cAJI Mp.
YcalrA trilly,
Mark A. Wiley
WW./slv
PIIClrxalleR
C
3 - 5
II
cif�of MIIlIOW 9 view
nA4CIr 1'I\IINIY 4INN{CI\II\
14MI ltlr\IIWAY III
MI\IIN,K VI{W 4INN AM1111
144 "It
,tiro 6, 19116
A. .1. ('ardinai, sr.
Preyirinnt
Rirn ('inrk WAI_rraliml uialrirl
3505, Lexington Avpnne North
gi1ile 171
Arden llilis, MN 55126
pr- CIORM WATER
linar Mr. Card nail
Rnsirirnls have hrronght to the City's Attention the 1
pntontiAl hAznrria rplAtivp In .711diciAl bitch No. 1 And
J11IJiriAl Mich No. 1, Pranrh 5.
The ditr•h, with ifs hrAnrhns, runs through the City of
Mounris Vlew And Also extends into the City of Blaine
And AnnkA Cnnnty. It is rV nndpratanding And the City
Alfornpy's undprstandinq that the ditch fAlls within
the juriarlirtion of ynur WAterahed nistriet powers.
It is my hoIipf thAt. enrh ronliltinna, while pnsing a
hazard In flip publir At the present lime, could in fArt
result in some Injury or damAgns to certain ritizens
within flip city. As A result I Am requesting, on
hrhalr or flip City of Mnunrls View, IhAt you tAke
whalovor ^.lolls Are npcessAry In remove these
p,o entially liazArdona cnnditions In ensure thr safety
of flip vilizpns of Mnunrls Vinw. It is my tindrrstAnding
thAl, this rrapnnaibility has henn drlegAtpd to your
Watprshnd nistrir.t. pnrananl. Lo MinnpantA St Atutp
l il.11 112.43, fitlNl. 3. if thin In not done, Rice
Creek WAInrShed Uiakrirt worild he liAbin for injuries
or dAmagps rraniting frnm lark of ditch repair.
Tr.... pr...p il,p r•ity r\r m,mmie View rAnnot he held
IIAI,Ir for IIIUr ICM •rl Unn1.Hp•Y :tr1�1I11. 1,1Y1 �1. rAi. ,if Y.n ...
ditch repair.
3 - 6
Mr. CaIIinal
C Pa<1^ Two
.11 n,e 6, 19106
If you have any rpteSlJnnS, pinaSe An nnl. heait.ate to
cnnlacl. MO.
Sincerely,
CI -ry OF MolINDC VIEW
Jort LInY.r
Mayor
/hac
cca Ctty Council
Clark -Administrator Pauley
City Attorney Meyers
City At+,rney Barney
PnI)lir WnrkS/Community Develnpment
1 Director Thatcher
Pate WillenbrinU, F. A Ilicknrk F Associates
M oyd Scott, Sr., 51oo Red Oak Drive
3 - 7
� I •q '�N 11>•1flf�m
NDit'M
II �
C IT ! ftWAJ, r� w
i • /d/rol" CITY /R/JRL7 •�
� •t►��/ RRAyjr�/l�rELl1► M.StILRI
lie - t.
r R _ ,I
41
�I I
I
ate• a. ...cc� !7 � ;. i \ ��
DI7c.+=1
I • � •, •.es. is �evorc:n REVArK v PfNtwDDJ I .
• RL i
Cif Of vouhdiew
"Am!rvfllUMly YI"Now,IA
'I"' I�II,'MAI In
U1111N1r\ V1,W. MIN" 111111
M Z..,
June 11. 1986
A. J. Cardinal, Sr.
Prenidenl
Rice Creek Wateraherl DisLricL
1585 Lezinrlton Avenue North
Spite 177
Arden [fills, MN 55126
RE: J11DICIA1, DITCII NO. 11 IIRANCII NO. 5
Dear Mr. Cardinal:
The Moinkla View CiLy Council requeata that the Rice
Creek Walersll-d District allocate as mur,h money as
poaeihle ror the repair of ,judicial Ditch No. 1,
Branch No. 5.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
7 L�01,
/I fertPy LinkP
Ma yo r
/Ix
1 3 - 9
nn I
ONLY
lxl ,u it,
• " ��� u�ucUr w .�,dru��
�Atf,AoluCC� /vt<3Gl� hwe
��iv� e�,.earax�tt„cd ��e1 O
r �U h �rerg f
dexE YO �t,/
aQtiteds� ez�7i�CixCi'en.�v and ���� � � rna�r,�r /'
n1f�J
u�Ga)L/
.�-1 jr✓d,� 1.,� w
Q�cly r `tncol
f�11-i,y � II{osk`,
0
A3946Amiz
F_ 419 'i
�4I.5t 1/�cOY
r
►IN
(if4 of VOM 9 VQW
V nAMRi. CMI INI. MINNr On 1A
),ill III. NWA, 10
M, 1411, Wow MINN GO, 17
I R4 WA
MAY 11, 19116
Stan IIAllgell
8419 I(tiollwood Drive
MolinrlR View, MN 55412
Rt:t YOIIR I.Kl I1:R I)A'rl•;D MAY 12, 19116
I hr•Ar Mt. Ilangrni
Per our rerrnl ronverRAtionn, we diRrnsRP(I inRtAlling a storm
sewer pipe frr,m tale manhole locat.ed approximately 160 feet Rnut_h
of the low AreA in your back yard.
The Cily would he glAd to install this storm sewer pipe provided
that you And your neighhnrs unrterstnnd that after the pipe is
i list AI led, storm water MAY romp nut the end of the pipe he(rAuse
the CltyIs rxinlillg Rt01"m sewer system ill the Area is underRixed.
1'hls Rtnt"ill water exltino the proposed Inlet pipe could CAIIRe
IocallzPd flooding more severe than you have at the present time.
if yell rin not. have any Problem With this, p1PAse Rerid mP A letter
RtAtinq R11(fll Alld we will proceed to install the storm sewer pipe.
I Am AIAn requesting that All the property owners that signed your
nriginAl letter sign ynur slI letter.
If ynu have any questions, please feel free to Cali.
Sincerely,
CITY OF
MO(IIFNDS/VII'W
St.Pvell W. I atrliei, II.F.
Dilerlm
of Pnhlir Works/Commnoily DPVPlnrrnrnt
AHr/bar
rr I MAY"r an.i C i l y (blinr i t
rlrik-Admini^.trAtnr PAulry
4 - 2
¢c x ! /.7j / 9/6
CCI'• �lt�JCr..ciiti
pf 77%�%�z�rrs�G�%/CGCU'
a -i
MEMO TO: [lnunds View City Council
F ROM Bruce K. Anderrnn, Director
Varks, Recreation and Forestry
DATE: July 2, 1986
RE: Greenfield Park Playground Equipment
As you are aware, the City rompletedi construction of Phase I of
Greenfield Park during the summer of 1985. During construction,
process, we removed the playground equipment and have since con-
structed a wood perimeter harrier for the equipment to be relocat-
ed in. The e.puipment was stored in the City reservoir for the
past year and we have now relocated it back to Greenfield Park.
After reviewing the condition of the equipment, it is staff's
recommendation that we do not reinstall the equipment due to its
poor quality. the equipment is 11 years nld and the slide has
been re-fiberglassed on three separate occasions, and currently
there art, holes through all four sections. in addition to the
slide being in poor condition, the whirl and swing sets were
tseverely bent when they were pulled out of the ground.
Staff has requested that the Greenfield Park equipment he con-
sidered as a capital improvement in the 1987 budget as a $20,000
expenditure. Staff would like to entertain some general discus-
sion on this issue regarding the feasihility of purchasing this
equipment in 1986 and havinq it instal L d this summer. This
could be completed on a temporary loan basis so that the neighbor-
hood does not have to go through another summer without playground
equipment.
Staff will he providing an indepth review of each piece of equip-
ment at Grt,enfield Park as well as pictures at Monday evening's
Council mectinq.
AKA/sII
k r
r
DATE. APPROVED: 6/23/86
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
` r RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
URegular Meeting
A ( y < < June 9, 1986
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Ilwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Mounds View City Council was called to order by 1. Call to Order
Mayor Linke at 7:02 PM on Monday, June 9, 1986.
The Pledge of Allegiance was said.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilmembers Uuick, Haake,
Blanchard and Mayor Linke.
It was noted that Councilmember Hankner was absent.
ALSO PRESENT: Attorney Mark Karney, Clerk/Admini-
strator Pauley and Public Works/Community Development
Director Thatcher.
Motion/Second: Blanchard/Quick to approve the May
27, 1986 minutes as presented.
4 ayes 0 nays
Donald Hodges and Ray Young of the Mounds View Lions
Club made a presentation to the Council of a check
for $500, to go toward the Festival in the Park.
The Council extended their thanks to the Lions Club,
Motion/Second: Haake/Quick to approve the consent
agenda, as presented, and waive the reading of the
resolutions.
4 ayes 0 nays
Mayor Linke closed the regular meetinq and opened
the first public hearing at 7:06 PM.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained a written
report had been given to the Council from the
Police Chief and himself, outlining the liquor
license renewal process and any problems experienced
With Any of the establishments in the past year.
2. Pledge of
Allegiance
3. Roll Call
4. Approval of
Minutes:
May 27, 1986
Motion Carried
5. Residents
Requests and
Comments from
the Floor
6. Approval of
Consent Agenda
Motion Carried
7. Public Hearings:
Mermaid, Inc.
Mounds View City Council June 9, 1986
Regular Meeting Page Two
--------------------------------------------------------- ----
Ron Michna, 5287 Edgewood, stated he did not like the
open air concerts, as they are very disruptive for the
neighborhood.
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing and opened the
next public nearing at 7:08 PM.
Jeff Moen, 5284 Greenfield, stated he is the property
manager for the apartment building, and they feel it
is unnecessarily noisy at closing time.
David Carlstrom, 5297 Edgewood Drive, read sections
of City Code Chapter 100, specifically 100 09, subd.
4, 5 and 6, stating it is the owners responsibility
to clear his premises at the end of the evening. lie
stated the noise problems continue past the allowable
time, and i,e fecle it is sufficient cause to revoke
the license of Muldoon's. Ile added the lights in the
parking lot do not work, which encourages the problem
outside, and he feels it is the owners responsibility
to take care of these problems.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained a violation of
this type would be handled by a citation rather than
an arrest, and the Police Department feels they are
more successful in handling the problem by clearing
the parking lot versus issuing citations. He added
the Police Department goes through the parking lots
of all the liquor establishments between midnight
and 2 AM, as time allows, but they are often called
out for an emergency.
Attorney Karney clarified that the purpose of these
public hearings was to allow the citizens to come
forth and air their complaints. The City Council
will listen to them, than meet, with the Police
Department and then the owners of the various
establishments where problems have been noted, and
address these prohlems. He added the public
hearings will put pressure on the Council to put
pressure on the owners to take corrective action.
Mr. Carlstrom asked what time the food service is
in operation at Muldoon's, particularly on Sundays.
Mr. Conroy repiio,i uuiii i .J•1, exccp.. o..
Sundays,
when it is 12.
Mr. Michna stated he has been told by the workers
At M:,Idnon's that food is not served, that something
is always broken in the kitchen. Ile added the same
complaints were aired last year, and he would like
action taken. Ile stated he has asked to speak to
the oc.ner of the operation while in Muldoon's and
has been told he is never in the building past
afternoon.
7B. Muldoon's Inc.
•
F-
L
Mounds View City Council June 9, 1986
Regular Meeting page Three
---------------------------------------------------------------------
00h` Duane Duke, no address given, stated he aqrees with every-
thinq Mr. Michna has said. other concerns noted in addition
to the noise was that patrons sometimes urinate outside, the
fence has been broken many times, and disrespect for property.
Janice Johnson, 515q Greenfield Avenue, stated she
wrote a letter to the City last year and voic^_9 her
complaints at that time, of which noise wa4 one of the
major ones.
Councilmember Ilaake stated she heard many of these same
complaints last year, and she agreed they a:e a bother
to the citizens and something must be done about them now.
Attorney Kerney explained the standards to use in deciding
to renew or not renew a liquor license are substantial,
and he reviewed the requirements which must be met in
order to not renew. Ile stated the Councii would have
to make sure they have sufficient evidence and grounds
to not renew the license, and there is a substantial
burden of proof, and it would have to be from more
t:,an a few citizens. lie stated they would require
hard evidence and documentation.
Mr. Duke stated he felt if off -duty officers or bouncers
rwere station outside, it would alleviate most cf the
problems.
Mayor Links stated the citizens should call the Police
Department and file a complaint when there is a
problem, which will help to document the situation.
Attorney Kerney advised that the times when an officer
cannot get there in time, the citizens should file a
complaint against the establishment. He also stated
that pictures or a video tape would be very helpful
as evidence.
Mr. Michna stated he was angry that the license went
from a restaurant to a bar.
Councilmember Ilaake advised the residents to file
complaints. She also adviseJ Mr. Conroy that he
should fix the outside lights, hire an attendent for
outside, and advise the patrons as they lease that
they are to clear out of the parking lot also.
Mr. Conroy replied that the Council should tell him
what to do, and he will do it. Ile added he hrc no
objection to having an off -duty security officer,
and he will fix the outdoor liqhts.
LMr. Michna stated he did want it known that since last
year's hearing, Mr. Conroy has kept the yard neat, and
the fence in good repair most of the time.
Mounds View City Council June 9, 1986
Regular Meetinq Page Four
---------------------------- ------------------------------------------
Mayor Linke stated the situation should not have to get n
this far, and Mr. Conroy should be able to think ahead r
and tackle the problems at the very beginning, lie
stated he would also like the Council to receive more
advance notice of special events that are going to be
held there, to allow time for discussion and to work
out potential problems.
Mr. Conroy replied that he would like to cooperate, and
he will do his best.
Attorney Karney advised that the purpose of the public
hearing is for license renewal, and revokation or
suspension can take place at any time, and the Council
does not have to wait until renewal time to do something.
Councilmember Blanchard recommends-d Mr. Conroy repair
the outdoor lights in the parking lot.
Mayor Linke agreed, stating he should meet the standards
fui parking lot lighting. Mayor Linke closed he
public hearing and opened the next public hearing
at 7:05 PM.
Mr. Michna stated he does not feel Donatelle's 7C. Donatelle's
has been much of a problem, and problems tha! have Super Club ��
been brought up before have been cleared up. He
stated however, that a buffer zone is required
around parking lots but it has not been enforced
at Donatelle's, and there were two accidents that
he was aware of in the past year with people leaving
Donatelle's and pulling onto County Road Ha.
Ed Donatelle replied that he cannot obtain any
additional land for parking. He has spoken with
the owner of the adjacent property in the past
and has informed him he would like to purchase
some, but has been told it is tied up in probate.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained the City has
tried to assist Donatelle's by talking to the o'Neils,
but they are not willing t,-, sell off a portion of it.
Mayor Linke explained this establishment is grand -
fathered in with their rights, so the City cannot
require the 10' buffer strip.
Clerk/Administratnr Pauley also explained that
County Road iQ is a County road and the City cannot
force them to do anything special with it.
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing and opened the
next one at 7:51 PM.
Mounds view City council June 9, 1986
Heqular Meetinq Page Five
---------------------------------------------------------------------
000� There were n.o comments from the Council or the 7D. Loose Ends on 10
residents present, .so 'dayor Linke closed the
public hearing and opened the next one at 7:51 PM.
There were no comments from the Council or the
7E. B L R Liquor
residents present, so Mayor Linke closed the
public heari,:q and opened the next one at 7:52
PM.
There were no comments from the Council or the
7F. Budget Liquor
residents present, so Mayor Linke closed the
public hearing and opened the next one at 7:52
PM.
There were no comments from the Council or the
7G. Simon's Liquor
residents present, so Mayor Linke closed the
public hearing and opened the next one at 7:52
PM.
There were no rnmmontc f...r ttie C^u^nil .ua
H. Bel -Rae Ballroom
residents present, so Mayor Linke closed the
public hearing and opened the next one at 7:51
PM.
Director Thatcher reviewed the request of 7I. Chester Glisan
Chester Glisan for a minor subdivision of his Subdivision.
property at 7800 Lona Lake Road. Ile stated the 7800 Long Lake
Planning Commission nas reviewed it and Road
recommends approval.
Mr. Glisan reviewed how his property is situaLed
and why he is requesting the minor subdivisio,.
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing and reopened
the regular meeting at 7:55 PM.
Motion/Second: Ilaake/Quick to approve Resolution B. Consideration of
No. 2015, recommending Mounds View Planning Case Rslt. No. 2015
No. 190-86, for the Chester Glisan minor sub-
division, and waive the reading.
4 aves 0 nays Motion Carried
Councilmember Haake questioned if leaving the 9. Consideration of
development aareement as it stands would cloud Development
the agreement with the MTC. Agreement No.
86-75
Clerk/Administrator Pauley replied he feels the
MTC is nitpicking, in excluding provisions that
are not applicable to them. He explained a standard
agreement was used as Staff did not have the time
to customize one for this particular case.
ea❑^.ei'"C^.�.L: �,uunc ♦rwuw,a,w e•i w, i �au9 a cover letter
Lstating that it is a standard form, and certain exclu-
sions will be made for the MTC. She added they must also
consider the phone issue, and the City should also delete
the necessity of the MTC having to install a pay
telephone on the site.
Mounds View City Council June 9, 198�
Regular Meeting Page Six
-
-----------------------------
Motion/Second: Ilaekn/Dlanchard to approve Development
Agreement No. R6-75, with a cover letter indicating
the non -applicable parts will be excluded, and the
requirement for the telephone on the site will be
deleted.
4 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Director Thatche- reported that Ronald Richardson
has submitted
10. Consideration
information to the City through Attorney
Meyers, and his banker is
of Development
requesting that the letter
of credit have an expiration date.
Agreement No.
86-64
Attorney Karney stated he wit! have to iesearch
the isane further to see if an d:C
-they
would be appropriate. Ile added that if do
establish one, it should extend beyond the first
of the year.
Mike R16i, representing mi. Richardson, stated he
had spoken with Mr. Richardsu,,'s banker, who told
him an expiration date was required. He added that
Mr. Richardson could request an extehtion to cover
"^y ad94tional time LLdt is necessary, or the City
could draw on the letter. Ile agreed that the date
could be advanced, to allow ample time for
construction to be completed.
Attorney Karney questioned the amount of the letter
of credit, wonderinq whether $10,000 would be
sufficient to protect the City.
Director Thatcher stated that $10,000 would be
sufficient.
Motion/Second: Quick/Blanchard to table this item
anti— lr the next regular meeting, on June 23, 1986,
to allow the City Attorney time to look into it.
4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Motion/Second: Ilaake/Quirk to approve the renewal 11. Renewal of On-
o th-fie on -sale and off -sale liquor licenses for the Sale and Off -Sale
Mermaid, Donatelle's Supper Club, Loose tnas on iu, Liquor Licenses
B : R Liquor, Budget Liquor, Simon's Liquor, and
the Bel -Rae Ballroom, from July 1, 19R6 cn
June 30, 1987.
4 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carrie,,
Aounds View City Council June 9, 1986
Regular Meeting Page Seven
------------------------------------------------------ ---------------
Motion/Second: Ilaake/Quick to authorize the issuance
o awn on -sale liquor license for Muldoons, Inc.,
contingent upon a written agreement being reached
between the owners of Muldoon's inc. and the City of
Mounds view, addressing all of the neighbors concerns,
and place a completion date for the fulfillment of those
requirements by June 30, 1986.
4 ayes 0 nays Motion carried
Councilmember Blanchard stated she was concerned the
City does not have enough documentation on this
problem. She also stated she was concerned with the
problem of the food and the serving of liquor on
Sunday.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reported the Police
Department has done spot checks, and found them to
be in compliance.
There was discussion among the Council of how they
could enforce the requirements upon Muldoon's, and
it was recommended that the unmarked squad car be
used in the parking lot, whenever possible.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reviewed his memo of 12. Consideration
June 4, 1966 to the Council, recommending the of Purchase of
purchase of a computer power line protector, and Computer Power
he outlined the reasons why Staff recommends going Line Protector
with the higher bid.
Motion/Second: Quick/Blanchard to authorize the
purchase of an RTE-Deltec Power Line Protector
from Herb Bacon Electric per a proposal frum ileimer
Agency, Inc. dated May 30, 1986 in the amount of
$3,140.
4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Director Thatcher reviewed his memo of June 4, 13. Consideration of
1986 to the Clerk/Administrator and Council Water Treatment
regarding water treatment plant No. 1 roofing. Plant No. 1
Roof
Motion/Second: Uuick/Blanchard to award the project
for Water Treatment Plant No. 1 roof to All Seasons
Roofing Co., Inc. in the amount of $8,225.00, with
the funding to come from Account No. 700-122-4123.
4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mounds View City Council June 9, 1986
Regular Meeting Page Eight
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Director Thatcher reported that, per Council's direc- 14. Report of elk
tion, he had sent a letter to the Rice Creek Watershed Public Worki
District regarding Branch 5 of Judicial Ditch 1, and Community
they would like to have one or two councilmembers Development
attend their meeting on June 11ti, al 7:30 P11, to discuss Director
it. Director Thatcher reported he and Mayor Linke will
be attending, and he stated the City must also send a
letter, asking the District to contribute as much
funding as possible.
Director Thatcher reported Gene Anderson has resigned
from the Planning Commission, and there are several
vacancies to be filled on the Commission.
Attorney Karney had no report.
15. Report of
Attorney
Councilmember Quick asked where the ^_ity is in
16. Reports of
negotiations on the airport.
Councilmembers:
Councilmember
Attorney Karney brought the Council up to date,
Quick
and he reported responses have been received
from various officials to date.
Motion/Second: Quick/Blanchard to reaffirm the
Counc l's position on this issue, and have Staff
and the City Attorney proceed with the airport
lawsuit negotiations.
4 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Councilmember Quick reported he would not be able
to attend the Festival in the Park, as he will be
at Camp Tomahawk with the Boy Scouts.
Councilmember Haake had no report.
Councilmember
iiddke
Councilmember Blanchard asked the status f the
Cuuncilmember
fire inspections, stating she has asked for this
Blanchard
three times.
Director Thatcher replied they are presently
scheduled to meet with Fire Chief Fagerstrom
later in the week.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained Staff will be
submitting a revised scheduled for fire inspections,
anA rhoy must make a better judgement on scheduling
time, and get a better handle on the relationship
with the Fire Department, and how they will be f
functioning together. He added he will be meeting
with Director Thatcher and the two inspectors to
work out the details of what is required, and make
a schedule on a calendar, to follow. He stated
Mounds view City Council June 9, 1986
Regular Meeting Page Nine
-- ----- -- ---------------------------- -------- - ------
foh"e hopes to have a report to the Council by the
irst agenda session in July.
Mayor Linke asked for a councilmember to attend Mayor Linke
the Ramsey County League of Local Covernments
meeting on June 11, as he would be attending the
Rice Creek Watershed District maetinq. CounCilmember
Quick volunteered.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reviewed a letter received 17. Report of
from Kermit McCray of District 119, regarding Highway Administrator
10, in response to the letter he had written Mr.
McCray earlier. Clerk/Administrator Pauley reported
Mr. McCray assured him the project will go through
this year, and it will be Lid in July and started
in August or September.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reported that earlier in
the day, the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners had
adopted a resolution to resurrect the court
consolidation issue.
Mayor Linke adjourned the meeting at 9:58 PM. 18. Adjournment
Res�ec�fully submi ed,
Clerk/Administrator
to