HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 1986/10/13CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
OCTOBER 13, 1986
6:00 P.M.
A G E N D A
1. 6:00 p.m. - Executive Session - Discussion of Pipeline
Lawsuits with City Attorney
2. 7:00 p.m. - Call to grder - Regular Meeting
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Roll Call - Blanchard, Quick, Hankner, Haake, Linke
5. Approval of Minutes: September 22, 1986
Regular Meeting
(Corrected copy enclosed)
6. Public Hearings: 7:05 p.m. - Phyllis Leenerts
Minor Subdivision
7:10 p.m. - K-Gas Conditional Use
Permit 6 Development
Review for Gas Station
7:15 p.m. - JLN Development re:
General Concept Plan
7. Residents Requests and Comments From The Floor
---------------------------------------------------------
CITIZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING PLEASE GIVE YOUR FULL NAME
AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES
8. Approval of Consent Agenda
ITEM A. Accept Quote From Aqua Engineering, Inc. For an
Automatic Lawn Sprinkler System in the Front of
City Hall at a Cost of $3,272.00 With Funds to
Come From the Forestry Fund
ITEM B.
Authorize Installation of Underground Electri-
cal Service by N.S.P, at Groveland Park at a
Cost of $9,970.00 to be Charged to Account No.
100-380-4513
ITEM C.
Authorize Clerk -Administrator and Police Chief
to Enter Into Computer System Use Agreement
ITEM D.
Approve Resolution No. 2110 Amending the 1987
Budget to Reflect Increased 1987 Fire Protec-
tion Services Costs Negotiated Subsequent to
Adoption of the 1987 Budget
ITEM E.
Amend Item P of the September 22, 1986 Consent
Agenda to Read, "Declare 1966 International
Truck/Puppet Wagon as Surplus Property and
AuLhorize Sale to Jnhn nuckloy for $25.00"
AGENDA
OCTOBER 13, 1986
PAGE. TWO
ITEM F. Adopt Resolution No. 2097 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 431
ITEM G. Adopt Resolution No. 2098 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. A431
ITEM H. Adopt Resolution No. 2099 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 798
ITEM I. Adopt Resolution No. 2100 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 538
ITEM J. Adopt Resolution No. 2101 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 617
ITEM K. Adopt Resolution No. 2102 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 431
ITEM L. Adopt Resolution No. 2103 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 1004
ITEM M. Adopt Resolution No. 2104 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 5336
ITEM N. Adopt Resolution No. 2105 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 431
ITEM 0. Adopt Resolution No. 2106 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 431
ITEM P. Adopt Resolution No. 2107 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 5336
ITEM 0. Adopt Resolution No. 2108 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 1004
ITEM R. Approve Soil Corrections and Utility Wire
Burial at Groveland Park Tennis Courts
ITEM S. Set Public Hearing for Red Oak School Site
Major Subdivision for 7:10 p.m. on October 27
ITEM T. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding
Carol Rasmussen Three Month Review
ITEM U. Set Public Hearing for 19R6 Long Term Financial F
Plan for Monday, October 20, 1986 at 7:05 p.m.
ITEM V. Adopt Resolution No. 2113 Approving Just and
Correct Claims Against City Funds
AGENDA
OCTOBER 13, 1986
PAGE THREE
ITEM W. Licenses for Approval
General - Expires 6/30/37
BTL Construct on, Inc. - New
Franzen Const. Co. - New
Mark G. Johnson and Sons - Ncw
Osborne Const. - New
!!eating and Air Conditioning - Expires 6 /3'3 87
Ganley's Heating and Air Conditioning - New
Larson -Mac Company - Renewal
More's Burner Service - Renewal
9. Consideration of Resolution No. 2111 Regarding Approval
of Phyllis Leenerts Minor Subdivision
10. Consideration of Resolution No. 2112 Regarding Approval
of R-Gas Station
11. Consideration of Resolution No. 2109 Regarding JLN
Development
12. Consideration of Variance Request by Mr. Young, 2267
Lois Drive
13. Consideration of Variance Request by Mr. Gjerde, 2272
Lois Drive
14. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Clerical
Assistance
15. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 411, "An
Ordinance Amending Chapter 70 of the Mounds View Muni-
cipal Code Entitled, "Municipal Water System"
16. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 412, "An
Ordinance Amending Chapter 71 of. the Mounds View Muni-
cipal Code Entitled, "Municipal Sanitary Sewer System"
17. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 413, "An
Ordinance Amending Chapter 48 of the Mounds View Muni-
cipal Code Entitled, "Wetland Zoning Ordinance"
18. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Adult Foster
Care for the MenL•ally Retarded
19. Report of Public Works/Community Development Director
20. Report of Attorney
AGENDA
OCTOBER 13, 1986
PAGE FOUR
21. Report of Councilmembers:
22. Report of Administrator
23. Adiournment
Blanchard, Quick, Haake,
Hankner, Linke
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
1986
September 22,
UM t5 '�Mounds View City H:�.11
2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds
View, MN 55112
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Mounds View City Council was called to order by
1986-
1. Call to
Order
Mayor Linke at 7:00 PM on Monday, Septemher 22,
The Pledge of Allegiance was said.
2. Pledge of
Allegiance
MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilmembers Slaake, Blanchard,
3. Roll Call
Quick, Hankner and Mayor. Linke.
ALSO PRESENT: City Attorney Meyers, Clerk/Administrator
Pauley and Public Works/Community Development Director
Thatcher.
Motion/Serond: Quick/Hankner to approve the September
4. Approval of
Minutes:
- p. 1986 minutes as present^d.
September 8 and`
�.�
September 15,
ayes 0 nays
1986
Motion Carried,:;
Motion/Second: Blanchard/Quick to approve the
Septem er 15, 1986 minutes as presented.
Motion Carried-.
5 ayes 0 nays
There were no residents requests or comments from
5. Requests sidents and
the floor.
Comments from
the Floor
Mayor Linke read Resolution No. 2072, a resolution 6. F.pproval of
of commendation and appreciation to Bruce Anderson, Resolution
and presented him with a brass plaque
of the No. 2072
resolution, and a jacket with the Mounds View
insignia. Mayor Linke and the Council thanked
Mr. Anderson for the work he has done for the City.
11--�/
Mounds View City Council UN-i
y� �? y F September 22, 1986
1 , "0 P��E�-----Pa a Two -
Regular Meeting °� ' _ �71 g----------------------------.ini-Y-44---------
Mayor Linke closed the regular meeting and opened the
`rst public heating at 7:05 PM.
Director Thatcher presented an overhead projection,
showing a map of the area, indicating where the existing
lines are and the proposed redelineation. He explained
it was determined by Tom Peterson, of the Ramsey Soil
and Water Conservation District, and himself, that this
area of the City's wetland map was larger than the actual
wetland area.
Mr. Forsberg stated he is planning to develop the area
in the future, which is why he has asked for the
redelineation.
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing and reopened the
regular meeting at 7:10 PM.
Mayor Linke closed the regular meeting and opened the
next public hearing at 7:10 PM.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated the Council had been
presented with the final draft of the Development
District 12 Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan. He
explained JLN Development plans on putting in commercial
_office and industrial warehouse development in that
6
41r. Hartman, of Holmes and Graven, the city's bonding
agent, reviewed how tax increment financing would be
used forithe proposed JLN development in Mounds View.
Councilmember fiaake stated she understood the develop-
ment district includes the Herbst property, and asked
if the Herbst's have any objections to tax increment
financing.
Mr. Hartman reviewed the process that is followed, and
what the developers options are under this plan. He
stated the guidelines are quite stringent and he did
not feel this would be detrimental to the Herbsts.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated he can see no
negative impact on the Herbst property, and that tax
increment financing is positive for the Herbst property,
and a definite benefit to them when they choose to
proceed with development.
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing and reopened
the regular meeting at 7:20 PM.
J
7. Public Hearing:
Redelineation
of Wetland
#I-23
8. Public Hearing:
Development
District No. 2
Plan and Tax
Increment
Financing Plan
Mounas View City Council v September 22, 1986
RegulAr Meeting a B _ i ,.;,n Page Three
------------------------------ --- - --- = ------------------
otion/Second: Blanchard/Rankner to approve the consent
enda, as presented, and waive the reading of the
:solutions.
5 ayes 0 nays
Director Thatcher reviewed the reasons the Planning
Commission had denied the variance request for
Dynamic Designers. Ile stated Staff is in agreement
with the denial by the Planning Commission.
Motion/Second: 11aake/Quick to adopt Resolution No.
2006, denying the variances for Dynamic Designers
proposal, Planning Case No. 138-83, and waive the
reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
Clerk/Administrator Pauley asked authorization to
send a letter to Mr. Boyles, stating the City's
formal policy regarding his Code violation on his
property.
Motion/Second: Quick/Linke to approve sending the
letter to Mr. Boyles, with a clarification in the
+tier stating that as a result of the information
jmpiled by the survey, the City Council has
determined there is no justification for modifying
the current City Code.
5 ayes 0 nays
Director Thatcher reviewed proposed Resolution No.
2087, and the need for cleaning Judicial Ditch No. 1,
Branch No. 5, and he reviewed the process that would
be followed in cleaning the ditch.
There was discussion among the Council of the cost for
this cleaning, and future cleaning and repair of the
ditch.
Motion/Second: Nankner/llaake to approve Resolution
No. 2087, regarding City Project No. 86-6, repair of
Judicial Ditch No. 1, Branch No. 5, and waive the
reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
�_i
9. Approval of
Consent Agenda
Motion Carried
10. Considarati-on
of Rslt. No.
2086
Motion Carried
11. Approva Letter
to James Boyles
Motion Carried
12. Consideration
of Resolution
No. 2087
Motion Carried
September 22 1986
P �
'Mounds View City Council �K
Regular Meeting
------------------------
page Four
--�� 3-
i-a
----------------------- V 1 Vo 6u
reported this item was carried
13. Discussion of
i.nance Director Brager
from the September 8 meeting, and lie was willing
1987 General,
Forestry and
er
i answer any questions anyone might have.
Utility Fund
Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated he had met with Fire
Finance
Budgets
Chief Fagerstrom earlier in the day, along with
from Blaine.
Director Brager and the .City Manager
their concliisi.on that the Fire Depart-
He stated it was
ment budget was reasonable and justifiable, but with a
38 salary increase rather than the 4% that was asked
involve a small transfer of
for. He added it would
funds, and he asked for approval,ftom the Council of
the budget tonight, with an amendment to be made at
the transfer for
the October 13 meeting, relative to
budget, which would involve $5,000
the Fire Department
to $7,000.
Councilmember Flankner stated she still would like to
area, where
see training moved to tho administrative
feels Staff and the Council would have a better
she
handle on how the funds were being utilized.
Motion/Second: Hankner/Quick to adopt the resolutions
transfer
aj_uthoriTiCnglevles for the 1987 budget, and
the administrative section.
the.training money to
Motion Carried
5 ayes 0 nays
juncilmember Hankner stated she feels the City is weak
and training to all
in offering additional schooling
it to the
eligible employees, and that by moving
it would give the Clerk/
administrative section,
leverage over who attends what.
Administrator more
that she would like to see ''Management by
Sae added
Objective" on a quarterly basis, to track how things
are going.
taff
feels
Councilmember
odjobrofdded keepingtthePserviceSlevelsagood
dcne a very good
and the budget in line.
Motion/Second: llankner/Ilaake t.o adopt Resolution
operatingbudget, and
No. 2093, adopting the 1987 City
waive the reading.
motion Carried
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion/Second: Quick/Blanchard to adopt Resolution
interest tax
No. 2094, certifying the 1987 bonds and
level., and waive the reading.
Motion Carried
c ayes 0 nays
' .otion/Second: Ilankner/Blanchard to adopt Resolution
fund and forestry
�M5,
No. certifying the 1987 general
tax levy, and waive the reading.
fund property
Motion Carried
0 nays
5 ayes
September 22, 1986
Mounds View city Council page Five
q pp
Regular Meeting aa ? S� z? r_� �" i P
------------------------------
---------------- ---- U I MI ..N ; G
ayor Linke advised that Cable Commissioner Jerry keTfy 14. Discussion on
requested that Council Meetings be cablecast live, Cable Casting
INinning with the first meeting in November. of Council
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reported some money nas been Meetings
received from franchise fees this year.
There was discussion among the Council of who would
operate the equipment and it was agreed to have Mr. Skelly
come in at the next agenda session to talk to the Council.
and advise them of what is going to happen.
Maor m he would
going Linke a tolookllbe
for operators,
Clerk/Administrator pauley added that some Staff has
received training on the equipment, but if City employees
are used to operate the equipment during the evening,
unless they are administrative, the City would be required
to pay them overtime.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained the intent of proposed
Resolution 2089 is to thank Jan Quick for the work she has
done in organising the Spano/Balk benefit dance for
September 24.
,Motion/Second: Blanchard/liaake to approve Resolution
y, 2089, a resolution of commendation and appreciation
Jan Quick, and waive the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
Clerk/Administrator Pauley advised that Advanced Printing
had printed the tickets for the benefit dance at no
charge.
Motion%Second: Quick/Naake to approve Resolution No.
2690, a tesolutiM Of commendation and appreciation
to Advanced Printing, and waive the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion/Second: Ilaake/Quick to have the first reading
of 0rdinance No. 413, an ordinance amending Chapter
48 of the Mounds View Municipal Code, entitled "Wetland
Zoning Ordinance", and waive the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
ttorney Meyers advised it will take aCo 4/5vote this finance.
juncil with the final reading,
15. Consideration
of Resolution
No. 2089
Motion Carried
16. Consideration
of Resolution
No. 2090
Motion Carried
17. First Reading
of ordinance
No. 413
Motion Carried
Mounds View City Council [[p 3 n rn " ,;
September 22, 1986
Six
fl
Regular Meeting i ,.-
j_- � ___J..----------------------
Page
--------------------------- --y„zi�.rF 6r-r-e-eav L' LEA
lerk/Administrator Pauley reviewed the purpose of the
18. Consideration
of Resolution
roposed resolution, for JLN Development. He stated
the City is not
No. 2091
ais would create the district, but
fie stated he would like
obligated to JLN in any way.
indication from the Council if they plan on going
an
ahead with the project, as considerable Staff time will
be involved.
Motion/Second: Quick/liankner to approve Resolution
No. 2091, approving the establishment of Development
relating thereto
District #2 and the development program
Increment Financing District #1 and
and establishing Tax
the tax increment financing plan relating
approving
thereto, and waive the readi,.g.
Motion Carried-
5 ayes 0 nays
Director Thatcher reported JLN is in the process of pre-
environmental assessment worksheet, which
paring an
they will have to the City on September 26. tie asked
the
that the Council authorize someone on Staff to sign
worksheet and certify the information provided is
for them to send
accurate, which is required in order
lie added he has
the worksheet on to the State agencies.
along well on it.
received a draft and they are coming
Motion/Second: Haake/Linke to authorize Steve Thatcher
o sign all documents for JLN Development, should he
they are true and accurate.
.etermine
Motion Carried
5 ayes 0 nays
Director Thatcher reported the concept plan will be
Commission at their October 1
reviewed by the Planning
meeting, and should they approve it, which seems likely,
the Council would need to set a public hearing on the
lie explained it would be the
development concept plan.
first public hearing that is required for this develop-
ment under the PUD process-
Motion/Second: Hankner/Haake to set a public hearing
for the concept plan
for October 13, 1986 at 7:15 PM,
of JLN Development, contingent upon approval of that
plan by the Planning Commission.
Motion Carried
5 ayes 0 nays
Councilmember Hankner stated a major concern expressed
at the informational meeting the Planning Commission had
held on September 17 was traffic, and she suggested
considering placing more stop signs along Quincy, if it
,toes become a problem.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley left the meeting at 8:00 PM.
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
--------------------------
September 22, 1986
Page Seven
irector Thatcher reviewed the purpose of proposed Ordn. 19. First Reading
411. and 412, which would change the property owner's of Ordinance
responsibility for water and sewer services from the property No. 411
line out to the street.
Motion/Second: Ilaake/Quick to approve Ordinance No. 411,
as corrected, an ordinance amending Chapter 70 of the
Mounds View Municipal Code entitled "Municipal Water System",
and waive the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Motion/Second: Raake/Quick to approve Ordinance No. 4121 20. First Reading
'in ordinance amending Chapter 71 of the Mounds View Munici- of Ordinance
pal. Code entitled Municipal Sanitary Sewer System" and No. 412
waive the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carrie
Director
Thatcher presented an
overhead of the area, and
21. Consideration
of Staff Memo
reviewed
the situation of the
sanitary sewer easement
RegarGroveland
under the
homeowners home. Re
it
stated the easement is
be under the house,
not needed
and recommended
vacated
it be
_
Road
but kept
on the north side of
the house, as may
weeded in
the future.
:here was discussion among the Council on whether to
vacate all the easement or retain 9' on the north side.
Councilmember Hankner asked what type of research Staff
does when issuing building permits, to alleviate this
type of problem.
Director Thatcher replied they do check for easements,
but that type of information is kept at the County. He
added they will be kept on the City's computer in the
future.
Mction/Second: Blanchard/Linke to adopt Rasolution
No. 2092, vetcating part of the sewer easement at 8106
Groveland Road, and waive the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
Park Director Anderson reviewed the reasons for
proposing a sprinkling system for the grounds at
City Hall, and he reviewed the three bids received.
Motion Carried
22. Consideration
of Staff Memo
Regarding
Irrigation
September 22, 1986
Mounds View City Council
' '
page
Eight
Regular Meeting r s , r t'
---------
uncilmember Hankner asked how the lawn had been
,rinkled in previous years.
Park Director Anderson explained they ran 300' of
with Otis Newton
hose and moved it as necessary,
that. He added in the past two years
doing most of
they have made an agressive move to change the outside
appearance of City Hall, and sprinkling has been
neglected in the past.
councilmomber Hankner stated she would like more time
the order of
to think about where this request sits in
the City should be spending it's
priorities and how
money.
Councilmember Haake stated she agreed, that this might
not be the best time to pursue this item.
Motion/Second: Linke/Hankner to table further discussion
on —tnls request to the next agenda session.
Motion Carried
5 ayes 0 nays
23.
Report of
Director Thatcher had no report.
Director of
public Works/
®
Community Dvlpt
24.
Report of
'Attorney Meyers had no report.
Attorney
25,
Repo_ts of
Councilmember Haake had no report.
Councilmembers:
Councilmember
Haake
Councilmember
Councilmember Blanchard had no report.
Blanchard
Councilmember Quick reported he had attended the
Councilmember
Quick
Park and Rec Commission meeting last Thursday, at which
five year capital
time they put ti,e final touches on a
the lie statedtheywould
improvement plan for parks.
the Council as :oon as possible
like to meet with
discuss it.
it was the concensus of the Council to direct Staff to
to the October 6
have the Park and Rec Commission come
C genda session.
Councilmember
Councilmember Hankner had no report.
Hankner
Mounds View City Council f'li ,5�'fP S P , 1966
September 22
Regular Meeting BF P!;.,,, Page Nine_________
___________________________0Wif �� � . W IZLO
Cayor Linke reported he would be attending a court Mayor Linke
)nsolidation meeting on September 24.
The Council authorized Staff to send flowers, from
the Council and Staff, for the funeral of Clerk/
Administrator Pauley's mother.
Mayor Linke adjourned the meeting at 8:33 PM. 26. Adjournment
Respectfully submitted,
Donald F. Pauley
Clerk/Administrator
4-1/
7r0?, rti.
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE. OF MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Mounds View City Council
will meet on Monday, October 13,1986, at 7:05 p.m. at Mounds View
City Hall, 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, Minnesota, 55112 to
consider the -equest of Phyllis Leenerts for a minor subdivision
(1 lot into 2) for the property located at :-6n9 County Road I,
legally know as
SPRING LAKE PARK HILLVIEW
LOT 48
Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to this matter,
may be heard at this informational meeting.
Donal] F. Pauley
Clerk -Administrator
(New Brighton Bulletin: September 24, 1986)
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
PUBLIC NEARING
PHYLLIS LEENERTS MINORSUBDIVISION
OCTOBER 13,
7:U5 P.M.
-----------------------------------------
Warren M. Johnson et al -'
7710 Greenwood Drive -
Minneapolis, MN 55432
Robert L. Leenerts et al
2609 County Road I W.
Mounds View, HN 55432
Robert d Carole Raes
7715 Eastwood Drive
Mounds View, MN 55432
Curtis C. Kullberg
7745 Eastwood Drive
Mounds View, MN 55432
Alton L. Ahlstrom, Jr.
Cheryl R. Ahlstrom
7711 Greenwood Drive
Mounds View, MN 55432
Elizabeth A. Koopmeiners
8201 Pleasant View Court
Mounds View, ?IN 55432
Walter F. 6 Mary J.Bauer
4324 Lake Point Court
St. Paul, MN 55112
Paster Enterprises -
Mounds View Square
2227 University Avenue -—
St. Paul, MN 55114
• T � �j7) (47) I/ a 2b2
r )
�42.) <
\ ` s 1FIZ N
4529.--r---+3--
83\ r° ($O) O �j 4) ��) (7J (4)
i _ I� 82
2 9
g l (5Y 9� � m n 2 L14
rc
3 ES
�\ `,♦ (�,� m Iay,� {301 (27' lzl m (SE) 4 n
Q 1571 (SA)
r'�\; ♦ rt�, 49 41
C u'S�2 6
3 �'' IBB_ a G4 (29) (2e Gi + ! u<a o SZ.44 '33!'.
2 a.f
.37aa.
1 ✓0'
i Y V g6°e•
1T„ 0111 all a9r...
Y �
J' ] to O 1
to
1° V f Ifll
°
°1fu.11 �° a b yi 10 GI)12
1
J 4 M fe) 9 f I�~�,.8s�ti°. 0
MEMO To: Clerk-AdminisLraLor and City Council -7:/0
FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development
DATE: September 9, 1986 -
r SU13JECT: PLANNING CASE 164-84, KUN7. OIL COMPANY
1
Attached please 'find the following:
1. My memo dated 4/11/85 with attachments.
2. Notice of Informational Meeting held by the Planning
Commission on 2/6/85.
3. ALLendance list from Informational Meeting field on 2/6/85.
4. Mcmo from Clerk -Administrator dated 5/2/85 regarding Kunz
oil Company and the moratorium.
The Planning Commission has r..•iewed this development and
recommends approval. Upon reviewing the Kunz Oil Company's
proposal, there are two items that should be noted. The first
item is that the site plan indicates a 6' high. fence in front of
the front building line. The Planning Commisson discussed this
rhnt K-Gas could extend the fence oer the
residential -pr-Qer v. The second item is that the Plannin
Commission has added the following item to conditional use
permits for other gas station proposals si^ce the Planning
Commission passed Resolution No. 127-85 on April 3, 1985:
entrance s ab. Outside stac ing shall not• exceed four feet
in freight.
p.m.
The memo from Clerk -Administrator Pauley dated May 2, 1985,
clearly indicates that we are concerned that any effort on the
part of the City to allow construction on the K-Gas lot prior to
addressing a larger problem with the Comprehensive Plan would
jeopardize the enforce ability of the entire Comprehensive Plan.
ACTION REQUESTED: Staff requests direction on this matter.
SWT/bac
:niMO TO: Clerk -Administrator and Cily Coun:iI
rmim: Nireel.or of Pnblie: Works/Communlly p^v�'IopmeM�
OATI;: April II, 1911''i
SN11Jh:CT: PI,ANNrNC CASK: 154-94, KIINZ 011, CIIMPANY
Attached please find the following:
1. Mounds view Planning Commission Rusninl.ion No. 127-05
2. Letter from Kunz Oil Company dated Uerember 19, 1984
3. Letter from Kunz Oil Company dated April 3, 1985
4. Site plan
5. Landscape plan
6. Staft Report dated December 19, 1954
7. PlanniIg Report from Nnrl:hwr.;t. Associated Consultants
dated January 31, 1985
R. Letter from Attorney Meyers dated .7anuary 26, 1985
9. nrochnre on the Armor Shield brand nli tank lining
The Planning VnmmiRAinn rerommo"cls approval of Ms project as
presently pr..poand.
HWT/bc
Atl.achments
" AIMFF C►fy of Vounds view
REPORT
Y1..�wl.I
PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSIIOP REVIEW DATE,: December 19, 1984
AGENDA ITEM NO: 1
H
W`I'
k.d
rP�A
rbbd
CASE NO: 164-84
APPLICANT: Kunz Oil Company
PROPOSED REQUEST: Applicant requests development review
and conditional use permit for gasoline sales facility
with a building of I -re" square feet.
, -,I.
LOCATION OF RFQUFST: 2901 highway 10
SITE, SIZE: Approximately 0.80 acres
LOT DEPTH AND WIDTH: 232,67' on Highway 10
50.98' x 100.00' x 144.96' x 296.75'
(5 sided)
EXISTING ZONING: B-3 Highway Business District
CONTIGUOUS LAND USE: .Single Family Residential
CONFORMANCE. TO COMPRF.HF.NSI4i LAND USE PLAN: The comprehen-
sive Plan denotes this area to be developed/redeveloped as
Medium Density Residential.
ZONING CONFORMANCE. TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Existing zoning
does not conform.
STAFF REPORT
CASE: 164-84
PAGE. TWO OF' •fi.RRE..
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
Conditional Use Permit Section 40.18, Subdivision D(3) Requirem
for Motor Fuel Station:
1. All requirements of this section are complied with except for
the following:
a) Paragraph (b)- Is the proposed building and site so
dissimilar to the existing buildings or area as to cause
impairment in property valves or blight?
b) Paragraph (e) - Drainage system subject to the approval of
the City Engineer.
c) Paragraph (g) - vlill lighting meet the requirements of this
paragraph and Section 40.04, Subd. J?
d) Paragraph (i) - Do the requiremens of this paragraph and
Section 40.04, Subd. F1, of this Code meet the satisfaction of.
the Planning Commission? 5fRE(A1111F - it • •,ii..;
e) Paragraph (1) - The south drive entrance is existing and is
approximately 40 feet wide. Section 40.07, Subd. D(8)f
requires a maximum curb cut of 30 feet.
f) Paragraph (n) - Are the noise control provisions acceptable
to the Planning Commission? n." -/" ..^i
.1) Paragraph (o) - Where will garbage be stored and is it i i
ccmpliance with Section 40.18, Subd. D(4)?
h) Paragraph (p) - Is any outside sale or service in ccmpliance
with Section 40.18, Subd. D(5)? IVd a;ifJln C ,S lei 6S
�i) Paragraph (s) - Section 40.25, Subd. A(5) asks the question;
1 is the development in conformance with the Comprehensive
:111 Plan?
Setbacks and Lot Requirements?
1. All structures, parking and drives meet minimum requirements.
2. The curb and gutter shall be D-618 instead of the 6" curb
indicated on the drawing`..
Parking and Access Requirements:
1. Applicant provides 13 parking space's with an additional 10•
possible at the pumps. This meets Code requirements.
2. Commercial curb cuts are limited to 30 feet and this plan meets
the requirements.
STAFF REPORT PAGE THREE OF THREE
CASE 164-84
Zoning, Comprehensive Plan and Proposed Use:
1. The property in question is zoned B-3, Highway commercial. The
proposed use is allowed under a conditional use permit.
2. The Comprehensive Plan designates the area as Medium Density
Residential.
COMMENTS
Please refer to City Code Chapter 40.25, Subdivision C, which states -
that in granting a conditional use permit, the City Council shall
find that the use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of
the City. At the present time, the proposed development is not in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
f
i a
t
C
cif 0f Vow g view
NAMSEY COUNTY. MINNESOTA
240111101,WAY IU
MOUNDS VIEW, MINN. SS 112
7 S:4OSS
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF INFORMATIONAL MEETING
NOTICE, IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Mounds View Planning Commission
will meet on Wednesday, FebruYY 6r 1985 at 7_40 m at Mounds
View City Hall, 2401 N.F. Highway 10, Mounds VIEW, ldnnesota, 55112
to solicit citizen input on District 6 of the City's Comprehensive
Land Use Plan. District 6 is bounded on the south by
Highway
10 and County Road I, the east bynLong Lake Road, the north by
Ardan Avenue and the west by Sp. 9
Citizen input is also requested on the proposal by K-Gas, 2901
Highway 10, to tear down the existing structure and construct a new
self service gas station.
Anyone clesiring to be heard with reference to this matter may be
heard at this meeting.
(Bulletin: January 16 and 23, 1985)
Donald F. Pauley
Cl,irk-Administrator
CZ4Fy LlIj
;putly�,
t/'Diiv1d Noe)
(eke
� V 7L �✓J(J
1 /
,
Grrre 7 tlinacw
P)J I A)r 7-
Nl,Y /'L flrnivl.-_CO r1•_itll/i'r" � -
,=1hnR%St
=Ile
—
2Sa�
Dry
13,30 n10 1-4.)0c iJ 17•�
i
273'X N✓J
'TJ(�N,.�7,rv,
hjy ,o
7717
,�gcsxlr
I
-SFrv rlt& OA)
Tc
_ M1
fI
,\ '\, .•` s 1' ... fro„_•.. :_::�;.: -.,; ��
' � . \ • F! 'r24}7sIt0� %t%M6. IY� C S?r�pp �-. r� x .
L' J4stA r-, ` �•r��I.� � :''�s. � i'r.' zl�r'iA�a 7s
r
HEADQUARTERS
1810 Highway 10
Spring Lake Park, Minnesota 55432
Unte: August 11, 1986
City of Mounds View
2401 Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
Attn: Steve Thatcher
Re.: Proposed Urveinpment Rcvtewnl Rana OIL
Ucar Steve:
No offer the following, cnmments an the developments as
indicated.
1. Red Oak Park
A) Accessibility ap^enrs adequate.
--�� RI Six loch dn.,d end water main should give us more than
adequate Flow. A hydrant should be located on the dead
end of the cul-de-sac.
2. K-Gas Station Ilwy lO
A) A permit from the fire department must be nbtained prior:
to any work being, done on the burted tanks and piping.
If yoo have any gnentlons please feel Free to call.
Yours very truly,
(iJ
Gat i P�l[`1iJ�a
Ron Faget'orom
Chief of ))apartment
R F/.I b
O
SEP1986 N>
RECEIVED w
EIIY,OF +^•,
4OUNDS VIEW a�%
��Ulrar62Qi� '
■
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE. OF MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Mounds View City Council
will meet on Monday, October 13 1986, at 7:10 p.m. at Mounds View
City flail, 2401 highway 10, Mounds View, Minnesota, 55112 to
consider the request. of Kunz Oil Company for a conditional use
permit to remove their existing building and construct a
gasoline/convenience store at 2901 Highway 10, legally known as:
SUBJ TO HWY; THE FOL; PART OF LOT 32 DESC BEG
ON EL LOT 32 100 FT S OF NW COR LOT 50 TH S ON
SD L TO NE L OF HWY TH NW ON HWY 32 FT THE NE
TO BEG AND 100AFTOONEELYWLYTRI PART SO TRI; ALLEOF LOTT50N NL
Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to this matter,
may be heard at this informational meeting.
Donald F. Pauley
Clerk -Administrator
(New Brighton Bulletin: September 24, 1986)
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
PUBLIC NEARING
KUNZ OIL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST
® OCTOBER 13, 1986
7:10 P.M.
James L. Droel
James B. Jackson
7401 Central Avenue N.E.
8080 Groveland Road
Minneapolis, MN 55432
Mounds View, MN 55432
Donald R.o Dolores A. Gross
John W. Cook
2100 Talmage Avenue S.E.
8060 Groveland Road
Minneapolis, MN 55414
Hounds View, MN 55432
Jonathan J. Thomas
Marion M. Dahlin
10
8040 Groveland Road
2949 Highway
Mounds View, 14' 55432
Mounds View, MN 55432
Daryl D. Blasberg
Steve Dahlke
8106 Groveland Road
8030 Greveland Road
Minneapolis, MN 55432
Minneapolis, MN 55432
John L. Wells et al
Gordon T. Hafslund
8110 Groveland Road
8020 Groveland Road
Minneapolis, MN 55432
Minneapolis, MN 5 54 32
Matt S Phyllis Meicd
Maego, Inc.
4230 Central Avenue N.E.
Pearl Lammi
Minneapolis, MN 55421
7365 Spring Lake Road
Mounds View, MN 55432
Steve's Appliances, Inc.
Wayne Thul
Avenue (Upper)
2841 Central Avenue N.E.
535 Hall
Minneapolis, MN 55432
St. Paul, MN 55107
Gregory A. 6 Cindy S. Johnson
Lloyd J. Blanchard et al
8005 Groveland Road
2865 Highway LO
55432
Minneapolis, MN 55432
Hounds View, MN
c/o Sec. St. Bank of Mankato
The Kunz Oil Company
P.O. Box 3109
P.O. Box 24107
55424
Mankato, MN 560U2
Minneapolis, MN
Terry L. 6 Linda K. Bankston
Frederick E. Jones
8025 Groveland Road
Ronald V. Anderton
Mounds View, MN 55432
2925 Highway 10
Minneapolis, MN 55432
Larry A. 6 Arlen^ Y. Pearson
Carroll D. Welte et al
8045 Grovelnnd Bond
7924 - 6ch Street N.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55432
Minneapolis, MN 55432
PUBLIC REARING
KUNZ OIL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST
OCTOBER 13, 1986
PAGE TWO
.. ------------------------------------------
Donald L. 6 Jill R. Zachor
8065 Groveland Road
Hounds View, MN 55432
Steven A. d Kathleen A. Harvey
2856 Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55432
Walter C. Harvey et al
2856 Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55432
Frederick J. 5 Barbara A. Hillyer
1432 - 98th Lane N.W.
Coon Rapids, MN 55433
City of Spring Lake Park
1301 - 81st Avenue N.E.
Spring Lake Park, MN 55432
Gaughan Land, Inc.
299 Coon Rapids Blvd.
Coon Rapids, Mi 55433
I
11
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE UP MINNESOTA
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE OF PUHLIC HEARING
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that on Monday,_ZMtemllei;22_'
19 gy , acting on behalf of the City of Mounds View, deposited in
the United States Post Office in New Brighton, Minnesota, copies
of the attached notice of public hearing for the re uq_ est o
Oil ompplly—f9La_con
Ut Qaa,-U, t� moYa i-fie=r ing
buildin and ( 0 tMC�11- C� rni anrn Sts� e rat-22g1�it�X�R—
enclosed in sealed envelopes with postage thereon fully prepaid
addressed to the following persons with the addresses appearing
,jpposite their respective names.
Date: r/ .J°1
(SEE ATCrnC1iED LIST)
FOR THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
I -
.,' Z<L/ --_ \/2/e:i.-� 1I� p .60". j.n •)� (44) os PLO
r7L° \'/ , .rr _,�011lRl:l f•a
�•; (3O� 2 � 32,7St°' �Ji ; .._��-yJ t� AS Q 3•-3aG. 4.tl
(L7) oso dn�I .u... o 6 SL�3
09 _ I I )' ] p xSe.t I70 41 °c. 17,770• (42) 4 •• 1 "-1.L\M , a... le6p6\e •r ('3� (31�
YARDEN 0
4 r 3 ° it,SARDEN
I
X ,(24Jtio.e1 IcL-3,u.c
V;+ u d
e
oc Q;4-46
(26) (3)a(4) (rJ=1 (32 I 3n.
2 D ITIO q: lit G
.�.. 4. .. •1a.0 ul. s f OV C3) !i
/ 37 13 (I L)o 14/) u
v •�. o_ EMI N 134'l49) I.SGec. r4- ^o
+ rn I 8 (T) e
too
. >I1,79 ; 2 O. r. •' 1 _- N C ! C �DW 2 (36 $ , 437.E N�51 (50)T
(q
0 .62m L I S 4
• (Li) b1♦ (10/ 0 (50) C70 p 3 C7f) (eJ
t7o (14)11 ,°. 41i.1°
[y ! 2 ,�.�, A_ a7
I I 1.21°e- .96e.e. ` - •55at, 13 K C) CO1 •ae•c. (C) d /1••! (5!) O<;1 (34L_ ? (33) I C ' ' (•2EE..-0 (4
2)� (Ili 09 $ MI-1771T�
(16) 1.21et.1 `_.'� _ (SS)q(32` .y ' 3 5 'gI 'r Z"ICJ IV
I t ♦� '/ (SLJ C'3 /iiC.o:..r,3,c,
<< , �)-_ 33 - r_:9:r 46 pLAPORT i p
;(17 2.a2 ` i[ Q -7ovi�
u.___. \! 17 5•... cbc.z _Yr ./� (71) so '� (15) �4) (13I'O-T (15) 7•.L .66°e 91se�
i -lO a (6/ 1J I �( 53) 6�2 �. • T Z'EZ _.� : Z0� C •�0(�•rc+�ry Y .
.trot. l� x (s o)In
4- (P el 0 1.67se LM°c.r.AS<c. ':r♦ 'C v
�_ 4 � � __ _ e ♦ I i < i4.
c1c: SI Z �Y'!• „i..l _ SS ac. 1- -- -+- (z; to ,o.
( B) rl.� .Y..c.l.?7L.a;l ♦ I 1 1 1 CCs
I� Lou•.c. ♦W LOS.c.� .,i p/1 I Z ioG - •al (2,S)(L4):�
1 Id-' �iaZ
65a(i (.) 4I ❑O CIE,
1 I UCC .■■■ G6 6 I
y30 `I 131 / 32• Lea
v'• . wn 6.1 o b I 3 IAI IOc
rE \ I 7 IC Bat. ,h el .tt•4.�n /•
(L3) '35 030/ s (24) ago
`>; \ 1c/. )J I(33) iJ e+ al
4 �.42 x.2 I \ ., J e�/' (3 LJ _--- I/)I
�1Y of �g5 YoIC • ,\ , ; 32 - m 1.42°4. ' �n .a5or. • I (`)
,546" ,\ o (2$) ;`•( ) .43Lal.,bad tµ-137
(Zy)its 1.89•L. 7 a, I 19 I.:
�y' s ( )
z 1` � � .,5 a6. SL act • I t 44.1 4
19612)_-O,IG_O I --(%�oJT,bLt.�- r ,, •, , rI n MI rd -19e4. .A-t"-(=_)(31 122c. -17G(_ (16)
0 -
- JI
All
•Elo, J I i- �5 96w. -
I oro y A� 4 220 -T38-
i�6 GA 19) np o d 1 7� _ _ 'als:_ ____ - () a . (45)
16 I Ilo , \ 50 J it n .Blec-3pp�-T•IZLi -1 -
_ 40•e. Y: �
soot. (1 oao xo I i I - "Vo • �� • n ( )17
C. : \ - .t��I
54' . (2 N I l� V \ 1 49 "_ I '° 17 ?�/-.lOur. .`I
\ \7 •odl I r -�
uGv
1:1 ♦ I 4..7- ,
,29 o60•w
(17) .�7 %.,_ \\ !♦•r, i .5848 I !' .Bim. • .424.G 2,o
34 71�- . _-•3.'G-_ /4) �. � , � , roe W
Oc n ^/S?r 2.5Cx 202 ot. Zp . L .25" 10 (42)
(75 ( „ I I I .Gaoc Lll ot. (9) eac/I•I
I n x.•c. 9 , �, a
.0 050 .6o ot. (1 07- I �Cb`J� .. 28 i b Li / ,\ I (ISJ ?'t .z6m. oeo "
(72)_ID ' ..5 �.a, 4 (3 SJ (34) �.�/, �l 62� 4 -
°" _4aa--
-i3--tom' (7)
_ I C T •z ' ,' '^' .I .'��I 26ac to /' ' iao/
(377) I •3> O O.Y S61
116 .•Jiae.100 1
(34)1a��11 I Y I u G • I • • V1.0 , r iE5r8P 0 p� 132
LU
1..7 ,4,'4uL.�♦si...l s,(/t)� e 1 ) olo n u Pv I .5c� I h°J•` L _6•c_nli • �I
?I I I .,n..... I, y `n (43)•9> , /J-
(381 4lac� se oc. I �/� (40)1(41) h; . i cLn C56/
19 •57;
(3Ie) I(37J i (39J I (I f) `/6r1 S1 .4.6ws.. •' / ' �w
I I \ <O 3
i ll Iwo t. 11e I oCo Z n I (4L`
IG 0
714M,
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
' STATE OF MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC BEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Mo,inds View City Council
meet on Monday, October 13, 1986, at 7:15 p.m. at Mounds View
City Hall, 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, Minnesota, 5.5112 to
consider the request of JLN Development, Inc. to develop the 60
acres of vacant land located south of County Road 11-2, west of
Interstate 35W and north and east of State Highway 10, legally
known as:
LOTS 1, 2, 3, BLOCK 1; LOTS 1 AND 3, BLOCK 2;
AND LOT 2, BLOCK 2, EXCEPT THE SOUTHERLY 5 ACRES
THEREOF; PINECREST ADDITION, INCLUDING RAYMOND
AVENUE, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
SECTION 8 TOWN 30 RANGE 23 EX SWLY 150 FT PT OF
SW 1/4 OF I4VI 1/4 OF SE 1/4 NELY OF STH 10/62 IN
SEC 8 T'N 30 RN 23
SECTION 8 TOWN 30 RANGE 23 EX N 33 FT FOR CO RD
H2 PART OF NW 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 NELY OF L
PAR WITH AND 150 FT NELY FROM CL OF STH 10/62 IN
- SEC 8 TN 30 RN 23
The proposed general concept plan includes a Planned Unit
Development with a mix of commercial (office/service/showroom),
light industrial and restaurant uses.
Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to this matter,
may be heard at this meeting.
Donald F. Pauley
Clerk —Administrator
(NEW BRIGHTON BULLETIN: OCTOBER 8, 1986)
I
W
55UI
5so3 sson S,I,
541i: j..
5n93 S49A7A —-.547.
SAGS SABfi •AB
34•I
514S
- �AMBE11f
IMF.
53"L32
_ -
ert
H,
5331
5373
5517rk
5309
527
5301
5295
N F
uebllY
EOGEWOOD
JR NIGH SCHOOL
ql C Sdd
91 -o
5 5051 t _
PINEWOOD
SCHOOL
Steven 5 Cindy Reinhardt
Earl F. 6 Joan Denney
Mary F. McCracken
5425 Adams Street
5446 Jackson
Drive
2210 Bronson Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View,
MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
^
Parker
Ted S. Moore
et al
John J. Standzyk et al
1 e
Adams Street
5454 Jackson
Drive
222.2 Aronson Drive
1
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View,
MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Harvey W. Hathaway et al
Patricia F.
Lange
Charles A. DeBee
5415 Adams Street
5462 Jackson
Drive
2210 Bronson Drive
MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View,
MN 55112
Mounds View,
{:
I
Kenneth 4 Karlene Breault
Robert L. Zimmer et al
Duane G Marlene Standzyk
5405 Adams Street
5468 Jackson Drive
2222 Bronson Drive
MN 55112
"uuads vier, MN 551i7.
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View,
David 6 Mary Wallcntiny
Sounjik d Haesook Kim
Robert J. Edmond et al
Drive
5406 Jackson Drive
5474 Jackson Drive
2234 Bronson
Mounds View, MN 55112
Hounds view, PIN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Richard W. Bandinere
Linda J. Thorson
Nancy C. Ostman
Mary Jo Backous
2242 Bronson Drive
5414 Jackson Drive
C ads View, MN 55112
5480 Jackson Drive
's 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
No% View, MN
Cross of Glory Lutheran Church
Donald 4 Darlene.Wilsan
Scott E. Doberenz
5472 Adams Street
2250 Bronson Drive -
Jeffrey J. Carlson.
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
5420 Jackson Drive
Hounds View, MN 55112;i
Robert 6 Ramona Waste
Duane d Julie Anne Smith
Leroy C. Bartz
2256 Bronson Drive
5290 Pinewood Court
5468 Adams Street
MN 55112
Mounds View. MN 55112Lawr'
Mounds View, MN 55I12
Mounds View,
-
E. d Mabel Young
Vernon L. Hall al
Glenn 6 Monica Knowlton
2262 Bronson Drive
5426 Jackson Drive
5426 Jac
iv
2186 Bronson Drive
M N 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View,
_
Gary R. 6 Carol A. Anderson
Rose E. Nejedly
Paul R. Woolcott et al
2270 Brnnson Drive
5434 Jackson Drive
2194 Bronson Drive
55I12
Mounds View, HN 55112
"-nods View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN
Gerald S Cynthia Marezynski
Paul W. Hiller Trustee
Richard H. O'Kel.ly
5440 Drive
2200 Brannon Drive
1455 Lake Street W.
MN 55408
.Jackson
Houndn View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Minneapolis,
Lowell 6 Mary Ann Nygaard
Atnold M. 6 Renee A. Lokken
Colonial Mortgage
Y214 Lambert Avenue 1
2278 Bronson Drive
P.O. Box 1468
Philadelphia, PA 19105
Mounds View, FIN 55112
Hounds View, MN 55II2
harry T. Strus et al .�
el J. Eller
. Laursen
Olaf E.
2220 Lambert Avenue
Bronson Drive
c/o Lee E. Laursen
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55II2
2221 Lambert Avenue
DIN 55112
Mounds View,
Donald 6 Lorraine Meyer
Mary P. Peterson
Lee b Debra Laursen
2228 Lambert Avenue
2294 Bronson Drive
2221 Lambert Avenue
MN 55112
Mounds View, DIN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55II2
Hounds View,
Franklin V. , Kathryn Meyer
Frank 4 Delores Kellerman
Dean 6 Kathryn Lykke
2234 Lambert Avenue j
5366 Jackson Drive
2'll5 Lambert Avenue
55112
Hounds View, MN 55112 i
Mounds View, DIN 55112
Mounds View, DIN
Laurance Jr. 6 Cheryl Moreland
Michael D. Bruzer
Jeffery 6 Roberta Olson
2242 Lambert Avenue
Kathleen Bradish
2209 Lambert Avenueds
MN SSII2
Mounds View, MN 55112
5354 Jackson Drive
Mounds View,
Moun
Mounds View, DIN 55112
al
Danny G. Meyer et al
Gerald II. 6 Charlotte Fields
Glen E. Dawson et
2250 Lambert Avenue
55 Lambert Avenue
Lambert Avenue
MN
Mounds View, MN 55112
ids View, MN 55I12
1lounds View, .SSII2
Mounds
Dennis J. 6 Beverly Roes
Cary A. Gustafson
5302 Jackson Drive
Natalie J. Ilope
Nat
2249 Lambert Avenue
2143 Lambe r[ Avenue
SSIl2
View, DIN 551 12
Mounds ,
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN
Charles E. 6 Diane Phillips
Ruth L. 'Ian Reese
Robert Peterson
2295 County Road H••2
2243 Lambert Avenue
185 Lambert Avenueds
FIN SSII2
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, FIN 55112
ounVlew,
Mounds
M
A. Docken
David A Laurie Shoop
F.layne N. Johnson
2287 County Road H-2
Dorothy
2235 Lambert Avenue
FIN 55II2
2oun Lambert Avenueds
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55II2
Moun View,
Gurney M. et al
.James H. Lyons
2279 County Road
H-2
Allen Czeck
Amy Murrny-Czeck
rt Ave
2192 Lambert venac
55112
Mounds View, MN
55112
Mounds View, MI'
,m5 Lambert Avenue
' do View, DIN 55112
Bruce M. 6 Donna
L. Dfyking
Adman. of Veteran Affairs
Diary '.• Florlensno
2271 County Road
1I-2 W.
Fort Snelling - Rnom 266C
2206 Lambert Avenue
55112
Mounds View, MN
55112
St. I'nul, DIN 55111
Mounds Vlew, DIN
Crarencd E. Pinske et al
2263 County Road II-2
Moundn View, PIN 55112
CD. Kreidler
County Road II-2
Mounds View, MN 55112
Marvin A. Bouley
2249 County Road 11-2
Mounds View, MN 55112
.Joseph S. Lehman et al
2243 County Road II-2
Mounds View, MN 55112
Madelyn V. Kelly
2235 County Road 11-2
Mounds View, MN 55112
Robert D. Bixler
2235 County Road II-2
ids View, MN 55112
Wm. d Estelle Grassinger
2229 County Road II-2
Mounds View, MN 55112
Dale L. Silbernngei
2221 County Road H-2
Mounds View, MN 55112
Jeanette E. Kilduff
2213 County Road 11-2
Mounds View, MN 55112
Charles d Marilyn Lightfoot
2205 County Road II-2
P... nds View, MN 55112
Patricia Othoudt
Herman 6 Linda Tatley
Remer, MN 56672
115 Horizon Circle NE
Minneapolis, MN 55421
Kenneth A. Losee
Herbert Jr. 6 Mary Gutkneeht -`
2191 County Road 11-2
5391 Raymond Avenue
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112 �!
Clinton d Diana Martell
Steven G Catherine Larson
5307 Quiney Street
907 - 221st Avenue NE
Mounds View, MN 55112
Cedar, MN 55011
.John R. Funk
Gerald J. Pittman at al
2185 County Road H-2
5379 Raymond Avenue
Momids View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Alden A. .Johnson
Douglas 11. 3 Pauline Pouliot.`
P.O. Box 6416
5371 Raymond Avenue
2630 Superior
Mounds View, MN 55112
Duluth, PIN 55806
Mounds View Mobile Home Park
Marlow 6 Darla Zuroff
1046 Montclair Avenue
5363 Raymond Avenue
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Micro Matic Employees
Jeffrey A. Ruikka
Profit Sharing Trust
5357 Raymond Avenue
7871 Hickory Street NF.
Mounds View, MN 55112
Fridley, MN 55432
Richard 6 Diane Dovries
GI. S. Wiedewitech et al
1975 Long Lake Road
5351 Raymond Avenue
New Brighton, MN 55112
Hounds Viev, MN 55112
J. R. Huntad 6 G. A. Nelson.
Route 1 - Box 168
Zimmerman, MN 55396
Admin. of Verteran Affairs
An office of USA
Verterans Administration
Washington, D.C. 20420
Charles D. Eystad et al
5343 Raymond Avenue
Mounds View, MN 55112
Richfield Bank 6 Trust Co.
6625 Lyndale Avenue So.
Richfield, MN 55423
Joseph D. Radlinger, Jr. Robert 6 Sandra Mershon Linnea C. Whitney
2199 County Road II-2 5294 Raymond Avenue 5337 Raymond Avenue
Mounds View, MN 55112 Mounds View, MN 55112 Mounds View, PIN 55112
Raymond 6 Loretta A. Jensen
M. Schucharat al
Charles'A. Frye et al
5316 Clifton Drive
5386•Clifton Drive
5329 Raymond Avenue
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
kounds View, MN 55112
.as R. b Beth A. Kayser
Floyd M. b Lyme MViager
Leslie E. Mazo at al.
5392 Clifton Drive
Raymond Avenue
founds
5324 Clifton Drive
55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
View, MN 55112
Mounds View, PiN
J. N. Schmid[ al.
Kerr J. McCarty
y
John J. b Nancy Curry
5391 Clifton Drive
Avenue
Raymond Avenue
Clifton Drive
MN SSll2
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN SSIl2
Mounds
Mounds View,
Mounds
Raymond W. b Linda Gruba
y'
Gordon N. Blomberg at al
Leslie M. al
5oun Clifton Drive
5385 Clifton Drive
nd Ave ue
Raymond Avenue
Mounds Clew, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, PIN SSI12
Mounds
Douglas b Carol Lien
Dcar. W. Stillson at al
Sharon A. Clmquist
5379 Clifton Drive
1020Taylor Street NE
5344 Clifton Drive
MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Blaine, PIN 55434
Mounds View,
Roger W. b Leola J. Johnson
Ray G. Talberg et al
Robert W. b Ramona Turner
Lake, MN 55025
3371 Clifton Drive
5293 Raymond Avenue
Forest
Mounds View, MN 55112
nds Vlew,.MN 55112
Lewis A. b Delores Truehart
William b Sandra Clark
Charles E. Miller et at
5352 Clifton Drive
5363 Clifton Drive
55112
5287 Raymond Avenue
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN
Mounds View, PIN 55112
Corinne S. Jesperson
Douglas M. Benson
Dolores J. Doerr
5358 Clifton Drive
5357 Cliftou Drive
55112
5288 Clifton Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN
Mounds View, MN 55112
James L. b Mary Deutsch
Daniel b Sherri J. Gates
Robert J. Roy
Donna C. Caron
5294 Clifton Drive
536n Clifton Drive
PIN 55112View,Mounds
5351 Clifton Drive
Clifton
Mounds View, N 55112
Mounds View,
MN 55112
T. B. Johnson, Jr. et al
5300 Clifton Drive
wf�unds view, PIN 55112
Warren D. b CIntre Braun
5308 Girton Drive
Mounds View, PIN 55112
Wayne G. Weflen et 11
5372 Clifton Drive
Mounds view, MN 55112
Neal L. Mortenson
5380 Clifton Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
David D. b Catherina Larson
5343 Clifton Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Henry b Carole Gunnick
7677.Authur Street
Fridley, MN 55432
George 8. Punt at Al
.1. Howard & Dorothy J. Hill
Cedric & Amy Wheeler
5337 Clifton Drive
4 Oriole Lane
5380 Quincy Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
St. Paul, MN 55110
Mounds View, MN 55112
J. & Cathy Seiberlich
Andrew H. & Anna flume
Thomas P. Jager
i Clifton Drive
5316 Quincy Street
5386 Quincy Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN .55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
i
i
David P. Kraft
Steven M. & Linda Peterson
Ernest Bendt
5323 Clifton Drive
5324 Quincy Street
Arleen A. Van DeWalker
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
5392 Quincy Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Dale A. Persons
Eugene W. & Rosemary Seiberlich
The Sands Apartments
5307 Clifton Drive
5330 Quincy Street
5445 Jackson Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Larry L. Meyer
Jack H. Warren at al
A E. L Management
Sharon G. Penner
5338 Quincy Street
2051 Long Lake Road
5299 Clifton Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
New Brighton, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
James L. Lautenschlager
Darrell M. & Cheryl Hanson
Donald & Elizabeth Babinski
5293 Clifton Drive
5344 Quincy Street
Jackson Apartments "+
ids View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
1115 — 2nd Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55403
Thomas F. Trautweln
David J. Lach at al
Douglas D. & Connie Thompson-,
Margaret M. Oven
5352 Quincy Street
5395 Jackson Drive
5287 Clifton Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Lyle D. & Carnl Hall
Charles R. Kitner
Ernest B. Quast at al
5288 Quincy Street
16850 — 3rd Street N.E.
5387 Jackson Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Ham Lake, MN 55303
Hcunds View, MN 55112
Leo L. Von Rueden at al
Betty Bettis
Therese A. Mailand
5294 Quincy Street BE
.5358 Quincy Street
5381 Jackson Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
David S. Kurnth
Roland J. Brick
Donald C. & Winntfred Nissen
5300 Quincy Street
5364 Quincy Street
5373 Jackson Drive
View, MN 55112
Mounds View, 11, 15112
Mounds View, MN 11112
10—,nds
Richfield Bank & Trust co.
Lanier K. Scott at al
.Inn:es M. & Sheila M. Quick
6625 Lyndale Avenue So.
5372 Quincy Street
5367 Jackson Drive
Minneapolis, MN 55423
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Richard?. Hansen
Raymond Skiba
Lyle A. 6 Doris Lelm
c/o237 t.Highwaoosco, Inc.
718 — 6th Avenue NW
2139 Belle Lane
Mounds View, MN 55112
2375 Highway 10
S[. Paul, MN 55112
Minneapolis, MN 55112
Christensen
Carew Properties, Inc.
Harriet F. Schmi.t
NE
�.
J N. Highway 10
9100 Bloomington Freeway
1331 — 96th Avenue
55434
Mounds View, MN 55112
Suite 133
Blaine, MN
Bloomington, MN 55431
Pinecrent Properties
Franchise Realty Int. Corp.
Harlan M. Bush
2153
61France Avenue South
Po Box AMP
Moundselle VlewLane
MN 55112
d123 23
606661fiare
Chicago,, I07
Edina, MN 55435
Robert H. 6 Rita M. Waste
Blair Wolfson Reuben
Willi J. Rude _
2345 County Road 11-2
Corrine 6 Carl Birnberg
2159 Belle Lane
Mounds View, FIN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55,17
hStreet
Minn eapolls,MN
,tames 6 Louise J. Paron
C. H. Miller
Michael 6 Marilyn Johnson
2165 ne
2288 Highway 10
John D. 6 Evelyn A. Miller
Creek Way
Moundselle VlewLaMN SSll2
Mounds View, FIN 55112
47 N. Rice
Fridley, HN 55432
R. W. l
Standard off
flurry Stanke
466 Laurel Avenue
2280 Highway 10
4940 Viking Drive
Minneapolis, MN 55435
St. Paul, MN 55102
d nds View, MN 55112
1
Wafter R. O'Connell
John D. Miller 6 Assoc.
Curtis J. Flor
Sandra J. Trombley
2260 Highway 10
5009 University Avenue NE
MN 55421
a
2134 ne
LMN
Mounds View, MN 55112
Minneapolis,
Vlewlle
Mounds View, 55112
�r
Carroll R. Bona
2244 Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
Ervin L. Jr. 6 Eleanor Herbst
Herbst 6 Sons Const.
2299 County Road 11
Mounds View, MN 55112
Charles L. Hall
7 Field Ridge Road
Q. Paul., MN 55110
Norb Yentsh
2149 Program Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55112
Independent School Dist. 621
2959 Ilamllne Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55113
.lames E. 6 Nancy L. Herman
2125 Belle Lane
Mounds View, MN 55112
Reinhard E. Just
2142 Belle Lane
Mounds View, MN 55112
Dorothy M. Cunningham
2150 Belle Lane
St. Paul, MN 55112
Steven A. 6 Jacquelyn R.
2158 Belle Lane
Mounds View, MN 55112
men 6 Gustafson
Delores J. Peterson Gladys J. Johnson
1396 Ntcc Street 2137 Bette '.one 2166 Belle Drive
Mounds View MN 55112 Mounds View, FIN 55112
St. Paul, MN 55117 �
Wayne A.-Mortenson
Leroy G. Charron
Gerald M. Wesen
5405 Quincy Street
2175 Bronson Drive
5465 Quincy Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
i
shun 6 Kyongson Yi
Ruth I. C. Ericson
JoAnn Perry
2201 Bronson Drive
Bronson Drive
5475 Quincy street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds view, Nt: 55112
Floyd B. S Eileen M. Olson
John R. 6 Denice A. LAaota
Dennis 6 Michelle Cooper -
2159 Bronson Drive
5467 Quincy Street
2209 Bronson Drive J.
Mounds view, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Dwayne F. N.elsun
y
Dennis A Margaret McCann
K. J. La Rock
Drive
5459 Quincy Etrcct
2215 Bronson Drive
2151 Bronson
55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Hounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, I4N
Donald J. Tschida
Oscar J. Lindeman
State of Minnesota _
Trust Exempt
2143 Bronson Drive
5453 Quincy Street
N 55112
109 Court House
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, M
St. Paul, MN 55102
Thomas J. 6 Denise M. ThomannLinda
Alvin 6 Dolores Rygwall
L. Solum
2231 Bronson Drive
2127 Bronson Drive
5447 Quincy Street
55112
--
Mounds View, MN 55112
nds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN
Max 11. Rieck
William W. Wehner .
Michael P. Kinyon
5439 Quincy Street
2223 Bronson. Drive
Kinyon Concrete Products
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, PIN 55112
Route 1 — Box 62
Red Wing, MN 55066
Howard L. 6 Marlene Holm
Lao L. 6 Jeanette Sturges
Raymond N. 6 Janet M. Doble .;
2237 Bronson Drive
5511 Quincy Street
5433 Quincy Street
55112
Hounds View, MN 55112
Mounds view, MN SSII.
Mounds View, MN
Rodney L. Schultz
Victoria A. Hubbard
5505 Quincy Street
Mounds View, FIN 55112
Arden A. S Lovera M. Olsnn
5499 Quincy Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
David M. d Susan M. Mitchell
5493 Quincy Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Calvin E. Wall
5425 Quincy Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Raymond A. Habisch
5419 Quincy Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
R. J. Kinderman
5413 Quincy Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Marion K. Carlson
5070 Bona Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Ann M. Preston
5414 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Steven D. Uber
5420 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Steven•J. 6 Monika A. Cook
5428 Erickson Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
! as C. Vanlinrne
Erickson Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Philomena 6 James McKnight
5418 Erickson Road
Mounds View, FIN 55112
David W. d Barbara J. Snell
5446 Erickson Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
D. A. 6 S. K. McBride
5450 Erickson Road
Mounds View, MIT 55112
Emil E. 6 Anna M. Pietila
5454 Erickson Road
-ids View, MN 55112
. J
Wilfred J. Tri
5466 Erickson Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Frieda Neupert
5494 Erickson Road
Mounds View, IIN 55112
Corliss E. More at at
5503 Erickson koad
Mounds View, MN 55112
Peter A. d Lucille A. Krig
5493 Erickson Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Robert C. Brunet at al
5485 Erickson Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Nall S Catherine Harwood
5463 Erickson Road
Mounds View, MN 55117
Thomas L. 6 Kathleen A. Kosel
5449 Erickson Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Walter d Darlene Swenstad
5435 Erickson Road N.E.
Mounds View, MN 55112
Charlotte E. Bratc
5456 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Dennis 6 Sharon Kowalick
5464 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Fred, Jr. 6 Jacqueline Kirchner Alvin L. Ilillsdsle at al
5504 Erickson Road 7850 Spring Lake Road
Mounds View, FIN 55112 Mounds View, MN 55432
Laurence 6 Kimbertie muff
5512 F.ricksnn Rond
Mounds View, MN 55112
Noel V. Quarve
Gnry L. Krig
5497 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Fedor Enterprises, Inca
5491 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View Estates
Jospeh T. Siwek, Jr.
2536 Marshall Street NE
Minneapolis, MN 55418
Francis M. 6 Teresa L.
5479 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Jeanne J. Ayer
206 Park Lane S.
LeSueur, MN 56058
Larr; A. Truehart
5473 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
LaVonne 1. Kluck
5467 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Bruce A. Madsen
5463 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Laverne G. Gondek
5455 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Michael d Mary Kummer
5447 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Marilyn K. Bausman
5441 Adams Street
Mounds View, MN 55112
Donovan F. 6 Linda Falrurn Ann c. Krocker Larry 6 Nancy Stall
5511 Erickson Road 589 S. Saratogo Street 5433 Adams Street
SL. Paul, MN 55112 St. Paul, MN 55116 Mounds View, MN 55112
t> 7
Scott J.'s Linda Mohr George E. hill et al
5367 Jackson Drive 5475 Erickson Road
Hounds View, MN 55112 Mounds View, MN 55112
r A. d Darleen B. Swenson Laurence 6 Mabel Young
1 -Jackson Drive 5426 Jackson Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112 Mounds View, MN 55112
Lester H. 6 Barbara Voegele James L. Peron
5353 Jackson Orive 2300 Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112 Mounds View, MN 55112
Rayford Bankston et ai Elsie 6 Thomas Skardn
5345 Jackson Drive 2135 Bronson Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112 Mounds View, MN 55112
Henrietta Nihart Reyth 6 Mary Peacock '
5337 Jackson Drive 5453 Quincy Street
Mounds View, MN 55112 Mounds View, MN 55112
Leroy F. Meyer et al Robert 3 Penelope Skrentny
P31 Jackson Drive 5406 Adams Street.
Nds View, MN 55112 !founds View, MN 55112 +.
Gerald Thomas et al
Donald
C. Luptak
5323 Jackson
Drive
5478 Erickson Road
Mounds View,
MN 53112
Mounds
View, MN 55112
Gerald W. Morrison et al
Isabel
C. Schumacher
5309 Jackson
Drive
2200 Lambert Avenue -
Mounds View,
MN 55112
Mounds
View, MN 55112
Wm. 11 6 Ann D. Burmeister
Dwight
11. Denyes 6 Proserv.
5301 Jackson
Drive
300 Main Street E.
Mounds View,
MN 55112
Anoka,
MN 55303
Burton 6 Marcia Ramstad Ronald A. Anderson et al
5295 Jackson Drive 5317 Jackson Drive
"--Inds View, MN 55112 Mounds View, MN 55112
Dennis C. Feeney
Scott W. Pearson
Jeffrey M. Juergens
5287 Jackson Drive
Mounds Vinu mw 55119
Jack A. Johnson
2211 Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
CONSENT AGENDA
OCTOBER 13, 1986
The Consent Agenda is a technique designed to expedite '
handling of routine and miscellaneous official business of
the City Council. The entire agenda may be adopted by the
Council in one motion. The motion for adoption is non -
debatable and must receive unanimous approval. By request
of ny rom
thea
aConsent lAgenda dual oand Lplaced r ltem can be removed f
upon the Regular Agenda for
debate.
ITEM A. Accept Quote From Aqua Engineering, Inc. For an
C'itymatic Hall atWa Costnofer System $3,272.00iWitheFundsttof
Come From the Forestry Fund
ITEM B. Authorize Installationa �elandfGUndund Electri-
cal Service by
k at a
Cost of: $9,970.00 to be Charged to Account No.
100-380-4513
I1'Eil C. toLEntereintoClerk-Administrator
Chief
System Use Agreement
ITEM D. Approve Resolution No. 2110 Amending the 1907
Budget to Reflect Increased 7987 Fire Protec-
Lion Services Costs Negotiated Subsequent to
Adoption of the 1987 Budget
ITEM E. Amend Item P of the September 22, 1986 Consent
Agenda to Read, "Declare 1966 International
Truck/Puppet Wagon as Surplus Property and
Authorize Sale to John Buckley for $25.00"
ITEM F. Adopt Resolution No. 2097 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 431
ITEM G Adopt AssescmentsufornAudito0's NoReapportioning
. A431
ITEM R. Adopt Resolution No. 2099 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 198
ITEM I• Adopt
ssessmentsResolution No. 2100 Reapportioning
for Auditor's No- 538
ITEM J. Adopt Resolution No. 2101 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 617
1'CI;M K. Assessments'�n for Auditor's No. 43lNo. 2102 tioning
['fEM 1•• AssesResolution
i'1ioning
smentsf.orAuditors No.
0
ITEM M. Adopt Resolution No. 2104 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 5336
ITEM N. Adopt Resolution No. 2105 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 431
ITEM 0. Adopt Resolution No. 2106 Reapportioning
Assessments for. Auditor's No. 431
ITEM P. Adopt Resolution No. 2107 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 533u
ITEM Q. Adopt Resolution No. 2108 Reapportioning
Assessments for Auditor's No. 1004
ITEM R. Approve Soil Corrections and Utility Wire
Burial at Groveland Park Tennis Courts
ITEM S. Set Public Hearing for Red Oak School Site
Major. Subdivision for. 7:10 p.m. on October 27
rrEM T. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding
Carol Rasmussen Three Month Review
ITEM U. Set Public Nearing for 1905 Long Term Financial
,,Ian for Monday, October 20, 1986 at 7:05 p.m.
ITEM V. Adopt Resolution No. 2113 Approving Just and
Correct Claims Against City Funds
ITEM W. Licenses for Approval
General - Expires 6/30/87
BTI, Construction, Inc. - New
Franzen Const. Co. - New
Mark G. Johncon and Sons - New
Osborne Const. - New
heating and Air Conditioning - Sxpires 6/30/87
GanleyIs heating and Air Conditioning - New
Larson -Mar. Company - Renewal
More's Burner Service - Renewal
�I
RESOLUTION NO. 2110
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1987 BUDGET TO REFLECT
INCREASED 1987 FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES COSTS NEGOTIATED
SUBSEQUENT TO ADOPTION OF THE 1987 BUDGET
WHEREAS, the 1987 Operating Budget contained an estimate
of $115,000 for fire protection services provided by the
Spring Lake Fire Department, Inc.; and
WHEREAS, The City's 1987 contract with the Spring Lake
Park Fire Department, Inc. provides for payment of. $122,701
for fire protection services during calendar year 1987; and
WHEREAS, the City's 1987 contract with the Spring Lake
Park Fire Department, Inc. was executed after adoption of the
1987 Operating Budget;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council
hereby amends the 1987 Operating Budget as follows:
Account 100-3850, Appropriation of Fund Balance $ 7,701
Revised General Fund Revenues $2,113,818
Account 100-200-4390, Fire Department, Subsidies $ 122,701
Revised General Fund Expenditures $2,113,818
Attest:
(SEAL)
Mayor
Clerk -Administrator
RESOLUTION NO. 2097
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW HELD ON
OCTOBER 13, 1986
Change In: Auditor's No. 431
Motion by:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution of the City Council of
Mounds View, adopted Resolution No. 2097 , the Special
Assessments for. the Consrue on of Aud {tor's No. 431 , were
levied against the attached list of described properties, said
list made a part herein:
And WHEREAS, the above mentioned properties have been
conveyed or replatted and are described according to the attached
list, and said list made a part herein:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE. CITY COUNCIL of
Mounds View, that the assessments for Auditor's No. 431
against the heretofore mentioned properties be correctly
certified to the Auditor of Ramsey County for further collection
in the amount stated on the attached list, said list made a part
herein.
Seconded by
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
5 ayes
I, the undersigned being the duly qualified City Clerk of.
said City DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have carefully compared the
attached foregoing extract of Minutes of a meeting of the City
Council of said City held on October i�, , 1986_ at 7:00
p.m. with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same
is a full, true and rompleta transcript therefrom insofar as the
same relates to the changing of the assessment for Auditor's No.
431 because of the conveyance of/or replatting of certain
properties.
WITNESS my hand and seal of. said City this 13th clay of
October , 19 86.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Clerk, City of Mounds View
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 2U97 BEGIN DATE: U9/11/86 DIVISION NUMBER: DD060254
NAME OF ASSESSMENT: SANITARY SEWER
AUDITOR'S NUMBER: 431 DATA PROCESSING NUMBER: 47 t.... .�
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT:
(A) PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0002-1
SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 30, RANGE 23
EX N 105 FT LYING E OF A L
RUN S AT RA FROM N L OF SW
1/4 OF SE 1/4 AND FROM PT
THEREON 125 FT W FRUM WLY L
OF !-,WY AND EX S 958 59/10U
FT PART SVILY OF CL OF HWY OF
SW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 (SUBJ TO HWY) IN
SEC 8, TN 30, RN 23
(B) PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0003-4
SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 30, RANGE 23
EX PART IN E 546.75 FT OF S
715.1 FT AND EX E 202 FT OF W
557.57 FT OF S 401.47 FT AND EX
E 100 FT OF W 657.57 FT OF S 215
FT; PART LYING SWLY OF HWY OF S
958.59 FT OF SW 1/4 OF SE 1/4
(SUBJ TO RD) IN SEC 8, TN 30, RN 23
TOTAL ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT
nnnnnr rn.wrur.
(1) PARCEL 08-30-23-43-OLIO-2
HER3ST ENTERPRISES
LOT 1, BLOCK 1
(2) PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0011-5
HERBST ENTERPRISES
SUBJ TO ESMTS; LOT 2, BLOCK 1
(3) PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0012-8
HERBST ENTERPRISES
SUBJ TO ESMT; LOT 3, BLOCK 1
TOTAL APPORTIONMENT
$ 3,516.00
$13,929.71
17,445.71
$ 1,383.96
$13,748.88
$ 2,312.87
17,455.71
�.rr'
RESOLUTION NO. 2098
i
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW HELD ON
OCTOBER 13, 1986
Change In: Auditor's No. A431
Motion by:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution of the City Council of
Mounds View, adopted Resolution No. 2098 , the Special
Assessments for the Consruction of Auditor's No. A431 , were
ertie
levied against the attached list of. described props, said
list made a part. herein:
And WHEREAS, the above mentioned properties have been
conveyed or replatted and are described according to the attached
list, and said list made a part herein:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
Mounds View, that the assessments for Auditor's No. A431
against the heretofore mentioned properties be correctly
certified to the Auditor of Ramsey County for further collection
in the amount stated on the attached list, said list made a part
herein.
Seconded by
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
5 ayes
I, the undersigned being the duly qualified City Clerk of
said City DO HEREBY C0TIFY that I have carefully compared the
attached foregoing extract of. Minutes of a meeting of the City
Council of said City held on October 13 1186 at 7t00
p.m. with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same
is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the
same relates to the changing of the assessment for Auditor's No.
A431 because of the conveyance of/or replatting of certain
properties.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 13th day of
October 13 , 19 86.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Clerk, City of Mounds View
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 2098 BEGIN DATE: U9/11/86 DIVISION NUMBER: DD060254
NAME OF ASSESSMENT: SANITARY SEWER
i
AUDITOR'S NUMBER: A431 DATA PROCESSING NUMBER: A47
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT:
(A) PARCEL 09-30-23-43-0003-4
$ 691.23
SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 30, RANGE 23
EX PART IN E 546.75 FT OF S
715.1 FT AND EX E 202 FT OF W
557.57 FT OF S 401.47 FT AND EX
E 100 FT OF W 657.57 FT OF S 215
FT; PART LYING SWLY OF HWY OF S
958.59 FT OF SW 1/4 OF SE 1/4
(SUBJ TO RD) IN SEC 8, TN 3U, RN 23
TOTAL ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT
691.23
APPORTIONMENT:
(1) PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0010-2
HERBST ENTERPRISES
LOT 1, BLOCK 1
(2) PARCEL HERBST ENTERPRISES
-0011-5
SUBJ TO ESMTS; LOT 2, BLOCK 1
(3) PARCEL HERBST ENTERPRISES 0012-d
SUBJ TO ESMT; LOT 3, BLOCK 1
TOTAL APPORTIONMENT
$ 54.83
$ 544.76
$ 91.64
691.2
RESOLUTION NO. 2099
LI
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE.
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW HELD ON
OCTOBER 13, 1986 _
Change In: Auditor's No. 798 _
Motion by:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution of the City Council Of
Mounds View, adapted Resolution No. 20 9 , the Special
n
Assessments for the �063ructieof Audrtor's No. 798 , were
levied against the attached list of described properties, said
list made a part herein:
And WHEREAS, the above ment';oned properties have been
conveyed or replatted and are described according to the attached
list, and said list made a part herein:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
Mounds View, that the assessments [or Auditor's No._ 798
against the heretofore mentioned properties be correctly
certified to the Auditor of Ramsey County for further collection
in the amount stated on the attached list, said list made a part
herein.
Seconded by
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
5 ayes
I, the undersigned being the duly qualified City Clerk of
said City DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have carefully compared the
attached foregoing e:ctr.act of Minutes of a meeting of the City
Council of said City held on October 13, 1986_ at 7:00
p.m. with the original thereof on fii n my office, and the same
is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the
same relates to the changing of the assessment for Auditor's No.
79B because of the conveyance of/or replatting of certain
properties.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 13th day of
October , 19 86.
ATTEST:
(SEAL) Clerk, City of Mounds View
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 2U99 BEGIN DATE: 09/11/86 DIVISION NUMBER: DD060254
NAME OF ASSESSMENT: SANITARY SEWER �a
AUDITOR'S NUMBER: 798 DATA PROCESSING NUMBER: 76
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT:
(A) PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0002
SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 30, RANGE 23
EX N 105 FT LYING E OF A I.
RUN S AT RA FROM N L OF SW
1/4 OF SE 1/4 AND FROM PT
THEREON 125 FT W FROM WLY L
OF HWY AND EX S 958 59/100
FT PART SWLY OF CL OF HWY OF
SW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 (SUBJ TO HWY) IN
SEC 8, IN 30, RN 23
TOTAL ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT
APPORTIONMENT:
(1) PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0010-2
HERBST ENTERPRISES
LOT 1, BLOCK 1
(2) PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0011-5
HERBST ENTERPRISES
SUBJ TO ESMTS; LOT 2, BLOCK 1
(3) PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0012-8
HERBST ENTERPRISES
SUBJ TO ESMT; LOT 3, BLOCK i.
TOTAL APPORTIONMENT
$ 2,271.93
2,P71.9
$ 180.23 1
$ 1,790.50
$ 301.20
2, 771.93
RESOLUTION NO, 2100 �
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW HELD ON
OCTOBER 13, 1986
Change In: Auditor's No. 538
Motion by: —
WHEREAS, pursua,it to Resolution of the City Council of
Mounds View, adopted Resolution No. 2100 , the Special
Assessments for the Consruction of Auditor's No. 538 , were
levied against the attached list of described pruperties, said
list made a part herein:
And WHEREAS, the above mentioned properties have been
conveyed or replatted and are described according to the attached
list, and said list made a part herein.:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
Mounds View, that the assessments for Auditor's No. 538
against the heretofore mentioned properties be correctly
certified to the Auditor of Ramsey County for further collection
in the amount stated on the attached list, said list made a part
herein.
Seconded by 5 ayes
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
I, the undersigned being the duly qualified City Clerk of
said City DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have carefully compared the
attached foregoing extract of Minutes of a meeting of the City
Council of said City held an October 13, , 1986 at 7:00
P.M. With the original thereof on fin my office, and the same
is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the
same relates to the changing of the assessment. for Auditor's No.
538 because of the conveyance of/or replatting of certain
properties.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 13th day of
October 19 86.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
J
Clerk, City of Mounds View
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 2100 BEGIN DATE: 05/28/86 DIVISION NUMBER: DB060060
NAME OF ASSESSMENT: SANITARY SEWER/WATER DRAINAGE
AUDITOR'S NUMBER: 538 DATA PROCESSING NUMBER: 56
i
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT:
(A) PARCEL 06-30-23-31-0048-0 $ 72.51
AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION
NO. 89, ST. PAUL, MINN.
CONDOMINIUM NO. 228
KNOLLWOOD GREEN CONDOMINIUM;
SUBJ TO HWY, LOT 51 OF AUDITOR'S
SUBDIVISION NO. 89; RESIDENTIAL
UNIT NO. 5
(8) PARCEL 06-30-23-31-0081-7 $ 16.19
AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION
NO. 89, ST. PAUL, MINN.
CONDOMINIUM NO. 228, KNOLL -
WOOD GREEN CONDOMINIUM;
SUBJ TO HWY, LOT 51 OF
AUUITUR'S SUBDIVISION NO.
89; GARAGE UNIT NO. G-8
(C) PARCEL 06-30-23-31-0113-3 $ 15.30
AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION
NO. 89, ST. PAUL, MINN.
CONDOMINIUM NO. 228, KNOLL -
WOOD GREEN CONDOMINIUM;
SUBJ TO HWY, LOT 51 OF
AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO.
89; GARAGE UNIT NO. G-40
TOTAL ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT 10 .00
APPORTIONMENT:
(1) PARCEL 06-30-23-31-0159-9 $ 104.00
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 228
KNOLLWOOD GREEN CONDOMINIUM
UNIT R5, G8, G40
TOTAL APPORTIONMENT 104.00
RESOLUTION N0. 2101
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING d�Nti
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW HELD ON
1�
OCTOBER 13, 1986
Change In: Auditor's No. 617
Motion by:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution of the City Council of
Mounds View, adopted Resolution No. 2101 , the Special
Assessments for the Consruction of Auditor's No. 617 , were
levied against the attached list of described properties, said
list made a part herein:
And WHEREAS, the above mentioned properties have been
conveyed or replatted and are described according to the attached
list, and said list made a part herein:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
Mounds View, that the assessments for Auditor's No. 617
against the heretofore mentioned properties be correctly
certified to the Auditor of Ramsey County for further collection
in the amount stated on the attached list, said list made a part
herein.
Seconded by __
' COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
5 ayes
I, the undersigned being the duly qualified City clerk of
said City DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have carefully compared the
attached foregoing extract of Minutes of a meeting of the City
Council of said City held on October 13, , 1986 at 7:00
p.m. with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same
is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the
same relates to the changing of the assessment for Auditor's No.
617 because of the conveyance of/or replatting of certain
properties.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 13th day of
October , 19 86.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Clerk, City of Mounds View
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 2101 BEGIN DATE: 01/14/86 DIVISION NUMBER: OBU60060
NAME OF ASSESSMENT: SANITARY SEWER
AUDITOR'S NUMBER: 617 DATA PROCESSING NUMBER: 63 1
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT:
(A) PARCEL 06-30-23-31-0048-0
AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION
NO. 89, ST PAUL, MINN.
CONDOMINIUM NO. 228,
KNOLLWOOD GREEN CONDOMINIUM;
SUBJ TO HWY, LOT 51 OF AUDITOR'S
NO, 89; RESIDENTIAL UNIT 110. 5
(B) PARCEL 06-30-23-31-0081-7
AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION
NO. 89, ST. PAUL, MINN.
CONDOMINIUM NO. 228, KNULL-
WOOD GREEN CONDOMINIUM;
SUBJ TO HWY, LOT 51 OF
AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO.
89; GARAGE UNIT NO. G-8
(C) PARCEL 06-30-23-31-0113-3
AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION
NO. 89, ST. PAUL, MINN.
011BUMINIUM NO. 228, KNOLL -
WOOD GREEN CONDOMINIUM;
SUBJ TO HWY, LOT 51 OF
AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO.
89; GARAGE UNIT NO. G-40
TOTAL ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT
APPORTIONMENT:
(1) PARCEL 06-30-23-31-0159-9
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 228
KNOLLWOOD GREEN CONDOMINIUM
UNIT R-5, G-8, G-40
TOTAL APPORTIONMENT
b 6.68
$ 1.49
$ 1.41
9.58
b 9.58
9.58
cl
er'
RESOLUTION NO. 2102
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING �j �yvtJ
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW HELD ON
i
OCTOBER 13, 1986
Change In: Auditor's No. 431
Motion by:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution of the City Council of
Mounds View, adopted Resolution No. 2102 , the Special
Assessments for the Consruction of Aud tor's No. 431 , were
levied against the attached list of described properties, said
list made a part herein:
And WHEREAS, the above mentioned properties have been
conveyed or replatted and are described according to the attached
list, and said list made a part herein:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
Mounds View, that the assessments for Auditor's No. 431
against the heretofore mentioned properties be correctly
certified to the Auditor of Ramsey County for further collection
in the amount stated on the attached list, said list made a part
herein.
I' Seconded by
COUNTY OF R`,aff
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
5 ayes
I, the undersigned being the duly lualified City Clerk of
said City DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have carefully compared the
attached foregoing extract of. Minutes of a meeting of the City
Council of said City held on October 13, , 1116 at 7:00
p.m. with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same
is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the
same relates to the changing of the assessment for Auditor's No.
431 because of the conveyance of/er replatting of certain
properties.
WITN63S my hand and seal of said City this 13th day of
October 19 86.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Clerk, City of Mounds View
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 2102 BEGIN DATE: 01/14/86 DIVISION NUMBER: DA059742
NAME OF ASSESSMENT: SANITARY SEWER
AUDITOR'S NUMBER: 431 DATA PROCESSING NUMBER: 47 �'
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT:
(A) PARCEL 07-30-23-11-0002-3
SILVER LAKE WOODS
LOT 1, BLOCK 11
TOTAL ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT
APPORTIONMENT:
(1) PARCEL SILVER LAKEOWOODSI-0027-2
PART OF LOT 1 LYING SELY OF LINE
BEG ON NELY LINE & 235 FT SELY OF
MOST NLY COR OF SO LOT 1 TH S 41
DEG 30 MIN 27 SEC W 293.8 FT TH S
13 DEG 55 MIN 50 SEC W 53.55 FT TO
SLY LINE OF SO LOT 1 & (HERE TERM
(2) PARCEL 07-30-23-11-0028-5
SILVER LAKE WOODS
PART OF LOT 1 BEG AT MOST NLY CDR
OF SD LOT 1 TH SELY ALONG NELY LINE
OF SD LOT 1 235 FT TH S 41 DEG 30
MIN 27 SEC W 293.8 FT TH S 13 DEG 55
MIN 50 SEC W 53.55 FT TO SLY LINE OF
SD LOT 1 TH WLY ALONG SD SLY LINE 34.01
FT TH N 13 DEG 55 MIN 50 SEC E 83.5 FT
TH N 42 DEG 8 MIN 39 SEC W 253.23 FT TO
NLY LINE OF SD LOT 1 TH ELY ALONG SO NLY
LINE 265.69 FT TO BEG
(3) PARCEL 07-30-23-11-0029-8
SILVER LAKE WOODS
PART OF LOT I LYING SWLY & WLY OF LINE
BEG ON NLY LINE & 265.69 FT WLY OF MOST
NLY CDR OF 50 LOT 1 TH S 42 DEG 08 MIN
39 SEC E 253.23 FT TH S 13 DEG 55 MINI 5U
SEC W 83.5 FT TO SLY LINE OF SO LOT 1 &
THERE TERM
TOTAL APPORTIONMENT
$ 4,878.78
$ 4,878.78
$ 2,666.39
1
$ 1,120.29
$ 1,092.10
4,878.78
RESOLUTION NO. 2103
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING
OF THE. CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW HELD ON
OCTOBER 13, 1986
Change In: Auditor's No. 1004
Motion by:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution of the City Council of
Mounds View, adopted Resolution No. 2103 , the Special
Assessments for the Consruction of Auditor's No. 1004 , were
levied against the attached list of described properties, said
list made a part herein:
And WHERSAS, the above mentioned properties have been
conveyed or replatted and are described according to the attached
list, and said list made a part herein:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
Mounds View, that the assessments for Auditor's No. 1004
against the heretofore mentioned properties be correctly
certified to the Auditor of Ramsey County for further collection
in the amount stated on the attached list, said list made a part
herein.
Seconded by
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
5 ayes
I, the undersigned being the duly qualified City Clerk of
said City DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have carefully compared the
attached foregoing extract of Minutes of a meeting of the City
Council of said City held or, October 13, , 1986 at 7:00
p.m. with the original thereof on Me in my office, and the same
is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the
same relates to the changing of the assessment for Auditor's No.
1004 because of tFq conveyance of/or replatting of certain
properties.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 13th day of
October 19 86.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Clerk, City of Mounds View
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 2103 BEGIN DATE: 01/14/86 DIVISION NUMBER: DA059742
NAME OF ASSESSMENT: WATER
AUDITOR'S NUMBER: 1004 DATA PROCESSING NUMBER: 84 ( '
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT:
(A) PARCEL 07-30-23-11-0002-3
SILVER LAKE WOODS
LOT 1, BLOCK 11
TOTAL ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT
APPORTIONMENT:
(1) PARCEL 07-30-23-11-0027-2
SILVER LAKE WOODS
PART OF LOT 1 LYING SELY OF LINE
BEG ON NELY LINE & 235 FT SELY OF
MOST NLY CDR OF SD LOF 1 Th S 41
DEG 30 MIN 27 SEC W 293.8 FT TH S
13 DEG 55 MIN 50 SEC W 53.55 FT TO
SLY LINE OF SD LOT 1 & THERE TERM
(2) PARCEL 07-30-23-11-0028-5
SILVER LAKE WOODS
PART OF LOT 1 BEG AT MOST NLY CDR
OF SO LOT 1 TH SELY ALONG NELY LINE
OF SO LOT 1 235 FT TH S 41 DEG 30
MIN 27 SEC W 293.8 FT TH S 13 DEG 55
MIN 50 SEC W 53.55 FT TO SLY LINE OF
SD LOT 1 TH WLY ALONG SO SLY LINE 34.01
FT TN II 1? BEG 55 MIN 50 SEC E 83.5 FT
TH N 42 DEG 8 MIN 39 SEC W 253.23 FT TO
NLY LINE OF SO LOT 1 TH ELY ALONG SD NLY
LINE 265.69 FT TO BEG
(3) PARCEL 07-30-23-11-O029-8
SILVER LAKE WOODS
PART OF LOT 1 LYING SWLY & WLY OF LINE
BEG ON NLY LINE & 265.69 FT WLY OF MOST
NLY CDR OF 59 LOT 1 TH S 42 DEG 06 MIN
39 SEC E 253.23 FT TH S 13 DEG 55 MIN 50
SEC W 83.5 FT TO SLY LINE OF SO LOT 1 &
THERE TERM
$ 5,193.11
993.11
$ 2,838.18
S 1,192.47
S 1,162.46
TOTAL APPORTIONMENT 5,193.11
RESOLUTION NO. 2104
I
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW HELD ON
OCTOBER 13, 1986
Change In: Auditor's No. 5336
Motion by:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution of the City Council of
Mounds View, adopted Resolution No. 2104 , the Special
Assessments for the Consraction of Auditor's No. 5336 , were
levied against the attached list of described properties, said
list made a part herein:
And WHEREAS, the above mentioned properties have been
conveyed or replatted and are described according to the attached
list, and said list made a part herein:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
Mounds View, that the assessments for Auditor's No. 5336
against the heretofore mentioned properties be correctly
certified to the Auditor of Ramsey County for further collection
in the amount stated on the attached list, said list made a part
herein.
Seconded by
COUNTY OF RAMS61
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
5 ayes
I, the undersigned being the duly qualified City Clerk of
said City DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have carefully compared the
attached foregoing extract of Minutes of a meeting of the City
Council of said City held on October 13, , 1986 at 7:00
p.m. with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same
is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the
same relates to the changing of the assessment for Auditor's No.
5336 because of the conveyance of/or replatting of certain
properties.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 13th day of
October , 19 86.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Clerk, City of Mounds View
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 2104 BEGIN DATE: 01/14/86 DIVISION NUMBER: DA059742
NAME OF ASSESSMENT: SILVER LAKE WOODS 81-3
AUDITOR'S NUMBER: 5336 DATA PROCESSING NUMBER: 5336
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT:
(A) PARCEL 07-30-23-11-0002-3 $155,025.98
SILVER LAKE WOODS
LOT 1, BLOCK 11
TOTAL ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT 155,025.96
APPORTIONMENT:
(1)
PARCEL 07-30-23-11-0027-2
$ 84,725.89
SILVER LAKE WOODS
PART OF LOT 1 LYING SELY OF LINE
BEG ON NELY LINE & 235 FT SELY OF
MOST NLY CDR OF SD LOT 1 TH S 41
DEG 30 MIN 27 SEC W 293.8 FT TH S
13 DEG 55 MIN 50 SEC W 53.55 FT TO
SLY LINE OF SO LOT 1 & THERE TERM
(2)
PARCEL 07-30-23-11-0028-5
$ 35,597.95
SILVER LAKE WOODS
PART OF LOT 1 BEG AT MOST NL'I CDR
OF SO LOT 1 TN SELY ALONG NELY LINE
OF SO LOT 1 235 FI TH S 41 DEG 30
MIN 27 SEC W 293.8 FT TH S 13 DEG 55
MIN 50 SEC W 53.55 FT TO SLY LINE OF
SO LOT i IN WLY ALONG SO SLY LINE 34.01
FT TH N 13 DEG 55 MIN 50 SEC E 83.5 FT
TH N 42 DEG 8 MIN 39 SEC W 253.23 FT TO
NLY LINE OF SO LOT 1 TII ELY ALONG SD NLY
LINE 265.69 FT TO BEG
(3)
PARCEL 07-30-23-11-0029-8
$ 34,702.14
SILVER LAKE WOODS
PART OF LOT 1 LYING SWLY & WLY OF LINE
BEG ON NLY LINE & 265.69 FT WLY OF MOST
NLY CDR OF SO LOT 1 TH S 42 DEG 08 MIN
39 SEC E 253.23 FT TH S 13 DEG 55 MIN 50
SEC W 83.5 FT TO SLY LINE OF SD LOT 1 A
THERE TERM
155,025.98;
TOTAL APPORTIONMENT
RESOLUTION N0. 2105
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING G �/
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW HELD ON
OCTOBER 13, 1986
Change In: Auditor's No. 431
motion by:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution of the City Council of
Mounds View, adopted Resolution No. 2105 , the Special
Assessments for the Consruction of AUdlter's No. 431 , were
levied against the attached list of described properties, said
list made a part herein:
And WHEREAS, the above mentioned properties have been
conveyed or replatted and are described according to the attached
list, and said list made a part herein:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
Mounds View, that the assessments for Auditor's No. 431
against the heretofore mentioned properties be correctly
certified to the Auditor of Ramsey County for further collection
in the amount stater' on the attached list, said list made a part
herein.
Seconded by — 5 ayes
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
I, the undersigned being the duly qualified City Clerk of
said City DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have carefully compared the
attached foregoing extract of Minutes of a meeting of the City
Council of said City held on October 13, , 1986 at 7:00
p.m. with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same
is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the
same relates to the changing of the assessment for Auditor's No.
431 because of the conveyance of/or replatting of certain
properties.
WITNESS my hand and seal of. said City this 13th day of
October 19 86.
ATTEST:
(SEAL) Clerk, City of Mounds V ew
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 2105 BEGIN DATE: 06/23/86
DIVISION NUMBER: DA060120
NAME OF ASSESSMENT: SANITARY SEWER
AUDITOR'S NUI48Ek: 431 DATA PROCESSING
NUMBER: 47 -
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT:
a
(A) PARCEL 06-30-23-41-0055-1
E 1,978.90
SPRING, LAKE PARK HILLVIEW
LOT 66
TOTAL ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT
1,978.90
APPORTIONMENT:
(1) PARCEL 06-30-23-41-0070-6
E 989.45 ^_
SPRING LAKE PARK HILLVIEW
N 1/2 OF LOT 66
(2) PARCEL 06-30-23-41-0071-9
$ 989.45
,y
SPRING LAKE PARK HILLVIEW
S 1/2 OF LOT 66
1,978.90 �' _`
TOTAL APPORTIONMENT
• RESOLUTION NO. 2106
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW HELD ON
OCTOBER 13, 1986
Change In: Auditor's No. 431
Motion by:
i
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution of the City Council of
Mounds View, adopted Resolution No. 2106 the Special
Assessments for the Consruction of Audilor.'s No. 431 , were
levied against the attached list of described properties, said
list made a part herein:
And WHEREAS, the above mentioned properties have been
conveyed or replatted and are described according to the attached
list, and said list made a part herein:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
Mounds View, that the assessments for Auditor's No. 431 _
against the heretofore mentioned properties be correctly
certified to the Auditor of Ramsey County for further collection
in the amount stated on the attached list, said list made a part
herein.
Seconded by
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
5 ayes
I, the undersigned being the duly qualified City Clerk of
said City DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have carefully compared the
attached foregoing extract of Minutes of a meeting of the City
Council of said City held on October 13, , 1986 at 7:00
p.m. with the original thereof on file Tn—my office, and the same
is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as tha
same relates to the changing of the assessment for Auditor's No.
431 because of the conveyance of/or replatting of certain
properties.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 13th day of
October , 19 86.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Clerk, City of Mounds View
y
c
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 2106 BEGIN DATE: 05/29/86 DIVISION NUMBER: D0060067
NAME OF ASSESSMENT: SANITARY SEWER
AUDITOR'S NUMBER: 431 DATA PROCESSING NUMBER: 47
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT:
(A) PARCF.1. 07.3041-14-0001-1
SILVER LAKE WU0US
LOT 5, Ii10i,K 7
TOTAL ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT
APPORTIONMENT:
(!)
PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0549-8
SILVER LAKE WOODS
PART OF LOT 5 BLOCK 7 WLY OF
A LINE BEG AT
A POINT ON SWLY LINE 123.19
FT SELY OF MOST
WLY CDR OF LOT 5, TH N TO A
POINT ON TH NLY
LINE 88,45 FT ELY OF THE NW
CDR OF LOT 5
BLOCK 7 AS MEAS ALONG SD 14 LINE
(2)
PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0550-8
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE WOODS
CONDOMINIUM UNIT NO. 41
(3)
PARCEL
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 2151-1
SILVER LAKE WOODS
LONDOMINIUM UNIT NO, 42
(4)
PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0552-4
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE WOODS
CONDOMINIUM UNIT NO. 43
(5)
PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0553-7
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE WOODS
CONDOMINIUM UNIT NO. 44
(6)
PARCEL
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 2154-0
SILVER LAKE WIr9S
CONDOMINIUM GARAGE UNIT G41
; 625.16
sr 6
$ 424.31
54.60
9.25
RESOLUTION NUMBER NO. 2106
PAGE TWO Of TWO
(7)
PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0555-3
CONDOMINIUM
NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE
WOODS
CONDOMINIUM
GARAGE UNIT G42
(8)
PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0556-6
CONDOMINIUM
NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE
WOODS
CONDOMINIUM
GARAGE UNIT G43
(9)
PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0557-9
CONDOMINIUM
NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE
WOODS
CONDOMINIUM
GARAGE UNIT G44
TOTAL APPORTIONMENT
F:_: s,
$ 9.14
$ 4.65
$ 4.78
Y --r2
RESOLUTION NO. 2107
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW HELD ON
OCTOBER 13, 1986
Change In: Auditor's No. 5336
Motion by:
�10
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution of the City Council of
Mounds View, adopted Resolution No. 2107 , the Specia'
Assessments for the Consrur_tion of Auditor's No. 5336 , were
levied against the attached list of described properties, said
list made a part herein:
And WHEREAS, the above mentioned properties have been
conveyed or replatted and are described according to the attached
list, and said list made a part herein:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
Mounds View, that the assessments for. Auditor's No. 5336
against the heretofore mentioned properties be correctly
certified to the Auditor of Ramsey County for further collection
in the amount stated on the attached list, said liet made a part
herein.
Seconded by
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
5 ayes
I, the undersigned h,)ing the duly qualified City Clerk of
said City DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have carefully compared the
attached foregoing extract of Minutes of a meeting of the City
Council of said City held on October 13 , 1986 at 7:00
P.M. with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same
is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the
same relates to the changing of the assessment for Auditor's No.
5336 because of the conveyance of/or replattine of certain
properties.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 13th day of
October 13 , 19 86.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Clerk, City of Mounds View
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 2107 BEGIN DATE: 05/29/86 DIVISION NUMBER: D0060067
NAME OF ASSESSMENT: SILVER LAKE WOODS 81-3
AUDITOR'S NUMBER: 5336 DATA PROCESSING NUMBER: 5336
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT:
(A) PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0001-1
SILVER LAKE WOODS
LOT 5, BLOCK 7
TOTAL ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT
APPORTIONMENT:
(1) PARCEL 07-3U-23-14-0549-8
SILVER LAKE WOODS
PART OF LOT 5 BLOCK 7 WLY OF A LINE BEG AT
A POINT ON SWLY LINE 123.19 FT SELY OF MOST
WLY CDR OF LOT 5, TH N TO A POINT ON TH NLY
LINE 88.45 FT ELY OF THE NW CDR OF LOT 5
BLOCK 7 AS MEAS ALONG SO N LINE
(2) PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0550-8
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE WOODS
CONDOMINIUM UNIT NO. 41
(3) PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0551-1
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE WOODS
CONDOMINIUM UNIT NO. 42
(4) PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0552-4
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE WOODS
CONDOMINIUM UNIT NO. 43
(5) PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0553-7
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE WOODS
CONDOMINIUM UNIT NO. 44
(6) PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0554-0
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE WOODS
CONDOMINIUM GARAGE UNIT G41
$ 33,265.15
33,265.16
$ 22,578.23
$ 2,905.50
$ 2,476.44
$ 2,075.36
$ 1,750.06
$ 492.U2
RESOLUTION NUMBER NO. 2107
PAGE TWO OF TWO
(7) PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0555-3
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE WOODS
CONDOMINIUM GARAGE UNIT G42
(8) PARCEL 07-30-23-14-0556-6
CONDOMINIUM NUMBER 215
SILVER LAKE WOODS
CONDOMINIUM GARAGE UNIT G43
(9) PARCEL CONDOMINIUMNUMBER2157-g
SILVER LAKE WOODS
CONDOMINIUM GARAGE UNIT G44
TOTAL APPORTIONMENT
486.19
$ 247.18
$ 254.17
•33,265.15
RESOLUTION NO. 2108
101r A
Change In:
Motion by:
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE.
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW HELD ON
OCTOBER 13, 1986
Auditor's No. 1004
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution of the City Council of
Mounds View, adopted Resolution No. 2108 , the Special
Assessments Eor. the Consruction of Auditor's No. 1004 , were
levied against the attached list of described properties, said
list made a part herein:
And WHEREAS, the above mentioned properties have been
conveyed or replatted and are described according to the attached
list, and said list made a part herein:
NOW, THEREFORE„ BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
Mounds View, that the assessments for Auditor's No. 1004
against the heretofore mentioned properties be corrtly
certified to the Auditor of Ramseyec
County for further collection
in the amount stated on the attached list, said list made a part
herein.
Seconded by
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
5 ayes
I, the undersigned being the duly qualified City Clerk of
said City DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have carefully compared the
attached foregoing extract of Minutes of a meeting of the City
Council of said City held on October r 13 1986 at 7:00
p.m. with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same
is a full, true and complete transcript therefrom insofar as the
same relates to the c!:3nging of the assessment for Auditor's No.
1004 because of the conveyance of/or replatting of certain
properties.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 13th day of
October 13 , 19 86.
ATTEST:
(SEAL) Clerk, City of Mounds View
RESOLUTION NUMBER: 2108
NAME OF ASSESSMENT: WATER
AUDITOR'S NUMBER: 1004
ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT:
BEGIN DATE: 09/11/86 DIVISION NUMBER: DD060254
DATE PROCESSING NUMBER: 84
�1
(A) PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0002-1 $ 2,035.00
SECTION 8. TOWNSHIP 30, RANGE 23
EX N 105 FT LYING E OF A L
RUM S AT RA FROM N L OF SW
1/4 OF SE 1/4 AND FROM PT
THEREON 125 FT W FROM WLY L
OF HWY AND EX S 958 59/100
FT PART SWLY OF CL OF HIV.Y OF
SW 1/4 OF SE 114 (SUBJ TO HWY) IN
SEC 8, TN 3U, RN 23
(0) PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0003-4 $ 1,705.00
SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 30, RANGE 23
EX PART IN E 546.75 FT OF S
715.1 FT AND EX E 202 FT OF 4
557.57 FT OF S 401.47 FT AND EX
E 100 FT OF W 657.57 FT OF S 215
FT; PART LYING SWLY OF HWY OF S
958.59 FT OF SW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 c
(SUBJ TO RD) IN SEC 8, TN 30, RN 23
TOTA ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT 3,7 00.00
APPORTIONMENT:
(1)
PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0010-2
$ 296.69
HERBST ENTERPRISES
LOT 1, BLOCK 1
(2)
PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0011-5
$ 2,947.18
HERBST ENTERPRISES
SUBJ TO ESMTS; LOT 2, BLOCK 1
(3)
PARCEL 08-30-23-43-0012-8
$ 495.83
HERBST ENTERPRISES
SUBJ TO ESMT; LOT 3, BLOCK 1
TOTAL APPORTIONMENT $ 3,740.00
MEMO TO: Rounds View City Council
FROM: Rory Soarlon, Acting 0irector
Parks, Recreation and Forestry 1
DATE: October 9, 1986
RE: Groveland Park Tennis Courts
The Mounds View Parks and Recreation Commission has been In the process of
reviewing and updating the Parks and Open Space Capital Improvement Plan In
great depth during the past sir months. As part of that review process, they
have reaffirmed that the number one priority for park development Is the
rojec
as aafirstPark
prioritytennis
forcourts.
paststwoyou
years Haware,
anddulelt pstafftshas
ranked
successful
application of two LAWCON Grants, we have been unable to fund this project.
At the July 24. 1986 Park Commission meeting, the Comnlsslon adopted a policy
recommending that two-thirds of all future park dedication funds be set aside
In a park fund; with an eventual goal being to raise one-half million dollars.
The City would then expend the interest each year from the Park Fund on
development projects.
Staff contracted with Twin City Testing In June, 1984 to develop a soil
analysis at Groveland Park, and It was their recommendation that the soils
were weak, compressible, and highly frost -susceptible. They further
recommended that all of the soil should be removed from the area that the
tennis courts will be placed, as well as a minimum of five feet beyong the
edge, of the tennis courts.
We would then backf111 the area with compacted granular fill, having less than
50 percent passing a #40 sieve, and less than 5 percent passing a #200 sieve.
The reason we feel this Is a priority project Is that by doing the soil
�l corrections In the fall of 1986, it would allow them to settle over the
winter.
Three quotes were given for sell corrections:
I. Begin highdu time. Contracting
osk`y $
2o the topurchase soli SB0 for nerland crffor
This cost Isand deliver
It a long distance and an huurly rote for dozer machine and operator.
2. Arsenal Sand and Gravel - 310,580 for delivered material. This does not
Include compacting work.
3. Mary Anderson Homes - Under $7,000 due to the fact that soil Is available
on their property off Highway 10 and an operator and equipment Is already
available In tho area.
In addition to the soil corrections, we need to relocate the utility wires
that are running through Groveland Park underground, as they will be
Interrerring with the tennis court construction, as well as future tree
complete this fproject. has elStaff feels that both ved a quote From NSP lofttheseProjects he amount of 9can 0beo
which
spring of 1987 assuming the wCity Council apprroves funding cfor nGroveland Park.
RECOMMENDATION: To authorize staff to retain Mary Anderson Homes, Inc. for
athe Sol Iddition,caOFFeu'm" at an llowtstafF to rete n�N5P tout not tplaceeed the;7,000 utlIItynclu
wiresnunderground at
g material. n
the $13,000
come from the
DedicationPaccountaands
$4,000cot of 9from the ,70 hGrove4oand Park account•
'_ MS/sl
MEMO TO: Clerk -Administrator. and City Council
FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development
DATI.,: October 8, 1986
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RED OAK PARK (RED OAK SCHOOL SITE)
Attached please find the following:
1. Mounds View Planning Commission Resolution No. 174-86
2. Preliminary plat of Red Oak Park
3. Staff Report dated September17, i986
4. demo to Planning Commission from staff dated January 29,
1986 1986
5. Notice of Informational Meeting held
o Februaed ry
kSSchool
6. Lot sizes of the 16 lots proposed
site
The site is not in a wetlandzone
or flood
Rice Cplain.
reek Thehed development
will be reviewed and approved -by Y
District. The development meets City Code requirements.
The Developer would like to construct houses on Lots 1, 2, 3, 4,
15, and 16 this fall.
blic
RECOMMENDATION:
ion. recommend
earliestethelpublicuhearingacouldfor
be this
! scheduled is 7:10 p.m. on October 27; 1986. A notice will be
published in the tic Brighton Bulletin on October 15, 1986 and
mailed notices will be sent to property owners within 350 feet of
the subdivision by October 15, 1986.
SWT/bac
NING
MOUNDS
RESOLUTION NNO. 174-86SSI0N
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DING
CASE
NOFC0184-86, RED OAKIIPARK T(RED OAK LDRIVERAND SHERWOODCROAD)
WHEREAS, Mr. Chuck Cook has requested City approval of a
major subdivision; and propertyinto 16
WHEREAS, the request is se subdivide the ment for a detention pond over a
lots and to grant a drainage ease
portion of lots 81 9 and 10; and
WHEREAS the preliminary plat satisfies all City Code
requirementr, including Chapters 40, 42, 48, 49, 49A and State
statutes; and
WHEREAS, the development will be reviewed and approved by
Lhe Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) prior to construction;
and
WUr•.REAS, there is no wetland or flood plain located on the
subdivisiosn; and
al meeting was held on January 29,
WHEREAS, an information
_ 1986; and
WHEREAS, the minimum setback on the east side of Red Oak
Drive between Sherwood Road and Ardan Avenue is 54 feet; and
WHEREAS, the existing house on the southeast corner of
Sherwood Road and Red oak Drive has a setback of 44 feet from the
Red Oak Drive lot line; and
WIIF.REAS, the Developer requests a 10 foot variance from
the Red Oak Drive side yard setback requirements for Lot No. 2;
and
tCIIBREAS, the hardship is that the lot will not be
buildable without the variance; and
WHEREAS, Lhere are unique circumstances which apply to
Lhis property; and
rcumstances do not result from the
WHEREAS, the special ci
actions of the applicant; and
t71IER1•;AS, granting a variance request will not confer on
the applicant any special priviledges; and
RESOLUTION NO. 174-06
PAGE TWO OF TWO
WIIEREAS, the variance request is the minimum variance
which would alleviate the hardship; and
WIIEREAS, the variance is not materially detrimental to the
City Code; and
WHEREAS, Lot Nos. 1, 15 and 16 shall have front yard
setback of 44 feet, 58 feet and 58 feet, respectively;
NOW, TIIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mcunds View
Planning Commission recommends approval of the request by Chuck
Cook to subdivide the land as presented in the drawings received
by the City on September 25, 1986, contingent upon approval from
Rice Creek S•latershed District;
DE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission grants a 10 foot side yard setback variance for. Lot
No. 2;
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds Fiew Planning
Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City
Council prior Lo approval of the minutes.
Adopted this let• day of October, 1986.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Chairman
D3rectr. of Public Works
Community Development
STAFF C�fy �' Mounds e�
REPORT M....,
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW DATE: September 171 1986
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: 7
]^ CASE, NUMBER: 184-06
�1 APPLICANT: Charles Cook (Red Oak Park)
PROPOSED REQUEST: Applicant requests a major
subdivision on the land north of Sherwood Road,
east of Red Oak Drive (one lot into 16 lots).
�I LOCATION OF REQUEST: 5101 Red Oak Drive
SITE SIZR: 5.69 Acres
LOT DEPTH AND WIDTH: Each lct •caries in size, but
each lot weets Code requirements.
EXISTING ZONING: P.-1, Single Family Residential Dist.
F�1 CONTIGUOUS LAND USE: R-1
rWA4
V/
CONFORMANCE TO COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN: Request
conforms.
F+d 7.ONLNG CONFORMANCE TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Zoning
conforms.
Q
z
STAFF REPORT PAGE TWO OF TWO
CASE, NO.
LOT SIZE j
The proposed lots satisfy the City's Code requirements.
SETBACKS
Setbacks of the existing houses on the north side of Sherwood
�) Road between Red Oak Drive and Eastwood Road need to be
/ determined. J fkPss 315fF J
DRAINAGE
The site needs to be reviewed and approved by the Rice Creek
(� Watershed District because it is larger than 5 acres.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
City Code requires that the City Council hold a public hearing on
major subdivisions and mail notices to property owners living
within 350 feet of the property.
WATER AND SEWER ACCESS
City water and sewer lines need to be installed to service the
lots on the cul-de-sac.
WETLAND AND FLOOD PLAIN
The site is not in a flood plain or a wetland.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Preliminary Plat Received September 10, 19B6
1,4 Ai[orR,11), V, LPT 13
MEMO TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development
DATE: .January 29, 1986
SUBJECT: RFD OAK SCHOOL surE SBBDIVISION
Att_aci:ed please find a copy of the informaLional meeting notice
for the subject matter.
Staff contacted the following people, and talked to them about the
possibility of subdividing the back portion of their lots:
1, Karon Banson-88150140 FEastwoodRRoad
2. Arnie Knapp -
oad
3. Robert Young - 8160 Eastwood Road
4. ,John l,indowski - 8175 Red Oak Drive
5, Mark Ahmann - 0156 Red Oak Drive
Each of the above residents also received a copy Of the informa-
tl,;n;;l. n;ti• ing notice. During preliminary discuss{nos with the
above property Owners, everyone except John Lindowski said that
they probably would not subdivide their property. They seem to
propertywant to keep their large lots. The buildings iners tl:eoharkstwood portion
also had large garages or accessory
of their property. They did not really want to move those
+ buildings.
Mr. Mark Ahmann, 8156 Red Oak Drive, indicated to Chuck Cook, the
developer, that he did not want to subdivide his sleep lot. In
order to utilize Mr. Lindowski's land, 8175 Red Oak Drive, in
this subdivision, Mr, Ahmann would have to change his preliminary
decision. In other words, in order to develop one extra lot in
the Red Oak School site subdivision, both lots, 8156 and 8175 Red
ne
rty owner
wantOak Orive, must be to subdivide, thedex.LradlotlinothepRedeOak Schnolds{toes enot
subdivision cannot he added.
ha.^,izeJt:at if. the subdivision is approved and the above
property own r� do not subdivide their lets, the hack portion of
their lots will be landlocked nfuthey will
anot
lso a able tothat it
subdivide their property in thp was their decision and the was certainly not forcing them to
akindo either, but was rather making sure that everyone understood
that now is the time to decide whether or not they ever want
their property subdivided.
If you have any quroations, please feel free to call.
SWI•/bac
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMiSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA' .
INFORMATIONAL MEETING
NOTICE 13 HEREBY GIVEN that the Mounde View Mining
Co,n iWm wkl meal on W Fab j&y5. iAft at 7-30
P.m . at Mamba VMW C 11, 2401 IQ "y 10, Nim-As View,
Ml mma 6511210 Ew" the rectum of Charles Cook for e
mekx subdlvtokm it bt ho 161ole) of sMoximsfety saes Red
Oak Woo (old Red Oak School N»), 4aiy known a:
SECTION 0, TOWI•ISHIP 30, MANGE 23 SUBJ TO $HER -
WOOD RD AND RED OAK OR THE S 247 S110 FT OF E 525
FT OF W ION FT OF HE % ALSO THE NE 157 61f00F S 405
FT OF E 250 FT OF W 1065 FT OF SO Vi IN SECTION 5,
TOWNSHIP 30, RANGE 23,
Anyone dt*hV to bo heard 64JIW wroa to OtM cl9W, may
be heard at era Iniormmlonal nnefkrfl.
Donald F. Aaulay
C14rk-..0WrA lralor
(Bullelln:,lan.29. %W1 ,.
I
i
.
•
tl is
.r
;r
l
•f
�•.•,':.
is
•
.it
, ry
:a.
t'•t. y� 11
I•✓fOdMij%IPA, L mT
x,:n vAs; srtiwL 1 r�
z 15111
NoJ91c) IS
L 40/ <,n, V /v
9/7.s' ti<,) nnk .De.
ms S4-fcwvd tc�
�ruaHfe5r.�� o� (— S l c5G�
liCJ�i
7Ci y- -J v SS
-7
75 E -Y5S.3
79-1- 3073
78•�� - 7066
Z-sle -*62-6
I I LD7 pffb
I
A O DRif 3c14POL r7TtLAPORT
I
DR.VE
'IQPS
.4
' � 1409I f7t
nUJ
\
1 SASt
KI
01
LU
cc
� li � IIi D`i �7 f't � I7110V'�♦ I ♦i � i
I 1
•1• . t ~ �. IIt7o4fit�1119jitt" STpR�7 1 1
. I • / 11117SF7 ; Ia704fi1 7 � I )r,,vF.R I I
r SHR EWOOD ROAD m; rcgt>
CI I ---•— Inc lYS F7
1 I Ii o
�I
=¢�
y:
I
I.
I
I
:I
I ,
L: fT' L-11 I
M1 _
I L•.
LAPORT DRIVEi
.. .
I
I •---------
------------
LJ
I
<
\ T
u1 I , I I -J•
I
PRELIMINARY FLAT*
RED
OAK PARK
EDP
CONTINENTAL DEVELOP MENTCOMPANYIm
1
COONgAPID y33
...
wrLEGAL
-+
DESCRIPTION
SITE DATA
' OUNDS
. SITE
t-
LEGEND
_ Rl.C. tS 'R•
LOCATION MAP
RESOLUTION No. 2111
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR 2609 COUNTY ROAD I,
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 182-85,
WHEREAS, Phyllis Leenerts, 2609 County Road I, requested
City approval for a minor subdivision on October 10, 1985; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. Leenerts has provided a Surveyor's
Certificate; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the staff
report and information submitted by the applicant; and
WHEREAS, the fence has been moved Cuff of the lot to he
created; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed this
' proposed minor subdivision and it is in conformance with all
Chapters of the Municipal Code, specifically Chapters 40, 42, 49
and 49A and State Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reccmmends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City
Council approves the request by Mrs. Leenerts for a minor
subdivision.
Adopted this 13th day of October, 1986.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Mayor
Clerk -Administrator
�M�
RESOLUTION NO. 2112
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION REGARDING MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE
NO. 164-84, KUNZ OIL COMPANY
WHEREAS, Kunz oil !company has requested City approval to
remove their existing building and construct a gasoline/
convenience store in the City of Mounds View; and
WHEREAS, construction of this gasoline/convenience store
facility as requested requires approval of the development and
conditional use permit; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the staff
report and has reviewed the report on the develupment from
Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. along with information
submitted by the applicant which includes the following:
a) Development Plan
h) Site Survey
c) Project Summary
d) Evidence of Site Control
e) Landscaping Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has also reviewed this
proposal and it is in conformance with all Chapters of the
Municipal code, specifically Chapters 40, 42, 49, and 49A, and
State Statutes; and
WHEREAS, this development does not need to be reviewed by
the Rice Creek Watershed District; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation will
review the development prior to construction; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the letter from
Attorney Meyers dated January 26, 1985, that states a City simply
cannot legislate a business out of existence; and
WHEREAS, the storm water control shall be approved by the
City Engineer prior to approval by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission conducted an
informational meeting with the residents of the area on February
6, 1985 at 7:40 p.m.; and
WHEREAS, the proposed plan has been revised to minimize
the neighbors complaints; and
RESOLUTION NO. 2112
PAGE TWO OF THREE
WHEREAS, the neighbors attending the February 6, 1985,
meeting were invited to the Planning Commission's informal
meeting on March 20, 1985. At that meeting the neighbors in
attendance stated that they felt the project, as revised, was
acceptable; and
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends
approval and recommends amending the Comprehensive Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City
Council approvcs the request by Kunz Oil Company and amends the
Comprehensive Plan for this one site.
HE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a development agreement be
entered into between the City and the Developer which includes
the following provisions:
1) Exhibits:
a) Site, grading and utility plan
b) Site, development dnd landscaping plan indicating
size, number and variety of plantings, including
hardwoods
c) Site survey
d) Legal description
e) Ordinance No. 49A 7-year performance bond of $1,000 i
f) 8uildino Dlans and specifications
2) Security for the development in an amount to be
determined, and the security shall include viability
of landscaping for one year from time of planting.
3) Exhibit 2A to require the following:
a) Payment of all City expenses above and beyond
amounts previously submitted.
b) Other items as may be required by the City Council.
c) Maximum hours of operation shall be from 6 a.m. to
10 P.M.
d) The underground storage tanks should, as a minimum,
he pressure tested according to MPCA standards and
meet or exceed said standards.
e) If the gas station is closed for 12 months, the
tanks shall be filled with sand by the property
owner.
f) Any trees that die shall be replaced within 2
months.
g) Sand blasting and lining of underground storage
tanks shall be conducted using a process approved
by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
RESOLUTION NO. 2112
PAGE THREE OF THREE
h) F. and I. two V -8' diameter inspection wells and
magnesium anodes attached to tank and test station
and Armor Shieldtm or approved equal lining inside
tank.
i) A 6 foot high fence in front of building line is
acceptable.
j) Outside merchandising shall be confined to the
concrete entrance slab. Outside merchandise
stacking shall not exceed 4 feet in height.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a conditional use permit be
granted which includes the above items.
Adopted this 13th day of October, 1986.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
mayor
Clerk -Administrator
0
4
RESOLUTION NO. 2109
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION REGARDING JLN DEVELOPMENT, INC.,
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 86-199,
GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL
WHEREAS, JLN Development, Inc. has tequested general
concept approval to construct the following:
1. 231,000 square feet of office/service,
2. 481,000 square feet of light industrial,
3. 4,000 square feet of restaurant,
at the site bounded by T.H. 10, I-35W and County Road H-2; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has requested a planned unit
development review process; and
WHEREAS, construction of this development, as requested,
requires the following approvals:
1. General concept plan
2. Development stage
3. Final plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council have
has reviewed the staff report and information submitted by the
applicant which includes the followinq:
1. Letter from JLN Development, Inc. dated July 9, 1986
2. Letter from JLN Development, Inc. dated August 12,
1986
3. Memo to Mayor and City Council from Clerk -
Administrator dated August 12, 1986
4. Memo to Planninq Commission from Public Works Foreman/
Building Inspector dated August 21, 1986
5. Letter from JLN Development, Inc. dated September 3,
1986
6. Letter from Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc.
regarding parking standards for office and industrial
uses dated September 8, 1986
7. Development Concept Plan received September 8, 1986
8. Letter from Benshoof & Associates, Inc. regarding
traffic study for JLN Project dated September 15, 1986
9. Letter from Benshoof & Associates, Inc. regarding
traffic study for JLN Project dated September 18, 1986
IG. City of Mounds View Development District No. 2 Plan
and Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Industrial
Redevelopment District Project received September 22,
1986
It. Rounds View City Council Resolution No. 2091 adopted
on September 22, 1986; and
RESOLUTION NO. 2109
PAGE TWO OF FOUR
WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a project that meets
the requirements of City Code Chapter 40.24, Subd. C(2), -
commercial or industrial planned unit development; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has provided the information
required by Chapter 40.24, Subd. E(1), general concept stage; and
WHEREAS, in order for the light industrial building in the
northwest corner of the site to be constructed, the property must
be rezoned from B-3 to I-1; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted some development
stage information at this time and requests recommendations from
the Planning Commission on parking requirements for Lhis project;
and
WHEREAS, the letter from Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uben,
Inc. dated September 8, 1986, addresses parking standards for
office and industrial uses and does not address the restaurant;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council have
reviewed the parking report prepared by Dahlgren, Shardlow, and
Uben, Inc. and the staff memo regarding parking dated October 2,
1986; and
WHEREAS, surveyed cities have parking space requirements
for office buildings that vary from 4 to 5 packing spaces per
1,000 square feet of building; and
WHEREAS, surveyed cities have parking space requirements
for warehouses that vary from 0.5 to 2.0 parking space per 1,000
feet of building; and
WHEREAS, surveyed cities have parking requirements for
buildings with 50 percent office space and 50 percent warehouse
space varying from 2.25 to 3.0 parking spaces per 1,000 square
feet of building; and
WHEREAS, existing City Code requires 5.7 parking spaces
per 1,000 square feet of building area plus 3 parking spaces for
office buildings; and
WHEREAS, existing City Code requires 2 parking spaces per
1,000 square feet of building plus 8 parking spaces for
industrial buildings; and
WHEREAS, existing City Code requires 1 parking space per
100 square feet of public service area plus 2 parking spaces per
1,000 square feet of storage area for retail sales bu+.ldings with
50 percent of the space devoted to storage; and
RESOLUTION NO. 2109
PAGE THREE. OF FOUR
WHEREAS, existing City Code requires approximately 25
parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of building for restaurants
or 1 parking space per 3 seats; and
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission recommmends
approval of the General Concept Plan dated October 1, 1986; and
WHEREAS, Mounds View Planning Commission recommends
rezoning the property proposed for the light industrial building
in the northwest area of the site from B-3 to I-1; and
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends
.that the City Council retain another traffic consultant to study
alternatives for Quincy Street traffic; and
WHEREAS, that the Mounds View Planning Commission
recommends traffic control at the intersections of Quincy Street
and Bronson Drive, Quincy Street and County Road H-2, County Road
H-2 and Montclair Avenue (entrance to the Mounds View
Manufactured [ionic Park) and at the center intersection in the
proposed development; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission will continue to review
the number of parking spaces that will be required in a P.U.D.
context; and
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends
that th, restaurant meet City Code requirements for parking
spaces;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City
Council approve the General Concept Plan dated October 1, 1986,
contingent upon changes being made to provide additional parking
spaces;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
shall initiate the rezoning process for the light industrial
building in the northwest area of the site from B-3 to I-1;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
install traffic control at the intersections of Quincy Street and
Bronson Drive, Quincy Steet and County Road 11-2, County Road H-2
and Montclair Avenue (entrance to the Mounds View Manufactured
Home Park) and at the center intersection in the proposed
development if the development is constructed;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
requires that the restaurant meet City code requirements for
parking spaces;
l
RESOLUTION NO. 2109
PAGE FOUR OF FOUR
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a plan be submitted such that
the truck loading area pan be converted to automobile parking
spaces when the building use changes;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if the Developer acquires the
single family house west of the McDonald's Restaurant, it shall
be included in the P.U.D.;
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
shall initiate the process to amend the PUB nortion of the City
Code to allow Lhe following parking requirements ir. a PUD which
is larger than 60 acres:
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
1) Office - 5.0 parking spaces/1,000
2) Warehouse - 2.0 parking spaces/1,000
3) 50% Office/508 Warehouse - 3.5 spares/1,000
Adopted this 13st day of October, 1986.
Mayor
Clerk-Adm nistrator
C
MEMO TO: Clerk —Administrator and City Council
FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development
DATE: September 9, 1906
SUBJECT: VARIANCE FOR RAYMOND YOUNG DRIVEWAY AT
AT 2267 LOTS DRIVE
The driveway at 2267 Lois Drive was replaced without obtaining a
building permit. The new driveway is in the same location and is
the same size as the driveway it replaced. The new driveway does
not meet the existing Code in the following areas:
I. The setback is less than 5 feet from the property line.
2. The cdrb cut is greater than 22 feet.
City Codes states that any restoration work done in the City must
comply with existing Codes (Chapter 40.03, Subd. A and G).
The Planning Commission denied the variance request because a
hardship could not be found. Please refer to attached copy of
the Planning Commission minutes of September 3, 1986.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommedds that the variance request be
enied.
SWT/bac
PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Ufa /� rrri u ® Regular Mee tin
�^� !!! FL" September 3, 196
Mounds View City lial
------2401 Ilwy• 10, Mounds View, MN 5511
----------------------------------
Thc Rounds View Planning Commission was called to
order by Chairman Mountie at 7:43 PM on Wednesday, I• Call to
September 3, 1986. Order
MEMBERS p1� tESENT- Commissioners Eollner, Miller, Corslund 2. Roll Call
and Chairman Mountin.
ALSO PRESENT: Public Works/Community Development
DtrecLor 'thatcher and Councilmember Blanchard.
MoLion/Sec.•ond: rorslund/Zollner to set aside the August 3. Approval of
21, 1986 minutes to review at the next agenda ,oss'
Minutes:
4 ayes 0 nays August 7, 19
and August 2
1986
Motion
Crir
MoLion/Second: Forslund/Miller to approve rile August 7, 1)86 minutes as presented.
4 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carrie
There were no residents requests or comments from tile
4. Residents
Requests and.
Comments from
tine Floor
Fcr,lll
Planning Commission agreed Lo hear the next twoes I.ogether, as Flr. Young was not present, and Mr. S. Raymond J.
Gjerrle had agreed Lo speak for him also. Young, 2267
ois br'
D.irecLor ThaLcher explained the contrncLor who did the Case 3rde an
work for. these two parties was not licensed to do work 6 2272 Lois Dr
in Lhe City. Ile replaced an existing driveway for both Case Lois Driv,
Parties, with a cement driveway. Tire existing driveways Case 194-86
were w.i.Lhin 5 feel of the property line before replace-
ment, and Code requires Lhat any improvements done which
equal. greater. than 50 percent of the area must abide by
existing Code, and the existing Code requires the drive-
ways Lo be 5 f.^.et off. Lhe property line.
Flonnds view PlIII ing Commissi
UTUT
..
September 3,
arMeeting Page Two ----------------------------•ROVED
-----------------
Mr.
Mr. Gjerde sLaLed he felt his hardship was Lack of room
to park voliicl.es as he has a single car garage, and
without the additional 5 feet on the side of his driveway,
there would be no place to park the three cars or boat.
Commissioner Miller stated she felt the contractor should
have checked with the City to see what the Code calls for
before installing the driveways.
Director 'rhatcher replied the ultimate responsibility
rests with the property owner., to insure that any work
being clone meets Code, and that the contractor is licensed
in the City.
Mr. Gjerde stated that one corner of his garage is about
0. feet from the property line.
Chairman Mountin stated she has a real problem with the
driveway encroaching on the lot line, and she reminded
the Commissioners they cannot consider an economic hard-
ship.
Director Thatcher reported he has gone through the files
and can find no variances that wYre ever granted for these
two properties.
Chairman MounLin also pointed out that according to Code,
no driveway can be any wider. that 22 feet at the curb cut,
and tor. Gjerde's driveway is considerably wider than 22 feet.
Mr. Gierde replied he had driven past a new home on Sherwood
that has a three car garage and the dr.ivaway goes straight
out to the street, and is wider. than 22 feet.
Director Thatcher replied he would have Staff look into it.
Ile also checked for the Commissioners and reported Mr. Gjerde's
lot is Do feet wide.
Chairman Mountin stated she has a problem with a lot that
size encroaching on the neighbor. She added that while the
neighbor al: this time may not mind, there is no assurance
of who will live in those homes in the future and what their
feelings may be. She also stated she did not want to delay
a decision any longer on Ois item, and that if the Planning
Commission should deny the variances for the two properties,
the property owners would have the right of appeal to the
Council.
Mounds View planning CommissirU-NA
� / (�September 3, 198t
Regular. Meetiny P RO U E '-------Page ------------
Commissioner Fors.lund stated she would agree with Mr.
Gjerde that Ire (Ions not have access to his back yard and
she did not like to see a boat parked on the grass, as it
would rip it up.
Commissioner Miller stated she feels the Planning
Commission must uphold the Code, which requires a
hardship for a variance, and she does not feel Mr.. Gjerde
has one.
Commissioner Zollner stated she can sympathize with Mr.
Gjerde, but she must go along with the Code, and without
a hardship, cannot grant a variance.
Motion/Second: Miller/Zollner to deny the variances for
Lhe property at 2267 Lois Drive, Case 193-86, an.l
2272 Lois Drive, Case 194-86, due to lack of hardship.
3 ❑yes 1 nay
Commissioner Furslund voted against the motion, stating
site felt it was a pre-existing condition, and he only
needs about a 2!1 foot variance since the garage is
closer than 5 feet from the property line. She added
she would rather see them park on the concrete drive-
way than on the grass.
Commissioner Miller stated that since the Code states
that anything which is replaced to a degree of more
than 50 percent must be brought up to Code, she feels
the driveway shrnrid he placed 5 feet from the property
line, as specified in the Code.
Chairman Mountin stated Lire applicants Can appeal the
pinnning Commission's decision to tine City Council.
Director Thatcher reported the next Council agenda
session is September 15, and he requested the
applicants submit a letter stating that they wish
to appeal the denial.
Director Thatcher reviewed the history of Dynamic
Designers briefly. lie also stated that, in response
to the planning Commission's question of whether
any further fill could be pl.aced on the property, Ire
has dCLermined that: a minimal amount could still be
placed without causing any problems. tie added that
this wetland will not be changed with any future
storm sewer system. Director Thatcher also pointed
out t:he applicant was in the process of filling the
property when the City nnacLed the moritorium on the
wetlands, and had the moritorium not been imposed,
they could have filled the property and built on it.
Motion
7. Dynamic
Designers,
7656 Woodlawn
Drive,
Case 138-83
MEMO TO: Clerk -Administrator and City Council
FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development
DATE: September 9, 1986
SUDJECT: VARIANCE FOR
DRIVE
BARDARA GJGRDE DRIVEWAY
AT 2272 L
Attached
Attached please find the following:
1. My memo to the Planning Comission dated 7/24/86.
2. Minutes from the 9/3/86 meeting regarding this variance
request.
The main issue is that the driveway at 2272 Lois Drive was
replaced without obtaining a building permit. The new driveway
is in the same location and is the same size as the old
driveway. City Code states that any restoration done in the City
must comply with existing Codes (Section 40.03, Subd. A and G).
The Planning Comipcould
sdenied
btheir
request for a variance
because a
ot
d.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the variance not be
yrant�—
SWT/bac
Y
w
TO: Planning Commission
rldoM: public Works/Community Development
Director Thatcher/7VA
DATE: July 24, 1986
Rr.- Variance for. Mylo and Barbara
Gjerde
Driveway at 2272 Lois Drive
A dri.veway was replaced at 2.272 Lois
Drive without obtaining
a huIlelftig permit for. Luis work. The
contractor doing this
work was not licensed to work in the
City or Mounds Viet".
When the new c1r..ivewny was inspected,
it did not meet the
existing code which requires a :i-foot
setback from the
proper.Ly
CtLy code states that any restoration
work done in the City
inns_ comply wi.Ch Lhe existing codes.
(Chapter 40.03,
subcdiv.isi.on (A) and (G)) .
The property owner. has nplAied for a
variance to the 5-foot
property setback requirement.
EEL'OMML•'MDATION: 5l:af.f recommends that:
the variance no:. '•e
C''.�;
aCCP.l ed and that• the City's bul..l.d.ing
code be enforce�c—•
i
PROCEEDINGS OF TIIR PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
^ RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
1 i UNAPPROVED
Regular 3,Meetin
198
September 3, 198
Mounds view City Hal
2401 Ilwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 5511
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Mounds view Planning Commission was called to
1. Call to
order by Chairman Mountin at 7:43 PM on Wednesday,
Order
September 3, 1906.
MI?:':9ER5 PRESENT: Commissioners Zollner, Miller, Forslund
2. Roll Call
and Clmirm,ii: E6unLill
ALSO PRESENT: Public Works/Conmunity neve.l.opment
Director Thatcher. and Councilmember Blanchard.
Motion/Second: Forslund/Zollner to set aside the August
3. Approval of
21, 1906 minutes to review at the next agenda session.
Minutes:
August 7, 1!
4 nyes 0 nays
and August
1986
Motion Carri
' Motion/Second: Forslund/Miller to approve the August 7,
19Fl6 'minutes as presented.
4 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carri
There were no residents requests or comments from the
4. Residents
floor.
Requests and
Comments froi
the Floor
I'ha Planning Commission agreed to hear the next two
5. Raymond J.
cases together, as Mr. Young was not present, and Mr.
Young, 2267
GJerde had agreed to speak for him also.
Lois Drive,
Director Thatcher explained the contractor who did the
Case 193-86 e
6. My. er e,
work for. these two part.i.es was not licensed to do work
2272 Lois Drl
in the City. Ile replaced an existing driveway for both
a 194-86
parti.cs, with n cement driveway. The existing driveways
were. wi.l:hi.n 5 feet of the property line before replace-
ment, and Code requires that any improvements clone which
equnt Urcater. than 50 percent of. the area must abide by
exisLing Code, and the existing Code requires the drive-
ways to he 5 feet off khe property line.
Mounds View Planning Commiss.in V D September, 19
Regular Meeting H-O Page iWo--_----
Mr. Gjerde presented pictures to the Planning Commission
of Mr. Young's driveway. lie stated his own had been in
very bad repair and needed replacing.
Chairman Mcuntin explained that when finding for an appli-
canL on a variance request, they must find a hardship
which must be unique to that property, and the hardship
cannot be self-created by the property owner.
Mr. Gjerde stated he felt his hardship was lack of room
to park vehicles as he has a single car garage, and
without the additional 5 feet on the side of his driveway,
there would be no place to nark the three cars or boat.
Commissioner Miller stated she felt the contractor should
have checked with the City to see what the Code calls for
before installing the driveways.
Director. Thatcher replied the ultimate responsibility
rests with the property owner., to insure that any work
being done meets Code, and that the contractor is licensed
in the City.
Mr. Gjerde stated that one corner of his garage is about
4 feet from the property line.
Chairman Mountin stated she has a real problem with the
driveway encroaching on the lot line, and she reminded
the Commissioners they cannot consider an economic hard-
ship.
Director Thatcher reported he has gone through the files
and can find no variances that were ever granted for these
two properties,
Chairman MonnLin also pointed out that according to Code,
no driveway can be any wider that 22 feet at the curb cut,
and Mr. Gjerde's driveway is considerably wider than 22 feet.
Mr. Gjerde replied he had driven past a new home on Sherwood
that has a three car garage and the driveway goes straight
out to the street, and is wider than 22 feet.
Director Thatcher replied he would have Staff look into it.
lie also chocked for the Commissioners and reported Mr. Gjerde's
lot is DO feet wide.
Chairmnn Mountin stated she has a problem with a lot that
size encroaching on the neighbor. She addcd that while the
neighbor at this time may not mind, there is no assurance
or who will live in those homes in the future and what their
feelings may be. She also stated she did not want to delay
n deeision any longer on this item, and that if the Planning
Commission should deny the variances for the two properties,
the property owners would have the right of appeal to the
Counci.I.
Hounds View planning Commissi�
Reyul.ar. Meeting d�nI �/ nSeptember 3, 19
PT��-V-�-L-�------------------
Page Three
Commissioner Fors.lund staled she would agree with Mr.
Gjerde that he does not have access to his back yard and
she did not like to see a boat parked on the grass, as it
would rip it up.
Commissioner. Miller stated she feels Lite planning
Commission must uphold Lite Code, which requires a
hardship for a variance, and she does not feel Mr. Gjerde
has one.
Commissioner Y.ollner stated she can sympathize with Mr.
Gjerde, but she must go along with the Code, and without
a hardship, cannot grant- a variance.
Motion/second: Miller/Zollncr to deny the variances for
Lite property at 2267 Lois Drive, Case 193-86, and
2272 Lois Drive, Case 194-06, due to lack or hardship.
3 ayes 1 nay
Commissioner rorslund voted against the motion, stating
she felt it was a pre-existing condition, and lie only
needs about a 24 foot variance since the garage is
closer than 5 feet from the property line. She added
she would rather see them park on the concrete drive-
way than on the grass.
Commissioner Miller slated that since the Code states
U-1: anything which is replaced to a degree of more
than 50 percen,_ must be brought up to Cnde, she feels
the driveway should be placed 5 feet from the properly
line, as specified in the Code.
Chairman Mountin stated the applicants can appeal the
Planning Commission's decision to the City Council.
Director Thatcher reported the next Council agenda
session is September 15, and he requested the
LO111`1`
anLs submit a letter. stating that they wishcal Lite denial.
Director. Thatcher reviewed the history.of Dynamic
Designers briefly. Ile also stated that, in response
to Lite Planning Commission's question of whether
any furthor fill could be placed on the property, he
has determined that a minimal amount could still be
Placed without causing any problems. Ile added that
this wetland will not he changed with any future
storm sewer system. Director Thatcher also pointed
out the applicant was in the process of filling the
property when Lite City enacted File moritorium on the
wetlands, and had Lite moritorium not been imposed,
they could have filled Lite property and built on it.
Motion Carri
7. Dynamic
Designers,
7656 Woodlawn
Drive,
Case 138-83
rPLICANT:
r
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
PLANNING APPLICATION
Date l•./•�•��`
Phone 7b (• %%C1
Address r�'•J%� j' JY r l'i --- — `,
Interest in Property (check appropriate box):
Owner of Record Lessee, Operator, Managcr
Contractor for Deed Owner Agreement to Purchase --
Other (Explain)
Documentary evidence of applicant's interest in the property may be required
before final City action on this request.
PROPERTY: Address/General Location �•��� LC/�
REQUEST:
Legal Owner: Name/Address M06 l d I X1-IXiTc}.
Present Use (Check Appropriate Box):
Undeveloped/Vacant
Single Family Dwelling
Duplex Dwelling
Multiple Dwelling (3-6 units)
Other (explain)
Property Classification:
Is
Apartment
Business Esablishment
Industrial Establishment
❑ Abstract ❑ Torrens
{I r., ,alllllnn,+� _lllrc: fr•r Pi'hic� burl Ini.
•I II E. ,1�'c J(-J el -. n 1 - ., ,, I I- cl - - 1U` J
I hereby declare that the above statements are true. _
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:
BASE FEES*
Subdivision, Major ($150)
Subdivision, Minor ($75)
Rezoning ($50) •�
Conditional Use ($50)
Variance ($50)
Code Appeal ($50)
Alteration Permit ($50)
*Rase Fees in parenthesis are non-refundable.
Park Fund dedication
Date raid
Receipt Number
ADDITIONAL ADDITIONAL FEES
sat. L%p CI=P
r
fture)
---------------------
Reapportionment
Public llearting Notices
Staff, Consultant Reviews
Miscellaneous _
Subtotal
'ftl'1'AL PEES
Date Paid
Receipt Number
' 24-IIOUR NOTICD REQUIRED FOR INSPECTIONS.
.Permit NO. CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
``-►`�s�= BUILDING APPLICATION
e u SO
i
°s
............
w
"0•�
1
q. m.e n. . c>eau
3 �e 'r vr r - n�IGL kb:e s� Q
�Z
••e•�
...
.P[..l. el.,.... ...�. .DD....
..H•11.
V.r eI .V�.e.•
4
5 CIED of work: ❑NEW 0ADDITION ❑ALTERATION
❑REPAIR 0MOVE 0REMOVE
6 Detctike work: —�
(A7- J1� L M C. to
change of me ham
Change of tire to
//''
] V[Iuetidn of wnik:5
lYne nl
Comm
G((na.nrY
G.nup
Dn.lnn
NOTICE
S.I. nl Did,
ITDu11 Se FI /f•0
Nn nl
Slnne.
M.•
Orr Lord
F•,.
Enne
Ulf
2,.n.
Fill Snl.n.l Gl
Re ..... 0 Dye, ❑ND
THE PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUE
-'ION AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 170 DAYS, OR
OFFSTREET PARKING SPACES
CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED
)R A PERIOD OF 170 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS
.:OMMFNCED.
Nn nl
Ownnne VmU
rmH,d Unrnv.Nd
IIN,
•••e•
•..•
-
• •
.er rs.
1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS
APPLICATION AND KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT.
ALL PROVISIONS Or LAWS AND ORDINANCES GOVERNING THIS
TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED
HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT
PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE
PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LJCAL LAW REGULATING
CONSTRUCTION OR THE PERFORMANCE OF CONS TRVCTION.
FPxi.t APPmnh
RPRnned
R.su.ed
Nor R.Bwnd
ZONING
HEALTH DEPT.
FIRE DEPT
......... .....nrtr • • .Y........•..•r ..yl
SOIL KEPOR!
OTHER ISD¢nYl
_
—
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
IMPORTANT TO APPLICANT PLEASE READ.
SEPERATE PERMITS REQUIRED FOR:
eRK.l ma Hr.v 11
N•av unlrUnr
.nvinrnn nw. n..
PLUMBING !
HEATING, VENTILATING
'-fin"
OR AIR CONDITIONING M__�
CONTRACTORS LICENSE yes no
ELECTRICAL I
BLACKTOPPING #
SEWER 8 & WATER
FEE
s DU
N CHECK FEE
THIS IS AN APPLICATION ONLYE:PERMIT
THE PERMIT WILL BE ISSUED AFTERCNAncgM.CHARGE
REVIEWAI. OF THE APPLICATION.AL
iEE
S
RECEIPT N 0112,2 r—
ro
A
s
L
h
CITY OF MOUNDS ViliN _
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
PLOT PLAN
'��
POSED CONSTRUCTION
N
w T E
S
BLDG. PERMIT i
DATE/y/��
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL !�
FROM: CLERK -ADMINISTRATOR
( DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1986
SUBJECT: CLERICAL ASSISTANCE
As I indicated to you at the October 6, 1986 Agenda Session,
I am requesting additional hours for Deanna Mortenson to
provide clerical assistance at least through the November
Elections and November 13, 1986 trial. As Deanna has
already worked past the previously allotted hours, I would
request that 1 be authorized to have Deanna Mortenson work
whatever hours I determine are necessary after her previous
eighty (80) hour authorization expired through the week of
November 17, 1986.
At this point, it would be unlikely that Deanna w>uld work
full forty (40) hour weeks during that time. however, it is
difficult for us to make an accurate estimate as to the
hours we will need her assistance and, therefore, I am
requesting an open authorization.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council authorize the
hiring :jf Deanna Mortenson at the rate of $5.00 per hour as
determined as necessary by the Clerk -Administrator beginning
September 22, 1986.
DFP/dmm
ku- .. i
ORDINANCE NO. 411
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 70 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW
MUNICIPAL CODE ENTITLED, "MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM"
The City Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby
#'I
ordain:
SECTION I. Chapter 70.03 entitled, "Liability for Repd�
is hereby amended to read as follows:
70.03 Liability for Repairs. After the initial connect:
has been made to the waternain, the applicant, or the
occupant or other user of such premises shall be liable I
all repairs between the water main and the structure loci
on the premises. Maintenance of the curb stop box shall^
that of the applicant, owner, or occupant or other user Y
the premises and it shall be the responsibility of said`)
to maintain the curb stop box at such height as will ensl
that it will remain above the finished grade of the .land'
property. Nothing herein will prevent the municipality
recovering the cost of repairs from the applicant, owner,'
other occupant or other user of such premises or any othi
party in the event it can be established that said parts
were the cause of the damages requiring the repairs.
This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after theldi
of its publication. r
Read by the Council of the City of Mounds View on the 22,
day of September, 1986 E
Read and passed by the Council Of the City of Mounds Mll
this day of , 1996.
ATTEST:
(SEAL) Clerk -Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City AtLorney
u
I
ORDINANCE NO. 412
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
(i
STATE OF MINNESOTA L�
�i
la
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 71 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW
MUNICIPAL CODE ENTITLED, "MUNICIPAL SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM"
The City Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby
i SiSj
ordain:
SECTION I. Chapter 71.10 entitled, "Maintenance of Sewer" is
9oq
hereby amended to read as follows:
]'
11.10 Maintenance of Sewer. Each property owner shall be ;'
a
responsible for maintaining an unobstructed sewer line from..
the building located on the premises to the sewer main and
each property owner shall be responsible for all repairs to
E
that portion of the sewer line between said building and the
sewer main.
This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after the date
of its publication.
Read by the Council of the City of Mounds View on the 22rd
day of September, 1986
Read and passed by the Council of the City of Mounds View
;•;
this day of , 1986.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
Mayor
h:
b
Clerk -Administrator
�'.-�.. M.-._,= _P++^-- n'rms�a� b2�<„a' m-..e.�..^_ •5u„�..'.c `�`.'� _ nn�r�sr®s
i J
"CKSTD WETLAND
P.RCPOSBD BGFFE:z ARF? ✓ '* +Y L' ae�
t
x
V t%4 A
+ 5 ASS_2
H ri, 1
z t
n/ r� \ \r ?� ��� `f.a''i"��"°�5,,��-` i C.• �. � � *:'its
,• �\ .•i��`,.G;���•2A'�� ���.- eta' .'a'qi�� ,. •tv
� AitcA
I
'
ORDINANCE NO, 413 L t7�
f�
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 7
If'Igli.
r .
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
j1 {
STATE OF MINNESOTA
fir;
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 48 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW
MUNICIPAL CODE ENTITLED, "WETLAND ZONING ORDINANCE" !
1 ;i •`j
:►,.
The City Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby
ordain:
SECTION I. The wetland Zoning District Map as established)
<i}
in '8.15, Subd. 1, of the Municipal Cade is hereby amended by
redelineating the wetland boundary for Wetland I.D. No. I-23 as
Si:fil
per the attached exhibit.
SECTION II. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days
after the date of its publication.
1''f
Read by the Council of the City of Mounds View on the 22hd
day of September, 1986.
i
Read and passed by the City Council of the Citv of Mounds
! !;
View this day of _� 1986.
is
ATTEST:
I.
' 7 ,
Mayor
(SEAL)
II
Clerk -Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
r.i
y
City Attorney
is
NIiMO TO: Clerk -Administrator and City Council
FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development /(V T
DATE: October 8, 1986
SUBJECT: ADULT FOSTER CARE FOR THE MENTALLY RETARDED
on October 8, 1986, I met with James Loving of the Division of
Mental Retardation of the Bureau of Social Services of the State
of Minnesota and Cindy Fredrickson of Cambridge State Hospital
regarding adult foster cz'e for the mentally retarded. They are
proposing to lease 2 single family houses in the City of Mounds
View for the purpose of training mentally retarded adults to live
in the community. The addresses of the two houses are 2406
Dloodcrest Drive and 2125 Belle Lane.
This pilot project is targeted for the cities of Roseville.
Shoreview, Mounds View and Arden Hills because there is a low
percentage of mentally retarded persons in these communities.
Cindy and Jim requested a letter of support from the Mounds View
City Council.
This is a private program funded by the State of Minnesota for one
year. The program will probably be funded for future years. Each
house will have a maximum of 4 mentally retarded persons plus 24
hour a day adult supervision. In the morning and in the afternoon
when all four persons will most likely be around the house, there
will be two adult supervisors on site. During the day, the adult
will be trained at the Development Achievement Center (D.A.C).
Some adults will hopefully progress so that they can obtain a job
and live on there own. Some residents may never obtain the skills
necessary to live on there own and will continue to live in the
house.
The pilot project needs a license from the Ramsey County Board of
Commissioners. They have applied for that license.
Apparently, the proposed use does not need to abide by local
zoning laws. Attached please find an informational Bulletin No.
85-114 dated December 24, 1985, a request for proposal consisting
of 8 pages, and City Code Chapter 113. Staff will review the
enforceability of City Code Chapter 113 with Attorney Meyers.
RECOMMENDATION: 1 recommend that the City
informational meetiny on Lhia subject and
residents in the area of these two houses
the program directly from Cindy and Jim.
possibility of inaccurate rumors spreading
neighborhoods. The informational meeting
p.m. on October 20, 1986.
SWT/bac
Council set an informal
mail notices inviting
to come and learn about
This will reduce the
throughout these two
could be held at 7:00
(1�
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
CENTENNIAL OFFICE BUILDING
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA SSiSS
f!!t'ORFIA1'1pNAh RIILL6TIN 085-114
Oecemher 27, 1985
TO: Chnirpernon, Board of Gnnnty Commissioners
Attention: Director
Chnirperson, Ilumnn Services Honrd
Attention: Director
SIIME.CT: Request for proposals to Regional Centers for Community Tntegrared
Services for Regionni Center Residents with Mentai Kenrdation
l • PIIRPnSF.
The purpose of this holletin 1s to inform counties that the Department has
sent the attached Request for Propoant to Regional Craters (formerly called
state he .1ttached The fa�rppsr of the RFP is to Invite from Regional Centers .,
"enrPilot Will
r1lwill elop I
eofRegionaleternployees in
sCed toeerve20pernnneandlnvolve[heusleeJim] e
nsince tills is a pilot
project, the propos of the
serve residentswhosecountvnfFinancialresponsibilityison
following:
A. Tile same County that the Regional Center is Inc -tell in; or
R. A cnnnty within one haur's driving time (50 miles) from the Center. x'
tf
i f . AIITHORITY
Tile nnthnrity for this request for proposal Is Special(' Session which Lawsstatof
tlinnesota for 1985, chapter 9, article 1, suhdivisinn
following: "Within the limits of available anpropriatIons, the Commissioner
rAte
he
operated,ilcommnpltY-bnsedIl pilot cservicests tn demfor tstate thospital
hresllrntsity of state -
ITT. ACTION Rr.QUIRR1)
Cmmries may he Involved In file pilot projects In t mmnher of ways:
A, Pitnt prolectF will need the rnoperation of the county in the need
determination and licenslnF. processes.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
onsets
m ea
Page Two
INFORMATIONAL. nULLETIN #85-114
December 27, 1985
R. The county of financinl responsibility will need to authorize the deli-
very of services as defined in Minnesota Rules, parts 9525.0015 to
9525.0145 [Emergency]. Services will be provided in the individual's
home community and the county of financial responsibility will need to
monitor services provided to the individual. Federal home and
community -based waiver conversions and special project dollars will
fund the operating costa of services established by tine pilot project.
A pilot project may assist your county in meeting Welsch vs. Levine
compliance requirements. These pilot waiver conversions ore separate
from county waiver conversions and will not affect counties' waiver
allocations.
The Regional Center in your region may be contacting your county for pilot
project development assistance and support. Your county's assistance and
support is encouraged by the Department.
This pilot project is vi<wed by the 0?psrtment as a high priority. The
Mental Retardation Division and other central office staff will be available
to provide technical assistance and staff support to the Regional Center and
county staff in the development and delivery of pilot project services.
IV. CONTACT PERSON
If you have questions or concerns regarding this bulletin, contact:
Ed Skarnulis
Mental Retardation Division t
Department of Human Services
St. Paul, MN 55155
6121296-2160
Sincerely,
Al U....I
C
C
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
I. PURPOSE
'Die purpose of this Request for Proposal is to establish two pilot projects
for the provislnn of community Integrated services for residents with mental
retardation roving out of regional centers.
These projects shall be designed to:
A. Provide Persons from regional centers with individually developed ser-
vices in their home communities.
B. Provide services Chat. are dispersed and integrated in local com-
munities.
C. Develop service building capacities in local communities.
D. Ilse regional. centers employees in service development and delivery.
F. Develop replicnble public service models which can be used statewide.
II. AUTUORITY
The authority for this Request for Proposal is Special Session Laws of
Minnesota for 1985, Cliapter 9, Article 1, subdivision b, which states the
following,: "Within the limits of available appropriations, the commissioner
may establish pilot projects to demonstrate the feasibility of state -
operated, community -based services for state hospital residents."
111. FUNDING
Federal home and community -based waiver conversions and special project
dollars will fund the operating costs of services established by this pro-
ject. (See M1nnesotn Rules, parts 9525.1800 to 9525.1930). Regional cen-
ters will be expected to show funding sources of start-up costs.
Iv. APPLU:ATiOF PFOCESS
only regional centers may apply directly to the conmissioner for project
funding. Regtonnl centers miy provide services directly, or contract for
the prnvl.sion of services with approved vendors. An example of using an
approved vendor would he it regional center contracting, with a county or a
private provider to develop a public service system using regional center
employees.
proposals rmist cover the time interval from April 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987.
Each proposal must project services for 20 persons currently receiving ser-
vices in regional renters. Projects may expand based on availability of
walvered service slots.
-2—
The following, are proposed timelines:
Request for Proposal due to Commissioner March 1, 1986
Approval of proposals by Commissioner March 15, 1986
Time interval proposed to cover April 1, 1986"
to June 30, 1987
First persons receiving services June 1, 1986
V. COMUNITY—INTEGRATED SERVICES PROPOSAL CRITERIA
A. The proposal shall be limited to serve regional center residents whose,;>�.
county of finnncir.l responsibility is one cf the following:',
1. The same county that the regional center is located in; or
2. A county within one hour's driving, time (50 miles) from the
regional. center.
R. An individual shall be eligible to receive pilot project services If
the individual meets the following criteria:
1. The individual is eligible for medical assistance under Minnesota
,...�y
Statutes, chapter 2568; and,
2. The Individual is a resident of a regional center;* and,
3. The individual is a person with mental retardation according to
!�'1
the definition In part 9525.0015 jEmergencyl, subpart 22 and has
at least one of the following,-yaracteristics:f�(
a. Severe maladaptive behavior as listed in unit 1, 2, or 3;
(1) Self —injurious behavior which is a clear danger to the
client such as Ingesting inedibles; removi.ng major items
of clothing,; striking, biting, or scratching self;
moving into dangerous situations which clearly threaten
or endanger the cltent'n life, sensory abilities, limb
mobility, brain functioning„ physical appearance, or
other major physical functions; or
(2) Aggressive behaviors which are a clear dnnger to others
such as striking, scratching, or biting others; throwing -'
heavy objects at others; attempting inappropriate sexual
activity with others; or pushing or placing others into
dangerous situations which clearly threaten or endanger
their life, sensory abilities, limb mobility, brain
functioning, sexual integrity, physical appearance, or
other major physical functions; or
(3) Destructive behaviors which result to extensive property
damage;
*In addition to each project serving 20 residents from regional cen—
ters, Lounttes may work with these pro!ects to serve nddittonal
eligible persons from the community using waiver slots.
�-� b. Severe physical disabilities such as deafness, blindness,
sensory impairment, or motor problems;
C. Medical conditions as listed In units (1) or (2);
(1) Degenerative diseases diagnosed by a physician as ter-
minal; or
(2) Short-term medical disabilities that can be treated
within the level of care the Minnesota Department of
Realch certifies an ICF-MR to provide, such as tempor-
ary immobility, intermittent catheterization, or post-
operative recuperation.
C. The county of financial responsibility will authorize the delivery of
services as defined 1n Minnesota Rules, parts 9525.0015 to 9545.0145
[Energeccyl. Statutory requirements must be met prior to a resident's
movement out of a regional center.
D. People shall receive services in their county of financial responsi-
bility. It is the intent of this proposal to move persons currently
living in regional centers back to their home communities. While some
;.eople mny no longer have close family or community ties in their home
communities, moving them home will provide for the renewal of old rela-
tionships and/or the opportunity to make new ones. Variances will be
considered if adequate justification is made.
E. The pilot project will start 1.:oviding services to individuals by
June 1, 1986. At least two persons will begin receiving services by
this date. _
F. Services provided shall be tailor-made to meet the individuel's needs.
One person may require a relatively unstructured environment, while
another person may require 24-hour supervision teamed by professional
residential staff. (See the attached Core Cluster Delivery System
Nanuhl for nervice examples.)
C. No mnre than four persons shall reside in the same house (single family
living unit). Preference will be given to proposals that use existing„
ordlna'rq housing. No haysinq nhnll be adjacent to the regional center
grounds. (Adjacent means "next. to" or "across the street from.")
Housing shall be rented or leased. Rousing, used for services must meet
location and zoning requirements in accordance with Minnesota Statutes,
section 245.812. In order to provide individual, integrated services
to individuals and to avoid excessive grouping of persons with mental
retardation, it is Important to provide services in small home -like
settings.
If. There will be separate programs for children and adults. Permanency
planning requirements will apply to children programs. (See attached
Permanency Planning Requirements.)
-4-
I. Family involvement will he actively promoted in service. delivery.
Since families have an interest, concern, and responsibilities regard-
ing a family member's well-being and are an important part of the per- ^
son's life, family involvement in service delivery is important.
J. All services will be provided off regional center grounds in community
settings. This means that ordinary housing and the community pharmacy,
dentist, doctor, church, recreational facilities, etc., would he used
to provide an array of services to the individual whenever possible.
Contracting with regional centers may take place for support, mainten-
ance, specialized or professional services not available in the commun-
ity, or to take advantage of economies by using state. employees.
Contracts most he in place to purchase services from the regional
center. .Shared service a;reements or interagency agreements may be
used where appropriate.
K. Proposals should stress ways in which public employees will enhance and
Increase community service building capacity. Proposals that would
involve contracting with county or private providers must guarantee
that regional center employees be used in the development of services
and will deliver Lhe services.
L. There will be a zero return of reeidents to the regional center. Prepo-
pals rill be given preference that provide safeguards to prevent state
rehospitalization or care in other institutional settings (e.g., com-
munity hospital, correctional facility, etc.). These safeguards shall
be built into the service delivery system. Examples of safeguards are:
back-up residences in the community that are available 24 hours a day
for emergencies or c_isis, beepers for the project director, and other
staff, etc.
C1I
M. Those proposals that have the support of the following shall be viewed
more favorably:
1. County support
2. Parent grouna
3. Employee unions
4. Legislators and other political leaders
5. Advocacy groups
G. Community leaders
7. Community agencies such as schools, DACs, etc.
This support can be shown by including letters of support with the
proposal.
N. Since ona of the funding sources for this project is the federal home
and community -based services program (see attached Minnesota Rules,
parts 9525.1E00 to 9525.1930), the project must comply with service
standnrds set by that program.
-5-
0. There will be a plan to assure that services are meeting individual
needs and demonstrating, program effectiveness. It is the responsi-
bility of the county of financial responsibility to monitor services
provided to the individual to ensure that services are provided in
accordance with the person's individual service plan as described In
Minnesota Rules, Parts 9525.0015 to 9525.0145 (Emergencyj.
P. Projects will participate in a standardized evaluation process.
0. All services will follow existing licensing processes and standards.
R. Projects will be funded to allow for an average per diem expenditure
over the project perind of no more than $100 per day total cost per
individual. Project funding shall pay for "home and community -based
services"* as described in Minnesota Rules, parts 9525.1800 to
9525.1930. Board and lodging costs will be paid for through SSI/MSA
funding.
S. A plan to disseminate project development and service delivery infor-
mation to other regional centers and counties, parent organizations, the
legislature, advocacy groups, other providers, and state agencies.
Information shared would include positive and negative experiences and
recommeadatl.ons.
Requests for any variance to the proposal criteria listed above must be
accompanied by a ratiogale for the variance. Variances must be approved
c; the assistant commissioners prior to March 1, 1986, to be eligible
for project funding.
' *"Uume and community -based services" means the following services which
are provided to persons with mental retardation, if the services are
authorized under United States Code, title 42, section 1396 et. seq.,
and authorized under the waiver granted by the United States Department
of Health and Human Services: case management, respite care, home-
maker, in -home family support services, supported living arrangements
for rhildren, supported living arangements for adults, day habilita-
tion, and minor physical adaptations to the home, as defined in part
9525.1860; and other home and community-hased services authorized under
United States Code, title 42, section 1396 et. seq., if approved for
Minnesota by the United States Department of Health and Human Services.
VT. FORMAT
Reptonnl center project proposals for the delivery of community integrated
services for regional center residents include:
A. A description of the proposed community integrated services project
which 1s based nn the proposal criteria listed under AIV in this re-
quest for proposal. The proposal must show how these criteria are or
will he met in service delivery. This description should include plans
to decertify lvds to accomplish legislative mandates and, if necessary,
meet requirements of the HCISch vs. Levine Consent Decree.
-e-
6.
Pilot project developmental timelines and service delivery timelines.
This would include the dates when the following would occur:
1. Appointment of project director
2. Appointment of project staff
3. Need determination application Process
4. Licensure
5. County/provider contract
C.
A description of how current regional center staff will he used in the
delivery of services. This description should include the following:
1. Job descriptions of project director and project staff.
2. Resumes/vita of the project director and project staff,
3. salary data and FPE (full-time equivalency) of staff.
D.
A statement of measureable project goals and objectives to be accoan-
plished including an evaluation format to measure program effective-
ness. Program effectiveness for the individual served will be shown by
the following:
1. Evidence of personal growth and development of individuals
receiving pilot project services (e.g., weight, height, verbal
ability, self•heip skills, etc.).
2. Reduction of psychotropic medications, reduction of seizures,
reduction of crisis intervention and evaluation of inappropriate
behaviors.
3. Evidence of increased family contact.
4. Evidence of increased community involvement/participation by the
Individual.
5. Examples of individual success stories which will be documented
(e.g., videotaped).
Program effectiveness of the service delivery system will be shown by
the following:
1. Number of regional center employees involved in the development
and delivery of pilot project services.
2. Evidence of support of the following: parent, employee unions,
advocacy groups, community leaders, etc.
3. Evidence that community service building has occurred.
E.
A description of the project's Internal and external monitoring
systems. Indicate how the project will address such issues as quality
assurance and licensing.
-7-
F. A budget showing, project income from all sources for the pilot project
and the methods used in projecting, expenditures. When projecting
coats, the total costs for the array of services received by the indi-
vidual off regional center grounds should be used. Project start-up
costs should he listed with funding shown,. (Cost statement forms will
he distributed at the January RFP meeting.)
VI1.. vROPOSAL APPROVAL
The proposal selection process will he administered by John Clawson,
Assistant Commissioner, and Al Ilanzal, Assistant Commissioner. The criteria
used in the review of Proposals include:
A. The degree to which the proposal demonstrates the feasibility of a com-
munity int- rated services progrsm for regional center residents with
mental retardation using the criteria set forth in this request for
proposal.
R. The degree and plan by which current regional center staff are used in
the delivery of services. (See attached State. Planning Agency. (1985,
January). Policy Analysis Series Paper No. 8: options and recommen-
dations for the Minnesota 80spltal system. St. Paul, 194.
Developmental utsabilities Program, State Planning Agency.)
C. The degree to which the budget for services is based upon reasonable
cost projections and methodologies.
`~ D. The proposal's compliance with Minnesota Rules, parts 9525.0015 to
9925.01145 (Emergency) and Minnesota Rules, parts 9525.1800 to
9525.1930.
To be considered for grant dollars, proposals must be received on or
before March I, 1986. Send five copies of the proposal to the address
on page R.
Final approvals of proposals will be made by March 15, 1986.
Vlll. ATTACHMENTS
Attached to ti,la bulletin are the following:
1. Conflict of Interest Information.
2. State Planning Agency. (1985, January). Policy Analysis Series Paper
No. 8: Options and recommendations for thr. ltinneso[a Ilospital system.
3. Cost Statement Forms.
4. The Core Cluster Service Delivery System Manual, to be used as a pass-
ible delivery system of community integrated services.
5. Minnesota Rules, parts 9525.1E00 to 9525.1930.
6. Permanency planning requirements. (�\,
Information from these attachments should he reviewed and used as
appropriate in proposal development.
Ill. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE _
If you need assistance in developing your proposal, nr have questions or con-
cerns regarding this lxilletin contact: -
Mental Retardation Division
Department of Human Services
Centennial Office Building
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
612/296-2160
6BUL/04
Attachments
Sincerely,
AL HANZAL
Assistant Commissioner
JOHN CLAWSON
Assistant Commissioner
i
�'
113.01
CHAPTER 113
RECUPERATIVE 11014ES OR "HALF -WAY" IIOUSF.S
113.01 License Required. No person, partnership, association,
or corporation, profit— or non-profit, shall establish, conduct or
maintain a recuperative home or half -way house for the care of human
beings in the municipality without first obtaining a license there-
fore in the manner hereafter provided.
113.02 Definition. Recuperative home within the meaning
of this chapter spa mean any institution, place, buileing, or
structure in which any accommodation is maintained, furnished, or
G;
offered for the recuperation of human beings which is the care
emotional problems brought about
t.
required by a person because of
by the use of drugs, alcohol, marital problems, or other causes
of emotional difficulties.
113.03 Requirements of Applicant. Before license shall be
issued the person applying shall submit evidence satisfactory to
he is not less
the Council and the municipal health officer that
of reputable and responsible
than twenty-one (21) years of ago and
in the event the applicant is an association or corpora-
character;
like evidence shill be submitted to the members thereof and
tion
the persons in charge. All applicants shall, in addition, submit
to comply with the provisions
satisfactory evidence of their aLility
all rules, regulations, and minimum standards
of this chapter and
adopted thereunder.
113.04 Application. Any person, partnership, association,
the Council a
or corporation desiring a license shall file with
containing the name of the applicant desiring
verified application
said license; whether such persons so applyirg are twenty-one (21)
to be operated; the location
1
years of age; the type of institution
the in charge thereof; and such ether
thereof; the name of person
information pertinent there Lo as the Council by regulation may
or association
ar
require. Application on behalf of a corporation
two officers thereof or by its managing agents.
shal.l be made by any
113.05 License Fees. rach application for a license to
operate a recuperative home within the meaning of this chapter,
shall be accompanied by a fee established by resolution of the City
Council. No such ree shall he refunded. All licenses shall expire
annually on the 31st day of December. An application for renewal
of the license shall be riled not later than the 31st day of December.
All such fees shall be received by the Council and shall be paid to
the general fund. No license granted hereunder shall be assignable
or. transferrable.
113.06
113.06 Inspection. Every building, institution, or
establishment for wn— ch a license has been issued shall be periodi-
r+. cally inspected by the municipal health officer under the rules and
regulations to be established by the Council. No institution of any
kind licensed pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 144.50
Lo 144.56 shall be required to be licensed by the Municipality.
113.07 Zoning. Any institution, place, building, or
agency that is to e—used for a recuperative home shall not be
established it the Municipality unless it conforms to the provisions
of Chapter 40 as amended from time to time, as said chapter applies
to hospitals, sanitariums, rest homes and/or nursing homes.
113.JC penalty. Any person, partnership, association,
or corporation v olating any provision of this chapter shall be
guilty of a misdemeanor. (180)
ADMINISTRATIVE
___NEWSLETTER
October. 13, 1986 City of Mounds View Number is vol. VI
OUTDOOR WARNING SIRENS
The City's two older outdoo,• warning sirens have been relo-
cated to the new sites p_eviously approved by the City
Council. The siren which was originally located on County
Road I, on the shore of Spring Lake, has been taken in for a
complete refurbishing due to the fact that the zAiren has not
had any maintenance performed on it during the twenty-five
years it has been located in the City, and it was recently
struck by lightning requiring rewiring of nearly the entire
unit. These sirens will be thoroughly tested and should be
operational no later than November 1, 1986.
NTSB BOARD OF INQUIRY
At the present time, Staff and the City's Attorneys and Con-
sultants are preparing for the National Transportation
Safety Board's Board of Inquiry Hearing commencing on
October 22, 1986. As this is an opportunity for the City to
ask questions of various witnesses which will include repre-
sentatives from Williams Pipeline Company, the Department of
Transportation Office of Pipeline Safety, the American
Petroleum Institute, and the National Transportation Safety
Board as well as residents in the area of the pipeline inci-
dent, and Fire Chief Fagerstrom, I am soliciting questions
from members of the City Council should you have any which
would be appropriate for the purposes of the Board of
Inquiry's Hearings. I anticipate that greater discussions
will occur prier to the Board of Inquiry's hearing, and
there may be a possibility that City Attorney Neyers and/or
myself will request an Executive Session of the City Council
prior to this hearing in order to communicate to the Council
our strategies and intentions for this hearing. Attorney
Meyers will be returning on October 12, 1986 and it is anti-
cipated that detailed discussions will occur during the week
of October 13, 1986 which will require communication to you
prior to the Board's hearings. •
Should you have any questions or require any information
regarding the Board of Inquiry, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
ADMINSTRATIVE NEWSLETTER
OCTOBER 13,
1986
PAGE TWO
�1
CALENDAR
October 13,
1986
6:00
p.m.
Executive Session
7:00
P.M.
Council Meeting
October 14,
1906
All
Day
Washington, D.C.
NTSB Pre -hearing
Conference
October 20,
1986
7:00
p.m.
Agenda Session
October 21,
1986
9:00
a.m.
Department Head
Meeting
October 22 -
24, 1986
NTSB Board of
Inquiry Hearings
"
DFP/dmm
C
ti-
MEMO TO: Clerk -Administrator and City Council
FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Developmen
DATE: October 8, 1986
SUBJECT: COUNTY ROAD I RECONSTRUCTION
Kathryn DeSpiegelaere of Ramsey County Public Works Department
indicated to me in a telephone conversation that Ramsey County
will not proceed further with the subject project until the City
approves the feasibility study. I indicated to her that the City
of. Mounds View will not approve the feasibility study until the
issue of who pays for the signal light at County Road I and
Quincy Street is resolved. I also indicated that the traffic at
the intersection of County koad 1 and Quincy Street is projectd
to increase to 1,900 vehicles per day from north bound Quincy
Street because of the proposed development of approximately 60
acres south of County Road II-2.
In summary, the County Road I reconstruction project will be
delayed as long as the issue of who pays for the reconstruction
of the signal light at County Road I and Quincy Street is
unresolved.
SWT/bac
IN#
IN
;t=
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA SESSION
�'. OCTOBER 28, 1986
7:00 P.M.
A. Special Council Meeting
1. Consideration of Request from Paul Vedeen, Midland
Vedeen, Inc. Regarding Temporary Fill Permit Request
2. Consideration of Resolution No. 2109 Regarding JLN
Development, Inc. Concept Plan Approval
B. 8:00 P.M. •. Informational Meeting
1. Adult Foster Cares Homes for the Mentally Retarded
(Information Provided in 10/13/86 Packet)
C. Agenda Session
1. Presentation by Ken Renkixmoller representing the East
Metro Development Council
2. Consideration of Application for " nointment to Planning
Commission by Eric P. Saunders, 83ji Spring Lake Road
3. :onsideration of Renewal of Contract with Metropolitan
Council for H.R.A. Inspections _
4. Consideration of Resolution No. 2114 Approving the
Transfer of Ownership of Group W Cable of the North
Suburbs, Inc.
5. Consideration of Revenue Sharing Audit
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
�•�'^ q ,� � �,,,� RAMSEY COUNTY, M?NNESOTA
VED October 13ee1986
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Mounds View City Council was called to order
by Mayor Linke at 7:02 PM on Monday, October. 13,
1986.
The Pledge of Allegiance was said.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilmembers Blanchard, Quick,
Hankner, Haake and Mayor Linke.
ALSO PRESENT: City Attorney Meyers, Clerk/
Administrator Pauley and Public Works/Community
Development Director Thatcher.
Motion/Second: Haake/Hankner to approve the
' September 22, 1986 minutes as presented.
5 ayes 0 nays
Paul Videen, of Midland, Videen and Associates,
stated he owns 9 acres of property south of the Bel
Rae Pallroom, and he understands the City is talking
about using part of the property for storm water
storage. He stated he had spoken with Director
Thatcher about combining the water storage in May,
but he understands that due to the pipeline situation,
nothing has been started yet. Mr. Videen stated he
needs a large amount of fill for the property, and
he has been offered some from New Brighton, at an
extremely good price, and he has submitted his
application to the City for a fill permit, but he
would like Council action tonight, if possible, as
he will lase the fill if he doesn't act on it
quickly.
Director Thatcher explained Mr. Videen is requesting
a fill permit, but this is a fairly complicated
issue as the site is in the wetland and flood plain.
The way the City ordinance reads, a fill permit could
not be granted for that site, but in speaking to
Attorney Meyers, he feels the City should review it's
1. Call to
Order
2. Pledge of
Allegiance
3. Roll Call
4. Approval of
Minutes:
September 22,
1986
Motion Carried.
5. Residents
Requests and
Comments from
the Floor
`hounds View City Council October 13, 1986
Regular Meeting Page Two
------------------------------------------------------------------------
stance on the flood plain.
Mr. Videen statedthe had granted the City an easement
on the south and east sides, and in return was pro-
vided a catch basin, which in turn created the flood
plain area when the street was put in.
Attorney Meyers clarified that part of the City
improvement did create the wetland on the property.
Mr. Videen stated that since the fill is available
immediately, he would like to stockpile it about 20'
back from Gdgewood Drive, and cover about 2; act ..
lie added it would not affect the drainage of the area.
Councilmember Hankner stated she was concerned with
not knowing the whole drainage area and she needs more
time to look at it in greater detail. She added she
was afraid that hasty action could cause more problems.
Mr. Videen replied that 30,000 cubic feet of fill is
very expensive, approximately $100,000, and he could
have it hauled in for $5,500. He added he will lose
it if he doesn't take it immediately.
I°`�9nr�;
Councilmem er Blanchard-4'sta ed th worked long and
hard on the_wetlana.ordinarice. Aa z also would like
more time to investigate it before taking any action.
Councilmember Quick asked how much of the property is
non -wetland, of the 9 acres.
Director Thatcher replied approximately half of it,
with both the flood plain and wetland being in the
middle of the property. He added there is not 2;
acres to put the fill on, without requiring Council
action.
Councilmember Quick asked if Mr. Videen could get
permission from Tony Jambore to store the fill on his
property, which is adjacent, and the City could
require Mr. Videen to post a bond, bo allow the fill
to be brought in.
Mayor Linke stated there are many factors to look at
before granting approval. He added the Council would
like to find a way around the problem, and stated he
would like to discuss it at the next agenda session,
and have Staff get all the information together prior
to that.
Mr. Videen stressed that time is a very big problem,
as he must act on this immediately.
Councilmember Hankner stated she would be willing to
call to order on Thursday, once Staff has the informs-
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
------------------------------------------------------
'\ Lion together.
Motion/Second: Hankner/Blanchard to have Staff
gather all pertinent information for the Council
to make a decision, and to have Attorney Meyers
get the history and legal information of the property,
to be presented at the next agenda session, and to
set a special Council meeting for 7 PM, on
Monday, October 20.
5 ayes 0 nays
Mayor Linke introduced the Mounds View Lions Club,
specifically Ray Young and Mylo Gjerde, who made a
presentation to Police Chief Hamacher of stuffed
animals to be given to children by the Police
Department.
Police Chief Ramacher thanked the Lions Club, and
explained '.:,e animals will be kept in the squad
cars, to b= given to children the police encounter,
who have either been in an accident, abused, or
October 13, 1986
Page Three
---------------
Motion Carried -
frightened in some way..
99. ¢¢ n r ^ ^^s' � '
Mayor LikeXpi'aned,thati as',the,R ffed animals
are given out; thdy iill be :re6fac6dl by the Lions
- Club, and he also thanked the Lions for their
donation.
Mayor Linke closed the regular meeting and opened
6A. Public Hearing:
the first public hearing at 7:32 PM.
Phyllis Leenert
Minor Subdivi-
Director Thatcher reviewed the request of the
sion
applicant to divide one lot into two. He stated
it meets all City code requirements, and the Planning
Commission has reviewed it and recommends approval.
Warren Johnson, 7710 Greenwood Drive, stated he has
no objection to the subdivision, as long as whenever
the lot is developed it is graded properly, so that
the runoff goes toward County Road I and not to his
house.
Councilmember Hankner explained there is an ordinance
in place, the storm water management ordinance. which
states that development cannot allow any more runoff
than is already there. She added the Council is
looking at an overall plan for the entire City,
for runoff.
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing and reopened
the regular meeting at 7:36 PM.
Mounds View City Council October 13, 1986
Regular Meeting Page Four
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Motion/Second: Haake/Quick to approve Resolution 7. Consideration
I No. 2111, approving a minor subdivision for 2609 of Resolution
County Road I, Mounds View Planning Case No. No. 2111
182-85, and waive the readinq.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mayor Linke closed the regular meeting and opened 6B. Public Hearing:
the second public hearing at 7:38 PM. K-Gas CUP and
Development
John Hannigan, stating he was representing Kunz Review for
Oil Company, explained that in December of 1984, Gas Station
Kunz Oil requested a conditional use permit for
remodeling their facilty on Highway 10, and he
feels they have complied with all the requirements.
He explained they would remove the existing main
building and build a new, 19,000 square foot
building, and nut in new pumps and islands, with
new fencing, lighting and so forth.
Donald Gross, 8060 Grovelard, asked if anything has
changed since the original blueprint.
Mr. Bannig' 'replied,, Unothing has'bha0 d.
lJ�'h Yot
f Councilmember loot ard reporrt edMthe Planning
Commission had conducted an informational hearing
with the residents of the area, and the residents
and Kunz Oil did come to an agreement, which is
reflected in this plan.
Attorney Meyers explained there is a provision in
State law that permits the City to impose a moritor-
ium while the Comp Plan is being review. However,
this is a pre-existing use, the zoning is proper,
the CUP is proper, so the moritorium does not address
this specific site.
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing and reopened
the regular meeting at 7:43 PM.
Motion/Second: Haake/Blanchard to approve Resolution B. Considers*ion
No. 2112, granting approval to the K-Gas Station, of Resolution
regarding Mounds View Planning Case No. 164-84, and No. 2112
waive the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mayor Linke closed the regular meeting and opened 6C. Public Hearing:
the next public hearing at 7:45 PM. JLN Development
Mounds View City Council October 13, 1986
Regular Meeting Page Five
Tim Nelson, of JLN Development, introduced their
development team and gave a slide presentation of
developments they have done in the area and their
proposal for their development in Mounds View.
Phil Carlson, planning consultant to JLN Development,
made a presentation showing where the area was
located in Mounds View, access to it, and presented
sketches of the proposed development, showing the
layout. He also reviewed the planned traffic flow,
parking and use of the area.
Jim Benshoof, traffic consultant to JLN Development,
reviewed the data they have compiled for the traffic
flow in and out of the development, and how they
anticipate the traffic will flow.
Mr. Nelson reviewed the benefits they fee]. the develop-
ment will provide to the City of Mounds View.
Councilmember Haake asked for a clarification of the
number of parking spaces planned for the proposed
office and warehouse space.
Mr. Nelson 4p.,lained they•had'discus; 0dit with Clerk/
Administrator"Pauley and•Director+:�Tha er last week
and had agreed to provide additional p rking spaces if
Je they are needed in the future.
Director Thatcher stated he has agreed with JLN to
review their plan for parking, but he has not cut down
the requirements yet.
Clerk/Administrator Fauley stated that based on the
numbers presented by JLN last week, it was felt it
was workable, and any further development would
require them to come back to the City for further
discussion and approval. He added this is a conceptual
approval at this time, and they will be in many more
times with further details.
Director Thatcher clarified that the Planning Commission
has not made a recommendation on the parking yet, and
they will be meeting on October 15.
Councilmember Hankner stated she feels stcu signs would
be needed north of the development site, and suggested
several locations they should be placed, to keep speed
down as cars go through the residential areas.
Mr. Carlson stated he agrees the concern about controlling
traffic is very valid, but reminded the Council they are
proposing a development within the boundry lines of their
property, and they do not have input on what will happen
outside the property line, whereas the Council does, and
he asked the Council to address the JLN Development itself.
Mpunds View City Council
Re ular Meetin
October 13, 1986
-___--- _ Page_Six
--------
Mayor Linke stated that if the development goes a 50/50
mix of office and warehouse space, it would reduce the
anticipated traffic flow to and from the area.
Kay Radlinger, 2199 County Road 112, stated she can live
with the proposed project, but she is concerned about
access onto County Road H2, as there are children on
Quincy all hours of the day mid she does not feel there
is a good time for the traffic to go up Quincy at all.
She added she does not feel the truckers will obey the
signs, prohibiting truck traffic.
Mayor Linke replied there are three proposed stop signs
to be placed between County Road H2 and County Road 7
on Quincy, which should significantly slow the traffic.
Duane Nelson, 5459 Quincy, stated the people on Quincy
were told a few years ago there would be no exit from
the development onto County Road H2.
Susan Mitchell, 5493 Quincy, stated she does not care
how many more cars are projected, she has five children
crossing the street all day, and she does not want the
traffic.
Betty Wahl, A25?Qdincp rst'ated,"she,, romised by
Steve Thatchet ,that the developmeritiwo�8 not be allowed
access onto County Road 112. She added!b a does not want
to see an increase in traffic
Andrew Hume, 5316 Quincy, presented a petition to the
Council of about 100 signatures, regarding access
onto County Road H2 and traffic on Quincy. He stated he
has two daughters who walk to school, and the sidewalks
are not cleared during the winter, and the children end
up walking in the street.
Wally Johnson, 2287 County Road H2, stated he was repre-
senting his mother at that address. He stated she is
not necessarily against the development but he feels it
could be done without access onto County Road H2 or
using Quincy, and lie does not feel the setbacks are
wide enough, or the berms high enough. He suggested
cutting down on the square footage, to improve the
parking situation, and getting access through the vacant
property southeast of, them, coming off the exit ramp.
Mayor I.inke explained &A does not own the property
southeast of them, and it is tied up in litigation.
lie also stated he doubts MnDOT would agree to them
tying into the exit ramp.
Councilmember Hankner stated they must keep in mind the
health, safety and welfare, in wanting to close off
access to County Road 112.
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
------------------------
Mr. Johnson stated they could have chained accesses,
' or break -offs, or something similar, for emergencies,
and they do not need a through access street. Fie added
the City could use condemnation to acquire the vacant
property for this development.
Mayor Linke stated that in addition to part of it
being in litigation, the land next to the motel is
used as a holding area for the motel.
Laurel Larson, of the Mounds View Mobile Home Park,
stated they do not have two accesses, and instead
have a crash gate as their emergency exit.
Russell Paul, 7940 Greenfield, stated he agreed that
high berming would be beneficial, and he would like
to see a horseshoe effect for the streets, and close
off access on County Road 112, and have two signalized
intersections on Highway 10.
Director Thatcher explained MnDOT will allow only one
additional signal on Highway 10 between County Road H
and County Road H2.
Duane Helso stated he 'does not'feel:� stop light
on Highway Ahoµ1d p.0 q.degtate for tke amount of
traffic going in and out, as is proposed, and many
of the people would end up going north to County Road
H2 instead.
Mrs. Ratlinger stated she feels access onto County
Road H2 and north onto Quincy would benefit the
developers only.
David Mitchell, 5493 Quincy, stated he feels the
developers are deliberately trying to get people to
turn out onto Quincy as they leave the development.
Mrs. Mitchell stated she feels the community would be
too disected with the additional traffic on Quincy.
She added there are meetings and activities going on
at Pinewood School during other than school hours,
and she feels the developers are thinking only of
themselves and recommended they be required to cut
out one building, to have room for a turn -around.
Jack Johnson, 2211 Highway 10, stated he owns the home
adjacent to the proposed development, and he !canted it
known that his property is for sale for a fair market
value, and he is concerned with being land -locked and
devaluation of his property.
October 13, 1986
Page Seven
---------------
Joe Ratlinger, 2199 County Road H2, asked who is accountable
at the City, as he was told t:fore purchasing his home that
no access would be allowed onto County Road H2 when the
property was developed.
Mounds View City Council October 13, 19B5
Regular Meeting Page Eight
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Councilmember Haake stated she would remember when
that was policy in the 1970's, when she was chairman
of the Planning Commission, and the intent was to have
a ring -road system for any large development.
Councilmember Hankner stated the problem is that every-
thing is always subject to whatever is planned, and
that unless a written document is exchanged, they cannot
help what prior information was given out.
Director Thatcher stated that back when Pinecrest
Properties was being discussed, the developer did not
plan on having access onto County Road H2.
Councilmember Haake referred to sections of the Comp
Plan, regarding high density residential zoning and
traffic.
Attorney Meyers pointed out that many years ago, the
land was zoned high density residential.
Tim Nelson stated he was informed by Staff from the
very beginning of concerns with access onto County
Road 112, and they. tried,working a rind -road concept
but it would not work. He added',tha't�pgrhaps many of
the project s� diet were proposed,befoi did not follow
through becatT§J bf the iraff!6rflox�-p ohlems. He
added they want to be good neighbors.
Mayor Linke closed the public hearing at 9:54 PM.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained a representative
from Naegele Outdoor Advertising, Inc. was present, in
response to the City's stance on political signs.
Michael Cronin, of Naegele, explained their billboards
are permanent, fixed signs, and at this time of the
year, every two years, they have over 250 political
billboards in place. He stated that all other
communities they deal with regulate these under their
codes as billboards, and he asked that Mounds View
continue to regulate billboards as billboards and not
election signs.
Mayor Linke explained the City has an ordinance that
regulates electioneering signs, and there is a size
requirements. tie added that Mr. Dahl and Mr. Sikorski
do not _apresent this area, and the City does not want
these billboards advertising candidates. Fie also
explained they are discussing taking billboards out
of Mounds View altogether in the future.
Councilmember Blanchard pointed out this same issue came
up two years ago, and Naegele was cited at that time and
paid the fines, and they were aware of the fact it was
against City ordinance when they placed the advertisements
this year.
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
--------------------- ••----------------------
6� Mr. Cronin apologized and stated he was present to make
an administrative appeal. He stated they have not run
into this problem anywhere else, and while they were
fined two years ago, the problem somehow slipped through
the cracks and was not remembered until they received
notice from the City recently.
Councilmember Haake stated she has no problem with a
campaign billboard in the City.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated a warning letter has
been issued, giving Naegele 15 days to remove the sign,
then a citation will be issued.
Councilmember Hankner stated the City took the stance
two years ago, and political billboards do not follow
the Code, and she recommended sticking with the Code
and implementing the ordinance as it is written today,
and then taking the electioneering ordinance under
consideration sometime in the future.
It was agreed the Council would discuss it further
during their next Code review, scheduled for 1987.
Councilmembei Blanchard asked `itfia ' t B and R 9
be removed fUn the c,'nse'n6 941 d Cscussion.
Councilmember Haake asked that Item A be removed
for discussion.
Motion/Second: Blanchard/Quick to approve the
consent agenda, minus Items A, B and R, and waive
the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
Councilmember Haake stated that on Item A, the
issue was discussed at the agenda session end she
had stated then she was opposed to the expenditure
of $3,272 for a sprinkler system for the grounds
in front of City Hall, as she feels the money could
be better used, such as with the increase in oak
wilt. She added she feels the hoses and sprinklers
can continue to be manually moved around.
Councilmember Quick stated he feels this is a good
buy for the money, and the system would pay for
itself during a dry spell, with the amount of
labor that would be involve', and the inflatic
factor.
Councilmember Haake reiterated that she felt the
funds could be better spent.
October 13, 1986
Page Nine
Approval of
Consent Agenda
Motion Carried
Mounds View City Council October 13, 1986
Regular Meeting Page Ten
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mayor Linke stated they are trying to create an image
for the City, and they have received many comments
about the flowers that were planted in front, and he
feels the sprinkler system would be well worth the
money.
Motion: Haake to deny the expenditure of $3,272 for
an automatic sprinkler system for the front of City
Hall.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Motion/Second: Quick/Blanchard to accept the quote
from Aqua Engineoring, Inc. for an automatic lawn
sprinkler system in the front of City Hall, at a
cost of $3,272.00, with the funds to come from the
Forestry fund.
4 ayes 1 nay Motion Carried
Councilmember Haake voted against the motion, for
previously stated reasons.
Councilmember Blanchard stated that Items B and R
appear to be duplicate items.
Clerk/AdministHtor'Pauley requested`apprdval of
iitem B over Ite R due etoj the }languaye.�
Notion/Second: Blanchard/Quick to authorize the
installation of underground electrical service by
NSP at Groveland Park at 3 cost of $9,970.00 to be
charged to account nc. 1u0-380-4513.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained account number
100-380-4513 is the general fund capital improvement
account for the Groveland Park tennis courts.
Acting Park Director Mary Saarion reviewed her memo
of October 9, 1986 to the Council, regarding the
Groveland Park tennis courts.
Motion/Second: Blanchard/Quick to approve Item R,
and authorize Staff to retain Mary Anderson Homes, Inc.
for the soil corrections at an amount not to exceed
$7,000 including material, and allow Staff to retain
NSP to place the utility wires underground at Grove -
land Park at a cost of $9,970, with the $13,000 to
come from the Park Dedication account and $4,000 from
the Groveland Park Foundation Account, no. 100-380-4513.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
-------------------------------------
October 13, 1986
Page Eleven
---------------------
Councilmember Haake stated she feels JLN is a good
development, but she has been concerned about having
iii a ring -road from the very beginning, and she
reviewed sections of the Comp Plan which refer to
the ring -road concept, including the Development
Framework Commercial goals and policies, goal 2,
policy G and J, Industrial goals and policies, goal
2F, Residential goals and policies, goal 2,
Commercial uses, Transportation goals and policies,
goal 8, E and F, Streets and Parking, Collector
Streete, and Ring Roads. She stated she would get
the information together for the Council that she
was referring to. She also added that she feels
the intent atl along was to have a ring -road
system in that area.
Councilmember Haake stated she would like more time
and discussion on the road alignment and concerns
the residents have. She added she likes what the
development will be, and she agrees the property
owner has the right to develop his land as best he
cam, but they must remember the residents and their
concerns.
Councilmember H,a�nkner stated'-tfielris i�o mandate in
the Comp Plan, "With the way it isded and they
need to balan�Ceer��thefwhole�thing.Cut. 5 e stated
she feels JLN Ab done a good job, and she would
also like more time to work with the resideW's and
JLN further. She stated she feels the concept is
alright, except for the access onto County Road H2.
Director Thatcher reported the Planning Commission
has not addressed the concept plan, as they did not
have a quorum earlier in the month, but the three
Commissioners who were present felt it was a good
plan, and they de want to discuss the parking again.
Attorney Meyers reminded the Council the Planning
Commission is an advisory commission only, except
for variances.
Mayor Linke stated that in visiting with the residents
of the area last Saturday, he was told by many that
stop signs on Quincy would alleviate their concerns.
Councilmember Hankner stated she gets the impression
there is mistrust on the part of the residents.
Councilmember Quick stated there is an area of the
City that has a ring -road, in Silver Lake Woods,
and he same complaints and concerns were expressed
by the citizens then, and they are fears of the
unknown. lie stated he feels stop signs, side walks
and so forth will address these problems. tie added
that if the area was developed as R1, R2 or R3, they
10. Consideration
of Resolution
No. 2109
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
---------------------------------------------
Awkk have a much worse problem, with higher
density per acre. Councilmember Quick stated he
feels this is the best development they can get
for that site.
Motion/Second: Quick/Blanchard to accept Resolu-
tion No. 2109 regarding JLN Development, and
waive the reading.
No vote was taken on the above motion, as Bill
Franke, President of JLN Development, stated he
has problems with the resolution the way it is
worded, specifically with the parking spaces as
they are noted, and while they are down to the
wire on time, with their option on the property,
he would like to get together with Staff and
work out the final bugs, and then request that
the Council call to order at their next agenda
session and vote on the resolution then.
Motion/Second: 11aake/Hankner to table this item
until October 20, 1986 at 7:05 PM.
5 ayes 0 nays
It was agreed 6l ake'the nest'+two items•tIogether, 11
as they address the same issue.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explaineP the Planning
Commission had denied the variance request of both
parties because a hardship was not found.
Director Thatcher stated that the Code reads that
when a use is destroyed to greater than 50% of it's
original use, it must be brought into conformance
when it is replaced, and these two driveways were
not.
Mayor Linke stated he felt the variances should be
given, as they were repairing or replacing an
existing condition, not increasing th<: size.
Councilmember Hankner asked why a building permit
was not obtained.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained the contractor
did not come in, which is a problem the City has
experienced as least a dozen times in the past year,
that has been caught.
Director Thatcher added that Staff noticed what was
being done, as it was being completed.
There was considerable discussion among the Council
and Staff of the problem of people not taking out
October 13, 1986
Page Twelve
Motion Carried
Consideration
of Variance
Request by
Mr. Young at
2267 Lois Drive
and Mr. Gjerde
at 2272 Lois
Drive
-Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
--------------- •--------
^ the required building permits, and the problems
` with enforcing it, and that the problem existed
for more than just driveways.
Councilmember Hankner stated the problem seems to
be not in granting variances but rather in
enforcing the code.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley responded that it can be
no other way than selective, as it would be
impossible to enforce any other way as they do not
and could not have a Staff large enough to patrol
the City and catch everything that was being done,
especially on weekends.
Councilmember liankner stated the Council is being
asked to not enforce the Code uniformly.
Mayor Linke stated he feels personally that because
the driveway condition was existing, they should
make allowances in the Code to allow for it.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley pointed out there is
still a Code violation, as they did not get a
building permit, and the City must enforce the Code
to the best of it's ability.
Director Thatcher explained Ent $p aid to
be licensed, after � }k�ea.ng caught�ana'w� ble-
feed, but the b+Nin' permit was not approved as he
did not meet Codee.
Councilmember Hankner stated they need to discuss
enforcement of the Code, and the Code itself.
Attorney Meyers advised the Council either change
the Code or stick with it, and not grant variances.
He explained that if they keep varying it, soon they
have no Cede a� all. He added he feels these two
applicants do not warrant variances.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley advised they must loot: at
the entire Code, and not do it piecemeal.
Ray Young, 2267 Lois Drive, stated it was not his
intention to violate any Code, and he had assumed
the contractor was taking the building permit out.
Councilmember Hankner explained the Council is not
blaming him for not taking the permit out, but the
Council must educate the public that building permits
are necessary, and it is the ultimate responsibility
of the property owner to insure the contractor is
licensed in the City and takes out the necessary
permits.
October 13, 1986
Page Thirteen
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
October 13, 1986
Page Fourteen
Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated the common pro-
vision for non-conformance is that it can be
maintained, but once it is 50% destroyed, Code
takes over and it must be brought up to existing
Code. He added it is a common provision through-
out the State of Minnesota.
Motion/Second: Lirke/Hankner to have Staff take
some time and get ahold of Blaine, Spring Lake
Park, Shoreview and surrounding communities in the
Metro area to find out what their feelings are and
how they address this issue, for driveways only.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated he would place it
on the first agenda session in November for discussion.
Eric Hanson, 2228 Oakwood Drive, stated he had applied
for a permit to replace his driveway and was told he
could not do it, as it was, because of Code, and was
told he could use woodchips or gravel in the areas
that would not meet Code. Fie stated he would rather
replace the blacktop with concrete, and asked what
would prevent him from replacing one-third of the
driveway three different times.
Paul Fedor, 2288 Knoll Drive, statel3 eyer�yyone has a
_ weekend project butUt.appears-;mosti of the problems
the City is expVe
encing'-is'w th']�y bx-npt
contractors, �uk�i tPdS�onsidered
a higher fine. a ded he realices variances are
hard to grant, but in this case, both parties were
taken by the contractor.
Attorney Meyers responded that it is the ultimate
responsibility of the property owner, and if
citations were going to be issued, they would have
to start Issuing them to homeowners also, for not
insuring that: a building permit was taken out by
their contractor.
Earl Marr, 2265 Lois Drive, stated he is a neighbor
of Mr. Gjerde's and he has no objection to the driveway
as it was put in. lie also pointed out that Bob
Eigenheer was allowed to build 4k,' from the property
line many years ago, which must have required a variance
then.
Mr. Paul stated he feels the ordinances are out of
line with the people, and he has not heard any
constructive reasons why Code requires the driveway
to be 5' from the property line, and he asked why
the Government should say it has to be 51, and why
the people should have to pay a fee to replace something
on their own property.
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
------------------------------------------
Motion/Second: 11aake/Blanchard to authorize the
hiring of Deanna Mortenson at the rate of $5.00
per hour as determined as necessary by the
Clerk/Administrator beginning September 22, 1986
5 ayes 0 nays
October 13, 1986
Page Fifteen
12. Consideration
of Staff Memo
Regarding
Clerical
Assistance
Motion Carried
Motion/Second: Haake/Hankner to have the second 13. 2nd Reading and
reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 01, amending Adoption of
Ordinance
Chapter 70 of the Mounds View Municipal Code
entitled "Municipal Water System", and waive the No. 411
reading.
Councilmember Blanchard - aye
Councilmember Quick - aye
Councilmember Haake - aye
Councilmember Hankner - aye
Mayor Linke - aye Motion Carried
Motion/Second: Haake/Hankner to have the second 14. 2nd:Rdadih4, and
reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 412, amending Adoption of
Chapter 71 of the Mounds View Municipal Code Ordinance
entitled "Municipal Sanitary Sewer System", and No. 412
waive the reading.
Councilmember Blanchard - aye
Coupcp.ime�mper Quick - aye
Couhhcl%emVer HaaK€rraye,
Councilmembe H nk'ne �'a
Mayor Linke aye yY Motion Carried
Motion/Second: Haake/Quick to have the second 15. 2nd Reading and
reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 413, amending Adoption of
Chapter 48 of the Mounds View Municipal Code: Ordinance
entitled "Wetland Zoning Ordinance", and waive No. 413
the reading. _
Councilmember Blanchard - aye
Councilmember Quick - aye
Councilmember 11aake - aye
Councilmember Iian!,ner - aye
Mayor Linke - aye Motion Carried
Motion/Second: Haake/Hankner to set an informal 16. Consideration
informational meeting for adult foster care of of Staff Memo
the mentally retarded and m7til notices inviting Regarding Adult
residents in the area in question to come and learn Foster Care for
about the program directly from the directors, and Mentally
set the meeting for 8:00 PM on October 20, 1986. Retarded
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
October 13, 1986
Page Sixteen
At Council's request, Clerk/Administrator Pauley
j stated Staff would do another mailing to the
residents involved with the JLN Development,
notifying them that it has been continued to
October 20.
Director Thatcher reported Staff will be meeting 17. Report of
with the School District at 9:00 AM on October Public Works/.,'
15 to discuss the County's proposal to change the Community
intersection at County Road I and Quincy and remove Development
the stop lights. Director
Attorney Meyers reported Judge Diana Murphy has 18. Report of
announced the case on the pipeline shall be ready Attorney
to be tried b_, January 30, 1987.
Councilmember Blanchard reported she had attended 19. Reports of
the MIIDOT public hearing on the extension of Councilmembers?
Highway 10. Councilmember
Blanchard
Councilmember Quick had no report. Councilmember..
Quick
Councilmembar Haake had no report. Councilmember
Haake
Councilmember Hankner had no report. Councilmember;(..
Hankner
Mayor Linke reviewed the proposed resolution Mayor Linke
from the Ramsey County League of Local Governments
committee on court consolidation. He reported they
will be having their last meeting on October 15,
and are proposing to bring the 5 courts down to
2, to be located in New Brighton and the Maplewood
Mall area. _
Clerk/Administrator Pauley had no report. 20. Report of
Clerk/Administra
for
I
Mayor Links adjourned the meeting at 11:56 PM. 21. Adjournment
Respectfully submitted,
Donald F. Pauley
Clerk/Administrator
MEMO TO: Clerk -Administrator and City Council
FROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development
DATE: October 16, 1986
SUBJECT: PAUL VIDEEN'S REOUEST FOR A FILL PERMIT AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF T.N. 10 AND EDGEWOOD DRIVE
Attached please find the following:
1. Flood plain map
2. Wetland map
3. Fill plan from Paul Videen dated October 13, 1986
I reviewed the site with Tom Peterson of Ramsey Soil 6 Water
Conservation Distxict on Wednesday, October 15, 1986. Mr.
Peterson indicated to me that he would send a letter to the
City with a map indicating where the wetland area is as soon as
possible. Hopefully, his schedule will allow us to receive his
letter and map by Monday. I also hope to hear from Attorney -
Meyers by Monday about any past City commitments to Mr. Videen
regarding his land. I also asked Mr. Videen to submit any
wr.itLen commitments the City made to him. If the above mentioned
obstacles can be overcome, there are a few other requirements
that need to be met prior to a ' .: permit being approved for
this site. The requirements are as follows: v
1. Thirty thousand (30,000) cubic yards of fill may be too
large a quantity for this site. Therefore, the Developer
shall submit drawings and calculation from a reputable
engineering company indicating the final fill location and
quantity.
2. Eventually, buildings and parking lots will be installed on
top of the fill. Therefore, the Developer shall furnish a
report from a reputable engineering company stating that
the fill is suitable as base material. for constructing
parking lots and buildings.
3. The fill site shall be cleared and grubbed, and this
material shall be removed from the site.
4. Top soil shall be stockpiled on the site and spread over
the completed fill.
5. Any organic material not suitable for spreading as top soil
shall be removed from the site. A representative from the
City Engineer's office shall determine what organic
materials shall be removed from the site.
6. Developer shall furnish plans for installing an inlet to
1 the storm sewer manhole and install said storm sewer inlet
when approved by the Engineer.
October 16, 1986
Page Two
(
7. Developer shall furnish and install ground cover (i.e.,
seeding or sod).
8. Developer shall deposit a $21
000 security for repair of any
damage Lo City streets because of this filling.
9. Developer shall sign s development agreement with security
in an amount to be determined that will guarantee that• the
above mentioned work will be completed satisfactorily.
10. Developer shall record the following easements with Ramsey
County and furnish the City proof of recording:
1. Drainage Pasement
2. Roadway and utility easement for Edgewood Drive
11. Wetland and flood plain map need to be revised.
SWT/bac
Attachments
.moo
qq
IV
IN
-,.,��----------T-,-- g ice- i -
I _
[tc>I 09 •1
- _—'_--g0v92 � .� r. Gb5 1•1�IIjI I
If
V _ N Q Vl V) y OJ �A O
ON �' f V } _ n I 7777 ` NI L i.
Vf n n/ n rl n n Ot A
,
1•<. N � 6
4100t t- O 14 N Ca7C1`n 1111�
J � I t •�i
N O
1 I I I \r .rh N ` N IV
\_
I I N� • �S Y+1 y
—�-•� I Nrl ,,
w Ott
N MN11Ill
�a c
ii.�li�
rJ-13I3N33i39 3
OfiEii.:::,;jl.:.
Q I N N N •� ,
`J r uU F
N _
V1/1' I• Apry/�,,
VO
1nI I W L
o ;
•.,t•-•-i! --- ',,, Tom: fl6EV�f99ff-----_ --_
�e
cti I 1
�''�,' .. _ .:r.•:;:.;4� lam '):5�--��: � ,
r rr;;,;;:,.:fit...::a::;i:'ii::i:'a�;/rJ•..:.. P GREENFIF_LD
v � :{yt��t•:tr...::: O
D ,CAI N • � J'1 - t ��!�:�;i�.:.::i:`��: ', .. � .r .
o ♦ Z n 9 N
4NW y��/ oa�u
1 . t�• o
L
l O N. � �• 1 1 I 1
P ' III Ill l
TT N
'•MINI . 0 N .�•� � '•� \N111
' f -'IVY
W _ K
i it .L. T {O .. + I I� P J.I •�'j'�l
lo04 1.in)
IA I i� ant] _u_i ' Z 1
��t '
645
iiC3
-�
v I
it
n
•l
3012e11'.:%ir Yo-dL
MISS WILL NDigttDO SI79 ""IMLT
TPLIkIMI, ANY I " PP DFAITI:
PAINYAIL, EXCRT VIDH it Li. SITPACR
IS FPP7.tN, TO GUEST AND CDPIFITT
ANY INSICK MDLHS. .
W PAUL L. VIDEEN
p7Ar
�O-/JFR
/:3 t/npt ��•` f�
A
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF MEETING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Mounds View City Council
will meet on Monday, October 20, 1986, at 7:15 p.m. at Mounds
View City Hall, 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, Minnesota, 55112 to
discuss the request of JLN Development, Inc. to develop the 60
acres of vacant land located south of County Road H-2, west of
Interstate 35W and north and east of State Highway 10, legally
known as:
LOTS 1, 2, 3, BLOCK 1; LOTS I AND 3, BLOCK 2;
AND LOT 2, BLOCK 2, EXCEPT THE SOUTHERLY 5 ACRES
THEREOF; PINF.CREST ADDITION, INCLUDING RAYMOND
AVENUE, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
SECTION 8 TOWN 30 RANGE 23 EX SWLY 150 FT PT OF
SW 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 NELY OF STH 10/62 IN
SEC 8 TN 30 RN 23
SECTION 8 TOWN 30 RANGF. 23 EX N 33 FT FOR CO RD
112 PART OF NW 1/4 OF NW 1/4 OF SE 1/4 NELY OF L
PAR WITH AND 150 FT NELY FROM CL OF STH IU/62 IN
SEC 8 TN 30 RN 23
The proposed general concept plan includes a Planned Unit
Development with a mix of commercial (office/service/showroom),
light industrial and restaurant uses.
Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to this matter,
may be heard at this meeting.
Donald F. Pauley
Clerk -Administrator
MEMO TO: Clerk -Administrator and City Council
CFROM: Director of Public Works/Community Development
DATE: October 16, 1986
SUBJECT: J.L.N. DEVELOPMENT
Attached please find the following for your review:
1. Mounds View Planning Commission Resolution No. 173-86
approved by the Planning Commission on 10/15/86.
2. City Council Resolution No. 2109.
SWT/bac
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 173-86
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION REGARDING JLN DEVELOPMENT, INC.,
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 86-199,
WHEREAS, JLN Development, Inc. has requested general
concept approval to construct the following:
1. 221,200 square feet of office/service,
2. 502,600 square feet of licht industrial,
3. 3,600 square feet of restaurant,
at the site bounded by T.H. 10, I-35W and County Road 11-2; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has requested a planned unit
development review process; and
WHEREAS, construction of this development, as requested,
requires the following approvals:
1. General concept plan
2. Development stage
3. Final plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the staff
report and information submitted by the applicant which includes
the following:
1. Letter. from JLN Development, Inc. dated July 9, 1986
2. Letter from JLN Development, Inc. dated August 12,
1986
3. Memo to Mayor and City Council from Clerk -
Administrator dated August 12, 1986
A. Memo to Planning Commission from Public Works Foreman/
Building Inspector dated August 21, 1986
5. Letter from JLN Development, Inc. dated September 31
1986
6. Letter. from Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc.
regarding parking standards for office and industrial
uses dated September 8, 1986
7. Development Concept Plan received September 8, 1986
B. Letter. from Benshoof & Associates, Inc. regarding
traffic study for JLN Project dated September 15, 1986
9. Letter. from Benshoof & Associates, Inc. regarding
traffic study for JLN Project dated September 18, 1986
10. City of Mounds View Development District No. 2 Plan
and Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Industrial
Redevelopment District Project received September 22,
1986
11. Mounds view City Council Resolution No. 2091 adopted
on September 22, 1986; and
RESOLUTION NO. 173-86
PAGE TWO OF FOUR
1
WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a project that meets
the requirements of City Code Chapter 40.24, Subd. C(2),
commercial or industrial planned unit development; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has provided the information
required by Chapter 40.24, Subd. E(1), general concept stage; and
WHEREAS, in order for the light industrial building in the
northwest corner of the site to be constructed, the property must
be rezoned from 0-3 to I-1; and
WHEREAS, tha applicant has submitted some development
stage information at this time and requests recommendations from
the Planning Commission on parking requirements for this project;
and
WHEREAS, the letter. from Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uben,
Inc. dated September 8, 1986, addresses parking standards for
office and industrial uses and does not address the restaurant;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the parking
report prepared by Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uben, Inc.; and
WHEREAS, surveyed cities have parking space requirements
for office buildings that vary from 4 to 5 parking spaces per
1,000 square feet of building; and
WHEREAS, surveyed cities have parking space requirements
for warehouses that vary from 0.5 to 2.0 parking space per 1,000
feet of building; and
WHEREAS, surveyed cities have parking requirements for
buildings with 50 percent office space and 50 percent warehouse
space varying from 2.25 to 3.0 parking spaces per 1,000 square
feet of building; .and
WHEREAS, existing City Code requires 5.7 parking spaces
per 1,000 square feet of building area plus 3 parking spaces fore
office buildings; and
WHEREAS, existing City Code requires 2 parking spaces per
1,000 square feet of building plus 8 parking spaces for
industrial buildings; and
WHEREAS, existing City Code requires 1 parking space per
100 square feet of public service area plus 2 parking spaces per
1,000 square feet of storage area for retail sales buildings with
50 percent of the space devoted to storage; and
4
RESOLUTION NO. 173-86
PAGE THREE OF FOUR
WHEREAS, existing City Code requires approximately 25
parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of building for restaurants
or 1 parking space per 3 seats;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View
Planning Commission recommends considering traffic control at the
intersections of Quincy Street and Bronson Drive, Quincy Street
and County Road 1I-2, and County Road 1I-2 and Montclair Avenue
(entrance to the mounds View Manufactured [lone Park);
BE IT PURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission will require that the restaurant meet City Code
requirements for parking spaces;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission recommends the following parking requirements based on
4.9 parking spaces/1,000 square feet of office and 1.7 parking
spaces/1,000 square feet of warehouse and the office/service
buildings shall not exceed 75% office space and the light
industrial buildings shall not exceed 40% office space:
1. Office/Service Buildings (75% office/24% warehouse)-
4.11 parking spaces per 1,000 square f^,et.
2. Light Industrial Buildings (40% office/606 warehouse)-
2.68 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a plan be submitted such that
the truck loading area car, be converted to automobile parking
spaces when the building use changes;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if the use of buildings change
and the City Council requires that the truck loading area be
converted to automobile parking spaces, the property owner shall
convert the truck loading area to automobile parking spaces;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission recommends that the City Council retain a traffic
consultant to review ways to mitigate the traffic impact on
Quincy Street;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission recommends rezoning the property proposed for the
light industrial building in the northwest area of the site from
B-3 to I-1;
RESOLUTION NO. 173-86
PAGE FOUR OF FOUR
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission recommends including the single family house west of
the McDonald's restaurant in the P.U.D.;
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission direct staff to forward this resolution to the City
Council prior to approval of the minutes.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Adopted this 15th day of October, 1986.
Chairman
Director of Public Works
Community Development ,
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2109
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION REGARDING JLN DEVELOPMENT, INC.,
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE. NO. 86-199,
GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL
WHEREAS, JLN Development, Inc. has requested general
concept approval to construct the following:
1. 221,200 square feet of office/service,
2. 502,600 square feet of light industrial,
3. 3,600 square feet of restaurant,
at the site bounded by T.H. 10, I-35W and County Road H-2; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has requested a planned unit
development review process per 40.24, Subd. A; and
WHEREAS, construction of this development, as requested,
requires the following approvals:
1. General concept plan
2. Development stage
3. Final plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council have
has reviewed the staff report and information submitted by the
applicant which includes the following:
1. Letter from JLN Development, Inc. dated July 9, 1986
2. Letter from JLN Development, Inc. dated August 12,
1986
3. Memo to Mayor and City Council from Clerk --
Administrator dated August 12, 1986
4. Memo to Planning Commission from Public Works Foreman/
Building inspector dated August 21, 1986
5. Letter. from JLN Development, Inc. dated September 3,
1986
6. Letter from Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc.
regarding parking standards for office and industrial
uses dated September 8, 190G
7, Development Concept Plan received September 8, 1986
B. Letter from Benshoof s Associates, Inc. regarding
traffic study for JLN Project dated September 15, 1986
9. Letter from Benshoof 6 Associates, Inc. regarding
traffic study for JLN Project dated September 18, 1986
10. City of Mounds View Development District No. 2 Plan
and Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Industrial
Redevelopment District Project received September 22,
1986
11. Mounds View City Council Resolution No. 2091 adopted
on September 22, 1986; and
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2109
PAGE TWO OF FOUR
WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a project that meets
the requirements of City Code Chapter 40.24, Subd. C(2),
commercial or industrial planned unit development; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has provided the information
requic,.J by Charter 40.24, Subd. E(1), general concept stage; and
WHEREAS, in order for the light industrial building in the
northwest corner of the site to be constructed, the property must
be rezoned from 0-3 to I-1; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted some development
stage information at this time and requests approval on said
development stage submittals; and
WHEREAS, the letter from Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uben,
Inc. dated September 8, 1986, addresses parking stand
ards for
office and industrial uses and does not address therestaurant;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and City Council have
dlow, and
reviewed the parking report prepared by DarkinendatedrOctobern2,
Uben, Inc. and the staff memo regarding p" 9
1986; and -.
WHEREAS, surveyed cities have parking space requirements
for office buildings that vary from 4 to 5 parking spaces per
1,000 square feet of building; and
WHEREAS, surveyed cities have parking space
requirements
000
for warehouses that vary from 0.5 to 2.0 parking space per
feet of building; and
WHEREAS, surveyed cities have parking requirements for
buildings with 50 percent office space and 50 percent warehouse
space varying from 2.25 to 3.0 parking spaces per 1,000 square
feat of building; and
WHEREAS, existing City Code requires 5.7 parking spaces -
per 1,000 square .`.set of building area plus 3 parking spaces for
office buildings; and
WHEREAS, existing City Code requires 2 parking spaces per
1,000 square feet of building plus 8 parking spaces for
Industrial buildings; and
WHEREAS, existing City Code requires 1 parking space per
100 square feet of public service area plus 2 parking spaces per
1000 square feet of storage area for retail sales buildings with
,
50 percent of the space devoted to storage; and
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2109
PAGE THREE OF FOUR
WHEREAS, existing City Code requires approximately 25
parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of building for restaurants
or 1 parking space per 3 seats; and
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission recommmends
approval of the General Concept Plan dated October 15, 1986; and
WHEREAS, Mounds View Planning Commission recommends
rezoning the property proposed for the light industrial building
in the northwest area of the site from B-3 to I-1; and
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends
that the City Council retain another traffic consultant to study
alternatives for Quincy Street traffic; and
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends
traffic control at the intersections of Quincy Street and Bronson
Drive, Quincy Street and County Road H-2, County Road 11-2 and
Montclair Avenue (entrance to the Mounds View Manufactured Home
Park) and at the center intersection in the proposed development;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission will continue to review
-the number of parking spaces that will he required in a P.U.D.
context; and
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends
that the restaurant meet City Code requirements for parking
spaces;
NO'r7, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City
Council approve the General Concept Plan dated October 13, 19B6;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
shall initiate the rezoning process for the light industrial
building in the northwest area of the site from B-3 to I-1;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
shall install traffic control at the intersections of Quincy
Street and Bronson Drive, Quincy Steet and County Road H-2,
County Road II-2 and Montclair Avenue (entrance to the Mounds View
Manufactred Home k) and at the
ntersection
proposedudevelopment rcenter
if the developmentisiconstructed;' the
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
requires that the restaurant meet City code requirements for
parking spaces;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a plan be submitted such that
the truck loading area can be converted to automobile parking
spaces when the building use changes;
DRAFT RESOLUTION N0. 2109
PAGE FOUR OF FOUR
�1
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if the Developer acquires the
single family house west of the McDonald's Restaurant, it shall
be included in the D.U.D.;
BE IT FURTHER. RESOLVED that the Mounds View CityCouncil
allow the following parking requirements basedo4.9caes/1000
spaces/1,000 square feet of office and 1.7 parking Pa
and the office/service buildings shall
square feet of warehouse
not exceed 75% office space and the light industrial buildings
shall not exceed 40% office space:
1. Office/Service Buildingsl(75% square/feetwarehouse)•-
4.11 parking spacesper
2. Light Industrial Buildings
0(40%oo office/60% warehouse)—
2.88 parking
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Developer install all
parking by the perm and office/service building #3 during initial
construction;
Council
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City ber 29, 19861
approves the Landscape Concept Plan dated1Septem
prepared by Dovolis, Johnson, and Rugg e
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
shall require additional landscaping (trees) on the interior �.
public streets of the P.U.D.; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
approves the concept plan size of buildings and arrangement of
buildings;
BF IT FUF.THER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council
imum height of the following buildings:
approves Lhe max
1. Office/service - 20 feet maximum exterior height.
2. Light Industrial - 32 feet maximum exterior height.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City shall install Program
Avenue in the area not on the JLN site and assess the cost to
benefitting property owners.
Adopted this 20th day of October, 1986.
ATTEST:
Mayor
(SEAL)
Clerk -Administrator
000 ,G
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF INFORMATIONAL MEETING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Mounds View City Council
will meet on Monday, October 20, 1986, at 8:00 p.m. at Mounds
View City hall, 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, Minnesota, 55112 to
discuss a request by the State of Minnesota to lease 2 single
family homes in the City of Mounds View for the purpose of
training mentally retarded adults to live in the community.
24-hour a day adult supervision is proposed. The addresses of
the 2 homes are 2125 Belle Lane and 2406 Woodcrest Drive.
Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to this matter,
may be heard at this informational meeting.
Donald F. Pauley
Clerk -Administrator
SI'A'IF. OF MUMSU A
Russell J. & Judy Fearing
Clairin EL-1lalawani
M.R. HOUSING
5175 Bona Road
5144 Irondale Road
2406 F1000CRFSF LRRVE
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Bell W. &Jeanette Anderson
R. J. Schwinghamner et al
Howard J. Neisen et al
5159 Edgewood Drive
5165 Bona Road
5150 Irondale Road
Pounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Padith & Khamrouk Vongharath
Roger N. Lund et al
Roger J. & Flvira 0. Henderson
5149 Fdgewood Drive
5149 Bona Road
5101 Irondale Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Walter A. Lehne
Brian J. Ryan
Richard A. & Dorothy A. Swift
Bonita M. Baleoo
5145 Bona Road
5109 Irondale Road
5139 Edgewood Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
R. M. Schaffhausen et al
R. w. willhaus et al
Anthony Olzeske, Jr.
5130 Bona Road
5135 Bona Road
Lucille V. Olzeske
Mounds View, MN 55112
rounds View, MN 55112
5117 Irondale Road
Mounds View, M 55112
Mary P. Brent
Robert Bona et al
James J. & J. M. Lahoud
r'q Bona Road
5108 Irondale Road
5117 Irondale Road
Js View, PIN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds view, MN 55112
Gordon J. Ziebarth et al
Dwaine C. Lindman et al
James R. Ross & Marcia H.
5150 Bona Road
5120 Irondale Road
voronyak
Pounds View, M14 55112
Mounds View, I -IN 55112
2523 Nbodcrest Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
F. B. Whipple e_ al
Clinton A. Ratfield et al
no
S
Donald G. Ea
5160 Bona Road
56622
Ball Club, MN217
5 Woodcrest Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Pounds View, MN 55112
Dale E. & Bonita G. Wojtowicz
Dennis P. Ehrenberg
John F. & Barbara J. Sorbo
5170 Bona Road
5128 Irondale Road
2511 Woodcrest Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Hubert J. Bona et al
Lawrence D. Marker et al
Carol A. Finley
5155 Bona Road
5136 Irondale Road
2505 Woodcrest Drive
r is View, WI 55112
I�
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Joseph G. & Paulann M. Kucera
Harry D. & Elenore M.Bryant
M. F. & P. C. Lindgren
5185 Bona Road
5140 Irondale Road
2505 Wooderest Drive
M�nryln Vinw, IN ,9117
Mpurxi.s Vinw, MN 55112
Mourxls View, MN 55112
Richard K. & Pamela Traeger Donald & Margaret Pauley Berwyn & Muriel Christensen
5093 Irondale Road 5071 Bona Road 111 Kellogg Blvd. E.
Mounds View, MN 55112 Mounds View, MN 55112 Apt. 2512
St. Paul, MN 55101
Kevin J. Johnson
5071 Irondale Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Ruth Olson
5069 Irondale Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Vivian L. Hjelm
2500 Wocderest Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Conrad 0. Moss et al
2514 Woodcrest Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Raymond Nathe et al
2520 Woodcrest Drive
Mounds View, ?IN 55112
Robert L. Woehnker et al
5067 Irondale Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Amald L. & Marian R. Larson
2503 County Road H
Mounds View, MN 55112
R. C. Links et al
2491 County Road H
Mounds View, MN 55112
Walter Truh et al
2406 Woodcrest Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Mark J. & Debra M. Bayer
5061 Bona Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Colin F. & Wanda S. Hanes
5051 Bona Road
?founds View, MN 55112
Eigenheer Builders
Robert L. Lawrence
2409 County Rcad H
St. Paul, MN 55112
Roger F. Miller
5064 Irondale Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Constanw K. Wicklund
5066 Irondale Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Darlene Gardner
5068 Irondale ',toad
Mounds View, MN 55112
Terrence R. & Margaret M. Teed
5070 Irondale Road
Pounds View, MN 55112
Donald R. Olson et al
5080 1rondale Road
?founds View, ?IN 55112
Charles H. & Virginia Benolkin
5090 Irondale Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
David S. & Patricia Ward' 1
4324 Lake Point Court
St. Paul, MN 55112
Thomas a. & Randi. C. Meyer
5071 Edgewocd Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Alexander & Debra Korkula
5061 Edgewood Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112.
Dale L. & Carol A. Denault
5041 Edgewood Drive
Mounds View, MN 55112
Larry & Kathleen Delarder
5030 Bona Ra...i
Mounds View, MN 55112
Herbert S. & Dorothy Hong
5040 Bona load
Mounds Viaw, MN 55112
Janice M. Stukel
5050 Bona Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Jerome M. & Corrine E. Skiba
5060 Bona Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Sven D. Carlson
5070 Bona Road
Mounds View, MN 55112 / �•
Curtis C. Bouton Steven M. & Maria Z. French Craig E. & Alice W. Herrington
5075 Bona Road 5101 Edgewood Drive 5080 Bona Road
Mounds View, PIN 55112 Mounds View, MN 55112 Mounds View, MN 55112
y
Wayne A. & Melissa A. Mann
5090 Bona Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
�iId & Mary Pitzl
�U:P0 Bona load
Mounds View, MN 55112
Wayne P. & U1 Son Miller
5100 Bona Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Kathleen S. Kieffer
5180 Bona Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
Gary A. & Judy A. Mathiowetz
5125 Irordale Road
Mounds View, MN 55112
STATE OE MN
Harry Stanke
DJnald J Tschida at al
M.R. HOUSING
466 Laurel Ave.
2143 Bronson Drive
(2125 Belle Lane)
St. Paul, MN 55102
St. �aul, HN 55112
rs Barb Collins
Curtis J Flor 6 Sandra Trombley
Elsie M 6 Thomas M Skarda
_ %:y of Mounds View
2134 Belle Lane
2135 Bronson Drive
2401 Highway 10
St. Paul, MN 55112
St. Paul, MN 55112
Mounds View, MN 55112
Independent School Dist. 0621
Reinhard E Just at al
Thomas J d Denise M Thomalla''e'
2959 Hamline Ave.
2142 Belle Lane
2127 Bronson Drive
Roseville, MN 55113
St. Paul, HN 55112
St. Paul, MN 55112
James E 6 Nancy L Herman
Dorothy M Cunningham
Michael P. Kinyon
2125 Belle Lane
2150 Belle Lane
c/o Kinyon Concrete Prod Inc
St. Paul, MN 55112
St. Paul, MN j5112
Route 1 Box 62
Red Wing, HN 55066
Delores J. Peterson Steven A 6 Jacquelyn R Rolph Alden A Johnson
2133 Belle Lane 2158 Belle Lane PO Box 64i6 2630 Superior
St. Paul, HN 55112 St. Paul, MN 55112 Duluth, MN 55806
Lyle Archie S Doris 1 Lelm Gladyo J Johnson Hervert W Jr 6 Mary K Gutknechi
2139 Belie Lane 2166 Belle Lane 5391 Raymond Avenue
Paul, MIN 55112 St. Paul, MN 55112 St. Paul, MN 55112
V;
Harriet F. Schmit V,�yne A Mortenson Steven L 6 Catherine R Larson
1331 -96th Ave. N.E. 2175 Bronson Drive 907 -221st Ave. N.E.
Blaine, MN 55434 St. Paul, MN 55112 Cedar, MN 55011
Harlan M. Basch at al Myonghun 6 Kyongson Yi Leslie E Mazo et al
2153 Belle Lane 2167 Bronson Dr.ve 5392 Clifton Drive
St. Paul, MN 55112 St. Paul, MN 55112 St. Paul, HN 55112
Willi J. Rude et al Floyd B 6 Eileen M Olson
2159 Belle Lane 2159 Bronson Drive
St. Paul, MN 55112 St. Paul, MN 55112
Michael E 6 Marilyn J Johnson KJ LaRock et al
2165 Belle Lane 2151 Bronson Drive
s Haul, MN 55112 St. Paul, MN 55112
al
C
APPLICATION FOR ADVISORY GROUPS
Group Apptiea ror:
Second —Choice any): I N
Full Name (print or type):
Address: P�33S S(� � F'6-AD
Years At This Address. Years You Have Lived In Mounds View.-..,
�— Work or Other:
Telephone: ilome: '78
r .1U? f
OUALIFICATIONS YOU WANT TO HAVE THE COUNCIL CONSIDER _-
SkillsrA�and Interests:
"16 7I ��I1fC7�1 Pit, OFSI�
Employment, Occupation or Other Experience:
rshtps,
Other
Please State Your. Reasons For Wanting To Serve On This Committee.
ST t'i �✓i`i( Qh�f�T/o'� %�� GTi s
Your response to any Of the ahnve may ne continued on the back
and you may attach any other materials which you want the Council
to consider.
. � Date
Signature _—
The City Of Mounds View is committed to the policy that all
persoi,.% shall have equal accessto
itscreprogramsd, color, facilities, and
employment without regard
national origin, or handicap.
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
G 3,.
FROM: CLERK -ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: OCTOBER 16, 1986
SUBJECT: RENEWAL OF CONTRACT WITH METROPOLITAN COUNCIL _
FOR H.R.A. INSPECTIONS
As you may know, the City of Mounds View has been conducting
inspections of rental apartments in the City of Mounds View
eligible for Section 8 Subsidization by the Metropolitan
Council. These inspections are compensated for by the
Metropolitan Council as part of a contract between the City
and the Council, dated February 7, 1978.
S':aff has reviewed this document in detail, particularly ar
it relates to increased costa for inspections and the amount
of time spent by staff on those inspections, and determined
that the compensation received by the City of Mounds View
for the cost of these inspections is adequate. Therefore,
Staff would recommend Council approval of the contract
renewiag the initial agreement.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend Council authorize
Clerk -Administrator Pauley to enter into the First Amendment
to Contract Number 7639, between the City of Mounds View and
the Metropolitan Council for the performance of H.R.A.
inspections.
DFP/dmm
p�C`V V J°rj Melrapulitan Council
100 Metro Squsle 0utets
►+ �� � q Srvemhand Ilnhrtl Streets
St. Paul, Mimlesola 55101
August 12, 1986 '•,�/IJ��..` Telephone16121291.6359
Hr. Donald Pauley
City or Hounds View w *'•
21101 Highway 10 11FC1•11(GI) Y+,
Hounds View, HII 55112 .,, CITY or
r VIo11!10SViol;,;'
Dear fir, Pauley:
A recent check of our contract file for administrn Lion of the Section 8 Rent
Assistance Program indicated that the term of contract for your city has
expired. The enclosed amendment to the contract will remedy this situation.
The language resard.inp, the terms of the con`,iact has boen changed so that it
will automatically run e.ncurrently with the term or our HUD Annual
Contributions Contract. The HUD Contract was extended periodically as new
runds were added to the program.
Please sign and return all three copies of the amendment. We will then sign
and return a fully executed copy for your needs.
it you have any questions, please call me at 291-6306.
Sincerely,
Phillip L( RatZong v
IIRA Division Ftanager
PI,K/mk
enclosures
IIMIIRA I /HK282A0
`I
M faud OPPm,unby F... vwy ,
CONTRACT NO. 7639
FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT NO. 7639
n
The parties hereto agree that the Section B housing Assistance Payments
Administrative Services Contract they entered into on the 7th day of
:_'cjLrjLtry , 191g,, relating to the provision of certain technical and
professional services, shall be and Is amended in the following particulars:
1. Section 3, Term of Agreement, Is amended by deleting existing language
and Inserting in Its place the following:
3. Term of Aereement. The services to be purchased by the Council
and furn?shed by the City under this Agreement shall commence on
jAW_ . 1977 and shall continue until the earlier of the following:
1) termination of program funding by HUD: or 2) termination of the
Agreement by either party. The Council and the City shall both have
the right to terminate this agreement at any time by submitting
written notice of the intention to do so to the other party at least
ninety (90) days prior to the specified effective date of such
termination. Cancellation or termination of this agreement by either
the Council or the City shall not affect the rights of participating
families within the City during the terms or their leases. In
addition, the City will be paid for services performed up to the date
of contract termination on the basis set forth in Section 2.
This amendment is effective immediately upon execution.
Except as amended hereby, the provisions of :.ne above -referenced contract shall
remain in force and effect without change.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this amendment to be
executed by their duly authorized representatives on this _, day of
19_
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
t,,pproved as to form:
By —
Assistant Counsel Maurice K Dorton. Executive Director
CITY:
By
Its
HAHRA I /MK 265A
CONTRACT NO. 7639
FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT NO. 7639
The parties hereto agree that the Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments
Administrative Services Contract they entered Into on the 701 day or
February , 1978, relating to the provision or certain technical and
professional services, shall be and is amended in the following particulars:
I. Section 3, Term of Agreement, is amended by deleting existing language
and inserting in Its place the following:
3. Term of Agreement. The services to be purchased by the Council
and furnished by the City under this Agreement shall commence on
.Tune 1. 1977 and shall continue until the earl ler of the followings
I) termination of program funding by HUD; or 2) termination or the
Agreement by either party. The Council and the City shall both have
the right to terminate this agreement at any time by submitting
written notice of the intention to do so to the other party at least
ninety (90) days prior to the specified effective date of such
termination. Cancellation or termination of this agreement by either
the Council or the City shall not affect the rights of participating
families within the City during the terms of their leases. Ir,
addition, the City will be paid for services performed up to the date
of contract termination on the basis set forth in Section 2.
This amendment is effective Immediately upon execution.
Except as amended hereby, the provisions of the above -referenced contract shall
remain in force and effect without change.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this amendment to be
executed by their duly authorized representatives on this day of
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Approved as to form:
By
Assistant Counsel
Maurice K Dorton, Executive Director
CITY:
By
I is
IIMIIRA I /MK265A
CONTRACT NO. 7639
FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT 110. 7639
The parties hereto agree that the Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments
Administrative Services Contract they entered Into on the 7th day of
-EeUu-ary I 19 , relating to the provision of certain technical and
professional services, shall be and is amended in the following particulars:
1. Section 3, Term of Agreement, Is amended by deleting existing language
and inserting in its place the following:
3. Term of Agreement. The services to be purchased by the Council
cnd furnished by the City under this Agreement shall commence on
.june 1 1971 and shall continue until the earlier of the following:
1) termination of program funding by HUD; or 2) termination of the
Agreement by either party. The Council and the City shall both have
the right to terminate this agreement at any time by submitting
written notice of the intention to do so to the other party at least
ninety (90) days prior to the specified effective date of s::ch
termination. Cancellation or termination of this agreement by either
the Council or the City shall not affect the rights of participating
families within the City during the terms of their leases. In
addition, the City will be paid for services performed up to the date
of contract termination on the basis set forth in Section 2.
This amendment is effective immediately upon execution.
Except as amended hereby, the provisions of the above -referenced contract shall
remain in force and effect without change.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this amendment to be
executed by their duly authorized representatives on this day of
t9_.
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Approved as to form!
Eli _
Assistant Counsel Maurice K Dorton, Executive Director
CITY:
By
Its
IIMHRAI/MK265A
METROPOLITAN ' C'OUNCIL
Suite 300 Metro Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101-
SECTION 6 HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS PROGRAM
CONTRACT WITH MUNICIPALITY
THIS AGREEMENT, entered Into as of this day, the 7 J11 day of .
between the Metropolitan Councll' (hereinaftr referred to as the Council), and
City of Mounds view (hereinafter referred to as the City).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Councll intends to undertake a program of subsidizing rent payment
for lower income families and for the elderly to assist them In obtaining adequate
housing, and
WHEREAS, the Council has received funning from the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) under a HUD Section 8 Housing Assistance
Payments Program Master Annual Contributions Contract (Master Contract) dated..
october 5, 1977 to act as a Public Housing Agency to implement this
program, add
WHEREAS, the City has by resolution Indicated Its des -Ire to participate in this ..
program and to assist such individuals and families to obtain decent, safe and
sanitary housing in the City at prices they can afford, and. '
WHEREAS, the Council desires to purchase certain necessary administrative serr_ie
from the City In connection with carrying out the program, and
WHEREAS, the Council Is authc: zed io execute an agreement for the purchase of,
program services and to take all action specified or contemplated herein pursuant
to Laws 1975, Chapter 13, Section 6, Subd. 3; Section 21, Subd. 1; and Section
24, and has all of the powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authorJty
pursuant to Laws 1975, Chapter 13, Section 24 under the provisions of the
Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 462.411 tc
462.711, and acts amandatory thereof; -
NOW , THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and p !n!ses contalne
herein, the parties agree as follows:
1. Purchase of Service. The Council agrees to purchase and the City
furnish the following services:
a) Inspection of housing units,
b) Re -Inspection of housing units,
all as more specifically set out in Section 4 below.
-2-
2, Price for Se Ices Purchased. The Council agrees to make the following
payments for the services rendered by the City:
a) Initial inspection. The Council agrees to pay the
City an inspection fee of up to $24 per unit for
the inspection of units coming under the program
for the first time and inspected during the period
from June 1, 1977 to August 31, 1978
which are reimbursable to the Council by the Depart-
ment of H.U.D.
b) Continuing program payments. The Council agrees to
pay the City during the tern of this agreement
following 2itiaprenP of each per monthunit a for ref
ee of
inspection
two dollarss (.($_-J7) p_enitP r
required in connection with the performance of this
contract.
31 Term of Agreement. The services to be purchased and furnished under
this agreement shall commence on 6/1/77 , and shall continue through
10/5/82 . This agreement may be terminated by the Council upon thirty (30) _
days' written notice in the event program funding is not provided or is terminated
by HUD. In addition, the Council and the City shall both have the right to terminate
this agreement at any time for cause by submitting written notice of the intention to
do so to the other party at least ninety (90) days prior to the specified effective date
of such termination. Cancellation or termination of this agreement by either the
Council or the City shall not affect the rights of participating families within the
City during the terms of their leases. In addition, the City will be paid for services
performed up to the date of the contract termination on the basis set forth in Section
2 above.
4. Program Obligations of Clty. The services to be performed by the City
under this program shall be as follows:
Tnsodction and re-lnsoection of units shall include an on -sight
Inspection and certification of the suitability of each housing -
unit prior to'lnitial lease by a participating family and also the-
reinspection of each housing unit prior to any annual re -certification
of the family. Any such inspection shall be sufficiently thorough
and complete so as to insure decent, safe and sanitary housing
for each participating family. Housing quality standards shall be
as set forth in Title 24, Chapter VIII Part 882.109 of the HUD
Regulations and by applicable building codes. Reports of inspection
and re -inspection shall be made on fors provided by the Council, a
sample of which is attached.
In order to furnish the services herein purchased and provided, the City shall
provide adequate staff time and office or program space and shall keep the
Council.
available to applicants during scheduled business hours approved by
the The City shall also provide adequate signs and directional information to appli-
cants cants and possible applicants so that the place and manner of making application
can be easily ascertained. The City shall keep on hand for distribution adequate
brochures or other information releases prepared by the Council and shall suppleme
said brochures with informational releases concerning local '.taus as appropriate.
The manner of furnishing these services shall be determined by the City but the
parties shall from time to time come: concerning the details h n� QnCaibie demands
furnishing of the services and. the City agrees to comply
of the Council concercling the same. It is die intent of the Council to maintain
culdelines for the*reasonably uniform furnishing of services by the several cities
participating In the area -wide program so that brochures can be printed and.
affirmative marketing activities can. be conducted on an area -wide basis.
5. pro..m Obligations of Council. The parties understand that the City St
not be required to provide the following program services and activities. Said
activities are the sole responsibility of the Council.
a) Alfarea-wide affirmative marketing activities such as preparauo
of brochures and advertising, contacting and working with area
® community groups and rental property owners and management '
groups and explaining the program to them.
b) Making final determinations of participation, Issuing certificate;
of family participation, making the housing assistdnce payments
to owners, determining whether to authorize evictions, and hear:
grievances of applicants.
c) Application processing including assisting applicants to complet
forms, checking and verifying applicant's income to determine
eligibility for participation in the program, determining approprft
dwelling size, gross rent and gross family contribution to the
rental payments, explaining the rights and responsibilities in th,
program to successful families who have been issued certificate
and upon request of a,partCity, elpating family, assist In locating .
xamining leases and forwarding leas
suitable units in the City,
and Housing Assistance Payments Contract to owners for execntl
11
d) Determining that very low income and affirmative action
preferences and guidelines are being carried out on an area -wide
ng area -wide applications for participation
basis and monitoriin
order tot
tdetermine any reed for realloand waiing lists tog catlonether with lists of loElprogram funds.
e) Training local program staff and preparing operating brochures
and forms.
f) Collecting all area -wide data and preparing all housing assistance
program reports for HUD.
g) On -going program processing including annual re -certification
of tenants and the maintenance of program files and records for
monthly reports, maintaining contact with, owners of rental units
n and
ersianding
program and maintaining listsoi to encourage their P�
of available rental units, the
h) All other matters contained in the Master Contract.
6 Reoert. The city shall document its furnishing of servicJOcumE
es on a monthly
_ basis within ten d?shall be on forms profrom
svided by the council. c The Council reserves L e r gh motion
in info
time to time to alter oor mend allther tlon s asssarynecesto the Cosary in uncil for er td aits p g m on
required by HUD or
responsibilities.
ents for the services herein u
7, Time of Pavmeg. All paymdMt theCouncil cannot
shall
be made o� a d unlesss�unds are pro ldedrby HUstands
U nder the Master Contract,
e
payments until
B. Records. The Council shall have access to the City's records atreason�
able hours in order to exercise its responsibility to monitor the service purchased.
All records shall bekept by both parties for five (5) years !or audit purposes.
Tile partsas shall comply with all requirements imposed by Title 6 of the
9.
24 CFR.
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Public Law 88-352 �78 Statutes 241; the regulations 0
the Department of Housing and Urban Development Issued thereunder.,
vIlf of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 and the
Subtitle A, Part 1, Section 1.1; Title
rules and regulations issued pursuant thereto; ec tive Orders the regulations an ethe
that, In accordance with the Act, round of race, color,creed„ religion, nationals
requirements, no person shall on the g
origin or sex, be excluded from participation in, or be denied the benefits of, the
housing assistance payments program or be excluded from employment or be other-
wise subjected to discrimination. No person shall automatically be excluded from
41 participation in or be denied the benefits of the housing assistance payments
program or be subject^d , discrimination in employment because of membership in
a class such as unmarried mothers, recipients of public welfare, ecc. These
provisions are Included pursuant to the regulations of the Department of Housing
and Urban Development and the requirements of said Department pursuant to said
regulations; and the obligations of the City to comply therewith Inures to the
benefit of the United States, the said Department and the Council, any of which
shall be entitled to Invoke any remedies available by law to redress any breach -
thereof or to compel compliance therewith by the City.
10. Safeguard of client information. The use or disclosure by any party of
infcrmation concerning an applicant or participant in the.program in violation of
any ,ule of confidenUallty or for any purpose not directly connected with the
administration of the program is prohibited, except on written consent of the
applicant or participant. '
II. All services furnished under this Agreement shall be without charge to
any applicant or participafirg family.
12, All problems or disputes between the parties shall be subject to review
and resolution by. the Metropolitan Houin sg and Redevelopment Authori� Advisory
Committee or other committee subsequently designated by the Council.
13. The City in accordance with its status as an independent contractor
agrees that it will conduct Itself consistent with such status and that it will
not hold Itself out or claim that its officers and employees are employees of
the Council. By reason hereof, it will make no claim, demand or application
to or for any right or privilege applicable to any officer or employee of the
Council, including, but not limited to, workman's compensation coverage
unemployment insurance benefits, social security coverage or retirement
membership or credit,
14. Master Contract. The City undArstands that the program is subject -
to the terms and conditions of the Master Contract between the Council and HUD
and to HUD's current and future rules and regulations and the Cltragrees to abide
by the same and to cooperate with the Council in its compliance therewith.
0
0
No membnr, oflicor ur eiiiployr:n of lhu GlIMIC11, no wonihor of ilia guverning body
'of the locality (city and county) In wbirli the project 1S situated, and no other
public official of such locality or localltfcs who c::crrIsns any [mwtluus or .
respunsibilllloS wish rospocl to the -project, during his tenuro or for ono year
lhnmaller, Shall have ally hderest, dDect or Indirect, In this contract or In
an)- proceeds or henafits arising therefrom.
15. Prior
t: ncracc au erceaea. Tnis contract superceaes any prior Be
ion B Dousing assistance payments program contract between
the Council and the city, if any.
IN WITNESS WII1:1,Uf P, thn partles hn au have: caused LDis ar)rornlonl LU Le es:ucltlod
ve till, day and year first abovu written by their ouLhurizr:rl roprosantallves.
Approved as to icgal form Fr adequacy
Office Counsel
ama
MUTHOPOUTAN COUNCIL
lI y__S.
�Cha Irma n
CITY W Mounds View
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUN
FROM: CLERK-ADMINIS:RAT
DATE: OCTOBER 16, 1986
SUBJECT: TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF GROUP W CABLE OF THE
NORTH SUBURBS, INC.
Attached please find correspondence from the attorney for
the North Suburban Cable Commission indicating that the Com-
mission has approved the transfer of ownership of Group W
Cable of the North Suburbs from Group W Cable Incorporated
to North Central Cable Communications Corporation. Also
attached is Resolution No. 2114, approving the transfer of
ownership of Group W Cable of the North Suburbs Inc. Staff
would recommend based upon the action taken by the Cable
Commission adoption of the attached resolution.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of Resolution
No. 2114 approving the transfer of ownership of Group W
Cable of the North Suburbs Inc.
enclosure A
RESOLUTION NO. 2114
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
!!! COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2114 APPROVING THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP
OF GROUP W CABLE OF THE NORTH SUBURBS, INC.
WHEREAS, Group W Cable, Inc., a New York Corporation
(hereinafter "Group W Cable"), by and through Group W Cable
of the North Suburbs, .Inc., a wholly -owned subsidiary, owns,
operates and maintains a cable television system in the City
pursuant to the terms and conditions of City Ordinance No.
319 (hereinafter "Cable Communications Franchise
Ordinance"); and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable desires to sell and otherwise
transfer all of the issued and outstanding shares of the
capital stock of Group W Cable of the North Suburbs, Inc.,
to North Central Cable Communications Corporation
(hereinafter "North Central") and thereby transfer control
of Group W Cable of the North Suburbs, Inc., to North
Central; and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable has requested the consent from
`— the City to a change in ownership and control of Group W
Cable of the North Suburbs, Inc. to North Central; and
WHEREAS, the North Suburbs Cable Commission
(hereinafter "Commission") has been delegated the authority
and responsibility to coordinate, administer and enforce the
Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance on behalf of City
pursuant to the terms of a Joint and Cooperative Agreement
for the Administration of a Cable Television Franchise; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has held a public hearing on
behalf of City and has reviewed the legal, technical, and
Einar.-ial qualifications of North Central and finds no rea-
sonable basis to deny the request for transfer as a result
of said review; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has, recommended to City
approval of the transfer of control of Group W Cable of the
North Suburbs, Inc. to North Central subject to the actual
closing of the stock sale; and
RESOLUTION NO. 2114
PAGE. TWO
WHEREAS, the Commission has also recommended approval of a
request by North Central to permit the pledge as security to its
lenders the stock and assets of North Central and its
subsidiaries, which would include Group W Cable of the North
Suburbs, Inc.:
WHEREAS, the City does not object to such security
interest in the stock and assets.
NOW THEREFORE, 8F. IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Mounds View:
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
1. That the City hereby approves the sale by
Group W Cable, Inc. of all of the issued and
outstanding shares of the capital stock of
Group W Cable of the North Suhurbs, Inc. and
the transfer of control of Group W Cable of
the North Suburbs, Inc. to North Central sub-
ject to an actual closing of the stock sale
transaction on or before December 31, 1986
pursuant to the terms and conditions as
evidenced by the Notice of Transfer to said
Commission and City and all written repre-
sentations from North Central associated
therewith.
2. The City approves the pledge by North Centrel
as security to its lenders the stock and
assets of North Central and Group W of the
North Suburbs, Inc.
Adopted this 27th day of. November, i986.
Mayor
Clerk -Administrator
n�'emu
K MI I.:.c"
OONW w"'W�nY
Lwr L i �'x
wx. w.roan
T inr. [w.�e
J. ru
M,ul o anvr�.
iMr'eeycrti I.i�nl.
FM��u �".�[•.0
e : g \i.win
i ......... N
::Loi K:L: r•aw
DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
O'CONNOR & HANNAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A �+
L1i / 1986
RECEIVED
"" or
MODUD,S VIEW
3600 IDS CENTER
80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREETx�°.:e
��?^
u. wn..
0<::o`i°e::
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-2254
16121 341-3BCO
TELEX 29.0580
TELECOPIER 16121 343.1256
pL[ e
.
e[..o errca .u•nnN., a a arrca ..o.ro enrcL
LM.i aoo .�la.00 .[N�w[cn
Le eu. co-m m L.ul\w�..•uu`` . . wp
<o aona .ur iaun+.oa nuvaw
�av�ibom ar wnan Laru cm.[n
erLWNLL .�u�..I. •Y ,n�Nen ...... .N.•
o.+o wni.uN• ,Gx-,r
.nl4ul Rr�[..u• pY.L L .�[[M
nLLu. L C.elr.•
aava. unnu.
.Mo\[S\�i o.L.v ° ".
MEMORANDUM
.LL �urcn•
1. x oxiiii�
W F C •pf,•• x
+ M.LKgf LVL51
wno. o o: iiean
�w i.nai w'•
TO: City Administrators and City Managers of
North Suburban Cable Commission FROM: Thomas D. Creighton, Legal Counsel
DATE: October 9, 1986
RE: Transfer of Ownership and Control of Group W Cable
of the North Suburbs, Inc.
As you are aware, Group W Cable, Inc., by and through Group
W Cable of the North Suburbs, Inc., requested the Cities' consent
to the transfer of ownership and control in Croup W of the North
Suburbs, Inc. to North Central Cable Communications Corpoiation
("North Central"). Group W is obligated to receive the Cities'
approval for this transaction under the Franchise Ordinance.
Tl;e North Suburban Cable Commission has undertaken an
analysis of the legal, technical, and financial qualifications
of North Central in the transaction. At its meeting on October 8,
1986, the Commission determined to recommend to its member cities
the approval of the transfer of ownership of Croup W Cable _of
the North Suburbs, Inc. to North Central. I have enclosed a
copy of the Commission's resolution.
The complexity of the transaction and the specific analysis
which was undertaken by the Commission, on behalf of its member
cities, cannot be fully described in this memorandum. I have
included a copy of a memorandum which explains in detail the
transaction. This memorandum was presented to the Commission
and formed a basis for their recommendation of approval. I
have enclosed this memorandum for your information and for the
information of your Council members.
I have prepared a Resolution for your City Council which
will effectively approve the transaction consistent with the
Commission's recommendation. No ordinance amendment is required.
I would ask that you place this matter on your next Council
agenda. If you would like a representative of the Commission
to be present at your Council meeting, please contact Footsie
Anderson, Cable Administrator, at 646-8172. Additionally, if
you should have any questions copcerning this transaction, you
may contact either Ms. Anderson or myself.
Following the council's adoption of the enclosed Resolution,
I would ask that you promptly return it to me at the above
address. Note: North Central has reeuested that the attached
Resolution be certified according to your regular procedures
for such certification. Please return a signed copy cf this
Resolution and the certification to my office as soon as possible.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
cc: Bootsie Andersor.
r�
L
Wo+w i:l`o:.YY
.Hu w.<nrur
.awl i �'.itr
iK : et tit�:.n
ni�m �u.o:p
°°qua lhmJ.
f'ii+'� eiv u
Nulu c .nu �w�rro�
DIRECT OIAL NUMBER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
O'CONNOR 6 HANNAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
3800 IDS CENTER
50 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET
MINNCAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402.2254
16121 341.3800
TELEX 29.0584
TELECOPIER 16121 343.1256
RCCCI tlrp
+..W CITY nT
YH.F.$'�. tN1+.N
...R uuH•
pY•.Tr JTC. ]MY<rN, 4 C ]°NJ
I.HK ONK.
• JM•
vnrm wY H•IR, .n•Y+u N'fwl ..r
•+a`rox o < °mw.]+°]
Y.�
).>,m
wm nn:, <° N+Hwu w
�( m.x Nan
MML CJ wId'YH° �Idl MJ^.JJ
it°°1 tlM]
�{,.� WYI.NYr°HI
w,wlpF�rLYI•
MEMORANDUM
Directors of the North Suburban Cable Commission
Thomas D. Creighton and Mark •J. Ayotte,
Legal Counsel
September 16, 1986
Group W Cable, Inc. Request for Approval of Trans-
fer of Ownership and Control
Please find below a summary and analysis of the proposed
transaction regarding a request from Group W Cable, Inc., to
the Member Cities of the North Suburban Cable Commission to
approve the sale and transfer of all of the issued and
outstanding shares of the capital stock of Group W Cable of
the North Suburbs, Inc. to North Central Cable Communt-
cations Corporation.
The purpose of this report is to provide the Commission
with an understanding of the transaction and the standard
for reviewing whether to approve it.
�^. I. INTRODUCTION
The Member Cities of the Commission had been requested
to approve the sale of stock in Group W Cable of the North
Suburbs, inc. to North Central Cable Communications Corpora-
tion. This request arises out of the previous denial of•
Transaction #2 wherein the Commission and the Member Cities
disapproved the sale of stock in your system from Group W to
North Central Cable Communications Company, L.P. It is
important to note that although the process and factors to
be considered by the Commission in this request for approval
are similar to the earlier process, this request is separate
and distinct. The Commission should not rely upon earlier
information or previous perceptions. The parties to this
request for approval and the information provided is
slightly different from that which the Commission previously
considered. This memorandum analyzes the current proposed
transaction before the Commission.
II. DESCRIPTION OF TRANSACTION
A. Background.
Before considering this transaction, the Commission
should be aware of the current structure of Group W Cable, _
Inc. The earlier Transaction #1 involving the sale and
transfer of all of the issued and outstanding shares of the
cap?.':al stock of Group W Cable, Inc. from Westinghouse
Broadcasting and Cable, inc. to the consortium of five
Buyers closed on June 19, 1986. Group W is now supervised
- 2 -
0
by a Board of Directors designated by the new Buyers. Each
Buyer has primary operational responsibility for the group
of cable systems which it had agreed to subsequently pur-
chase or dispose of pursuant to the Buyer's purchase agree-
ment.
The six suburban Minnesota efystems had been designated
by the Buyers to be purchased by Daniels & Associates, Inc.
("Daniels"). Daniels had assigned its interests to Daniels -
Hauser Holding Company ("D.F. Holdings"), a Colorado general
partnership. •vurtwhcurmcrc, D.H. .u.n.d.n..gc Lac :nncA :Le
...... ......-�.._- __-
rights to acquire a number of systems, including the Minne-
sota systems, to North Central Cable Communications, L.P.,
("North Central-L.P.") a Minnesota limited partnership.
Finally, the right to acquire each specific system has been
assigned to North Central Cable Communications Corporation
("North Central"), to whom the present request for transfer
approval is pending. Since the close of the earlier trans-
action, the management of each Minnesota system was immedi-
ately undertaken by North Central-L.P., as agreed by the
Buyers pursuant to a management agreement with Hauser Com-
munications, Inc. This change in management of each system
could legally occur without Commission approval.
B. Proposed Transaction.
The proposed transaction involves a number of different
entities and organ:.zations wish a series of assignments of
an interest to acquire the Minnesota cable systems. Note
that each assignment of the interest to purchase each system
is not a transfer of ownership of the system.
The proposed transaction involves the following primary
entities:
1. Daniels 6 Associates, Inc. ("Daniels") -- a
Delaware Corporation. `
2, Daniels - Hauser Holding Company ("D-H Hold-
ings") -- a Colorado general partnership con-
sisting of Daniels n Associates, Inc. and
North Central Cable communications, L.P. as
general partners.
3, North Central'Cable CaMinnesota
("North Certr
limited partnership consisting of Hauserandoie
Communications Inc. as general partner,
R.E. Hauser, Inc. as limited partner.
4, Hauser Cable of Minnesota, Inc. ("Hauser -
MN") -- a Minnesota corporation.
5, Continental C9ioa of Minnesota, Inc.
Minnesota corporation.
("Continental -MN -MN""))
g, North Central Cable Communications Corporation
("North Central") -- a Delaware corporation.
We have reviewed the necessary dog-.,;entation to conclude
that each of the entities is duly organized and In exis-
tence. The organizational existence of Daniels has been
certified by the Buyers. We have reviewed a Certification
and Joint Venture Agreement regarding D.H. Holdings, which
constitutes the partnership agreement of D-H Holdings. We
have also reviewed a Certificate of Formation issued by the
Minnesota Secretary of State and Limited Partnership Agree-
ment creating North Central - L.P. We have additionally
been presented with the articles of incorporation and bylaws
4 -
of Continental -MN and Hauser -Inn. We have reviewed the
I
necessary restated articles of incorporation issued by the
Delaware Secretary of State and an Application of Foreign
Corporation for a Certificate of Authority to Transact
Business in Minnesota, with an acknowledgment of acceptance
by the Minnesota Secretary of State, oa behalf of North
Central. The most significant entity for our analysis is
North Central, which is designated as the Transferee. North
Central is duly organized and is authorized to own and
operate a cablesystem. The genuineness of all documents and
authenticity of all signatures has been presumed.
To facilitate an understanding of the transaction, it
should be kept in mind that each of the aforementioned
organizations is a separate and distinct entity. D-H
Holdings, North Central L.P., Hauser -MN, Continental -MN, and
North Central are entities which have been created for the
purpose of accomplishing this transaction. A graph setting
forth the proposed transaction and transition process is
appended to the end of this report.
From the information we have reviewed, it appears that
Daniels is an original member of the Buyer group which
acquired the stock in Group W Cable, Inc. from Westinghouse.
Broadcasting and Cable, Inc. in the earlier Transaction
#1. The Purchase Agreement allowed Daniels to assign its
rights to purchase stock in each system to other entities.
We have reviewed a certification indicating that Daniels has
- 5 -
assigned its rights and obligations in the earlier trans-
action to D-H Holdings.
-North Central-L.P. has been assigned by D.H. Holdings
the right to acquire the six Minnesota systems by a Joint
Venture Agreement dated June 13, 1986. North Central-L.P.
has further assigned its intereut in the Minnesota systems
to North Central by letter dated June 18, 1986. Thus, it is
North Central which will ultimately own the stock in each
specific Minnesota cable system.
From the information we have reviewed, North Central is
a newly created corporation which is owned equally by Con-
tinental Cablevision of Minnesota, Inc. and Hauser Cable of
Minnesota, Inc. The Commission should note that both Con-
tinental Minnesota and Hauser -Minnesota are also stated to
be newly created corporations.
III. STANDARD OF REVIEW
The Commission's task in this process is to review the
information provided regarding the transaction and to recom-
mend to its Member Cities approval or denial of the transfer
of stock from Group W, Inc. to North Central. The Cities
must make the ultimate determination. The franchise and
state statute provides the Cities with the express right to
approve or disapprove the transfer of ownership in their
franchise and system. The standard of review is that the
Cities consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. For the
purpose of determining whether it will consent to the change
in control and transfer of the stock, the Commission has
made inquiry into the legal, technical, and financial quali-
fications of North Central, as well as other appropriate
factors.
In analyzing the transaction, the Commission must con-
sider whether North Central meet's all of the criteria orig-
inally considered in initially granting the franchise to
Group W. Note, however, that this analysis is not a
comparison between Group W and North Central to determine
which is more qualified. Rather, the analysis is an appli-
cation of factors to determine whether North Central satis-
fies the standards to the reasonable satisfaction of the
City.
The Commission should consider the following factors in
determining whether to recommend approval or denial of the
transfer to North Central:
1) Legal and character qualifications of North
Central;
2) Technical ability of North Central;
3) Financial stability of North Central; and
4) Other appropriate factors.
IV. ANALYSIS
The sources of information used in examining the legal,
technical, and financial abilities of North Central include
the Municipal Request For Information and other supplemental
information provided by Group W, Continental, and North Cen-
tral. Any subsequent transfers to Continental in the years
- 7 -
y to come are not the subject of this analysis and will not be
approved by any response by the Cities to this request.
A. Legal Qualifications
The legal qualifications standard relates primarily to
an analysis of whether the entities involved in the transac-
tion are duly organized and authorized to own the cable
system and franchise. Certain entities, such as certain
television broadcasting stations, national television net-
works, and certain telephone companies, are prohibited by
Federal law from owning, operating, or controlling a cable
television system. We have reviewed the Federal cross -
ownership prohibitions and have determined them to be in-
applicable, although these restrictions are primarily a
concern of the companies involved. Moreover, we have been
provided with the necessary documentation which shows that
each of the entities is duly organized and authorized to own
a cable system and franchise as described above.
The character qualifications of North Central, as well
as the principals of the organization, are satisfactory.
Since North Central is a newly created entity, it is appro-
priate to review the character qualifications of its prin-
cipals. North Central has provided information showing that
neither it nor any principal has ever been convicted in a
criminal proceeding of any crimes against character.
Althoueh Continental Cablevision, Inc., the parent company
of Continental -MN, was previously involved in proceedings
- 8 -
A before the Federal Communications Commission, no violation
of FCC regulations was adjudicated.
Based upon our review of the information provided, it
would appear that the Commission or Cities could not reason-
ably withhold approval of the transfer based upon the legal
or character qualification of Notth Central or its prin-
cipals.
B. Technical Ability
The technical ability factor relates to the technical
expertise and experience in operating and maintaining a
cable system. This analysis focuses upon the current and
fcrmer experience of the proposed Transferee. Since North
Central is a newly -created entity, it has not directly owned
or operated any cable systems. Therefore, the ability of
its managing principals must be reviewed. Information has
been provided concerning such other individuals' and enti-
ties' experience in owning, operating, and managing cable
systems.
Hauser Cable of Minnesota, Inc., as one-half owner of
North Central, will be primarily responsible for the manage-
ment of North Central by virtue of its control of two
directors' seats of North Central. Moreover, North Central
has stated that it intends to enter into a standard manage-
ment agreement with Hauser Communications, Inc. ("HC") to be
responsible for the day-to-day supervisory management of
North Central and the cable systems.
The information which we have reviewed indicates that
Mr. Gustave M. Hauser, Mr. John Evans, as the primary in-
dividuals of North Central, and HC, as the primary organiza-
tion involved in management, have extensive cable management
capability and experience sufficient to satisfy the tech-
nical ability factor as appliedtto each respective cable
system. Mr. Hauser is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
of HC, Arlington Cable Partners, and Suburban Cablevision
Company. He formerly served as Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of Warner Ame,! Cable Communications, Inc. He has
been involved in cable television and other electronic com-
munications since the early 1960's.
Mr. Evans, as President of HC and Arlington Cable Part-
ners, has 13 years of management experience in the cable
television industry. He manages a 34,000 subscriber cable
system in Arlington, Virginia and a 33,000 subscriber system
in Brooklyn Park, Minnesota. He has also served as System
and Regional Manager for over 90,000 subscribers in
Columbus, Ohio, for American Television and Communications.
Hauser Communications, Inc., which will be the manager
of each Minnesota cable system, has experience in managing _
the Arlington System, Brooklyn Center system, and is in-
tending to acquire a 23,000 subscriber system in Montgomery
County, Maryland.
The inclusion of Continental -MN, a wholly -owned sub-
sidiary of Continental Cablevision, Inc., should not be
10 -
considered as directly bringing any additional technical
capability to the operation of your system. Although
Continental -MN owns one-half of the stock of North Central,
the agreement between Continental and Hauser allows Hauser
to control two of the three seats on the Board of
Directors. It would appear that! Continental's involvement
is primarily as an investor in tna system. Although Con-
tinental Cablevision, Inc. has extensive experience in the
cable industry which could be brought to the management of
your cable system, since it does not control the management
of the corporation, its experience is subject to the de-
cision of Hauser.
Based upon our review of the information provided, it
would appear that neither the Commission nor Cities could
reasonably withhold approval of :he transfer based upon the
technical ability of the trarsfaree.
C. Financial Stability
The financial stability factor relates to whether North
Central has the financial resources available or committed
to not only acquire the system, but also to meet the exist-
ing franchise requirements. The Commission has engaged Mr. _
Kevin P. Cattoor, Financial Communications Consultant, to
undertake a review of this factor. Mr. Cattoor has prepared
an independent report of his analysis, and the Commission is
referred thereto.
D. Other Relevant Factors
Other appropriate factors which have been reviewed for
the purpose of determining whether to approve or deny this
transaction are contained in the Municipal Request For In-
formation. The most significant factor to be considered is
whether the cable franchise wilY be transferred intact and
whether North Central will agree to comply with all existing
franchise requirements.
The information which we have reviewed indicates that
North Central is not currently requesting any franchise
modifications as a condition of the transfer. Moreover,
under the terms of the original purchase agreement of the
consortium, North Central is prohibited from requesting any
franchise modifications as part of this transfer. In other
words, all systems are to be sold and transferred "as -is".
Consequently, North Central will agree to receive transfer
of the franchise intact.
With respect to the franchise requirements regarding the
existing service area and line extensions, North Central has
indicated that it will comply with the existing franchise
requirements and obligations. The construction practices of_
North Central regarding aerial and underground installation
and standards will also conform to existing franchise re-
quirements, including the burial of snow -drops at no charge
to the subscriber in the spring. North Central has not
proposed any modifications to the channel capacity or system
12 -
design (both subscriber and institutional network) and will
assume all existing franchise obligations regarding future
activation of channel capacity and upstream capabilities,
interconnection, performance testing and system maintenance
policies. North Central has stated that its personnel will
assist current users of the institutional network.
Moreover, North Central has agreed to assume all obli-
gations regarding the resolution of customer complaints. We
can take notice of the fact that HC, as current manager of
the system has already implemented improvements to the cus-
tomer service obligations by extending office hours. North
Central does not propose any addition or deletion of any
programming services.
In the ar-a of local programming and public access,
�'. North Central will agree to assume 11 existing franchise
commitments, including equipment, facilities, staff, and
funding. North Central will not agree to forego modifica-
tions of the local programming/public access commitments in
the future. North Central does not propose any additions to
the access commitments.
With respect to proposed rates, North Central is not
proposing any changes in the applicable franchise require-
ments and will operate consistent with federal law in set-
ting rates. North Central's expected rates are detailed on
a rate schedule contained in the financial information. For
those rates which are deregulated under federal law, North
- 13 -
Central is permitted to charge whatever it desires. Any -.
regulated rate will remain the same.
North Central has also indicated that it will comply
with all federal, state, and local laws relating to discrim-
in<.cion, equal opportunity employment programs and affirma-
tive action programs. Moreover/ North Central will abide by
all existing franchise requirements relating to staff posi-
tions and managers, to the extent these issues are subject
to the Commission's control.
North Central has agreed to execute the existing fran-
chise between Group W and the franchising authority, and to
'
comply 1Y
with all terms
and conditions of the fran
chise.
Additionally, North Central proposes that it will guarantee
the performance of the franchise. North Central states that
it is fully capitalized and has substantial assets, which
includes the other five neighboring Group W systems. In
addition., North Central states that it has arranged for the
existing performance bonds and letters of credit previously
established by Group W Cable, Inc. to remain in place and be
guaranteed by Continental Cablevision, Inc. and Hauser
Communications, Inc. North Central has taken the position
that neither Hauser Communications, Inc. nor Continental
Cablevision, Inc. are required to guarantee the performance
of the existing franchises.
The franchise provides that if the grantee is a sub-
sidiary or wholly -owned corporate entity of a parent corpo-
14 -
ration, performance of the franchise must be secured by
guarantees of the parent corporation "in form and substance
acceptable to city, . . .". in this case, North Central
states that the original-rantee, Group W Cable of the North
Suburbs, Inc., will remain in place as a subsidiary
corporate entity of a parent co6oratior., North Central.
The question before the Commission and the cities is
whether North Central's guarantee of the performance of the
franchise is "acceptable in form ,nd substance". if not
acceptable, the offering of an unacceptable guarantee would
be a violation of the franchise and more probably than not,
would be a reasonable basis for the withholding of approval
of the transfer. If not, the Commission and cities must de -
tide whether the guarantee of either Hauser or Continental
or bot:. .rould be acceptable. The question of the guarantee
is related to the amount of equity, the negative cash flows
in the first five years indentified for not only your
system, but also for the neighboring Group W systems and the
fact that the assets of the other systems are pledged as
security to the sank of Boston. Mr. Cattoor's report
addresses these factors more specifically. North Central
has stated that Hauser and Continental are reluctant to
guarantee the franchise based upon common industry practice
and the reluctance to show the guarantee as a liability on
the corporate books. The Commission should consider these
arguments in light of the perceived need for the guarantee.
-ls-
Based upon our review of the information constituting
i( other appropriate factors, and recognizing the uncertainty
as to judicial interpretations of the 1984 Federal Cable
Act, it does not appear that there is any legally Justifi-
able reason to withhold approval of the transfer to North
Central in the areas of legal orrtechnical.
The area of financial ability to perform the franchise
commitments appears to be the only remaining question for
the Commission's consideration, albeit an extremely signifi-
cant consideration. Depending upon the policy determination
regarding the viability of the financial plan and the
associated guarantee of performance, or lack thereof, Com-
mission staff is prepared to prepare the necessary documen-
tation to approve or deny the transfer of ownership.
- 16 -
too
3,srgviIle/ :brh
Eagan, Lc. Central,Inc .suburbs, ]x Cieles,st. mash., Lac. HiSp,:-c
1001 1001
;F,<3SCAY :}Ii'STSICN ryT G.bM. ZGS:CNS —?°•
TfSE0t4,N=IjMS1 M
GROUP N, INC. ral:XST MRPCPAT:CN
Mims c ASSCC:A =, LAC.
C7 4w SCUMMST CARLE TrxvlSICN, iiC.
T—vansition� (1)
Process: OANIELS-ELIUSER VOLDI:iIS
p Louisiana/California
1j Systems (2) Minnasota Systems
DANIELS b ASSOCIATES, INC ( NOM CMITRAL ALE 02+11RqU=NS,L.P.
l_
(I) Assignment
CCLTLYfNIAI. G8[EVISICN
OF MWESOM, INC.
NORTH CENTRAL CABLE
COMMUNICATIONS _ FAUSER
CORPORATION CCMlLNICnTICNS,
Mc.
W1G'eER C-012 CF
MUINES CA, INC.
,
2urnsvil! lrL,-
.............. 'bc�� dad ?amsey/ CoL. E!ehes, �
lA Eagan, L^t cantCries, Inc. Wash. , Inc.1loot...'..^...........i.......-..-....-... ...-.-------- .
a -
�t.
1.'c...c
�ui.•s
•e•t.
u. o-[.
[�.4
nn.•4 ".
• PGGM1I.n F.
�.iW
pnviln L•:.OYI
Ski '
G°.ni L..4e—n
.INT
iiit•
I
i"i[iru m•ue.+
n[w[oar.n.0 �a."ui
wG<Ye[.a .N°Yp
•N4.. e.uo ,Ks.+m�
DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
L
6) er;1ts86,
O'CONNOR & HANNAN
`' RECEIVED
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CITY OF
G Co
38OO -05 CENTER
-? 5 :�• = "�•
8wii{ t" off
80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET
, L ."e•
°•'• -
P'�` a ryrypp• )) nv.
MINNEAPOL15. MINNESOTA 55402-2254
o•�.S � „'= "'' P"�•:••';;; ' -
YL GG, .KPFG N.•.N�[IKn,
18121341.3800
Z1.111.L'�{�w...n.a.�r✓
re•
TELEX 29.0584
uoiM1.. c. a•.. e."n•
pnY 4.G•
I. GOY G i,��n a�IVG+ • ••YY•Y [..iM'•f[[�...
TELEC0PIER 16121343.1258
e:nii�a:: w+un ::'n ice.Fai�'"Me
SLii f ii) w•
..N
s�.�o o•.Kc u«.nmirnc[ �uenee c
Y e. •..� tawu•
Siunn°4Y. [n..... ....
e[Yne
pttiF�Ge bltli[G. i1Oli G"P. wf0°.C•0G..0'•��'l :FG [.I]NI
Mn'.[Ytll et+�YY[te•�[•Y
�wv tbnao ammmG i°P%i:`
��;�:
p°�.I w�le•.e u• jpGl�. L O��feY�
MEMORANDUM
TO: Directors of the North Suburban Cable Commission
FROM: Thomas D. Creighton, Legal Counsel
Kevin P. Cattoor, Financial Communications Consul-
tant
DATE: October 1, 1986
RE: Group W Transfer of Ownership
The purpose of this Memorandum is to update the North Sub-
urban Cable Commission ("Commission") on the status of the
request from Group W Cable, Inc. to the member cities of the
Commission to approve the sale and transfer of all of the
issued and outstanding shares of the capital stock of Group
W Cable of. the North Suburbs, Inc. to North Central Cable
Communications Corporation ("North Central"). This merlo-
randum specifically addresses the concerns expressed by Mr.
Cattoor's financial analysis as stated in his memorandum
issued September 11, 1986 and the reasons for continuing the
public hearing.
As noted in Mr. Cattoor's memorandum dated September 11,
1986, the financial analysis had surfaced the following
concerns:
I. BACKGROUND
First, North Central has projected that the cumulative cash
on hand necessary to finance operation of the six Group W
cable systems in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area goes into a
negative $2.9 million in the year 1993. Also projected by
North Central was an additional $8.5 million of senior debt
financing that would be obtained in the year 1992. A review
of the Request For Information indicated the existence of no
financing commitments that would cover the $2.9 million
shortage in cumulative cash flow nor the $8.5 million of
additional senior debt financing (total cash shortage of
$11.4 million).
Second, a review of the loan commitment letter from the Bank
of Boston for the $50 million senior debt investment calls
for certain financial ratios orrtests to be met in order for
North Center to maintain its loan. balance with the Bank of
Boston. The loan commitment letter indicates that the total
debt to operating cash flow ratio in each of the years one
and two must be no higher than 6.5 to 1 and 5.75 to 1,
respectively. In performing these calculations or. North
Central's pro formas included in the Request For Informa-
tion, it is noted that ratios of 8.0 to i in year one and
5.87 to 1 in year two exist. This indicates, based upon the
pro formas, that in year one and two North Central will not
be in compliance with the loan commitment with the Bank of
Boston. Additionally, the operating cash flow to debt ser-
vice ratio is also not met in year one when the ratio is
required to be at least 1.1 to 1.0. North Central's ratio
of operating cash flow to debt service in year one is 1.07
to 1. This indicates, again, that North Central would not
be in compliance based upon our understanding of the finan-
cial test as described in the Bank of Boston loan commitment
letter.
It should be understood by the Commission that the above
concerns result in the conclusion that the financial pro
formas as presented by North Central do not represent an
economically viable plan. To this previous conclusion, Mr.
Hauser took exception based on insufficient communication of
North Central's future borrowing capacity to meet the per-
ceived revenue shortfalls and an alleged misapplication of
the Bank of Boston financial ratios. The Commission subse-
quently continued the public hearing and directed its staff
to further investigate North Central's claims. The follow-
ing is a summary of our investigation as determined through
direct conversations with North Central management and fur-
ther documentation supplied by North Central.
First, in response to the September 11, 1986 memorandum
concluding that the financial pro formas as presented do not
represent an economically viable plan, North Central manage-
ment has taken the position that despite the pro formas
indicating cash shortfalls, significant borrowing ability
will exist in the future based upon the level of operating
cash flows generated from the systems. North Central has
attempted to demonstrate and confirm the additional borrow-
- 2 -
ing capacity by a letter from Phillip Hogue, President,
�. Investment Banking of Daniels & Associates, Inc. and a let-
ter from the First Bank of Boston which conclude that North
Central should have available additional borrowing capacity
far in excess of its cash requirements.
Second, North Central management has obtained confirmation
that the financial ratios used to test the compliance of
North Central's borrowings from First Boston are in fact
applied a year later than that discussed in Mr. Cattoor's
September 11, 1986 memorandum.
To date, the financial analysis has revealed the foll:wing:
II. RATIOS
Based upon North Central's response regarding the financial
ratios test as it pertains to the First Bank of Boston loan
commitment, there is still ambiguity as to when the finan-
cial tests are applied. As indicated in the Bank of Boston
letter, "if the closing were to occur on or about January 1,
1987, no tests would be applicable in 1987, and the first
year of the tests would be 1988." It appears that there is
still a possibility that the financial tests could be
applied on January 1, 1988.
However, our concern with the ratio issue is based on the
pro formas presented by North Central. As stated earlier,
the assumptions of the pro formas we have received have not
-. been challenged in our analysis. A modification of the
assumptions in such areas as interest rates, penetrations,
cash flow, etc., could effect the ratio question. The Bank
of Boston has informed Mr. Cattoor that they reviewed other
pro formas from their own sensitivity analysis and have made
a loan commitment based upon all of the information they had
available to them. Therefore, it is our conclusion that the
ratio question is irrelevaat to any further analysis of the
transfer in that our concern was based upon one set of pro
formas which have been discredited.
III. ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF FINANCIAL PLAN
With the objective of determining whether the financial plan
as presented to the Commission is viable, it is concluded
that the pro formas do not support an economically viable
plan. North Central has indicated to the Commission that
their borrowing plan as presented is dependent• upon addi-
tional borrowings if the pro formas did in fact become
reality. North Central has indicated that they have borrow-
ing capacity of approximately 5.5 times the operating cash
flow being generated from their systems. As it relates to
industry standards North Central's claim regarding their
- 3 -
borrowing capacity in terms of the 5.5 factor times oper-
ating cash flow is reasonable. However, the borrowing
capacity of North Central will be highly dependent upon the
level of operating cash flows being generated from their
cable systems at such time North Central would seek to bor-
row additional funds. The accuracy of the cash flow projec-
tions of North Central cannot be determined without an
indepth analysis of revenues and expenses as presented.
Nevertheless, assuming the cash flow projections of North
Central are reasonable, Mr. Cattoor can conclude that the
borrowing capacity is more thantsufficient to meet the pro-
jected $11.4 million shortfall. Additionally, North Central
has confirmed that should it find additional funding to be
necessary, it will endeavor to first utilize any available
equity or credit facility before initiating any discussions
with the Commission or its member cities with regard to
franchise or system modifications.
IV. OTHER COMMITMENTS
North Central has also documented other commitments and
assurances which address the questions and concerns raised
at the Commission public hearing. Specifically, North
Central has acknowledged that it understands and accepts all
of the provisions of the franchise and affirms that it will
comply with the same. Additionally, North Central has
agreed it will not initiate with the Commission or its mem-
ber cities discussions of changes in the community program
requirements of the franchises prior to one year from June
1986, if ever. North Central has also confirmed that its
obligations under the franchise are guaranteed by the per-
formance bonds and letters of credit now in place, which
bonds and letters of credit are in turn guaranteed 50-50 by
Continental Cablevision, Inc. and Hauser Communications,
Inc. Finally, North Central has provided evidence from
Continental Cable Vision, Inc. that it will utilize its best
efforts to borrow an additional $3 million for other busi-
ness requirements.
It should be understood by the Commission that to date no
detailed analysis of the North Central pro formas (revenues,
expenses, capital expenditures and other items) has been
performed. It can only be concluded at this point that the
amount of funds necessary to acquire the system appear to be
in place supported by a loan commitment from First Bank of
Boston for $50 million, and equity investments from Conti-
nental for $13 million and Daniels b Associates for $7.6
million.
- 4 -
V. CONCLUSION
The area of financial ability as part of the Commission's
consideration of this Request For Approval, appears to be
the only remaining issue, albeit an extremely significant
factor. The question of the financial ability of North
Central at this stage of our investigation results in a
policy determination for the Commission and its member
cities. It has been concluded that the financial pro formas
of North Central as presented do not represent a financially
viable plan. However, North Central has endeavored to sup-
port its financial plan by the commitments and assurances
stated above. It can be concluded that North Central's
financial plan based upon the information we have reviewed
does present a risk to Mr. Hauser. While the risk to the
Commission, its member cities and the franchise commitments
is a policy decision for the Commission, it would be my
opinion that, based -upon the totality of the circumstances,
the Commission could not reasonably deny the transfer to
North Central. To this end, it would be my opinion that if
the Commission or its member cities were to deny the trans-
fer based upon the information provided, a court would
likely conclude that the denial was unreasonable.
- 5 -
. `r.. .A .,C
1986
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL f 1/ REGARDING THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP nP��U�i��y
OF GROUP W CABLE OF THE NORTH SUBURBS, INC. c1S P'I171y
WHEREAS, the North Suburban Cable Commission (herein-
after "Commission") is delegated the authority and
responsibility to coordinate, administer and enforce the
Cable Communications Franchise Ordinances, as amended, of
its Member Cities pursuant to the terms of a Joint and
Cooperative Agreement for the Administration of a Cable
Television Franchise; and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable, Inc., a New York Corporation
(hereinafter "Group W Cable"), by and through Group W Cable
of the North Suburbs, inc., a wholly -owned subsidiary, owns,
operates and maintains a cable television system in the
Member Cities pu-suant to the terms and conditions of the
Cable Communications Franchise Ordinances, as amended, in
effect in the Member Cities; and
WHEP.EAS, Group W Cable desires to sell and otherwise
transfer all of the issued and outstanding shares of the
capital stock of Group W Cable of the North Suburbs to North
Central Cable Communications Corporation, (hereinafter
"North Central"), and thereby transfer control of Group W
Cable of the North Suburbs, Inc. to North Central; and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable has requested the consent from
the Member Cities to a change in ownership and control of
Group W Cable of the North Suburbs, Inc., to North Central;
and
WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the legal, tech-
r.ical, and financial qualifications of North Central and
found no reasonable basis to deny the transfer of Group W
Cable of the North Suburbs, Inc. to North Central; and
WHEREAS, North Central has requested as part• of the
transfer request the Member Cities' consent to allow for the
pledge as security to its lenders the stock and assets of
North Central and its subsidiaries, which would include
Group W Cable of the North Suburbs, Inc.;
WHEREAS, the Commission does not object to such security
interest in the stock and assets.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the North Suburban
Cable Commission:
1. That the North Suburban Cable Commission recommends
to its Member Cities approval by resolution of the sale by
Group W Cable, Inc. of all of the issued and outstanding
shares of the capital stock of Group W Cable of the North
Suburbs, Inc. to North Central subject to an actual closing
of the stock sale transaction by December 31, 1986 pursuant
to the terms and conditions as evidenced by the Notice of
transfer to said Commission and its Member Cities and all
written representations from North Central associated there-
with.
2. That the North Suburban Cable Commission recom-
mends to its Member Cities approval by resolution of North
Central's pledge as security to its lenders the stock and
- 2 -
assets of North Central and Group W Cable of the North
Suburbs, Inc.
The above listed resolution was mjvP9 by Commission
Director L;„ ebA!:, er, and duly seconded by Commission
Director v;iI-llg .
The following /Commission Directors voted in the affirma-
tive: fib j k `<P 1SQ j S)Ce.//-e dO. Wej 6'9 te4
Ile)fa-Fa/t
f
The following Commission Directors voted in the nega-
tive: Noy, e
A�IS� To.rno wsk �� G i-He ca h.,d0.
w2.yAr+ sho.-ev:ew �i
The above resolution way duly adopt::' this d day of
QG4ubtr, 1986.
ATTEST:
?✓-ee-s u. 2r
- 3 -